By Gordon Thompson
Fifty years ago, one of the great stories in pop music began when the Beatles debuted in a dank arched subterranean Liverpool club dedicated to music. Located in the narrow lane called Mathew Street, just of North John Street, the Cavern Club had opened as a jazz haven that enfolded blues and skiffle, which was how the Quarry Men, John Lennon’s precursor to the Beatles, had first descended the steps and climbed the tiny stage in August 1957. Three-and-a-half years later, the Beatles had evolved into a much different beast than the Quarry Men and the Cavern Club had modified its business strategy to embrace a growing youth audience. The band’s recent stint in Hamburg had initiated a transformation that was about to blossom inside the brick arched chambers built to warehouse vegetables. For the Beatles, Stu Sutcliffe’s return from Hamburg in late January added his dissonant rumble to their sound; but they had entered a transitional phase with Paul McCartney gradually assuming the role of bassist. As Sutcliffe returned to a career in art, the Beatles would tighten their sound and performances.
Other Liverpool bands played the Cavern too, including the Remo Four who had recently trumped the Shadows—the most famous band in the UK at the time. The Beatles would find the club a competitive environment in which to sharpen their skills in the pursuit of fans. Their first gig at the Cavern on 9 February 1961 would lack auspiciousness and earn them a mere £5 (split five ways) for their 12:00-2:00 PM performance. This engagement initiated the club’s attempt to draw a midday audience and, with little advertising, the crowd would have been small. Moreover, when owner Ray McFall saw the musicians, he took offense at their leather jackets and jeans, informing them that they had to dress better if they wanted to play the club again. And to the band’s further discomfort, Sutcliffe’s playing would have, if anything, deteriorated even further during the month he had stayed in Hamburg. But they were beginning to develop a reputation, commencing with a remarkable December performance at the Litherland Town Hall. The Beatles tapped into a curious mix of hard rock, rockabilly, and pop, with each of the band members taking a turn at the microphone and applying a combination of enthusiasm and irreverence.
The Hamburg experience had taught them how to survive the long hours by sharing responsibilities, working as a team, and exploiting their existing repertoire of all its possibilities. Their model may in part have derived from Britain’s postwar experience, when families shared and extended their meager resources. The division of responsibilities in the band helped make it successful. Lennon, the social director, knew how to deliver the emotionally charged performances. McCartney, the self-appointed music director, had a screaming Little Richard imitation that he could counter with coy ballads. And Harrison—the boy of the band—focused on his succinct guitar solos and a growing vocabulary of altered chords. That left the stoic and impassive drummer Pete Best and bassist Sutcliffe sitting at the back, occasionally crooning a song for the benefit of their fans.
In the Cavern, the Beatles would build an audience by playing rock ‘n’ roll while smoking, eating, and joking on stage, including McCartney doing imitations of the Shadows’ by now infamous Cavern catastrophe. (Their bass player had shown up drunk and fallen off the stage.) Lennon recalled that half their stage show was ad lib comedy, which portended the public image
I am just exhausted by this. It made me smile, and wince, pretty much at the same time.
I agree with everything you say, but I just do not know what the appropriate response is. Or if there is one.
We have been fighting this fight for a very long time. I would say that my energy needs to be directed other ways, but if I don’t respond to this, who am I? Am I not a “militant cyberfeminist” as I was once called in print?
Thank you.
The “men discussing this are treated differently than women discussing this” was another problem that I forgot about when I blogged about this. Thanks for spotlighting that. And thanks for spotlighting more of the problematic nature of “mudflap girl.”
[…] points out more problems that were in my head but didn’t make it into this post, so please go read her post. This was written by josh. Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007, at 3:16 pm. Filed under […]
They are taking a sexist image which is so common that we don’t even see it any more and parodying it so that we actually look at it. Simultaneous consciousness raising and library promotion. Would it work as well if it was a weaker image? Would it work at all?
They are also parodying guns, pickup trucks, grain silos, and windmills, so there are at least a few phallic symbols in the targets besides the “trucker girl”.
I don’t give a damn whether it would “work as well” or not, Mr. Underwood.
I’m sick of TnA being used to sell stuff, and I’m sick right to my SOUL that it’s being used to sell libraries.
Oh and D… thanks.
GraceAnne: “Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex.”
O.k., she was a wack jobby, but still. Gotta love Valerie for speaking her mind..!
Walt, I understand the intent was parodic. Having worked in a male field for eight years, it just left me feeling worn down.
*sugh*
I’m just waiting for them to come out with the “co-ed naked reading” t-shirts now.
“…even though this poor ‘girl’ is too well-developed to be a youngster except in the imagination of a pedophile.”
Actually, her “development” appears to be a matter of interpretation. The figure’s breasts are hidden in the silhouette of her arm. One can’t tell whether there are breasts at all.
Coming from an advertising background, I’d say the campaign hits the strategic creativity mark.
