The Nature/Technology Binary Opposition Dismantled in the Music of Madonna and Björk
Charity Marsh and Melissa West
Within feminist theory there has been an ongoing body of work that speaks to the subject of gender and technology as well as to nature and technology. This latter topic has increased relevance in the music world due to the rising interest in electronica, techno, and hip-hop in the last decade. What is considered “natural” is often thought of as opposed to what is considered “technological.” Nevertheless, there are musicians interested in working with technologies without compromising stereotypically “natural” issues such as self-awareness of one’s origins.1 Björk and Madonna are two female artists who have chosen different methods to narrow the culturally constructed division between nature and technology. Through an investigation into the issues surrounding electronica, nature, and culture, as well as appropriate theories regarding them, we will illustrate how Madonna and Björk fuse the two seemingly opposing forces. Analyzing the efforts and successes of Madonna and Björk further establishes a crucial stepping stone in the process of “de-gendering” nature and technology in popular music.
The musical connections between Madonna and Björk date back to 1994. The title song of Madonna’s album Bedtime Stories was written by Björk, and Madonna’s vocal delivery in it unmistakably reveals Björk’s influence.2 In several interviews, each has stated her respect for the other’s music. However, despite these nexus points within the popular music community, Madonna and Björk are viewed differently. Madonna is labeled a mega pop star, charting in the Top 40, whereas Björk established herself as a new wave and alternative artist and has moved into the realm of electronica in her solo career.3 Regardless, however, they share an ability to produce music that includes elements traditionally viewed by many in Western societies as conflicting.
Defining Nature and Technology
The nature/technology dichotomy is in a continual state of flux, and nature and technology are also included within other categories of difference, such as feminine/masculine and subjective/objective. Clearly, within the realm of popular music there has been a general acceptance that some aspects of technology are viewed as more natural than others. Because cultural definitions of nature and technology are fluid, we must define these terms carefully and contextualize them.
In Western society, the categories of nature and technology are socially constructed respectively as feminine and masculine.4 In the field of electronic music, likewise, there is much discussion of “warm” and “cold” sounds—warm is aligned with the feminine or nature and cold is aligned with the masculine or technology.5 Another factor particular to Madonna and Björk’s music is the dichotomy existing between acoustic (coded as natural) and electronic (coded as technological) sounds. Part of the problem with binary oppositions is the appropriation of the elements that are in alignment with nature by those that fall under the heading of technology. Because women’s biological capacity to bear children is considered natural, Madonna problematizes the distinction between nature and technology by bringing motherhood into a technological realm. Björk’s connection to nature extends to her homeland, Iceland, and arises from Björk’s descriptions of Iceland’s geographical and social characteristics.6
Although Madonna and Björk have different reasons for, and varying methods of, synthesizing nature and technology, both contribute to the dismantling of the nature/technology dichotomy promoted within the realm of popular music by using electronic technology in a non-traditional manner. This paper will focus on Madonna and Björk’s views of nature and technology through an analysis of two of their later albums, Madonna’s Ray of Light (1998) and Björk’s Homogenic (1997). After a discussion of Madonna and Björk’s views on electronic music, we will analyze Madonna’s track “Nothing Really Matters” and her embracing of motherhood within a technological setting. We will then move to Homogenic, examining Björk’s mingling of the concept of Iceland with electronica through her music, album art, and stage presentation. Donna Haraway’s concept of the cyborg will be used to theorize the manner in which Björk deconstructs the nature/technology dichotomy as well as to call into question Madonna’s relationship with technology.
Binary Oppositions
Binary oppositions comprise the culturally defined value system used predominantly in Western society to categorize difference. This system is comprised of a list of components classified as opposing elements; however, in many instances these elements can be understood through a less value laden approach as actually related to one another. The nature/culture dichotomy relies upon the definition of nature as feminine, subjective, and of the earth, whereas culture is defined as masculine, objective, and controlling the earth.7 At the center of binary oppositions is gender.8
There are a number of factors in popular music that perpetuate the masculine/feminine dichotomy.9 One of the most influential of these is the division between rock (masculine) and pop (feminine). In her article “Out on the Margins: Feminism and the Study of Popular Music,” Mavis Bayton suggests that “far greater value [is] placed on rock as ‘serious’ music, in contrast to the ‘light’ and seemingly ‘feminine’ frivolity of pop” (Bayton 1992: 52). Because both rock and pop are “gendered” using these prominent characteristics, pop musicians are more likely to be women while rock musicians are more likely to be men.10 This promotes the idea that pop music is less important than rock and also perpetuates the myth that women cannot be “serious” musicians.
Culture’s appropriation of nature is manifested through technology, a concept that moves beyond physical objects or machines to a system of relationships and exchanges between the machine, its designer(s), and its users (Terry 1997: 3). Paul Théberge discusses the idea of control over sound and, subsequently, control over technology in his book Any Sound You Can Imagine: Making Music/Controlling Technology (1997). Théberge considers an advertisement where a woman is portrayed as half human, half machine (Théberge: 1997, 123)—the presence of the woman is intended to furnish the “naturalness” considered absent in technology alone.11 In the male-dominated field of technology, the image of woman as machine not only implies male control of technology but also male control of woman, nature, and sound.12
Although feminist theorists have tried “to undo [the binary] oppositions, to revalue their terms, to cast them as contrasts rather than as strict dichotomies, or to negotiate a path that avoids too close an alignment with either side” (Code 1995: 191), many of these dichotomies continue to exist as the popular conception of electronica demonstrates.
