The Beatles and the Topic of Androgyny - Essay Example

? The Beatles and the Topic of Androgyny Introduction In the context of Jane Tompkins “I Want to Hold Your Hand”, the term androgynous is used to describe gender identity that exists in a society whose roles of gender do not entirely fit within the constructs of masculinity or femininity roles as designed by the process of social advancement. According to Barbara Ehrenreich, Elizabeth Hess and Gloria Jacobs, “androgynous” is the state of breaking away from gender roles, in which context they affirm that the Beatles were androgynous because they were free to be strong, sexual, and do what they liked(Golder and Sarah 523). In other words, androgyny is the state of breaking away from the rigid following of cultural principles, especially regarding the issue of gender roles. Ideally, application of androgyny is reported to have gained popularly from 1960s, but by 1950s and before, people used to strictly follow their cultural practices. As such, androgyny is a component of societal revolution and cultural changes, an aspect that is portrayed succinctly by Jane Tompkins in her “I Want to Hold Your Hand”. This essay will delve into the lifestyles of the Beatles music band, and the manner in which they advanced androgyny during their reign. The essay will close with a personal reflection on different Tompkins’ opinions regarding androgyny and the cultures of nineteen fifties and sixties. Discussion In her autobiography, Jane Tompkins reveals how her exposure to Beatle’s music transformed her life. She portrays Beatle’s music band as androgynous, something that was apparently likable by the women and hence encouraging them to become androgynous. Jane Tompkins grew up as shy person who, like any other persons who resembled her character, is interested in only the ordinary formalities of life. As such, she was less concerned with the interests of her contemporary peers, and in fact her gender role was defined by the American popular culture of the 1950s, an era in which gender roles were inflexible. Her perception about popular artists such as the Rolling-stones is very negative, and that is why she says that they were violent humans and that they possessed male chauvinist traits, a penchant she affirms that is associated with hostility towards the opposite gender. In the 1950s, the roles of gender were firmly based on guiding principles designed by the society. For example, masculinity was represented by roughness of a male as a person. Tompkins says Beatles seemed human because of the way they sing about “love” which she did not understand well. This shows that she is endured to the emotional aspect of their culture, which was uncommon in the music of 1950s. She confirms this when she says that most of the popular songs she used to listen were not human in this sense (Womack and Todd 216). What Tompkins loves about Beatle’s music most is the fact that it was innocent and appealing; it had childlike quality and it focused on quality, rather than being world-weary and knowing. What’s more, their songs were very simple and they did not pretend to be righteous or possess sheer masculinity, again supporting them in breaking away from following of rigid roles of gender, which she describes as being androgynous. Beatles had compassion for people other than themselves, because they told real stories, which again is a cultural transformation – breaking away from self-aggrandizement to thinking about others. To her, this is a reprieve because the songs by Beatles did not have the authoritarian baritone of many males’ singers whose tone declared the superiority of the male opinion, which was an advancement of male sexism. This is also seen where the author says that the singers of the sixties had stopped having authoritarian baritone of many male singers. She adds that this change is not only generational, but it has something to do with gender, being vulnerable, authority, showing your feelings, and wanting to change the world – all of which are signs of societal and cultural revolution, which in itself is inevitable. In the sixties, the singers who sung love songs did not mean what they sung, but what they did was romance comics, which according to the author is wicked and unhelpful and hence should be changed. The way the Beatles sing their songs with compassion and human heart has really appealed to the author, who confirms that that aspect makes her feel like they are in the same world with the artists. Even the way they dressed was different and it could be easy do draw a line between a female and a male, which to her is very important because it means that women are comfortable with their sex and the way they look. In other words, she thinks the society is changing for the better because people will stop living in sexual denial. According to her, the Beatles are not pretenders and they do not behave as if women do not belong in the same world with men. Tompkins maintains that Beatles are somewhat androgynous, and that is why they are allowing women to be androgynous too. Erstwhile, women did not make efforts to look feminine or rather opposite, which apparently is living denial. The author affirms that Beatles have changed sexuality in their culture, which to her is better because it is not so extreme or overtly marked. This shows that the author is against a culture that is so extreme. As such, she is quick to support that the Beatles have delivered sexuality out of a realm that is terrifying into something that is “more malleable, more imaginative, and less hidden” (Womack and Todd 217). The other positive aspect that Tompkins finds in the Beatles is that they are kind and socially conscious. Even the way the Beatle treats their drugs experience was not in defiance, they treat it just like any other person such that an individual feels encouraged to join them. Even if the author did not hear what the Beatles were singing about, she could at least feel that it was familiar, which made them totally different from the bands that were played in the 1950s, such as the Rolling Stones - which sounded scaring. According to Tompkins, 1950s singers did not only look angry most of the times, but their sexuality was also threatening, probably because male sex was treated as superior while female sex was treated as inferior. I do agree with Tompkins that there was a problem with fifties-era images of the masculine and the feminine. Most importantly, my opinion is that a culture that is so rigid is retrogressive and prevents a person from enjoying very many advantages that comes with modernity and cultural changes. As much as it is important to have some cultural norms to guide the humanity on how they should conduct themselves, having a strict culture such as that of 1950s, which fostered male chauvinism and downgraded women is uncalled-for. I also agree that the Beatles and sixties culture reframed such images in a way that was beneficial because this emancipated women to become a more respected gender. What’s more, this revolution came with other benefits such as allowing people to do as they like, hence making them more creative and more fulfilled. Conclusion Tompkins argues that the Beatles adopted postmodern cultural notions, which apparently challenges the popular music and what it constituted. Ideally the Beatle Culture exemplifies the manner in which the bands functions as a historical, cultural and economic product, which in itself challenges the established ideological norms, such as those to do with sexuality. Jane Tompkins’s article offers an emotional memoir story about the manner in which the Beatles changed her life through self-actualization, a change that set her free from the societal gender expectations, popular culture, and herself - which was a complete revolution from the practices of the 1950s. Works Cited Golder, Ken and Thomson Sarah. The Subcultures reader. New York: Rutledge, 1997. Print. Womack, Kenneth and Davis F. Todd. Reading the Beatles: Cultural Studies, Literacy, Criticism and the Fab Four. New York: Sunny Press, 2006.Print. Read More