<< 1 >>
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" Summary: unusual focus, weak execution Review: John Dickerson would have been better off just aiming to write a book focusing on women's advances in the music industry, both behind the scenes and on the public face. But he overreaches, building Women on Top around the thesis that 1996 was a breakthrough year, the first time female solo artists outsold male solo artists. The problem is that he attaches so many qualifiers to this thesis that it ultimately points to a triumph for semantics rather than a triumph for women. He spends paragraphs explaining how he did the calculations, but his methods are dodgy. For example, he classifies the Bangles as a solo artist on the basis that all members sang, but he excludes the Beatles despite their meeting the same criterion.Dickerson supports his argument with personality profiles. He chronicles specific women's achievements throughout the history of popular music, both the stars and the businesswomen behind the scenes whose accomplishments are less known. It is the latter that makes this book unusual relative to others on women in music. However, another weakness is that Dickerson's coverage is heavily slanted towards those who work in country music. He never clarifies whether this is because country music is more female-friendly than other genres or simply because these were the women to whom he had access to interview. His collection of profiles clearly documents the barriers of sexism that so many women in the music industry have encountered, and the tales of success are inspirational. But Dickerson undermines his credibility by making too definitive, too broad a statement. The individual bricks are solid, but there are gapping holes in the wall.
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" Summary: unusual focus, weak execution Review: John Dickerson would have been better off just aiming to write a book focusing on women's advances in the music industry, both behind the scenes and on the public face. But he overreaches, building Women on Top around the thesis that 1996 was a breakthrough year, the first time female solo artists outsold male solo artists. The problem is that he attaches so many qualifiers to this thesis that it ultimately points to a triumph for semantics rather than a triumph for women. He spends paragraphs explaining how he did the calculations, but his methods are dodgy. For example, he classifies the Bangles as a solo artist on the basis that all members sang, but he excludes the Beatles despite their meeting the same criterion. Dickerson supports his argument with personality profiles. He chronicles specific women's achievements throughout the history of popular music, both the stars and the businesswomen behind the scenes whose accomplishments are less known. It is the latter that makes this book unusual relative to others on women in music. However, another weakness is that Dickerson's coverage is heavily slanted towards those who work in country music. He never clarifies whether this is because country music is more female-friendly than other genres or simply because these were the women to whom he had access to interview. His collection of profiles clearly documents the barriers of sexism that so many women in the music industry have encountered, and the tales of success are inspirational. But Dickerson undermines his credibility by making too definitive, too broad a statement. The individual bricks are solid, but there are gapping holes in the wall.
<< 1 >>
|