Electronica
Electronica reached new heights within the culture of rave and techno music in the 1990s.13 Because of the innovative uses of technology in electronic music, it is often deemed a “masculine” art form, and this leaves little room for women (Marsh 1999: 17).14 Nevertheless, Björk has managed to challenge the persistence of these dichotomies in electronica. Homogenic is a synthesis of electronic sounds, techno noises, string orchestration, percussion, and her piercing voice. Often on a quest for new sounds, arrangements, and approaches in her music. Björk opposes the common belief that technology is cold and soulless, instead believing it to be warm and sentimental. She equates the way most people see technology with their fear of change. In an interview, Björk stated, “People saying ‘techno is cold’ is rubbish. Since when do you expect the instruments you work with to deliver soul? You do music with computers and get a cold tune, that’s because nobody put soul into it. You don’t look at a guitar and say, ‘Go on then and do a soulful tune.’ You have to put soul into it yourself” (Micallef 1997). The analogy she uses to explain the misconceptions of technology contains first a computer, an example of technology, culture, and the masculine, and second a guitar, which represents nature and the feminine.15 Adding “soul” to her music is another criteria for Björk’s compositional process. Björk is a pop musician who grew up listening to and playing electronic synthesizers in the 1980s. Goodwin suggests that this relationship with the synthesizer for Björk’s generation was crucial to a shift in thinking about electronic instruments. He suggests that “the very technology (the synth) that was presumed in the 1970s to remove human intervention and bypass the emotive aspect of music (through its ‘coldness’) became the source of one of the major aural signs that signifies the ‘feel’!” (Goodwin 1990: 265). Through her refusal to hear electronic music as cold and soulless, Björk has upset another of the characteristics that help define electronica as a “masculine” form of music. Björk stresses the tools are not responsible for making the music, rather it is the responsibility of the producer and the performer.
With the album Ray of Light, Madonna released her version of electronica, combining traditional pop melodies with an ambient groove. During the promotion of the album, it became clear that Madonna intended to bring something very new to the electronic music genre. “She [Madonna] was quoted on VH1 as saying she’d always been interested in electro/techno music, but felt that it generally lacked emotion. Working with Orbit, she hoped to ‘prove that it could be emotional.’ ” (Rule 1998: 34).16 Madonna also goes on to say, “My intention was to marry that scene with something personal and intimate. If I have any complaint about so-called electronica, it’s the lack of warmth. I like the textures, but sometimes it sounds alienated and cold” (Gunderson 1998). Clearly Madonna felt limited by the current state of electronic music.
Do you remember saying in an interview that techno equals death?
“Yes.”
Do you still believe that?
To a certain extent. There was a type of techno I was listening to that had a real emotional void. But I think it’s developed into something else and now there’s feeling and warmth to it. You can attach it to humanity and before I couldn’t. I couldn’t feel anything. (Walters 1998: 74)
The dichotomies of warmth and cold emerge in her words here, alluding to the nature/technology binary opposition. Through this statement, Madonna shows an interest in reducing the distance between the two polarities. As is often the case in her career, it is assumed that the men working with Madonna are responsible for the creative output. Clearly, Madonna does not view the production of her albums in this manner:
How do people like William Orbit or Marius DeVries bring warmth to a synthesizer or a machine?
They don’t; I do. They bring the cold, I bring the warmth [laughs]. (ibid.)
By assuming that Madonna does not have a role in the compositional process, this journalist in effect robs her of any agency in the production of Ray of Light.17 Madonna’s assertion that she brings warmth to the cold electronic sounds actually embraces the feminine of the feminine/masculine dichotomy, reflecting ecofeminism’s celebrations of women’s connection with nature. She also disrupts the assumption that technology is purely masculine in popular music.
The Power Relations between Producer and Performer
William Orbit produced Madonna’s album, while Björk worked with LFO’s Mark Bell to produce Homogenic. In order to analyze how Madonna and Björk disrupt major dichotomies through their work, it is necessary to explore the consequences of a musical relationship between a male producer and a female performer.18 Do the general imbalances of power in male/female relationships of everyday life transfer to the recording studio? In a majority of cases male producers have the advantage in the studio due to the technological aspects of the music-making process.19 Although the power struggle between producer and performer continues to prevail in the popular music industry, Björk and Madonna challenge the gender hierarchy by maintaining control on all levels and by participating in every aspect of the creation of their albums.
Madonna’s Relationship with Producer William Orbit
William Orbit was the main producer with whom Madonna worked on Ray of Light. “[Orbit’s] been breaking boundaries in the ambient underground for years. His Strange Cargo series laid the groundwork for countless modern electronic artists, and his remix list reads like a who’s who of rock and pop” (Rule 1998: 30). Madonna’s relationship with Orbit is not a new one. Orbit mixed several of Madonna’s singles in the past, including “Justify My Love” (1990), “Erotica” (1992), and “I’ll Remember” (1995). With Orbit as producer, one might even doubt Madonna’s agency in the production of Ray of Light. Keith Grint has an interesting perspective on this issue: “If Foucault is right that truth and power are intimately intertwined, those seeking to change the world might try strategies to recruit powerful allies rather than assuming that the quest for revealing ‘the truth’ will, in and through itself, lead to dramatic changes in levels and forms of social inequality” (Grint 1994: 71).20 To these ends Madonna recruited William Orbit, a powerful ally in the technological realm. Madonna’s choice of William Orbit in itself represents her creative and active role in achieving an ambient sound. Madonna is often dismissed as having little or no role in the compositional process, yet the choices she makes, from her producers to the sounds she will use, are an integral part of the creative process.21 On the other hand, Madanna’s control over her career is often celebrated. Through Orbit, Madonna is able to change the perception of music and technology, creating her version of electronic music.
