Review of Diane Pecknold and Kristine M. McCusker, eds., Country Boys and Redneck Women: New Essays in Gender and Country Music (University Press of Mississippi, 2016) Jonathan T. King NOTE: The examples for the (text-only) PDF version of this item are available online at: h.p://www.mtosmt.or0/issues/mto. 7.23.2/mto.17.23.3.kin0.php KE3WORDS: country music, popular music, social theory, 0ender, race, class, identity, intersectionality Received February 2017 6olume 23, Number 3, September 2017 Copyri0ht © 2017 Society for Music Theory 8 9 The si0ni:cance of 0ender as a determinin0 musical factor entan0led in the web of music analysis has been too commonly overlooked. Adoptin0 0ender as a primary startin0 block can serve as a useful corrective to unintentionally biased conte)ts when analyzin0 historical musical literature. It is also a crucial consideration when aemptin0 the di>cult theoretical task of interpretin0 contemporary musical te)ts, particularly in the production and performance of popular musics. A new antholo0y by Diane Pecknold and Kristine M. McCusker pushes us to take seriously the intersectionally 0endered aspects of aesthetics, composition, 0enre studies, performance, technolo0y, and reception history of country music. It considers both historical and contemporary music and musicians from these diverse analytical perspectives, with each author’s approach illuminatin0 the others. 82] Early aempts notwithstandin0 (notably Bufwack and Oermann’s Finding Her Voice: The Saga of Women in Country Music , :rst published in AA2", scholarly discourse on country music has been slow to absorb the insi0hts of 0ender studies. Pecknold and McCusker :rst sou0ht to redress this analytical lacuna in their 2004 collection A Boy Named Sue: Gender and Country Music . The editors themselves modestly Cuali:ed this initial eDort as “e)ploratoryF rather than comprehensive. However, the sophistication of concurrent scholarship proved to con:rm the early instincts of the editors. Country-music studies e)panded beyond the now-canonical historical narrative 1 of 6 established by Bill Malone ( Malone 1968 ), still bein0 reinforced in the mid-1990s (e.0., in DawidoD AAH ), to encompass analysis and criticism informed by more recently developed paradi0ms. These narratives, as David SanIek noted in his contribution to A Boy Named Sue , emphasized country music’s workin0-class roots and presented a musical tradition representative of honesty, labor, and resistance—one that, by dint of its strai0htforward nature, could be restorative or medicinal in its eDects (SanIek, in Pecknold and McCusker 2004 , )i). Althou0h the ri0or of this early scholarship did much to le0itimize this artistic tradition in the eyes of the academy, its reductive paradi0m failed to take into account many crucial codeterminants of the country aesthetic. Deconstructin0 a deeply embedded sociomusical narrative is not easy, of courseK sustained intellectual eDort and ag0ressive inCuiry are, and will continue to be, necessary. 829 4ith the present volume, Pecknold and McCusker have mobilized much new scholarly eDort and inCuiry toward this aim. One 0oal of this second collection is shared with the :rst: to demonstrate that 0ender is not only an interestin0 but a necessary analytical framework. They have e)tended their earlier antholo0ical work by collectin0 2 essays ( Example 1 ) that are co0nizant of the 0reatly e)panded body of scholarship that has emer0ed since their :rst collection. (A useful selected biblio0raphy of this more recent work is included in this new book.) This work sharpens the analytical focus throu0h another set of speci:c case studies, and is clearly articulated toward the end of Country Boys and Redneck Women by Leor0ia Christ0au. She oDers a perceptive illumination of the cross-pollinatin0 work of 0ender and class in the reception of Ki.y 4ells’s “It 4asn’t Lod Who Made Honky Tonk An0els.F As public perceptions of her chan0ed dramatically, 4ells’s own subdued reaction to the son0’s incredible success allowed for many interpretive ambi0uities over time. The shiftin0 reassessments of 4ells’s inte0rity and authenticity delineated by Christ0au reveal the di>culties inherent in popular-music analysis. Her essay clearly demonstrates the need for mutable analytical frames that can take these contin0encies into account. The collected essays Iudiciously chosen by Pecknold and McCusker oDer many such frames. 8B9 A more trenchant 0oal of Pecknold and McCusker’s new eDort is to productively problematize the intersectionality of 0ender with other socially maintained interpretive and e)pressive frames such as race, and class, and authenticity. Class and authenticity have lon0 been hallmarks of country-music scholarship (as noted above), commonly overdeterminin0 much of the narrative. This volume complicates their si0ni:cance by fore0roundin0 0enderK speci:c case studies demonstrate that 0endered concepts are ti0htly intertwined with, and even constitutive of, class and authenticity issues. 