"Uh Huh Her." Thoughts on the new PJ Harvey?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (498 of them)
i also don't see how masculinity - if it even applies to pj, whch i don't think it does - is inherently individualistic.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 08:54 (nineteen years ago) link

i think this is a misunderstanding on your part, and in my viiew momus wasn't doing that at all - he was (i think?) talking about how women are championed as such when they are like men, without mentioning his own standards of gender behavior

according to momus, pj harvey perpetuates what he calls "a perversion of feminism which proposes that women should become selfish, aggressive, egocentric assholes just like men." i'd say his standards of gender behavior (for both genders) are pretty apparent in that remark. he's certainly not referring to some objective universal standard of behavior, since i doubt everyone in the world considers PJH to be an arrogant asshole.

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 08:59 (nineteen years ago) link

Justin, i'm glad you bring up that I didn't say that, and I don't think momus implied that either...no one is saying that we should respect women "more" when they stick to traditonally non-masculine forms and instrumentation, but rather that the recieve greater acclaim when they pick up the oft-revered signifier of not only masculinity but also *authenticity* - the almighty geetar. also i don't think polly and patti etc wanted to sound this way to appeal to critics, but rather critics respond to them much more because of their sound...but it is again an oversimplication, and i wouldn't necessarily but patti and polly in the same categories, since patti doesn't fully embody the axewoman mythos that polly does and exhibit the "directness, linearity, violence, and bravado.." i mentioned in that post...still they have much more in commonthan someone like tori, though, which i wish someone would address here..

di, hi!!! miss you!!!! and haha i always had the impression of polly being man-ly and manlike from day one, not only because she actually *sounds* like a man during her first three records at time, but because her energy, power, anger is expressed in a thunderous force that resonates with me on some terrain of "the masculine" (as opposed to, for example "you oughta know," or "blood roses" or "professional widow" or even half of live through this, but courtney is like her own special category, since she seems to be one of the few who actually *does* self-consciously appropriate rock mythology for her own ends and critical acclaim..its like she's a moot point)....that along with all the artwork from the early period of an angry, hairy polly, gave me the impression of manliness. plus, all of her menstruation songs - it seemed to imply a resentfulness almost at the act of the feminine cycle itself, instead of an embrace of it.

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:04 (nineteen years ago) link

It's strange, but I guess it doesn't make for as compelling an argument, that the simple question of age and maturing hasn't been brought up here.
To lump together the 'primal woman' shock aesthetic of Dry with her current exploration of the eternal dilemma betwene love and freedom, is pretty counter-productive.
I mean most of the dissing of PJ trying to beat the boys at their own game comes across as the patronizing view of posters who obviously know better than a teenage rebel.

massive xpost

Baaderoni (Fabfunk), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:06 (nineteen years ago) link

you'd resent the feminine cycle too, if you'd had period pain.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:07 (nineteen years ago) link


i also don't see how masculinity - if it even applies to pj, whch i don't think it does - is inherently individualistic.

-- The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylure...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


it's time for me to get new-agey as you knew i would - but hey, it's me. i think the question here has to do with _archtypes._ in most world cultures previous to the20th century, i don't think it would be a stretch to say that masculinity was associated with autonomy and independence, and femininity with nurturing and if not dependence, at least interdepence. this i s proven with how the Sun, the archtypal male symbol, was also representative of independence and individuality, whereas the female Moon was reflective and inclined to relating to others.

okay, sorry.!! back to our regularly scheduled momus bashing/programming...

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:09 (nineteen years ago) link

i didn;t mean to misspell archetypes

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:11 (nineteen years ago) link

vic i miss you too. look out for me in LA in october!

i guess it just goes to prove that men do not have the monopoly on loudness, thunderousness, etc - which are being characterised here as masculine. if women can relate to that too, then perhaps they are HUMAN traits? and i dunno if you've noticed, but most women grow hair on their legs and under their armpits and some other places. some of them shave it off. therefore men do not have the monopoly on body hair either.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:11 (nineteen years ago) link

Can someone spell out to me what fluids Polly was saying were absent with 'Dry'? What is the imagery of 'dry' as it plays out through that album (which I confess I don't know)?

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:14 (nineteen years ago) link

(I mean, 'dry' also means strong, as in alcohol, and not sweet. And it means laconic in wit. And it means infertile, barren, or lacking in inspiration; 'dried up'.)

