2.5
I remember seeing reviews elsewhere say that this book is disjointed and yeah, it is.
Goldman means well and tries to provide a global range of what she describes as 'feminist music.' But using a thematic approach instead of providing a timeline of feminist music certainly contributes to how disjointed this is. Even then, Goldman's narrative is almost list-like, you are given a playlist at the start of each chapter, which is the order of which musicians and groups are discussed and there is very little room to discuss not only these tracks, but Goldman introducing the musician/group, their background and discussing the lyrics. They're more like samples of these musicians/groups. In terms of engineers, producers, management or record labels, Goldman introduces statistics on the lack of women in these positions in the music industry, but doesn't engage that much further in this.
Surprisingly the starting point of this is punk (from 1977-2019), which is odd, I would have been curious about the rise of Women's Lib, feminist musicians and record labels and how that distinguished itself from the rise of punk in the late 70s up to the rise of Riot Grrrl in the 90s. Even something like a mention of groups like Henry Cow, one of the few prog rock groups in the 70s with women as members who were also involved in feminist improvisational groups. I think it's a strange point to start with, but it might be because the sounds chosen for this book are limited to a punk/Riot Grrrl sound, with lyricism that often delves into what I call 'manifesto lyrics,' direct and political which is important to have, but can result in a lack of variety in terms of how musicians approach 'feminist music.'
Whilst this is 'a' feminist history, it is more accurate to call it a feminist punk history. There are some explorations into other genres such as reggae, pop, funk, disco and hip hop, but not much. Contemporary examples are also fleeting, a lot of the music discussed is from the 20th Century and any 21st Century mentions are mostly small, DIY groups who have broken up or sparsely record.
But the main thing for me with this was that Goldman's prose is very much the music journalist of the 70s turned 'punk professor,' who even talks about her own songs in this book. Some passages are strange, others are painful, almost cringe in trying to describe this kind of music and a definition of 'punk.' I think it adds to how disjointed the book is and at times, it felt like the book needed another approach to its editing to help make it flow better and make it a more enjoyable read.
I think another look would have helped to avoid some of the bizarre wording ('some of the founders did mate' 'affinity for transvestites' 'sensible Scandinavia') or outright untruths, such as how slut-shamming wasn't a thing in the UK like it was in Riot Grrrl. ('The horror of being called a “slut” that the Riot Grrrls were to battle in America’s Pacific Northwest in the 1990s was not even an issue in Britain, where it was assumed that all punks, boys and girls, were sluts and glad of it.')
Goldman also glosses over a lot of things too, whilst she mentions the backgrounds of some of these musicians, there's just no consideration as to why some of these white, UK-based musicians move away to places like Belize as some sort of colonialist fantasy 'escape from consumerism.' Goldman will mention how a Crass member got an inheritance (on top of being able to live communally in Dial House, a 16th Century cottage), but also how everyone was poor and squatting in this scene. I think that is her lack of awareness of the difficulties today in creating spaces for music or the lack of opportunities to get involved with music without being rich and having a blue link parent. Similar issues existed back then, but it does feel like it's said as if nothing has changed now and it's just as easy to 'start a band, make a zine.'
Goldman also seems unaware of how much 'punk' has become commodified, including in reactionary ways and how it is seen as 'Western' to those outside of the UK/USA. She is shocked that Gia Wang is pro-Trump and anti-abortion, but builds her up as this rebel in China only for this to be revealed and adds the caveat that Wang is entitled to this view 'especially in punk.'
Positives are that yes, this book still does help introduce readers to different varieties of 'feminist punk,' including some lesser mentioned and more obscure musicians/groups. Goldman's writing is also much better when she focuses on reggae, dub and ska, something that she specialises in, or when she's known the musicians for a long time and can have more introspective conversations.
Overall, I think if you are interested in feminist music that there are other resources (such as music discovery websites such as RYM or AOTY, especially if you want anything from the 21st Century) that might help in finding something outside of this narrow definition of 'feminist (punk) music.' This book was pretty disjointed, but I wonder if it's because I've not read too many music books (yet).