8M9 To this end, Nocelyn R. Neal interro0ates why EOadies Oove Country Boys” (the title of a hit sin0le released by Trace Adkins in 2006) in terms of the intersection of 0ender, class and economics. She asks what this musico-cultural moment in contemporary country music may have to say about the music’s fan base in the :rst decade or so of the 21st century. She e)amines a set of country tunes released between 2008 and 2012, each of which presents aspects of the E0ood ol’ boy” persona (3), and oDers a rich and polysemous assessment of the purportedly “rural” imagery deployed in these son0s. She caps the essay with a rich and layered analysis of Nustin Moore’s 2007 son0 E@ait a Hook” (and its accompanyin0 video) that traces shiftin0 tokens of rustic authenticity over the course of the son0. In the video, a surprisin0 seCuence of narrative shifts leaves listeners and viewers with radically diDerent understandin0s of the sin0er’s authenticity dependin0 on their own e)perience of “country life.” Neal’s close readin0 both con:rms and e)tends the ar0ument of the chapter: that both artists and audiences continually reconte)utalize these terms, thereby alterin0 their meanin0s. This e)empli:es the best kind of popular-music analysis, both culturally conte)ualized and rooted in practice. 86] Recently, the role of race in country-music history has been hi0hli0hted in another antholo0y curated by Pecknold, the essential Hidden in the Mix: The African American Presence in Country Music . 2 of 6 Pecknold’s own contribution to Country Boys and Redneck Women makes intersectionality historically e)plicit in a race-sensitive comparison of two seemin0ly contrastin0 women, Oinda Martell and Neanne C. Reilly, whose career traIectories challen0e many common race-, class-, and 0ender-based assumptions. She shows how these musicians worked a0ainst ideolo0ies of their time, demonstratin0 how the “practice” of country musicians can and does affect “theoryFJa lar0er aim of the antholo0y. In li0ht of this book, it is hard to imagine any convincin0 class- and race-based, commodi:ed, constructed, contained, or Cueer readin0s of either “country classics” or contemporary country performance without such a deeply felt and societally conditioned framework of 0ender. 819 The increased sophistication of research in masculinity studies since Pecknold and McCusker’s last edited volume allows for a more e)pansive readin0 of the si0ni:cance of 0ender and a renewed critiCue of concepts understood to be masculine. Ma.hew D. Su.on’s readin0 of African- American country star Charley Pride’s autobio0raphy hi0hli0hts the carefully drawn links between race and masculinity in the country music universe. In his own story, Pride carefully avoids presentin0 himself as too ambitious or driven, suppressin0 purportedly masculine characteristics in a racially frau0ht conte)t. Su.on’s dismantlin0 of Pride’s rhetorical “naturalness” demonstrates how careful aention to marked and unmarked e)pressive 0estures can work to challen0e and overturn interpretive norms, thereby pushin0 analytical theory forward. 8H9 This collection also probes the cross-cultural di>culties of 0ender and the possibilities for usin0 it as an analytical frame. Pse O.osson describes how Abori0inal Australians clin0 to the residual aesthetic norms of country music in order to frame their own emer0ent masculinities. His account, which untan0les “abori0inal” and “country” concepts of masculinity, demonstrates the interpretive subtlety reCuired when encounterin0 such intercultural appropriation. Analo0ously, Ale)ander S. Dent e)plores the 0rowin0 si0ni:cance of a rurally coded masculinity in urban Brazil, which is shiftin0 the poetics of contemporary mQsica serteneIa, or “colle0e country.F The emer0ence of this “formulaic” country 0enre in a cosmopolitan conte)t has created an)iety amon0 some Brazilians who fear the implications of potentially embarrassin0 intercultural readin0s of these son0s. The relationship between form and content is Cuite frau0ht in both of these e)amples, and cross- culturally 0endered assumptions are at the heart of these analytical conundrums. 8A9 Political implications of 0ender are introduced Cuite e)plicitly by Caroline Lnagy, who describes a 0roup of convicted women in the 1930s and 1940s who were able to creatively reframe themselves as an all-female country 0roup. These women were able to use the resources of the political institution that imprisoned them to harness the 0endered musical tropes and cultural stereotypes of the “outside world,”