Many studies focus on the composition of a piece without looking beyond that to other important aspects of the music. Grint, for example, criticizes feminist studies of technology that only focus on the design and development phases of an artifact’s life, as these constructivist studies of technology fail to see women at all (Grint 1994: 18). This is an important point to keep in mind while examining Madonna’s album. If we were only to look at William Orbit’s role as the producer, we would fail to see the influence Madonna had on the production of the album. William Orbit may produce Madonna’s album, but the final product bears Madonna’s name and ownership. Grint goes on to propose that studies in the realm of technology focus on the impact technology has on women, rather than the ways women impact the uses of technology (Grint 1994: 18). Keyboard magazine had this to say about Madonna’s role: “Star artists often keep tight control over their producers. When asked how much creative latitude Madonna allowed Orbit in the studio, she told us that ‘William had a very long leash, but I was firmly holding on to the end of it.’ Her analogy of the process: ‘I was the anchor, he was the waves and the ship was our record’ ” (Rule 1998: 34).22 When asked exactly what he did for Madonna in the production of the album, Orbit replied, “It ran all the way from complete tracks, really, to just bare bones backing tracks on which she subsequently put her lyrics and melodies” (Rule 1998: 33). Also, Orbit was not the only person that was brought in to work on the album. Marius DeVries helped with the production,23 Craig Armstrong orchestrated the violin arrangements,24 and longtime collaborator Patrick Leonard was brought in to assist with both writing and production. The credits for each and every song on the album name Madonna as a producer along with William Orbit, Marius DeVries, and Patrick Leonard, depending on the song.
Madonna is rarely asked compositional questions in interview situations. Contrast this with an article in Keyboard magazine that spends several pages outlining Orbit’s compositional techniques on (her!) album. This type of media coverage continues to perpetuate the myth that men are in charge of the technology and compositional work.25
Björk’s Relationship with Her Co-Producers
Over the years Björk has collaborated with a number of producers. In an interview she explains how she only wants to work with musicians who are as strong as her or stronger.26 Björk already has a solid understanding of electronica and how the technologies work.27 The fact that Björk is particular about her co-producers illustrates her desire to maintain a high level of control over her albums. She acknowledges her own strength as a musician and will not relinquish control unless she is matched in musical ability.28 In order to challenge the gender hierarchy, it is important for artists to completely understand the technological processes used to create music. For example, if Björk is unsure of how a piece of equipment works, she searches for the best person to teach her.29 Björk’s musicianship is well respected by many of the prominent producers and musicians in the field of electronica and techno.30
Björk’s first two albums, Debut (1993) and Post (1995), were almost entirely collaborative projects. On Debut she worked exclusively with Nellee Hooper. He produced or co-produced ten out of the eleven songs. Post was more multicollaborative; Björk co-produced two tracks with Graham Massey, two with Tricky, one with Howie Bernstein, one that uses all three of them, one was produced by Hanslang and Reinsfeld, and four were produced by herself. Björk’s first two albums “weren’t as much solo projects as duets with the producers who had inspired her: Nellee Hooper, Graham Massey, Tricky, Howie B” (Van Meter 1998: 96). Although Björk’s first two albums can be considered both solo efforts and “duets,” the male producer’s involvement lies just below the surface of each. Björk’s musicianship always enables her to maintain her identity in a technological realm.31 In an interview, Evelyn Glennie, a percussionist who plays with Björk, proclaims her awe at Björk’s ability to “hang onto her own identity no matter who she collaborates with.”32 When Björk talks about technology she also acknowledges those people from whom she learns. For example, in a documentary segment she explains how Mark Bell taught her how to use a QY20, a type of sampler for capturing noise and changing the pitch. It has over one hundred sounds, and she is able to create many of her tunes on this portable piece of electronic equipment. In an interview, she expressed her comfort with “taking from both masculine and feminine teachers, and [does not] see any problem with blending tales of conquest and nurture, fort-building and daydreaming” (Powers 1997: 339).
Electronic/Acoustic: Madonna’s “Nothing Really Matters”
Madonna’s recording of “Nothing Really Matters” reveals a merging of nature and technology. Her vocal delivery and other musical features bring a natural element to its electronic underpinnings. It opens with a synthesized instrumental introduction, where the use of the electronic is foregrounded through timbre (Ray of Light, track 6: 0:00–0:19). The first noise the listener hears is the percussive grinding sound of what reminds one of a computer processor. Added to this is a sound that exploits the overtones of the harmonic series.33 This sound is electronically produced on the album, but it has its origins in a “natural” place—the harmonic series and the abilities of acoustic instruments to create overtones.34 Accompanying the fluctuating overtones in the harmonic series is a single low string line that begins in an acoustic state and then is electronically distorted. Above all of this, there is a melodic riff, played in the upper range of the keyboard, that continues throughout the song. This sound is never altered or sequenced but always occurs in its original timbre with some melodic exceptions. The fusion of nature and technology clearly takes place on many levels in the instrumental introduction alone: there is the sound of the electronic processor against the natural harmonic overtones, as well as a melodic riff that becomes naturalized through its repetition against the sound of the distorted single low string tone.35
With the entrance of Madonna’s voice, another natural element is added to the electronic sounds (Ray of Light, track 6: 0:19–0:45). Madonna’s voice is not electronically manipulated here, the way a lot of sampled voices are on other albums.36 Her lyrics are also in direct contrast to the typical lyrics in dance music. Most dance music lyrics are made up of short repeated phrases that are electronically manipulated throughout the song. Madonna, on the other hand, sings long, narrative phrases. Her voice tells a story, arguably asserting her authorship. The short lyrical ideas presented by women in dance music of the mid 1990s on the other hand, clearly expose the “control” of the producer/mixer over the woman’s voice. Throughout this piece Madonna does not allow electronic sound to interfere with her voice. In the vocal introduction Madonna’s phrases rarely coincide with the phrasing of the melodic riff. Also in this section the processing sound of the instrumental introduction fades into the background, subsumed by more discrete pitched material. In the final phrase of the vocal introduction, when Madonna sings, “I’ll never be the same, because of you,” the natural sound of the voice is played against the technological sounds (Ray of Light track 6: 0:44–0:53). The voice is juxtaposed against an unpitched repeated bass sound that is then played for an extended time while the pitch is electronically changed. In this section the “natural” of the voice is played against the “technological” of the electronic sounds.
