Thursday 9 May 2013

ESSAY - edited version

To what extent did the Riot Grrrl movement of the 1990s have a radical and revolutionary impact on society, and what impact does it have today?


The Riot Grrrl movement was an underground, feminist, punk rock movement that emerged in Olympia, Washington in the early 1990s after being inspired by antiracist riots in D.C. This group of women particularly wanted to address the fact they felt they were being rejected from what was mostly a male-centric punk scene, with strong feelings of segregation. From this, a large number of bands became associated with the formation of the group, including Bikini Kill, Bratmobile and Huggy Bear. But music isn’t all they wanted to address. Riot Grrrl didn’t just stand for the empowerment of women in the music scene, but they also devoted their time to confronting the political and social issues of rape, domestic abuse, sexuality, racism and patriarchy. As part of a supposed subculture, they expressed their thoughts and beliefs through the creation of zines and art, holding a predominantly DIY ethic and anti-capitalist stance, issuing a manifesto, which discussed its philosophy and intent. Opinions are still divided, however, over the type of impact this movement really had on society, and whether or not they were truly groundbreaking. Their catchphrase “Revolution Girl Style Now”, taken from Bikini Kill’s 1991 demo cassette, is much debated and many believe Riot Grrrl to be a short-lived group of women, whilst others feel the torch is still burning. 
A number of authors have considered how the Riot Grrrl movement has created a platform for women, contributing greatly to the ‘third wave’ of feminism. The band Bikini Kill were at the heart of the movement, with their radical feminist lyrics and their hate for mainstream media. McIntosh (2010), D’Angelica (2009) and Carlip (1995) have all commented upon the fact that gender balance has improved since the creation of Riot Grrrl, continuing to ‘exert an iconic, nearly timeless influence’. For instance, McIntosh writing in her account of what exactly happened to the legacy of Riot Grrrl, describes how those that were at the centre of the feminist-punk movement have continued to keep the integrity of the group, explaining that the very existence of a women’s punk movement was groundbreaking in itself. She exclaimed that many are “continuing their involvement in a scene they so fiercely fought to be present in, and it was a fight that resulted in lots of positive changes.” (McIntosh, 2010) From this, McIntosh states that Riot Grrrl’s positive influence motivated female musicians, making them aware that they were capable of getting involved, describing them as a “revolutionary force for creatively-inclined women.” (McIntosh, 2010) For example, the DIY culture of the movement shaped individuals lives whilst it was in motion, with great influence on pop culture today. This “lady-powered” DIY movement pushed gender barriers within music, helping lay foundations for a new generation of craft revolution. Bikini Kill, a zine started in 1990 by Tobi Vail, focused on punk rock, politics, feminist issues and music. It was crucial in initiating the movement, and it was here they first issued their manifesto. The cut and paste format allowed for quick and efficient circulation of ideas and beliefs that could become widespread. It was also reflective of the punk rock aesthetic, with the use of safety pinks and crafting. It soon became a type of subcultural space that allowed for the transgression of gender and sexual hegemony.

This is supported by the fact that D’Angelica places all of her focus on the lasting achievements of Riot Grrrl, displaying the movement as influential and still in existence. She believes the movement has continued to spread through “internet connection amongst young women in the United States.” (D’Angelica, 2009, p109) D’Angelica writes in order to counter the argument that Riot Grrrl today is simply just watered down feminism, stating that those who believe this are simply ignorant. There is focus on the idea that all other articles and books relay the same pieces of surface information, following the same themes, and failing to ever actually look at how it affected women. Although many may claim the movement to be ‘dead’, it will continuously affect the live’s of many. “There still exist young women who consider themselves Riot Grrrls and boldly engage in feminist cultural activism.” (D’Angelica, 2009, p109) D’Angelica cites a contemporary zine titled Riot GrrrLife as an example and testament to “the enduring effect of Riot Grrrl cultural activism.” The simple fact that the movement hasn’t been forgotten about is said to be one of the main reasons as to why Riot Grrrl cannot be deemed a failure. This position is clearly further supported by Hillary Carlip’s book Girl Power: Young Women Speak Out! This book became a forum for young women, offering them a platform, something to inspire and encourage them. She states, “through writing, not only are demons freed and mockeries banished, but through self-expression...they come into their power.” (Carlip, 1995) By collecting everyone’s experiences, Carlip is offering inspiration, producing something that is still relative today. As part of her works, she looks at individual’s personal experiences of the movement, expressing how it affected them. One individual writes “this revolution is so real and so deep for me, it is something I have been waiting for my whole life, something that I think is imperative to my survival, or at least my sanity.” (Carlip, 1995) By displaying the personal effects of the movement, Carlip is demonstrating the important hold it had over these women, showing what it meant to those involved not just those who stood back and watched. It strengthens the argument of how it changed people on an individual level. Many of the books written about Riot Grrrl are by those who had no involvement with the movement, and it can be argued that many get it wrong. Carlip’s book therefore offers an insight into the thoughts and feelings of individuals who were there, they were part of what was going on, making it more credible.

