“Shut Up and Take My (Hege)Money!”

I wrote the following critical essay for the third course of my Dimensions of Culture (DOC) class. Quoting its syllabus for context, “the purpose of DOC 3 is to enable undergraduate students to understand the intersections of class, gender, sexuality, race, and other categories within a cultural object. The identification of social contradictions within a given object is especially important.


Introduction

This paper will argue that a contrast of Bessie Smith’s “Young Woman’s Blues” (1926) and The Supremes’ “Where Did Our Love Go?” (1964) allows us to understand how a dominant culture commercializes emergent ideologies in order to coopt them into less threatening forms.

            Both of these songs are about women whose male lovers lost interest in them. However, on analyzing their formal elements within their sociohistorical contexts, they hint at changes in American society’s ideologies (i.e. system of beliefs characteristic of a particular social category) that occurred over the forty years that separated them. Being cultural objects, songs often represent social practices and beliefs about how the world works (i.e. structures of feeling) – and since it is rarely the case that the different groups within the same social category share equal power and opportunity, one group tends to dominate its society’s power structures and strongly influence its hegemony (i.e. beliefs/practices that are considered commonsensical) by establishing a dominant ideology. The ideological tensions that arise as a result of simultaneously competing ideologies (belonging to different groups) usually find expression in such cultural objects. Often, as a result of contradictions between the dominant and the lives experienced by the minority, new structures of feeling arise, and the associated ‘emergent’ ideologies often contest the dominant. In order to maintain its power and the definition of hegemony that it set, the dominant attempts to coopt these emergent ideologies into its own by diluting their significance and/or reinterpreting them. If it fails, the emergent ideology will become the new dominant while traces of the previous dominant will usually remain in institutional structures as residual ideologies (Williams 121-135). American society, in the context of these two songs (and even today), is dominated by heteronormative White males. This paper will apply an intersectional analysis (similar to Crenshaw’s) on the social categories of gender, race and class to illustrate how the dominant group utilizes commercialization of emergent cultures as a tool to de-signify and coopt their representation in society in order to make them less threatening.

Commercialization as a Tool

            “Where Did Our Love Go?” (henceforth referred to as WDOLG) was released in a time when American society’s acceptance of neoliberalism as an economic theory was rising. The increasing prominence of capitalism that ensued strengthened the importance of a secure income in the lives of the average American. This occurred to the extent that the American hegemony of the 1960’s easily justified (and preferred) monetary pursuits over others such as social change. Knowing how society structures itself around the hegemony (Omi & Winant 32), one could attempt to explain the production practices employed by the recording company that The Supremes sang this song for: Motown. Driven by the desire to capture the (White) teenage audience – yet founded by a man of African-American descent – Motown hired songwriters and producers to prepare lyrics and instrumental tracks for songs, and then auditioned singers for these (Weissman 98). In order to further their opportunity for a better income by securing a broader (multi-racial) audience, these songwriters were cautious in penning their lyrics – and these lyrics often reinforced the dominant culture without challenging it.

            This is in contrast to “Young Woman’s Blues” (henceforth referred to as YWB), which Bessie Smith wrote herself approximately forty years prior to WDOLG. Smith does not hold back in challenging the dominant culture as she acknowledges her minority identities while placing herself within her society. Even though YWB was released in a time when industrialization was on the rise and economic conditions were unfavorable to those who lived in rural settings, it is apparent that Smith prioritized drawing attention social issues over economic pursuits. While these subtleties will be explored further later in this paper, it should be stressed now that by restructuring society to prioritize earning, the dominant culture had compelled artists (The Supremes) to commodify themselves and strip themselves of their (Black and female) identities. In line with the theory of how the structure and representation of a social group feed each other (Omi & Winant 36), this restructuring strengthened these artists’ representation in society since their multiple identities were now held with lesser significance. In other words, despite these songs being sung by artists who share similar racial and gender identities in times of similar race/gender-related revolutions, one may observe how these songs were made less threatening to the dominant culture over time.By noting how it was the economic climate that had changed relatively significantly (with the prioritization of monetary gain), this diffusion of threatening ideologies into milder forms could be attributed to the dominant utilizing commercialization as a tool to quell emergent cultures.