The influence of dance music is undeniable in the first statement of the chorus. The use of a rhythmic bass backbeat most clearly makes this connection (Ray of Light, track 6: 0:53–1:13). Compared to traditional dance music styles with repeated lyrics and additive phrases, Madonna uses a more narrative approach.37 The bass riff in Madonna’s chorus alone, although electronic, is a very warm, round, fat sound. Although Madonna is influenced by the dance music genre, her approach is clearly very different. In the chorus it is once again important to note that, although there are a lot of electronic sounds, they occur at the end of Madonna’s singing lines. The “wonky echo” (Ray of Light, track 6: 1:09–1:10) and ascending button sound (Ray of Light, track 6: 1:12–1:13), for example, are heard at the end of the chorus, avoiding contact with Madonna’s voice.
The final example to be discussed in “Nothing Really Matters” is the instrumental interlude (Ray of Light, track 6: 2:55–3:12). The synthesized solo instrument in it sounds first like a xylophone and then a piano, signifying the natural through its associations with acoustic instruments. This solo has an improvised quality about it, like a jazz solo. The associations with jazz and acoustic piano and xylophone conjure up an earlier form of music, one less controlled by technology in the moment of performance.38 The improvised instrumental section is played out against the electronic rhythmic section.39 The beat is maintained electronically and thus juxtaposes the instrumental solo in this section. Also against this electronic beat and instrumental solo is Madonna’s voice, repeated over and over again, making a humming sound.
Madonna as Mother in the Technological Realm
Madonna also brings nature to technology through the theme of motherhood on Ray of Light. The biological capacity to have children has constructed motherhood as a “natural” role for women. Therefore, electronic music has not traditionally celebrated motherhood as one of its themes; as Edna Gunderson states, “Electronic music is the unlikely vehicle carrying Ray of Light’s somber freight” (Gunderson 1998). Keith Negus illustrates through his example of Sinead O’Connor as a musical mother that the singer-songwriter has traditionally celebrated themes of motherhood with acoustic guitar (Negus 1997: 179, 180). Negus goes on to cite O’Connor’s song “three babies,” from the album I do not want what I haven’t got (1989), as an example of her personal confessional style (Negus 1997: 179, 180).
The confessional tone is very apparent in her song lyrics and arrangements, production techniques and musical textures. The confessional characteristics are signified musically in the use of a restrained, intimate voice, recorded softly and close to the microphone and with little echo and by the repeated use of the first person. It is also signified in the sparsity of many song arrangements—the sense of emptiness and silence which suggests that only the singer (rather than an ensemble) is present. (Negus 1997: 180)
This confessional tone is very different in Madonna’s electronic music. She does not use a restrained, intimate voice, recorded softly and close to the microphone. Instead Madonna opts for a strong voice with plenty of reverb and echo. Madonna also turns away from the sparsity of the typical confessional song arrangement by employing many electronic sounds in combination with her themes of motherhood.
Madonna has continually credited her current spiritual plateau to her relationship with her daughter, Lourdes, often suggesting that the album probably would have been very different if she had not become a mother. When asked what influenced Ray of Light, Madonna replied, “The birth of my daughter has been a huge influence. It’s different to look at life through the eyes of your child, and suddenly you have a whole new respect for life and you kind of get your innocence back” (Morse 1998). There are several songs on Ray of Light that reflect Madonna’s new role as a mother, including “Nothing Really Matters,” “Little Star,” and “Mer Girl.” Each of these songs makes heavy use of sounds associated with electronica.40 Madonna states, “There’s a song on the album called “Nothing Really Matters,” and it is very much inspired by my daughter. It’s just realizing that when the day is done the most important thing is loving people and sharing love …” (Gardner 1998). The introductory lyrics to “Nothing Really Matters,” however, are problematic in terms of recent feminist queries on the issues of motherhood, which suggest that motherhood may not be a completely fulfilling role for all women.41 Also, by referring to her selfish nature before she had her baby, Madonna perpetuates the unrealistic notion that mothers must be selfless. The lyrics of the chorus reflect Madonna’s new role as mother. As listeners we can assume that the “you” she is referring to is Lourdes, as she has stated that “Nothing Really Matters” was inspired by her daughter (Morse 1998).
In the chorus, Madonna extends the role of female nurturer to all people by stating “Love is all we need,” making it an all-inclusive emotion. The final verse of the song makes reference to her daughter when she says, “Everything I give you all comes back to me.” In this statement she is articulating the rewarding role motherhood has brought to her life.
Clearly, there are both advantages and disadvantages to Madonna’s celebration of motherhood. Women’s biological capacity for motherhood is seen by ecofeminists as connecting to an innate selflessness born of their responsibility for ensuring continuity of life (Wajcman 1991: 6). Ecofeminists believe that nurturing and caring are essential to the fulfillment of this responsibility (ibid.: 7). Madonna often plays into these themes of nurturing and selflessness in her representation of motherhood. Since the birth of her daughter, Madonna has privileged motherhood over her career, turning down movie roles and publicity opportunities and even canceling a yearlong world tour. From her privileged position as a wealthy and famous white woman, she has the resources to continue a rewarding career while at the same time focusing on her relationship with Lourdes. By combining themes of nature with electronic music, Madonna’s music brings nature to technology, blurring the dividing line.
Implementing Iceland with Electronica: Björk’s Homogenic
Throughout her solo career Björk has established herself successfully within the realm of electronica. This, in itself, illustrates her powerful presence and “serious” musicianship, according to the assumptions of the genre.42 Categorizing Björk’s music using the binary system is a real challenge. By combining elements of herself and her Icelandic heritage with the technology of electronic music, Björk has created a unique space that blurs the line between nature/culture, feminine/masculine, body/mind, and self/other. She has, in one sense, blurred the dichotomies and developed a new place in popular music.
