The "Woman Composer" Revisited

In response to all the discussion on NewMusicBox recently about women composers, Natalie wrote a great post about affirmative action, women composers, and the new music scene in general. I'd like to focus on some of the points brought up in Amy Beth Kirsten's article. (I'd recommend reading the comments too- some of them are quite illuminating and make really interesting arguments, both agreeing and disagreeing with what I'm about to say.)

Kirsten's main argument is that we are living in a post-gender world. I respectfully disagree. As we've talked about many, many times on this blog before, until there are equal numbers of men and women studying composition, graduating from composition programs, being programmed on concerts, obtaining jobs in the field (whether in academia or not, including residencies, commissions, etc), we are certainly not living in a post-gender world. The new music world is absolutely getting better with regard to the number of female composers, but we are making progress at a snail's pace. Just because we're moving toward a goal does not mean we are anywhere near it. And I don't think anyone can argue that there are equal numbers of male and female composers doing all these thing-- so why are people continuing to argue that gender doesn't matter?

I understand that some people don't wish to discuss it anymore. That's fine. What I don't understand is when people seem to state that no one should discuss it, and that to continue talking about the "woman composer" is detrimental to women in general and female composers in particular (because of the ghettoization/ segregation/ affirmative action problems). On the contrary, I think not continuing the discussion is even more detrimental to female composers, whether they wish to identify themselves as women composers or not. If we stop talking about it, it means that everything is fine, that the underrepresentation and under-programming of female composers is normal and acceptable.

I am not militantly forcing anyone to label herself a "woman composer," just as I do not expect anyone to force me to label myself a "Jewish composer" or anything else that might be applicable. But what is wrong with labeling yourself a woman composer (or a Jewish composer, or whatever you want- Judd Greenstein wrote an excellent comment to Kirsten's orginal article on this topic), while owning the title and being proud of it? Since some women have embraced the term "woman composer," (in applying it to themselves) it is troubling when others speak out against it-- not everyone needs to label themselves in this manner, but please don't judge others for doing so.

Something else I find troublesome is when female composers refuse to program their music on all-women's concerts. Although I understand not wanting to be pigeonholed or only have one's music programmed on specific-gender or other types of demographic concerts, I am concerned that adamantly distancing yourself from such concerts implies a certain kind of judgment. If I am happy to program my music on a women's-only concert, and other women (especially if they are more prominent composers) look down on these types of concerts, how does that affect the reputation of the concert and its music? What does it say about music that happens to be written by female composers in general, when women don't want to be described in this manner? A composer who will only program her music on a concert that includes music by men implies that she does not think that concerts of music by women are worthy, and therefore that the music itself is not as good. If your music is good, why not have it on an all-female concert? If female composers are just as good as male composers, what's wrong with an all-female concert, as long as all the compositions are excellent? We certainly have plenty of all-male composer concerts, and no one seems to have a problem with those. Having your work on a female-composer-only concert shouldn't imply that the work isn't good. However, when people start refusing to be programmed on these types of concerts they are implicitly making a negative statement about the music, which becomes an insult to everyone else on the concert. 

I also wonder what role success plays in these discussions. I once read an interview of a very prominent female composer who refused to label herself a woman composer. I completely understand that not everyone wants to take up this fight, and maybe it's partly an issue of not wanting to be labeled as an affirmative-action success story. But what bothered me about it was that I wondered what this woman thought before she became famous and whether it changed her perspective. It's so much easier once you've "made it" to think something like, "my music is programmed enough, so clearly gender isn't an issue." It would be so helpful for successful female composers to set an example for others instead of telling us our fight is no longer relevant. Setting an example would not only help other women in the field, but it would also help the rest of the world to see that calling oneself a "woman composer" is a proud, not derogatory, term.

There are dozens of reasons why a composer of any gender may or may not be successful. But putting talent aside, for just a moment, it seems disrespectful to all the women who haven't yet made it and may be experiencing sexism to say that this is no longer an issue. One, two, or even 200 successful women composers does not mean that we live in a post-gender world. Just because Barack Obama is president does not mean we live in a post-race world- why is this any different?

Posted by Sarah