Smiling and wincing at the same time is a good sign, imo.
I like it and have just ordered all the bumper stickers for my librarian ad collection.
Pam, what I’d say is success is not enough. Bush got pretty far with “Mission Accomplished,” but that didn’t make it right. I also don’t know if librarians smiling and wincing translate to reactions from the public.
What are the reactions from the public?
If success is not enough, then what else is needed?
i share your ambivelent response. I note that they do seem, to my eyes, to have made the library mudflap lady not quite so… curvacious as the ordinary mudflap lady.
In general, I like their ad campaign. I like that billboard that says ‘with the right online resources, nothing can hold you down’. Public libraries emphasizing their licensed databases, how unusual!
Except for mudflap-oppressed-person-of-female-gender (biological or reassigned), the campaign is quite good. Databases are one of those resources that get seriously underplayed by libraries — many put their database list BEHIND the proxy login, which is just poor marketing.
To test your excellent point about who is actually talking about this except librarians, I did a Google news search for the words Wyoming and read and then also with the word mudflap as well and came up with a big goose egg - zero results. It was only when I limited my search to blogs that it came up with results and virtually every blog post on this topic was from a library-related site. These results speak for themselves, yes?
As someone new to the profession, what surprised me most about the mudflap girl “flap” was not that it had been done but that it was being touted as innovative and exciting. Taking a subject that is viewed by the general public as boring or geeky and sexing it up with a hot girl is the oldest trick in the book. At best, it’s formulaic, at worst, offensive. But innovative? I don’t think so.
Cheryl, trust me, if it’s new in the library setting, then it will be claimed as innovative, even if it’s been part of some other groups professional practice for decades.
At best, it’s formulaic, at worst, offensive. But innovative? I don’t think so.
Thank you , Cheryl. Exactly.
And thanks Karen for saying what I have been trying to gear up to articulate and probably nerved myself right out of doing….
David, hah, yup. Cheryl, yes indeed.
Reading all the various comments about the literary version of Mudflap Girl/Woman/whatever you call her is very, very interesting. Everyone who posts a comment is doing so through their own group of opinions about how women are viewed in general. It’s not the best marketing image for libraries, but it is funny and it does start a dialog.
Myself, I hate those damn mudflaps. They’re yet another way to perpetuate stereotypes about women - but also about truckers. Yet when I first saw Wyoming Library’s so-called “Mudflap Girl,” I laughed out loud. My interpretation was that the image was poking a finger in the eye of those who reduce women to sexual objects with no other redeeming qualities. And yet, here is the symbol of that objectification, demonstrating an ability to read.
It’s a silhouette; are we just assuming she’s naked?
[…] people’s reactions to the campaign, but quite frankly, I’m tired. I appreciate the variety of opinions I’ve seen, many of which have affected the way I think about the issue. But […]
[…] I weigh in on the Mudflap Flap? Sure, why not? First off, yes to everything over at Free Range Librarian. The only response that isn’t going to be called uptight and anti-sex is […]
Catherine, I’ve heard the argument that the girl ain’t nekkid, but really… if she’s not, she’s wearing a spandex bodysuit. And no underpants!
All this flap over a flap! Some famous pundit once remarked “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.” Based on the uproar, I’d say the campaign to get attention to Wyoming’s libraries is brilliant!
Um, yeah, if you’re communicating to other librarians, it’s a great success.
I realize that I’m piping in about a week late on this post but I just wanted to say that I appreciated your thoughts on this. I can certainly see both sides of this issue from a library marketing stand point, although personally, as a woman I don’t find the image personally offensive. I do think you are right that the discussion on this has been far too limited to librarian opinion and not enough of “what does the public really think.” SJ provided a nice attempt with a post to BlogHer and the response from readers to the library mudflap girl image was mostly negative. http://blogher.org/wyoming-state-libraries-and-nekkid-chicks-flap-over-flaps
Dorothea says: “I’m sick of TnA being used to sell stuff”
There’s no T in the updated mudflap girl image. And strictly speaking, there’s no A either, since it’s just a silhouette.
I realize that there are lots of people who like to think that the ‘average’ library goer looks like the average ALA Annual participant — overweight, out of shape, sweating at the exertion caused by walking a few meters to catch the shuttle — but in reality, there are thin women who read, too, and some of them even know how to dress! (Not sure why you call the mudflap girl ‘naked — you can’t tell either way.)
Here’s an idea: ask a few non-librarians what they think. Here are my results:
1) mother (lesbian feminist): laughed
2) friend (lesbian feminist): laughed
3) gf: wants it as a tattoo
4) male friend #1: “cool”
5) male friend #2: “the original’s better”
Whining “Only librarians like it!” is pretty ’shrill’, unless you have the numbers to prove otherwise.
“Whining”; “shrill”; leveraging a sample of five to challenge a question (read my #1: only librarians are *talking* about it; it’s a marketing campaign); hmm, yeah, no baggage there, m.