The music on Björk’s album Homogenic cannot be analyzed in a vacuum. An analysis of the traditional division between nature and technology must move beyond the music to other sources of evidence. Björk uses everything, from her music, videos, performances, and album art, to her appearances and representations in and by the media, to produce this enigmatic union.43
Björk’s identity manifests itself through her Icelandic heritage and her music. Two of the main images associated with the feminine aesthetic are isolation and exoticism. Iceland is isolated geographically as well as culturally. Because of this isolation, what appears to be an exotic aura surrounds Björk. When Björk speaks about Iceland, she talks about her roots, the history, the elements, and her family. For her, Iceland is rejuvenating and inspiring. In one interview she claims, “I function in Iceland perfectly, it’s got nature, mountains and winds, and I can at any moment have a walk and sing at the top of my voice without anyone finding me weird. But it’s still a really modern place. It’s a nice combination of nature and techno” (“Björk future lover” 1999: 22).44
Björk describes Homogenic as minimalist because it is composed with only beat, strings, and the voice. One of the distinguishing features of Björk’s music is her vocalization. In many instances the beat is informed by, and the tracks are produced around, her vocals. Not only does her voice represent Western society’s understanding of the natural, but she also incorporates various native Icelandic influences, such as the vocal technique, a combination of speech and singing, used to narrate the sagas from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
The history of Iceland is vital to Björk’s juxtaposition of nature and technology in her music. Because Iceland only gained independence in 1944, its development as a nation was quick. “Out of this sped-up modernization sprang both an almost mythological relationship to nature and a brand-new fixation on technology” (Van Meter: 96). For over seven hundred years Iceland had been a colony of Denmark. The Icelanders were not allowed to sing or dance or play music because of its association with the devil; thus, they became obsessed with storytelling. “The core of Iceland’s national culture was its literary heritage, whose main components were the sagas from the 12th and 13th centuries and the romantic and often nationalistic poems of the 19th century, and which included a nationalistic interpretation of Icelandic history” (Gudmundssohn 1993: 2). Njall Sigurason, a folklore specialist, explains how Björk uses her voice in a specific way, like the Old Icelandic choir men. These men used a reciting voice that was a combination of singing and speaking. Björk’s adoption of this technique can be heard throughout the album; an excellent example is in “Unravel” (Homogenic, track 3: 1:32–2:28).
Analyzing Björk’s vocal technique as natural sounding is not difficult. Various distinctive vocal characteristics occur throughout the album, including Björk’s primitive-sounding screams, emphasized by a sampled and digitized beat (Homogenic, track 9: 1:38–2:28).45 In this example there is a basic perception of her voice as “natural” and being manipulated by something completely technological. The distortion of the beats and her voice add qualities of hard techno music, yet the methodical rhythm of the voice and the beat also evoke chantlike characteristics.
The Homogenic concert stage was designed in a manner that specifically addresses the distinctions between Western perceptions of natural and technological. The stage is divided in half, with the Icelandic string orchestra (representing “nature” or “traditional” music) on one side and live mixer Mark Bell (representing “technology” or “non-traditional” music) on the other. Throughout the concert, Björk moves freely between the two realms, embodying their crucial link. Björk also establishes an Icelandic context and presence by opening the concert with a traditional Icelandic ballad. She proceeds to synthesize the two components throughout the concert and ends on a purely techno level with a remix of “Pluto”.46 Although Björk began the concert with an Icelandic ballad and ended with her most “techno”-sounding composition from the album, the concert does not project a theme of technology consuming nature, rather, the fluidity of her movement between the two realms disrupts the distinction of both, rejecting the idea that one has power over the other.
Some of the techniques that Björk adopts to incorporate Iceland into her electronic soundscape derive from folk music practice and Icelandic stories. In the first track, “Hunter,” Björk uses the interval of a fifth continually throughout the work. For example, the cellos play the repeated two-bar motif a fifth apart (Homogenic, track 1: 0:00–0:30). Fifths were common in traditional Icelandic folksongs and their use was particularly relevant to performance. Björk explains, “‘Hunter’ is based on what my grandma told me at Christmas; about two different types of birds. One bird always had the same nest and partner all their lives. The other was always travelling and taking on different partners. At some point there was a conscious decision made to remain a hunter” (Walker 1997). That decision is most important to Björk and her music.47
There are also elements of Ravel’s Bolero in “Hunter.” One of the three main sections of the whole song is the Bolero ostinato (Homogenic, track 1: 0:00–1:36). The sounds Björk uses to cover the rhythmic pattern from Bolero are tightly interwoven. The same beat is repeated continually throughout the piece, with electronic sounds and the strings adding multiple layering. The electronic melody flows with the beat and takes on an “organic” feel—the perceived artificial sound changing to a perceived natural sound (Homogenic, track 1: 0:11–0:30). She exaggerates the strings by using sliding notes that are sluggish and slurring, drawing out specific notes similarly to how she draws out syllables with her voice. There is a sequence to her electronic sounds, with each sound taking its turn to weave in and out of the ostinato. The beats throughout the album are simplistic; Björk made “a conscious decision that the beats would be almost naïve, very natural but explosive, like still in the making.” She suggests, “This force is Iceland” (Walker 1997).