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:15 (nineteen years ago) link

the thing is, when you invoke these gendered archetypes, how much do you play into the culture of gender? how much do you reiterate gendered norms? i'm sure this is something we can't escape from.

xpost. momus stop you're giving me a dry-on.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:17 (nineteen years ago) link

di, i think you may be looking at some things with a post-feminist perspective? i don't know what that even means, sorry i'll shut up. whereasi agree with you on one level of course, i still think there's a very different kind of screaming when polly does it on "50 foot queenie" as opposed to when tori does it in "professional wido," or even when courtney does it in "asking for it" - it has to do with different shadings, with aggression vs. defensiveness, with an enegized polly's desire to take on male role's (with or without the intention of cutting holes in them), or maybe just in the words "i'm the king of the world." do you get what i mean?

of course i AGREE with you that loudness etc should not = masculinity, but there's a different subtext to me in pj harvey music that lends itself to patriarchal/masculine positioning. and it's not just one factor, it's a number of them that give this impression...

and i'm neither trying to reinforce nor deconstruct these gender norms here (though you know i'd be with you at the first moment to dissect them where appropriate) - i'm just observing them, and how they comeinto play here.

and yes they are inescapable, but we must remember that we are a composite of both forces of course, as both the sun and the moon are necessary, as the breath of life moves in and out of us (cheesy new-agey clincher you knew was coming!! )

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:22 (nineteen years ago) link

vic do you have the same problem with drag kings?

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:25 (nineteen years ago) link

or butch dykes? if so, i think you should read 'female masculinities" by judith halberstam.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:26 (nineteen years ago) link

di, it's not that i have a problem with polly's drag playing at all, just that i think it leads into my view that she is not and was not adhering to trad gender attributes on rid of me, she messed with them briliantly...BUT this is not why the album was praised, but because almost inadvertently (?) she assumed several positions of embodying trad/masculine rock-crit values...and i think you are coming at me wfrom a "do you have an issue with ambiguous gender identities?" stance -which you should remember is absurd since this is *me* you're talking to!! it's almost as if we're tlking about 2 or 3 differrent things here, and i just want to bridge these gaps and come to some sort of understanding...

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:31 (nineteen years ago) link

but there's a different subtext to me in pj harvey music that lends itself to patriarchal/masculine positioning

see this is where we have to stop for a second - cos i can, in one sense see where you are coming from, vic. but just because PJ in some people's eyes, endorses a kind of masculinity and therefore plays into the hands of patriarchy - does not mean that she's inherently endorsing patrirachy. we're talking interpretation, and how people make use of their intrepretations. in other, equally valid lights, she could easily be read as a threat to patriarchy. (in any case, masculinity shouldn't really be equated with patriarchy).

and yeah that wasn't really aimed at you, more aimed at what i perceived as your defense of momus, who is i think coming at this argument with a very different agenda to you n me.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:33 (nineteen years ago) link

http://www.libertas.co.uk/product_detail.asp?ID=795&CID=48

'Masculinity without men'. At first glance, I have to say that this looks like a classic example of 'me too'-ism; we don't need men to be men, we can do it better! Might this be a part of the universalising of masculine values and the erasure of feminine values?

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:33 (nineteen years ago) link

masculinity shouldn't really be equated with patriarchy

Masculinity + power = patriarchy

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:36 (nineteen years ago) link

um halberstam doesn't argue that women perform masculinity BETTER than men. and she certainly doesn't have a problem with female femininity. perhaps you should read the book so you KNOW what you're talking about.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:37 (nineteen years ago) link

The people who have read it on the Amazon customer reviews page say:

'I learned that the most interesting masculinities are not male'

and

'Halberstam would have been much better served if she had included a fem perspective in her unabashed celebration of butch subjectivity'

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:41 (nineteen years ago) link

if you're such a fan of feminine values, momus, why don't YOU embody em?

why should halberstam address fem identity when so many other feminists have?