Impact on Gender Formation

            In order to begin analyzing the impact of the dominant culture’s cooption of threatening ideologies, one can analyze the system of gendered relations (i.e. the gender formation) and ideologies in American culture of the times each song was written in. The traditional ideology of patriarchy – of women being less powerful and dependent on men – was dominant at the time (and persists even to this day, at least as a residual ideology). Thus, opportunity was (is) less accessible to women merely due to their gender-identity – and in the periods that both songs were written in, the actions of women were both highly scrutinized and heavily influenced by social expectations (Weissman 131-132).

            However, some women would violate society’s expectations regardless – and this separates female performers into two distinct categories: those who were “well-behaved” (conforming to the dominant culture), and those who were not: the “self-determined” (Mariscal). Bessie Smith falls into the latter, especially since YWB is speckled with lyrics that challenge the dominant. For instance, the line “I ain’t gonna marry, ain’t gonna settle down” (Smith)could be seen as a dismissal of society’s expectations of women (since the norm, i.e. patriarchy, dictated that women should ‘settle down’ with a man and rely on him for the rest of their married lives). Similarly, with “I’m gonna drink good moonshine” (Smith) Smith rebels against Prohibition, which was being enforced at the time. Interestingly, Prohibition was brought about mainly through the efforts of women – and Smith appears to transcend consolidation with her gender identity to lay a more-comprehensive attack on the norm. On the whole, it is apparent that Smith’s intent was very likely to use her song more as a medium for protest, and less as a source of income. Otherwise, she would have made efforts to not-discomfit the dominant culture with emergent ideologies of protest and self-determination by a ‘double minority’ (Black woman, in this case). It should be noted that in the years between the release of Smith’s and The Supremes’ songs, it was very common for recording companies to persuade songwriters to change their lyrics to secure commercial acceptance (Lipsitz 162). Thus, when contrasting YWB against WDOLG, it should come as no surprise that the latter feeds patriarchy by portraying the singer as a helpless and desperate romantic who was entirely dependent on a male figure. This is a result of Motown’s commercial interests of securing a broader audience. Theses interests are also affirmed by the music video for this song that was shown in class (04/11/2016): The Supremes wore ‘proper’ attire that would have improved their chances of acquiring a conservative White audience’s approval despite their racial and gender minority identities, especially over simultaneously-emerging youth countercultures in songs from artists such as Janis Joplin (who performed psychedelic rock and behaved “unwomanly” on stage) and others who dressed sexually provocatively (Lipsitz 160).

            What is striking is that both these songs were written in similar sociohistorical contexts with respect to gender-related issues. The 1920’s (YWB) was a period of protest by women: they had just earned the right to suffrage, and First Wave Feminism was underway along with other feminist movements such as the Flapper Movement. The 1960’s (WDOLG) too were a period of activism for women, with Second Wave Feminism ongoing. Even though The Supremes had reason to stand up for their female identity, they seemed less inclined to do so – and this is very likely due to the competitive commercial environment fashioned by the dominant culture. This structure paved the path for The Supremes to reinforce the ideology of patriarchy over the emergent ideologies brought out by Smith, coopting the latter to make them less threatening – and the dominant fed this representation of Black women by paying more for songs that aligned with its ideologies.

Impact on Racial, Class and Gender Formations

            Just as with studying gender formation, one can understand more about the impact of the dominant culture’s cooption of emergent ideologies (via commercialization of the latter) by analyzing the racial formation (system of racial categories and ideological relations) of America at the time the two songs were produced. YWB was released in a time when Jim Crow laws enforced racial segregation in America. WDOLG, on the other hand, was released in the year the Civil Rights Act was passed (that eventually stopped the enforcement of Jim Crow laws). This was a period of heightened race-related activism, with the Civil Rights Movement peaking. Clearly, race-related issues remained unresolved at the time The Supremes released their song – and interestingly, the possible repercussions for challenging the hegemony (as a result of the latter pushing back) were relatively graver for Smith since the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) – which has a reputation for physically assaulting ‘threatening’/successful non-White people (Hernandes 41-45) – was reviving at the time. Yet, economic pursuits and The Supremes’ contract with Motown kept the prior from identifying with, or even acknowledging, their racial (and female) identity(ies) despite the fact that WDOLG’s genre was primarily R&B.