Multiple Fusions of Nature and Technology: Homogenic Album Art
Another significant medium Björk uses to engage with the nature/technology dichotomy is her album art. The Homogenic album cover features a shocking computerized image of Björk on the front in which she appears half-human. She is a hybrid, a human/machine—a cyborg. Her costume is a kimono, made of shiny silver and crimson red. The necklace elongates her neck, making her head seem as though it is not quite attached to her body. Her fingernails are longer than claws but perfectly manicured and polished. The hair is divided on her head into what looks like two large satellite dishes. Her appearance subsumes representations of various cultures. Her dress associates her with the Orient, her necklace with Africa, and her hair with Asia. There is not one line on her face, and her eyes are black and silver. At first glance one may be tempted to suggest that Björk is merely appropriating other cultures. However, she is not; rather, she has created an image of cultural synthesis. The background is silver with little blue flowers. The flowers are representations of nature, whereas the silver alludes to the metallic and to images of technology.48 The image seems to have caught her in a state of metamorphosis. Perhaps it is here where the fusion of the “nature goddess” with “technology’s cyborg” is most evident.49
Inside the jacket there appears to be a microscopic vision of a living organism or plant. The shades are deep reds, like blood, and it appears fleshy. This image is fluid and organic, scientific and natural at the same time. But the idea of the microscope changes the vision to a scientific one. The blood is now controlled and gazed upon by the “masculine.” When you turn to the backside of the cover, the scene depicted inside is now viewed from a distance. The image is still organic and scientific but, from this distance, the “masculine science” is less oppressive. The background appears similar to that displayed on the front cover. There is a larger image of a flower surrounded by the fluid, which contains a glowing light resembling an entity made of energy. The shape of this design is also reminiscent of the uterus and the womb. Across this light is Björk’s trademark initial. The letter “b” is a graphic design that reminds one of hip-hop, techno, and the realm of electronica. This “masculinized” genre is set in an organic image of fluidity. The glowing light represents the creation of something new or perhaps the combination of the “feminine” and the “masculine.” Björk’s synthesis of nature and electronica is evident even here.
Conclusion
One of the most interesting concepts used to attack the nature/culture dichotomy is Donna Haraway’s cyborg theory. In “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century,” Haraway describes what she calls “an ironic dream of a common language for women in the integrated circuit” (Haraway 1991: 149). The cyborg theory is a theoretical ideology that contains no gender and is thus a better space for women and men to inhabit. Haraway defines a cyborg as a “cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. The cyborg is a matter of fiction and lived experience that changes what counts as women’s experience in the late twentieth century” (ibid.). It is imperative to remember that “the machine is not an it to be animated, worshipped, and dominated. The machine is us, our processes, an aspect of our embodiment” (ibid.: 180). Consequently, technology can be the machine elements that we use to adjust or alter our physical form or appearance.50
Haraway’s cyborg theory relates to Björk’s accomplishments in the music composition, production, and publicity of Homogenic.51 Through a synthesis of natural and technological elements in her music, Björk is able to compose without necessarily adhering to characteristic boundaries. Creating her music in an electronic industry does not preclude her Icelandic heritage from emerging, nor does her electronic music feel void of emotion.52 Björk, like Haraway, suggests an alternative escape from the oppressive forces of gendered binary oppositions. Björk manages to accomplish this by juxtaposing the elements traditionally considered by Western societies as opposing. Because “the cyborg [or Björk’s Homogenic] is no longer structured by the polarity of public and private … Nature and culture are reworked; the one can no longer be the resource for appropriation or incorporation by the other” (Haraway 1991: 151). Haraway describes the cyborg manifesto as “an argument for pleasure in the confusion of boundaries and for responsibility in their construction” (ibid.: 150).53 As the cyborg theory develops, women’s pleasure will be developed in the dismantling of the socially constructed categories of gender. The illumination of rigid gender categories initiates the process of freeing women from their subordination. By obscuring the boundaries between nature and technology, Björk disrupts the traditional role of women in popular music. She exposes gender in electronica by both using and moving beyond the stereotypes, challenging the assumptions that are attached to it.54 As Haraway suggests, “It means both building and destroying [musics], identities, categories, relationships, [and the way we listen]” (ibid.: 181).
By embracing both “organic and technological components” (Haraway 1991: i) in her music, can Madonna be described as inhabiting the cyborg world? Madonna combines motherhood and acoustic sounds (coded as natural) with technological music. The cyborg lives in a community that breaks down the binary of public and private: it “defines a technological polis based partly on a revolution of social relations in the oikos, the household” (Haraway 1991: 151). Blurring the boundaries between public and private through motherhood lessens the strict distinctions for creating a new place; however, Haraway’s theory moves beyond this concept. Haraway envisions people occupying a new space, in a new way: as a hybrid “of machine and organism” (Haraway 1991: 150). Despite Madonna combining elements of nature and technology in her music, does she exist in the new space that Haraway alludes to? Through the techniques used to compose the music on Ray of Light, Madonna appears to resists the hybridization: Madonna’s voice remains relatively free from any radical electronic alteration. Because of Madonna’s reputation for maintaining power over all aspects of her work, we believe that Madonna resists being controlled by the machine.
Haraway’s utopian world envisions a society removed of all power imbalances: “I do not know of any other time in history when there was a greater need for political unity to confront effectively dominations of race, gender, sexuality and class” (Haraway 1991: 157). For these reasons it is important to problematize Madonna and Björk’s cultural positions. Both Madonna and Björk benefit from their dominant position in most of these categories. Presently Madonna suffers from few issues of inequality in these power relations: she is a wealthy white woman, and although she has expressed bisexuality she is primarily playing out the heterosexual role. Björk’s privilege also extends to class, sexuality, and race, however she is often regarded as exotic Other because of her Icelandic heritage. Despite their privilege Madonna and Björk still continue to be marginalized as women in the male dominated field of electronica.
Women’s experimentation with technology is not entirely new. There are a number of other women who incorporate technological aspects in their music making. Performance artist Laurie Anderson is well known for her relationship with technology. “Only through [abusing and playing with technology] could she have invented her famous tape bow, where a tape loop is bowed across a violin with cassette heads instead of strings” (O’Brien 1996: 150). Recently in R&B and hip hop women have pushed beyond the boundaries of gender stereotypes. Missy Elliot utilizes various technological means to produce her albums. TLC’s transition from R&B to hip hop also connects with technological components. In their music videos “She’s a Bitch” and “No Scrubs,” Missy Elliot and TLC embody futuristic personas through costume and movement. Toronto-based musician Esthero is another artist striving to move beyond gender barriers in electronica. Although these women also experiment with technology in their music, Madonna and Björk are unique because of their synthesis of nature and technology. Yet in spite of their success, women musicians are far from the majority in electronic music. Their positions are marginalized in a number of ways: Madonna is often dismissed as somebody flirting with the latest, hottest trend (in this case techno-culture) rather than as a “serious” musician employing technology, and, although Björk composes in the electronica realm, she is often described as a gypsy, child queen, pixie, or a sprite-like enigma,55 which perpetuates the idea that women are incapable of harnessing technology to compose “legitimate” music.