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:42 (nineteen years ago) link

Oh Di,...absolutely. we agree there - i never meant to imply that i think polly can't be a threat to patriarchy, and in fact she's better interpreted that way, especially on rid of me. i'm glad you see though how i can say that she can play into the hands of trad rockcritdom's glorification of a certain masculine sound/aesthetic....and remember way up there i said i think momus may have a point in regards to symbolic ideology, and what's so wrong to discuss it? a critic's interpretation of an artist's work is independent of any original intention, pomo rule #1 of course. ... so yes, I wasn't discussing her intention at all

i think it's interesting to see how, for example, someone like karen o is also living upto rockcrit "fantasies" of the "rock-goddess" ideal, which is what many want her to be, in the hopes of making her a success to pjh

Vic (Vic), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:42 (nineteen years ago) link

if you're such a fan of feminine values, momus, why don't YOU embody em?

Well, I'm trying. On my new album I sing in a falsetto voice, ask Jesus to 'come back as a girl' and 'save the world without too much tomato ketchup', and call for an instant ban on foxhunting.

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 09:59 (nineteen years ago) link

This just in: the Other Music newsletter says of PJ Harvey's new album:

'The first record's maximized use of a minimal and brutal sonic palate of drums, guitar and feminist catharsis shone a light on the dearth of female rock presence and more importantly on a prodigious and unabashed new talent that shook up the music industry - over and underground. [...] Uh Huh Her, as its title indicates, strips the music of any superfluities and leaves only the voice and the songs. Harvey plays everything but the drums on every track and this intimate return to minimalism makes for some incredibly compelling bedroom music... A suit of songs both slight and bold emerge out of this delicate construction to create some of Harvey's most introspective and memorable work, combining the best of her previous investigations, while simultaneously returning to the vital and unadorned strength of her beginnings. [MC]'

All the stuff about PJ being 'unadorned' reminds me that I forgot to mention 'the Protestant ethic' as another thing that annoys me about PJ. This thing about 'stripping the music down to its bare, pure strength'. (I have 'catholic' and 'baroque' tastes myself. Clutter away! Surprise me!)

And to say that Polly shone a light on the dearth of female rock presence worries me. What, suddenly we realise that 'most women can't rock', but should?

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:06 (nineteen years ago) link

how in the world can you say that pj harvey is a poor artist, momus? just because you think she is conservative, she is using traditional instruments, she is not lesbian, she is not into gene splicing, she is not a submissive asian woman etc. that is so conceited and narrow-minded. and in a way macho. you want to force your subjects onto her.

i ask myself how you listen to music. do you first inform yourself about the political and aesthetical views of the artist before opening your ears?

i think there is good guitar and good electronic music, there is exciting avantgarde and boring avantgarde, there is good music by masculine and feminine women. you are full of prejudices and preconceptions how good artists should be (like you?). you are running around with blinders. you don't let the music grip you. it's all so rationalised. the exciting thing about music in my book is that it trespasses ratio, that it has a direct emotional appeal.

catholic/baroque and protestant/pure is another interesting dichotomy for sure. i am more of the protestant side but what is really important is the mix. there are no pure dichotomies like that.

alex in mainhattan (alex63), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:22 (nineteen years ago) link

X-post:

I've just had an interesting thought. Rock became central and normative. It went from being a way of losing control (ripping up cinema seats!) to a way of maintaining control (rock is played as your Virgin Airlines flight taxis towards the runway). We're all supposed to be rockers now. Capitalism became 'rockitalism'. Tony Blair was in a band that sounded like the Rolling Stones! etc etc.

Now, look at all these PJ Harvey songs that rock hard, and say to men 'fuck you, who do you think you are?' They're songs of jubilant rejection. It's very much a celebration of female control. Men want me, and the future of humanity lies between my thighs, but I'm the one who gets to say who goes in there. Now, in the past, in traditional societies, a woman celebrating her power in this way might have demanded that a man love her, marry her, provide for her, become a stable and responsible member of society, etc. (This is the message of songs like Gwen Guthrie's 'Ain't Nothin' Goin' On But The Rent': 'You've got to have a J.O.B if you want to stay with me') But PJ Harvey is saying something different. Women are still central, still controlling reproduction while men merely control production -- but in a time when rock and its irresponsibility is central, PJ's message is 'You've got to be a party animal and rock like a fucker to get between my thighs'. It is part of the culture of compulsory, joyless post-protestant hedonism, of dogmatic dissolution. If rock is Law, women will use rock as the main criterion in their Trials of Hercules. Woe betide the Man Who Does Not Rock. He will not reproduce.

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:25 (nineteen years ago) link

(I will skewer the next person who uses, unironically, the term 'submissive Asian woman'.)