            Both R&B, and the Blues (YWB’s genre) are deeply tied to African-American music and culture (Weissman 78, 97-99). However, unlike YWB (whose lyrics acknowledge African-American culture), WDOLG does not go beyond using the African-American music’s style. This could be interpreted as some form of dilution of cultural values (and associated emergent cultures in the American hegemony) that, in this case, is a consequence of the dominant culture’s shifted/stronger significance of monetary gain at the time. In a slight twist to this phenomenon, a contradiction may lie in the fact that Motown’s founder was of African-American descent (Weissman 98) – yet he inadvertently reinforced the dominant culture regardless. However, since he did not identify with the female identity that The Supremes shared – and given the fact that the songwriters for Motown were male (Weissman 145) – one may begin to understand: how Motown was essentially commodifying The Supremes by not encouraging (nor allowing them) expression of their identities; and why strengthening the ideology of patriarchy may have been unproblematic for them. As suggested earlier, Bessie Smith does validate and positively portray both her Black – “I’m a deep killer of brown” (Smith) – and female identities. She goes on to reaffirm at the end of the song how she’s “a good woman” and “can get plenty men” despite her: race; breaking the norm; and ‘promiscuous’ intentions. [As a side note, this was also the period of Margaret Sanger’s activism for birth control and more-liberal sex (D’Emilio and Freedman 186-191). Even though YWB doesn’t imply that Smith supported this movement, she certainly does indulge in the emergent ideology of female independence and feminism through her lyrics].

            A similar analysis of how race intersects with gender for women on the stage could give insight into the ideological tensions associated with multiple identities in other artists who also performed in the year WDOLG was released. The “unwomanly” behavior of Janis Joplin in her psychedelic/blues rock performances (in which she screamed and stomped her feet energetically), was drawn from African culture (Mariscal). Even though this behavior resulted in increased sales and fame as a female performer (although she remained in a negative light to the most-conservative, especially the elderly), it paints a different picture about the consequences of breaking the norm as a White woman. This is in contrast to the tighter restrictions that Tina Turner, a Black woman, felt that she should adhere to, when performing during the same year. While she certainly appeared to be more sexually-provocatively dressed (compared to The Supremes) in the music video showed in class (04/11/2016), she was at a higher risk of being blamed for society’s malfunctions (i.e. emergent ideologies that are considered dangerous by the dominant) due to the racial component of her identity. This may have been implied in the video shown in class (04/11/2016) by the statements issued by persons of the Alabama White Citizens Council (a.k.a. the KKK) about the obscenity, immorality and savagery associated with the African-American ‘beat’ (although this was in the context of Rock ‘n Roll). From the intersectional analyses of the cases of The Supremes, Janis Joplin and Tina Turner, it could be seen how a hegemony that encourages and accepts commercial pursuits allows lesser room for ideologies that threaten the dominant (patriarchal, White and conservative) culture; compared to a hegemony (during Bessie Smith’s time) in which money wasn’t as strong a driving force. As theorized by Omi and Winant, society’s structure indeed strengthened only the representation that reinforced it back in turn. Additionally, it could also be seen how the dominant is less harsh (or even welcoming) to a watered-down version of an emergent culture (as seen with The Supremes’ success; and Joplin’s fame that resulted from ‘borrowing’ from African culture). Yet, it is also seen how Turner, despite being of this same culture’s heritage, was subject to lesser freedom/opportunity specifically due to her racial identity. Ultimately, all this demonstrates the way that emergent ideologies (of non-conformity, and race/gender-minority narratives) from Smith’s time had been prevented from becoming dominant by the dominant culture’s cooption of them via commercialization.