Feminists have criticized the topics of analytical debate concerning gender and technology, suggesting that only those practices that reinforce or reproduce existing patterns of gender relations are noticed theoretically (Grint 1994: 17). “While gender and technology have been constructed as macro-actors and shut away into black boxes, we must insist on opening them up for investigation, where the meaning and significance of technology and gender identity are reconsidered in all their variations as they exist for the actors” (ibid.: 44). Through our analysis of Madonna and Björk we have opened the black box of electronic music, exploring the way two women musicians used technology in a nontraditional manner and contributed to the dismantling of the nature/technology dichotomy that exists in popular music. Although working toward similar goals, Madonna and Björk use various methods and inspirations for combining the two poles. Merging electronic production with themes stereotypically assumed to be feminine, Madonna and Björk have initiated the degendering of electronic music. Through a synthesis of nature and technology, these women have carved unique spaces for themselves in the realm of popular music.
1. These two terms, self-awareness and origins, here refer to Björk’s Icelandic heritage and Madonna’s role as mother.
2. Please refer to track 10, “Bedtime Stories,” on Madonna’s 1994 album Bedtime Stories, 0:00–0:40, and track 8, “Possibly Maybe,” on Björk’s 1995 album Post, 0:00–0:50. From these examples it is evident that Madonna imitates Björk’s vocal technique, using an intimate whispering tone. Although neither artist uses a wide melodic range, their timbral inflections are diverse.
3. “Electronica” refers to numerous genres and styles of electronic dance music.
4. For example, the voice—a human, “natural” instrument—is accepted as natural despite the fact that it is recorded through a microphone and put through filters.
5. These particular alignments will be discussed in detail throughout the paper.
6. Björk often promotes Icelandic principles as “natural.” Within this context she includes Iceland’s history of colonization by Denmark, Icelandic literary tradition, such as its sagas and folklore, and the Icelandic people’s connection to weather and survival of extreme climates. Refer to Aston, Micallef, Van Meter and Walker.
7. See Derrida 1976, Terry 1997, and Code 1995 for examples.
8. See the chapter “Gender for a Marxist Dictionary” in Haraway 1991.
9. For example, acoustic musicians are regarded as feminine, while electronic musicians are seen as masculine. The same is true for the singer/songwriter genre.
10. Traditional rock bands with their electric guitar, keyboard, bass, and drums usually have been made up of male musicians, whereas female pop stars are often featured as solo vocalists, rarely playing these instruments.
11. This also relates to Donna Haraway’s cyborg theory, discussed later. Haraway too suggests once the cyborg world comes into existence, there will be a combination of the natural with the technological.
12. See Andra McCartney, “Gender Symbolism,” in Creating Worlds for My Music to Exist: How Women Composers of Electroacoustic Music Make Place for Their Voices. Master’s thesis, York University, 1994.
13. See Simon Reynold’s Generation Ecstasy (1998) and Sarah Thorton’s Club Cultures (1996).
14. See Grint 1995, pp. 11 and 54.
15. Although, in the recent past the electric guitar has been associated with men in popular music.
16. Emotion is another characteristic coded as natural and feminine.
17. The role of journalists in authenticating Madonna’s work became apparent after reading Emma Mayhew’s “Women in Popular Music and the Construction of ‘Authenticity.’ ” These ideas will be discussed further in her forthcoming article in The Journal for Interdisciplinary Gender Studies.
18. This power imbalance can be true regardless of gender; however, it is more frequent in a relationship between a man and a woman.
19. Advantages including technological knowledge, male authority, studio experience, accesses to technology.
20. Emphasis is our own.
21. Madonna’s creative input in her albums and music videos are underestimated by her critics, yet, at the same time, those same critics celebrate her control over the marketing of her image and career.
22. Although Madonna emphasizes her control, her role in the recording studio is still unclear.
23. DeVries has also produced with artists such as Björk and David Bowie.
24. Armstrong has worked with Massive Attack.
25. For further information, see Théberge 1997.
26. Walker 1997.
27. Björk began her recording career at the age of twelve and spent several years as a keyboardist and lead singer in the punk band The Sugarcubes. She is well versed in music theory and music production techniques.
28. What is problematic with this statement is Björk’s continual use of only male co-producers. However, she has been known to work with women mixers. Of course, a major problem that continues to exist is the exclusion of women producers from the “boys club” at the top of the field, which is maintained through the assumption that men have a better understanding of technology and how it works.
29. Walker 1997. In this section of the documentary Björk explains how she uses a QY20 to write many of her songs. She speaks of its capabilities and how Mark Bell taught her how to use it.
30. Please refer to Aston 1996, Van Meter 1997, and Reynolds 1998.
31. Because electronic music is coded as masculine, Björk requires a high level of musical knowledge and ability to maintain her identity in this field.
32. Walker 1997. Besides evidence stated on the album cover, including composition, instrumentation, lyrics, and production, the roles of each person in the studio are unknown.
33. The sound referred to can be produced by playing over the main sound of a pitch to produce the harmonic series.
34. Acoustic is coded as natural in this context.
35. One of the ways that electronic music is developed is by sampling phrases or motives. This particular melodic riff is repeated without being sampled.
36. For example, the way Cher’s voice is sampled in “Believe” exposes the technological interference. We thank Jennifer DeBoer for pointing this out to us.