These three authors support the argument that the Riot Grrrl movement has had great impact on today’s society, creating a platform for women. They believe that it is not just the music scene that they played a role in, but they have also contributed to the efforts of feminism. Despite this, although all of the above authors shine a positive light on Riot Grrrl, they only ever briefly touch upon the idea of it having a truly revolutionary impact. Whilst believing it created great opportunities for women, even McIntosh herself appears to contradict herself. Towards the beginning of her account, McIntosh describes these women as a ‘revolutionary force’ who were ‘hugely inspiring’ and whose ‘contribution to third-wave feminism was deeply important.’ She then goes on to proclaim that Riot Grrrl in fact failed to cause widespread societal ripple, and that it was never their intention to do so. A quote from a zine written by Red Chidgey is used to back up McIntosh’s argument stating: 
“Riot Grrrl is not something with mainstream appeal. It will not change society. But it’s changing me. It’s not the full stop manifesto point of my politics - it’s part, it’s creative resistance and it leads me further than it’s own boundaries.” (Chidgey)
It therefore must be asked whether or not ‘revolutionary’ is the right word to describe the movement, or whether or not Riot Grrrl just made people aware of the possibility of revolution, offering women a foundation on which to build. The term ‘revolution’ is used too lightly within some texts, and a number of authors, such as McIntosh, see the movement in such a positive light that they sometimes don’t want to discuss the failings of these women. It seemed to influence people on more of an individual level rather than a political one. It did not cause any changes regarding their belief system, for example abortion rights or harassment laws - these changes were achieved by those within the second-wave movement of feminists. Instead, Riot Grrrl made personal transformations and adjustments by targeting women and girls on an individual basis. A member of the movement stated “I think it’s important that Riot Grrrl as a movement is documented as a ‘youth feminism’ of the 1990s. Riot Grrrl has made really significant contributions to the lives of many girls and should be recognised as a valid form of feminism and youth resistance.” (Riot Grrrl member, source unknown) Riot Grrrl created a community for those who felt rejected from the rest of the world, helping them overcome personal problems and issues. 
In contrast to the above arguments, a number of authors have considered how the Riot Grrrl movement died off pretty suddenly and faded into the background as a mere ‘novelty movement’ that had no real impact on society. Bag (1993), Hebdige (1979) and Downes (2007) have all commented upon the idea that a number of different factors contributed to the demise of Riot Grrrl and to society not taking them seriously enough. For instance, Bag writing in her account of the problems faced by the movement describes how the term ‘Riot Grrrl’ is it’s number one downfall. Their decision to choose ‘girl’ instead of ‘woman’ has supposedly caused the movement a handful of problems. Bag believes that the word ‘girl’ suggests a “pre-pubescent, unthreatening brat” whereas ‘woman’ would have suggested “a mature, menstrual female figure” and therefore the public does not view them as “huge, hairy, revolutionary women.” (Bag, 1993) They are merely cute girls having a tantrum. This factor supposedly led to ridicule and the failure to be taken seriously outside of their own community that they were in. This then led to critics deeming them invalid and writing them off, believing that they would evidently have a negative affect on the rest of the world. Their failure to talk to the mainstream media meant that these critics were never corrected. The media feed people ideas and therefore the group was misrepresented. Blase (2005) supports Bag’s argument, stating that the above was “used as a basis to the argument that Riot Grrrl denigrated and threatened the survival of ‘proper’ feminists by reducing feminism to cheap sloganeering and stroppiness.” (Blase, 2005) Many saw too many differences between being a girl and being a woman, particularly the difference in knowledge and experience. Many dismissed the movement, believing they lacked any sort of intellect and that they were just going through a phase that they would soon grow out of. Jane Graham, writer of Shag Stamp magazine further supported this argument, expressing her feelings towards the name given to the movement “Riot Grrrl means little more than a piece of history which has passed ...I was always ambivalent about it - both excited and little embarrassed by it. I like some of the stuff, but always hated the name and the overt girlishness.” (Blase, 2005) Although these arguments seem a little bit forced, they are reasons as to why the Riot Grrrl movement became discredited. Whilst some women found a real connection to the group, others wanted to steer clear. Lack of authority and organisation meant that there were still a large number of women that wanted nothing to do with the group.
This is supported by the fact that Hebdige came up with a number of reasons as to why he deemed the Riot Grrrl movement a failure. Hebdige believed that the media hysteria that accompanies the emergence of subcultures soon begins a ‘commercial and ideological process’ in which the cultural phenomenon is “codified, made comprehensible, rendered at once public property and profitable merchandise.” (Hebdige, 1979, p96) When this happens, society doesn’t deem the subculture threatening anymore, social order may be maintained, as it becomes property of the press. The problem that Riot Grrrl faced however was the simple fact that they continuously refused to come under any sort of media or press coverage. They were approached by big names such as MTV, who wanted to record one of their meetings, and they were also approached by a number of journalists who wanted to cash in on their stories of feminist youth culture. The movement, even to this day, refuse to communicate with anyone that some sort of relationship with the mass and mainstream media. Their reasoning’s behind this were mainly to do with the continuous misrepresentation and exploitation in newspapers and magazines, including the New York Times and Newsweek. It even got the stage where they declare a ‘press blackout’ in 1993. The result of this therefore was the prevention of what Hebdige calls the ‘recuperative process’, which occurs after mass exploitation. 