            So far, WDOLG has been portrayed rather negatively for having succumbed to the indirect ‘machinations’ of the dominant culture. However, an analysis of the class formation (i.e. the system of economic relationships) of the 1920’s and 1960’s show how both songs may have empowered Black women. The narrator in YWB appears to be from a rural neighborhood [as could be inferred from Smith’s reference to chickens crowing (Smith)] – and the 1920’s was a bad time for those who lived in rural areas due to the rise of industrialism in urban areas and ensuing lack of opportunity. Yet this woman appeared to afford a living-space [since it was her partner (and not her) who had left the following morning (Smith)]. Additionally, Smith herself was a famous performer who earned relatively more than other women who shared her identities. All this implies economic independence, and coupled with the narrator’s affirmation of her race and gender identities, both Smith and her song’s narrator could be seen as minorities who comprehensively rebel from significant aspects of the norm’s expectations. One cannot deny that The Supremes, being Black women themselves, were earning a lot of money, and had a favorable representation in the dominant society (especially since they did not break the norm). Since they were active in the time of economic trouble (during President Johnson’s War on Poverty), their commercial success may have strengthened the representation of their Black and female identities in society (and perhaps even compelled the structure to bring more Black women onto the stage). However, this apparent victory is but an affirmation of their own failure when compared with Smith’s time. This was a victory in terms of class, and it was the dominant that made class significant in American lives by shifting the hegemony to result in the commercialization of emergent ideologies. In an intersectional analysis in terms of race, gender and class, the downplaying of Black and women identities in WDOLG could be seen as even stronger when considering how it was reinforced by a victory in an aspect of society (i.e. class) that the dominant intended the emergent cultures to transition into (in order to make them less threatening). By commercializing groups of emergent cultures that may have risen from Smith’s time, the dominant had secured its victory.

In Conclusion

            One could argue that it was the emergent ideology of escapism (i.e. of rejecting the dominant culture and living as a passive bystander) in the 1960’s that may have influenced The Supremes from actively participating in improving the representation of their Black and female identities in society (Lipsitz 170). However, it was merely a subset of the American youth (the predominantly White ‘hippies’, for example) that embraced this counterculture; and The Supremes would have been less likely to identify with these groups due to their race and gender identities, and age. Additionally, Motown supporting this counterculture would have made them unfavorable in the eyes of their greater (White and conservative) audience (Weissman 98) – and this was what it attempted to avoid in the first place by ignoring/downplaying considerations of race/gender in its productions. Thus, reason could allow instead for the blaming of a capitalistic society on the cooptation of threatening ideologies into the dominant.

            In conclusion, the analysis of the two songs performed in this paper demonstrates: how cultural objects (songs, in this case) reveal a people’s structures of feeling (in terms of ideologies) when analyzed alongside sociohistorical context (as was seen in this specific analysis by isolating commercialization as a tool employed by the dominant); how these structures of feeling become complicated as a result of a group’s identification with several social categories; how Raymond William’s theory of the dominant attempting to coopt emergent ideologies to make them less threatening (Williams 124-125) is indeed observed in this analysis (via commercialization); and how the dominant culture feeds (via selective consumerism) non-threatening representations that preserve the hegemony established by the prior.

            With monetary pursuits being made more significant across the globe by the day, studies on the impacts of commercialization on culture (such as this, and Lipsitz 175) could prove priceless in attempts to encourage and maintain a diverse society. Since it is seen how this ‘tool’ can effectively dilute emergent ideologies (even those that may possibly be better for humankind as a whole if they were dominant), such studies could possibly lead to means that would allow emergent cultures more opportunity, and their proponents more comfort in expressing and living ‘themselves’ without having to ‘shut up’ as a result of the hegemony’s astute use of ‘money’.

Note on cover image: “Shut up and take my money!” is a catchphrase used in popular internet culture to express enthusiastic approval toward a product or idea. It is often associated with an image macro featuring the character Fry from the animated television series Futurama. [Source]


Works Cited

  • Smith, Bessie. Young Woman’s Blues. Columbia Records, 1926. Web.
  • The Supremes. Where Did Our Love Go? Motown, 1964. Web.
  • Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1977. Print.
  • Weissman, Dick. Talkin’ ‘Bout A Revolution. Backbeat Books, 2010. Print.
  • Lipsitz, George. Who’ll Stop The Rain. U of North Carolina P, 1994. Print.
  • Omi and Winant. “Racial Formation”. Dimensions of Culture 1, 2015. Print.
  • Crenshaw, Kimberle. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics and Violence Against Women of Color”. Dimensions of Culture 1, 2015. Print.
  • Hernandes, Harriet. “Testimony Against the Ku Klux Klan” (1871). Dimensions of Culture 2: Dr. Mark Hendrickson, 2016. Print.
  • D’Emilio and Freedman. Excerpts from Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America. Dimensions of Culture 2: Dr. Mark Hendrickson, 2016. Print.
  • Marsical, Jorge. (Lectures). U of California, San Diego. 11 Apr 2016.

Leave a Comment