rock, paper, scissors.
I’m increasingly frustrated by so many cut and paste “rock chicks” in top 40 today. It seems as if any poppet can add a few heavy guitar chords, attempt some sort of gravelly vocals and shes suddenly a woman in rock (thank you Rolling Stone for reinforcing Britney and Madonna as important female rock heroines…)
Don’t even get me started on the Veronica’s.
You don’t fool us with your eyeliner, tattoos and ridiculously stylish, jagged hair cut. That guitar playing looks mighty uncomfortable (and sort of staged, dear).
So why so insistent on the attempts of a rock chick look? You’re pop, pure and simple. (I mean, come on! One of you is dating an Australian Idol).
I suppose it begs the question to be asked behind the reasoning, the determination, the pure ambition to be seen as a girl of rock when you’re straddling the top 40 pop category.
Perhaps personal integrity? Maybe some sort of credibility when you whimsically name drop those inspiring women of the past as your heroes? Or maybe it’s just a great, bit marketing tool aimed at making more money and putting a bit of a different spin on what the traditions of being a girl in the music industry are (sing, look pretty and don’t do too much else.)
I hope I’m not being too scathing. I’m not going to lie, the sounds you release are catchy, sure. You make me hum along. But this cut and paste method of stylising your music to have some sort of rock edge doesn’t make you a rock artist.
And before I get beaten up by anyone, I’d like to site this article from Rolling Stone “Rock & Roll: Rock Chick
Svengali” which discusses how a grammy award winning producer has basically orchestrated Ashlee Simpson’s rock chick label by writing her songs with a rock style.
Surprise, Ashlee is a member of the cut and paste rock chick crowd too. What would Patti Smith think?
-kass.