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:26 (nineteen years ago) link

(By the way, could we re-title this thread 'Uh Huh Him'?)

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:59 (nineteen years ago) link

Momus: 'I just wanna listen to people who think like I do'.

Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 17:04 (nineteen years ago) link

I completely agree with Momus. Rock music/aesthetics/ethics should die. In fact they should have been dead long ago. Why is everybody always trying to save rock and roll (and celebrated for it)?

daavid (daavid), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 19:03 (nineteen years ago) link

why is there nothing happening in this thread when i am not sleeping or busy at work? momus, why don't you answer me? you said some clever things on this thread but i have the impression you didn't convince many people. sorry about the submissive asian women. i know that it is a cliché but there is a grain of truth in every cliché. i'd like some more team spirit too at the place i am working. which is not a question of the women working there but of the general atmosphere. i wouldn't blame it on the males though it's them ruling there right now. but i don't believe that it is better in japan or any other asian country. you seem to be romantising asian society and especially asian women. i still have this idea of asian perfectionism and asian copy-catism in my head. maybe i am wrong. the only "interesting" woman from japan i ever heard of was yoko ono.

i really don't like your way of slagging off males. there are no males. we all have male and female parts in ourselves. yin and yang. you know. and rock isn't a male dominion. rock is just letting yourself loose, forgetting about all that brain stuff. having fun.

alex in mainhattan (alex63), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 19:10 (nineteen years ago) link

momus is desperately trying to intellectualise that concept as I type

de, Wednesday, 9 June 2004 19:23 (nineteen years ago) link

"Why is everybody always trying to save rock and roll (and celebrated for it)?" and why is PJ Harvey being acused of this? I like momus's thoughts of reproductive power but I feel he's painting Polly Harvey with Courtney's brush. (Audible on America's Sweetheart actually) Escpecially in respect to her new record. The politics are much more one on one (rather than me vs. mankind) here. and I can't believe no one has mentioned Mr. Gallo at least in terms of Polly Harvey's flirtation with conservative politics or her new songs.

danh, Wednesday, 9 June 2004 19:49 (nineteen years ago) link

momus still hasn't mentioned any melodies or catchy little guitar hooks or anything.

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 20:05 (nineteen years ago) link

that would require actually listening to the record

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 20:22 (nineteen years ago) link

also, those things are so 1994, or 1894, or 1831. i forget.

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 20:25 (nineteen years ago) link

momus still hasn't mentioned any melodies or catchy little guitar hooks or anything.

Ahem, I said upthread, of 'Who The Fuck':

The only good thing about it is the silly backing vocals right at the end.

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 20:39 (nineteen years ago) link

"i really don't like your way of slagging off males. there are no males. we all have male and female parts in ourselves. yin and yang. you know. and rock isn't a male dominion. rock is just letting yourself loose, forgetting about all that brain stuff. having fun."

this is totally true. on this thread, momus characterises women as either feminine or not-feminine, and refuses to accept and acknowledge the shades of gray. and those shades of grey are where actual women's lives and art lie - both pj, and the asian women momus so lovingly fetishizes. women's lives are internally complex and women are diverse people. this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who considers women to be human beings.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 21:53 (nineteen years ago) link

and re: momus and yr supposed embrace of femininity - your arguing on this thread is really, um, aggressive, and individualistic. so by your own logic, you are masculine and nobody should be listening to you.

The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 21:57 (nineteen years ago) link

momus: i apologize, i missed that observation. would that there could be more such!

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 22:50 (nineteen years ago) link

I just heard this album and can't fathom how this much conversation could be derived by the actual lyrics, sentiments expressed within. I really wish some of you were forced to back up your ideas on Harvey's "message" with actual lyrics from multiple albums. Personnally, she seems like she's hopped around between different perspectives, as is her right, being an artist and all. I sense no consistent manifesto.

Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 23:05 (nineteen years ago) link

If anything, Momus should be railing against the unimaginative, unenlightened media which is keeping him from listening to her albums at face value (and the new one, on initial listen, doesn't have much).

Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 23:10 (nineteen years ago) link

rrrrrrrrrrr but momus has only actually used the word 'message' once, and then in a kind of deliberate-obnoxious shorthand fashion: in fact most the entire argument is outside of the notion of a deliberately constructed "message", and christ, who cares about lyrics

i think vic is quite otm until he gets all new age and shit and i kind of want to see more people talking about 'is this desire?' and 'dance hall at louise point', although this thread is isn't called "Thoughts on the PJ Harvey albums before the one before the new one"

weird thing about momus is how much more time he's prepared to spend arguing his point than going and finding out more about it. yes everyone else noticed this in 02, i'm slow okay

tom west (thomp), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 23:22 (nineteen years ago) link

confession: i only clicked on the link to the video bcz of the word "panties"

tom west (thomp), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 23:23 (nineteen years ago) link

I agree with Vic's argument but I think it's really limited to *critics' presentation of polly* rather than polly herself - which is i think what Tom's getting at when he brings up Is This Desire and Dance Hall, neither of which really fit into Momus's presentation of Polly *at all*. Even on To Bring You My Love there were as many intensely quiet songs as there were intensely loud ones, and tracks like "C'mon Billy" and "Send His Love To Me" sound very 'feminine' to my ears. Certainly Is This Desire? is one of the more resolutely and explicitly 'feminine' records I can think of, and if it's not a lesbian album then at the least it seems fascinated by female homeroticism, like an inverted D.H. Lawrence or something. But I'd be sympathetic to suggestions that this is a big factor in why it's not as celebrated as her other albums.

Even when Polly was flirting with masculine imagery earlier on it was much more fluxed up than simply beating the boys at their own game. She was almost more like a male drag queen in a woman's body, and I think this gave her a really compelling indeterminacy - one never knew where the layers sotpped and the "real" Polly was hiding.

Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Thursday, 10 June 2004 02:32 (nineteen years ago) link

Well, I'm trying. On my new album I sing in a falsetto voice, ask Jesus to 'come back as a girl' and 'save the world without too much tomato ketchup', and call for an instant ban on foxhunting.

-- Momus (nic...), June 9th, 2004.

Er, singing falsetto is one of the most masculine things a singer can do, becaus ewomen NEVER do it!

Also, foxhunting isn't very masculine is it? It has the full support of as many women as many and those who actually do it, well, they're a bunch of wimps!

mei (mei), Thursday, 10 June 2004 07:10 (nineteen years ago) link

"You taught me a lesson / I didn't want to learn"

Baaderoni (Fabfunk), Thursday, 10 June 2004 08:55 (nineteen years ago) link

Actually, I was joking about the song calling for a ban on fox-hunting. If you follow the link you'll find it's a song about how cool fat girls are. So it's only about banning fox-hunting in the sense that it's saying 'Don't chase foxes, fat girls are much nicer.'

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 10 June 2004 10:04 (nineteen years ago) link

Sure, there is a problem with female artists that uncritically embodies rockism and 'maleness', at least in terms of the discourse of music criticism and the interpretetions of such music. Pop, being a 'female' genre, is hopelessly overlooked and criticized because of its connections to femininity. I do, however, see a similar problem with female artists that uncritically embodies femininity. I do not agree with Momus that the image of the 'nice girl' is dated, it is very much alive. The 'nice girls' of mainstream pop, for instance, inevitably end up at the far end of a madonna/whore dicotomy, while their counterparts raises discussions of morality and female sexuality. Both are, in their own way, conformist. Neither is a 'rebellion'.

Now, I don't think it matters how you position yourself against gender roles of modern culture, as long as you do it with a healthy dose of playfulness, irony, camp or queerness. I believe that, and that alone, can raise questions about gender identification, roles and the heteronormativity of Western culture. And this is something, BTW, I find Momus doing brilliantly in his art. Or Björk, for that matter. "Perversion of feminism" or "gender capitulation"? Well, in the end, feminism is about freedom of choice more than anything else.

Though, I am annoyed with the following statement: "Women suffer particularly from the shift from traditional culture to modern hypercapitalist, atomised culture, because women were formerly at the heart of traditional cultures, which were highly-integrated and social. In modern western cultures, though, men dominate", I find it being slightly revisionist. Sure, women were the "heart" of traditional cultures - but they were Hermia, the heart of the hearth. The angel in the kitchen, etc. The point being, men dominated Western traditional cultures too. Now, I like being 'free' in a sense that I can vote, walk the streets alone, being seen in public, to think and speak my mind.

Maria Jacobsson (mariajacobsson), Thursday, 10 June 2004 12:32 (nineteen years ago) link

Why do you say pop is female?

mei (mei), Thursday, 10 June 2004 15:09 (nineteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.