Diplomarbeit Titel der Diplomarbeit Gender construction and American ‘Free Folk’ music(s) Verfasser Maximilian Georg Spiegel angestrebter akademischer Grad Magister der Philosophie (Mag. phil.) Wien, im Jänner 2012 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 300 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Politikwissenschaft Betreuer: ao. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Roman Horak 1 2 Acknowledgments This diploma thesis has been ubiquitous for me during the last three years; many people have contributed to it in many different ways, and I want to thank them for their help and support. I want to thank my supervisor, Roman Horak, for his advice, help and patience. My parents, Martin and Viviane Spiegel, have been supporting me ceaselessly throughout my studies. So have Rudolf and Susanne Ruthensteiner and Maria Spiegel. Without their aid, and that of my entire family, I wouldn’t have been able to finish this thesis. Christina Lutter offered invaluable advice and reassurance. Irene Revell, Holly Ingleton and the LCC Archive and Special Collections Centre staff helped me carry out research and gave advice thereon at London’s Her Noise Archive, an important institution that I want to recommend. Jeanette Leech took the time to meet me in Sheffield to discuss both her own project, Seasons They Change: The Story of Acid, Psych and Experimental Folk, and my thesis. Of course, without my interviewees, there would be no thesis. Phil McMullen, Eric Arn, Spencer Clark, Labanna Bly and Paul LaBrecque, Samara Lubelski, Karl Bauer, Matt Valentine, Ron Schneiderman, Natalie Mering, Eric Carbonara, Tara Burke, Mike Tamburo, Jeffrey Alexander and Miriam Goldberg, Eva Saelens, Evan Caminiti, Glenn Donaldson, Sharon Cheslow, Chris Moon, Britt Brown, Christina Carter, Pete Nolan, David Keenan and Heather Leigh Murray all proved to be generous and open-minded interviewees, often giving hints and help even beyond the actual interview, helping me set up further interviews and / or providing me with food and music. I can only hope that my thesis doesn’t pale too badly in light of their contributions and input. Vanessa Arn, Loren Chasse, Erika Elder, James Ferraro and Steven R. Smith all were willing to be interviewed but schedules ended up not permitting these; I hope to be able to close those gaps at some point. Lieven Martens provided me with the contact info for Spencer Clark, Labanny Bly and Paul LaBrecque. Gallina Tamburo hung out chatting about my US trip, MV Carbon and her friend Kim (I believe) joined Pete Nolan and me for a while during the interview, and so did Alastair Roberts when I interviewed David Keenan and Heather Leigh Murray. Many friends of mine offered advice on various levels and helped me in uncountable ways. Thank you, thank you, thank you Jenny Abittan, Holger Adam, Thomas Auer and 3 the entire Upper Austrian Krems-tripping crew, Iain ‘B|’ Campbell, Laura Dressel, Frank Epple, Lukas Ertl, Bettina Fitz, Carola Fuchs, Chris Halliday, Lucia Hammling, Cornelia Hauer, Andrea Heinz, Stephanie Hollauf, Daniel Jirdén, Hanno Kalkhofer, Stefan Kushima, Kerstin M. Horner, Julia C. Kunz, Vicky Langan, Taraka Larson, Alice Laval, Jeanette Leech, Charlotte Lejeune, John Levin, Alastair McLernon, Julia Miesenböck, David Murphy, Martin Nimmervoll, Shash Pattekar, Richard Rees Jones, Martina Rosenthal, Shilla Schlüsslmayr, Roswitha Schuller and the other participants in Roman Horak’s diploma thesis / dissertation seminar, Tom White, Lukas Winder and Franz Zar. Gefördert von der Universität Wien. 4 0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 6 1 Impetus .................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Listening ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Studying .......................................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 Writing ............................................................................................................................................ 13 2 Contingency and perspectivity: towards a minor cultural sociology of gender .............................. 16 2.1 Genealogy / history ......................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Minor history / minor cultural sociology? ....................................................................................... 19 2.3 Rhizome .......................................................................................................................................... 22 2.4 “Gender: A Useful Category of [any] Analysis” ............................................................................. 26 2.5 Doing and performing gender ......................................................................................................... 31 2.6 Anti-essentialism in contingent fields of research........................................................................... 35 3 Scenes ..................................................................................................................................................... 40 3.1 Rhizomes and scenes ...................................................................................................................... 40 3.2 Tracing the ‘New Weird America’ .................................................................................................. 42 3.3 Webs and / or multiplicities: further thoughts on the scenes’ constitution ...................................... 48 3.4 Exploring dynamic, heterogeneous scenes ...................................................................................... 52 4 Interview methodology ......................................................................................................................... 56 4.1 “Das qualitative Interview” ............................................................................................................. 56 4.2 Expertise ......................................................................................................................................... 62 4.3 Planning and access ........................................................................................................................ 65 4.4 Interview guide and process ............................................................................................................ 71 4.5 Interview analysis ........................................................................................................................... 85 4.6 Wrapping up the thesis .................................................................................................................... 91 5 Into the field .......................................................................................................................................... 94 5.1 Getting into music / Interviewees’ backgrounds ............................................................................. 98 5.2 Instruments .................................................................................................................................... 116 5.3 Social relations: friendships and relationships .............................................................................. 129 5.4 Influence ....................................................................................................................................... 137 5.5 Musicians’ lives ............................................................................................................................ 149 5.6 Organization / scenes’ structures................................................................................................... 159 5.7 Aesthetics ...................................................................................................................................... 171 5.8 Gender / Politics / Gender politics ................................................................................................ 181 6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 189 6.1 Gender construction and American ‘Free Folk’ music(s): concluding thoughts ........................... 189 6.2 Velocity of the yolk: future prospects ........................................................................................... 205 7 Literature............................................................................................................................................. 208 5 0 Introduction What is dangerous about this conception of thinking, according to Bergson, is precisely the privilege it accords to solutions to the detriment of problems, the denial of the power of problems as problems. A problem defines a field of possible experience, it sets out the meaning of the questions one can ask and prefigures the cases of its solution. Answers necessarily derive from the form of the problem, but the problem is not given in advance; it must be constituted. The freedom of thinking thus consists in the elaboration of problematic fields, and it depends on a critical attitude towards what is given, on our ability to experiment, to open up the limits of that which presents itself as necessary.1