This is further supported by the “angry women in rock”. Examples of these new angry women included Fiona Apple and Alana Morissette, who were said not to be as challenging as the women of Riot Grrrl, such as Kathleen Hanna. Their lyrics still addressed taboo subjects, however, such as sex and violence, yet they made their music much more relatable and it was deemed acceptable. It is said that they somewhat improved upon what Riot Grrrl had already achieved. This then links in with Hebdige’s link between subcultures and the media. For a subculture to be seen as non-threatening to the public and to social order they must be part of mainstream society, they must become a profitable commodity that can be sold and reviewed. The angry women of rock were able to construct themselves in such a way that they weren’t seen as a black mark on society, people weren’t threatened by the music they were producing, and they allowed others to interview them, coming across as respectable and polite individuals. This, therefore, is where Hebdige believes the Riot Grrrls went wrong. Their rejection of mass media and inability to co-operate meant they were displayed in a negative light. Newspapers and magazines would make up their own mind about them, printing further misrepresentations and misjudgements, causing many individuals to steer clear of the movement. Despite this, it is hard to say whether or not Riot Grrrl should be defined as a subculture. Their statement ‘every girl is a riot grrrl’ would suggest they’re not, however, the media response within newspapers and magazines is definitely consistent with how other youth subcultures were being portrayed around the same time as this movement. Their delinquency couldn’t be compared to the likes of the mods and rockers, although some of their behaviour was deemed unacceptable and rebellious. This was because they were breaking the ‘norms’ and conventions of femininity, however, and not because they were causing any form of actual riots or violent behaviour. The simple fact they were a feminist initiative would suggest that they did not fit the traditional modelling of youth subcultures as they had specific aims towards a particular cultural context. ‘Moral panic’ was often associated with youth subcultures (Cohen, 1980) and this wasn’t the case with Riot Grrrl, although certain newspapers did try to stir things up on occasion due to their rejection of media. Anne Barrowclough’s article in the Mail on Saturday stated “Meet the Riot Grrrls, the latest, nastiest phenomenon to enter the British music scene...They call themselves feminists but theirs is a feminism of rage and, even, fear.” (Barrowclough, 1993) This account displays the type of media fascination that Hebdige talks about, whilst portraying a threatening and invasive group of women, which was exaggerated and sensationalised to create reaction.
In addition to the above viewpoints, it should be noted that it is also argued that Riot Grrrl’s influence was predominantly within America, and details of the movement elsewhere, even in England, are extremely brief. This is important as it offers a range of factors as to why the movement may not have had the same effects all around the world. Although the movement was evidently visible within the UK, it is said that differences between social and cultural structures meant Riot Grrrl struggled to really set off. Downes (2007) provided an account of the movement’s influence within the United Kingdom, displaying the setbacks it encountered:
“The character that British Riot Grrrl would take was to be dictated and shaped by dominant cultural industries whose mainstream concept of indie, pub-centred music venue circuit and nationalised music media restricted, distracted and hindered an underground independent Riot Grrrl community. British Riot Grrrl had to start from scratch.” (Downes, 2007, p12-49)
Downes argued that the UK lacked the components and environment needed to produce and establish the same influence it held elsewhere. Although Huggy Bear were one of the main British bands to emerge from the existence of Riot Grrrl, straight away many could sense that it was different from the state the movement was in within America. Two males, Jon Slade and Chris Rowley, conceived Huggy Bear and although they set the foundations for the movement, it is argued that their different ideals are what inevitably caused its demise. Some may argue that a modern example of this can also be seen within The Cribs, who could be called a ‘post-Riot Grrrl’ band, however this is not really what they had in mind. The anger is there within their lyrics, yet it is not a true return to the movement. 
To conclude, it would appear that all of the arguments lead to this main idea that the Riot Grrrl movement became, and still is, something that changed and effected people on much more of an individual basis, rather than a revolutionary, world-wide one. Their production method of zines, and their DIY nature, meant that they could reach out to women everywhere. Zines were there to make a statement, and to empower, creating a support system for those who had the same belief system as this group of women. They were predominantly made up of women with an education, and therefore they had this sort of advantage, a tool, that would allow them to express their feelings in a successful manner. They connected with the reader, discussing issues that everyone could relate to, issues that everybody wanted to change. In addition to this, they contributed greatly to the way in which women began to feel about themselves, as well as creating a platform for them to become much more involved within the punk scene. Influence of Riot Grrrl can mainly be seen within third wave feminism but it is also visible in bands today. This includes The Gossip, The Yeah Yeah Yeahs and even British band The Cribs, with Everett True, a British music journalist, claiming that The Cribs believe the movement isn’t over and is still necessary in today’s society. This may add to the argument that Riot Grrrl isn’t dead, but there is yet to be a revolution. 
Individuals today continue to be inspired by the work of the Riot Grrrl movement, yet many wonder whether or not they would have been more successful if they’d created a better image for themselves within the media. Their refusal to participate shone a negative light upon the group. The mainstream media failed to reflect their true efforts, and their concerns, but many believe this to be their own failing. There was no real central organisation or authority that would allow the public to see them how they wanted to be seen. It is also suggested that the movement failed to appeal and meet the needs of everyone because it only really targeted the white, middle-class female. 
It therefore must be noted that this movement was not a revolution in the sense that it encountered and caused political changes, but it did create a platform for women today. Many hoped that individuals would pick up on what Riot Grrrl started and run with it. It was a short-lived movement but it never went away, and it has still not been forgotten about, but there is not enough of it. 

