Much how political cartoons continue to serve a purpose in propagating certain believes and perceptions in modern times, figure 3.7 portrays a women neglecting her feminine duties (childcare, kept appearance) in order to flirt and fool around with the men of the revolution in signing a boycotting pledge--this was an attempt on behalf of the English to negate the efforts of the colonies to establish its dependence, prior to the revolution. The women are incorporated into this drawing for the sole purpose of furthering the insult towards the male colonists attempting to gain independence from England. 

In Figure 3.9, you see a young soldier from the early days of the Revolutionary War. He is happy, his horse is happy, and the women carrying the American symbols of liberty and freedom is happy. The woman, by his side, is the key holder to the eagle and the flag. This is propaganda depicting the soldier's noble duties, the woman's "essential role" and reiterating the visual symbolism that is maintained throughout wartime publications--eagles, bells, flags, stars and stripes.

For figure 3.10, we are introduced to an angelic woman who has a close relationship with the eagle, a big symbol of American freedom. This drawing maintained popularity throughout the revolution due to the detail and beauty of the picture, and the symbolism of British defeat that is so evident throughout the drawing. Using a male soldier as opposed to a well dressed woman would have created a more masculine piece of propaganda which may have alienated some women and their impression that their role affected the success of the revolution. 

University of Southern California

Gender Studies Program Mark Taper Hall of Humanities,

422 3501 Trousdale Parkway

Los Angeles, California 90089-4352 USA

Attention: Professor Alice Echols

Dear Prof. Echols,

            The content of your biography on the life of Janis Joplin evoked in me a fresh perspective on the historical context of the blues scene in the 1960’s. While the political and sociological climate was ripe for radical change and revolutionary thought, the musical climate is often overlooked or generalized as one big hippie-ridden, LSD-laden Woodstock festival. Your biography, Scars of Sweet Paradise, The Life and Times of Janis Joplin, not only examined the life of Joplin, but it presented parallels with the counterculture of the 1960’s that are so relevant in its effects on the nation’s current political and social climate. The racial, economic, and gender divides during the 1960’s played such an influential role in the art and life of Janis Joplin, which is a major underlying foundation of your biography.

            The duality of her persona presented such inner-conflict, which you examined closely in your book. I visualized Joplin’s performances and music, but then connected her childhood background from the early chapters and how that effected her internalization of her insecurities. You create this sympathy for Joplin in the book, and give readers such hopes for redemption, success, and happiness for her. However, much to my own frustration, I never got the impression in your book that she was doomed from the beginning—such an undertone is nearly impossible to avoid when writing an account of a notorious tragedy. The self-destructive environment that you recognized of the blues scene in San Francisco doesn’t present itself as a foreshadowing to her untimely death. While I knew the story would be an anti-climatic one with a far from Hollywood ending, I found myself convinced, over and over, that Janis would end up living until the chapter on her overdose. Figuratively, she lives on through her music, your book, and the influence she had on modern day blues and rock. 

            Janis Joplin bridges the gap between the early 1960’s folk scene and an electric rock scene that emerges full-force in the 1970’s. It is that transition that truly parallels the transition of the politics and societal norms and movements of that period. The 1960’s were the period of revolutionary thought and action, and the period of the emergence of Civil Rights, Black Power, Women’s Rights, and Gay Rights movements truly gain momentum and nation-wide recognition. I was looking for some more definitive examples of this throughout the book, but there were mainly brief allusions to them amongst recounts of Joplin’s life.

            From what I interpreted after finishing the book, Janis teetered on the edge of feminist and anti-feminist, especially in the radical sense of that time. While she expressed female angst of inequality and mistreatment by men, she didn’t identify with the feminist movement by any means--“it seems like they haven’t had a good time in months (306)”—and invaded the male-ridden industry with her persona, yet that persona maintained a highly eroticized portrayal of her. Janis was, and was perceived as, a sexualized artist with ambiguous sexual preferences and public rejection of conventional relationships. This was often more “Pearl”, her stage persona,  than Janis, which allowed her to maintain a self-destructive character to her fans, as the miserable blues singer. While this is the publicized perception, your book truly showed the ways in which Janis was happy, and sought fulfillment in her relationships and in her actions over the course of her short life.

            Apart from it all, it was Janis’ love affair with music that made her a sensation and a legend, yet an affair with drugs that caused her untimely demise. This biography showcased the roots of her inspiration, the world she lived in, and the plight of the counterculture. Thank you for your thoroughness and dedication to developing such a strong piece of research that will remain a relevant source for examining the blues scene and counterculture of the 1960’s.

           

            Warm Regards,

                                    Katie Montgomery

European Images of Native American Women

The United States government is a compromise of institutions. Before this grandiose institution was officially formed in 1776, the Europeans who initially colonized North America engaged in a drawn out process of decimation and dehumanization of people of color. The European colonizers began exploring and looking for new land with a particular agenda in mind: to conquer, dominate, and expand--nothing could stand in their way of spreading their European ideology through inexorable imperial advancements. The colonizers used Native Americans to further their progress of colonization and concurrently degenerated the population of Native Americans. When colonists encountered Native Americans in North America in 1511, their hegemonic motives went unaltered.

Whitesattempted to destruct and change the natives’ culture as well as way of life. They used their own European Christian ideology to justify the harsh and barbaric actions against the natives. The Europeans viewed Native Americans as savages, inhuman, and animalistic. The views of Native women were that of fascination, as they seemed free, without inhibitions, and without clothes. Native culture was often that of a matriarchal society, which valued women and their roles. Native women were much more empowered than the European women. That resulted in lonely colonial men to pursue Native American women, no consent needed. After white settlers progressed into new territories for settlement, they relocated Native Americans to reservations. The tribes were forced to adapt to new agricultural methods, often left with limited, if any, resources. Starvation, disease, and corruption quickly grew to another hardship Indians were to face. Initially, in 1492, Native American population was over 5 million, and this drastically was reduced in a ten year span from 1890-1900 to roughly 250,000 Native Americans. This shift was due to an increase in mortality rates and a decrease in the birth rate, as a direct result from European colonization. From the beginning of reservations and to this day, the quality of many Native Americans’ lives is on the same level of that of third world, developing countries. Today there still remains economic and political barriers many Native Americans struggle against.

Musical Performance of The Blues

Janis Joplin escaped her hometown, full of rejection and isolation, and found solace in traditionally black music—blues, folk, and jazz. Her racial transgressions were limited to the musical components, as she didn’t herself socialize with the black population of her town.  She later went on to compare her own middle-class white expectations and her rejection of those norms to the black struggle of inequality and oppression.

She later found a place in the San Francisco blues scene with a variety of blues bands, each teaching her and guiding her development as a blues artist. Her natural rebellion was cradled by blues music; it was empowering and liberating to be part of an organic form of expression. She found herself rejecting the societal norms along with the subculture of the time—forgoing a bra, makeup, and hair styles to embrace a freedom of her own gender role, especially coming from a small Texas town.

Despite not having a polished appearance, Joplin was open with her sexuality and her activities, and exuded female sexuality in her live performances. Janis was bisexual as well yet held back about that personal aspect in the media and her music to cater to the male-driven industry and misogynistic norms.

Her lyrics expressed her experience as an oppressed woman; much alike how black blues artists expressed racial oppression.  She had a very powerful demeanor about her yet her lyrics also set her up as a tortured female, subject to emotional dependency on men, which was a mindset and a lifestyle that many females during that time were trying to reject, and encourage freedom from men.

“Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose”

One of my favorite Joplin lyrics, in hindsight, can be loosely interpreted to her life and perspective on blues, race, and gender.