Image
1. 

Bikini Kill, Issue 2, 1990

References
  • McIntosh, Heather (2010). Brign the herstory of Riot Grrrl back into the present. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2010/02/bring_the_herst [Accessed 12 January 13)
  • McIntosh, Heather (2010). Brign the herstory of Riot Grrrl back into the present. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2010/02/bring_the_herst [Accessed 12 January 13)
  • D’Angelica, Christ (2009). Beyond Bikini Kill: A History of Riot Grrrl, from Grrrls to Ladies. ProQuest, pg 109
  • D’Angelica, Christ (2009). Beyond Bikini Kill: A History of Riot Grrrl, from Grrrls to Ladies. ProQuest, pg 109
  • Carlip, Hillary (1995). Girl Power: Young Women Speak Out!. First edition, New York: Warner Books, Inc.
  • Carlip, Hillary (1995). Girl Power: Young Women Speak Out!. First edition, New York: Warner Books, Inc.
  • Red Chidgey, source unknown
  • Riot Grrrl member, source unknown
  • Bag, Sarah (1993), The G Word, in Leeds and Bradford Riot Grrrl
  • Blase, Cazz (2005), But What of Us? UK Riot Grrrl. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2005/01/but_what_of_us_uk_riot_grrrl_part_3 [Accessed 12 January 13)
  • Jane Graham in Blase, Cazz (2005), But What of Us? UK Riot Grrrl. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2005/01/but_what_of_us_uk_riot_grrrl_part_3 [Accessed 12 January 13)
  • Hebdige, Dick (1979, 96), Subculture: The Meaning of Style (New Accents). New Edition, Routledge, pg 96
  • Downes, Julia (2007) Riot Grrrl: the legacy and contemporary landscape of DIY feminist cultural activis, in Monem, N. (ed.) Riot Grrrl: revolution girl style now! London: Black Dog publishing, pg 12-49
Bibliography
1. Schilt, Kristen. Popular Music and Society, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2003.
2. Bag, Sarah. The G Word, in Leeds and Bradford Riot Grrrl, 1993.
3. Blase, Cazz. But What of Us? UK Riot Grrrl, 2005.
4. Marcus, Sara. Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokes to the Right, 2011.
5. McIntosh, Heater. Bring the herstory of Riot Grrrl back into the present, 2010.
6. Carlip, Hillary. Girl Power: Young Women Speak Out!, 1995
7. Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style, 1979
8. D'Angelica, Christ, Beyond Bikini Kill: A History of Riot Grrrl, from Grrrls to Ladies, 2009.

No comments:

Post a Comment