37. The narrative approach is less controlled by technology than the short manipulated phrases of dance music, which are controlled by technology.
38. Although jazz musicians use instruments, which could be considered technology, the instruments we refer to here are acoustic. Because jazz music is an older form of music than electronica, its sounds have become naturalized. Compared to electronica, where technology is exposed in the electronic sounds, jazz has a much more natural quality to it. Also the idea of an improvised solo implies a sense of freedom. The improvised section in the instrumental interlude seems to avoid the control of technology, specifically the electronic bass backbeat that accompanies it, thus aligning it with nature.
39. The improvised solo has the quality of being free from the control of technology since the improvised solo was originally designed in jazz to give the performer a chance to improvise on the melody.
40. See the section on musical analysis for more details on the electronic music in “Nothing Really Matters.”
41. See Singer 1996: 70–72.
42. See Frith and McRobbie; Bayton et al.
43. Three of these mediums will be referred to throughout the paper.
44. Emphasis is our own.
45. The word primitive is used specifically here despite all of the problematics that result from its use.
46. Claudio Dell-Aere is another scholar researching Björk who has come to similar conclusions after watching the Homogenic concert. We wish to express our gratitude to him for a number of thought-provoking conversations on this topic.
47. When creating her first two albums, Björk went hunting outside of Iceland to find her inspiration and search out innovative ideas. For Homogenic, she returned to her Icelandic roots.
48. Although silver is a mineral, which comes from the earth, it has become valued as capital and therefore appropriated by and for “culture.”
49. For a more detailed analysis of this idea, please refer to Marsh 1999.
50. For example, a razor, which is used to shave or cut hair from specific parts of our bodies depending on a person’s sex and/or culture. Make-up is another mechanical element used to mold faces.
51. Björk’s first two solo albums, Debut (1993) and Post (1995), contain a wide variety of musical styles and instrumentation. They did not encompass themes of Iceland in the same way as Homogenic.
52. Both Iceland and emotion are coded as natural in this context.
53. Italics are the authors’.
54. Although Björk is competent in the male-dominated field of electronic music, she also plays into stereotypes traditionally associated with the feminine, such as “pixie, elfin, natural mother, goddess, shrieking singer, diva” (Micallef 1997).
55. Refer to Micallef and Reynolds.
References
PRINT SOURCES
Aston, Martin. Björkgraphy. London: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
Bayton, Mavis. “How Women Become Musicians.” In On Record: Rock, Pop and the Written Word, eds. Simon Frith and Andrew Goodwin. New York: Pantheon Books, 1990, 238–257.
Berry, Venise T. “Feminine or Masculine: The Conflicting Nature of Female Images in Rap Music.” In Cecilia Reclaimed: Feminist Perspectives on Gender and Music. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1994, 183–201.
Bradby, Barbara. “Sampling Technology: Gender, Technology and the Body in Dance Music.” Popular Music 12/2 (1993): 155–176.
Burnell, Barbara S. Technological Change and Women’s Work Experience: Alternative Methodological Perspectives. Westport, Conn.: Bergin and Garvey, 1993.
Cockburn, Cynthia. Machinery of Dominance: Women, Men and Technical Know-How. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1985.
Code, Lorraine. “Must a Feminist Be a Relativist After All?” In Rhetorical Spaces: Essays on Gendered Locations. New York: Routledge, 1995, 185–207.
Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology, trans. Gayatri Chaleravorty Spivak. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976.
Gardner, Elysa. “Ray of Light.” Los Angeles Times (March 1, 1998).
Glenn, Evelyn Nakano, Grace Chang, and Linda Rennie Forcey. Mothering: Ideology, Experience and Agency. New York: Routledge, 1994.
Goodwin, Andrew. “Sample and Hold: Pop Music in the Digital Age of Reproduction.” In On Record: Rock, Pop and the Written Word, eds. Simon Frith and Andrew Goodwin. New York: Pantheon Books, 1990, 258–273.
Grint, Keith, and Rosalind Gill, eds. The Gender-Technology Relation: Contemporary Theory and Research. London: Taylor and Francis, 1995.
Gunderson, Edna. “Her Ray of Light Shines Earnestly in New Direction.” USA Today (March 3, 1998).
Haraway, Donna J. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991.
Jones, Steve. Rock Formation: Music Technology and Mass Communication. London: Sage Publishers, 1992.
Khayatt, Didi. “Talking Equity: Classroom Experiences.” The Florence Bird Lecture, Carleton University, November 6, 1998. Unpublished.
Marsh, Charity. “Homogenic: Björk’s Fusion of Goddess and Cyborg.” Unpublished essay, 1999.
McClary, Susan. Feminine Endings: Music, Gender and Sexuality. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1991.
Micallef, Ken. “Home Is Where the Heart Is.” Ray Gun (September 1997).
Middleton, Richard. Studying Popular Music. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1990.
Mies, Maria, and Vandana Shiva. “Ecofeminism.” In Feminisms, eds. Sandra Kemp and Judith Squires. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997, 497–503.
Moi, Toril. “Feminist, Female, Feminine.” In The Feminist Reader: Essays in Gender and the Politics of Literary Criticism, eds. Catherine Belsey and Jane Moore. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1989, 117–231.
Morse, Steve. “Madonna in the lotus position.” Boston Globe (March 20, 1998): C1.
Negus, Keith. “Sinead O’Connor—Musical Mother.” In Sexing the Groove: Popular Music and Gender, ed. Sheila Whiteley. London: Routledge, 1997, 178–191.
Nehring, Neil. Popular Music, Gender and Postmodernism: Anger is Energy. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1997.
O’Brien, Lucy. She Bop. New York: Penguin Books, 1995.
O’Dair, Barbara, ed. Trouble Girls: The Rolling Stone Book of Women in Rock. New York: Rolling Stone Press, 1997.
Ortner, Sherry B. “Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?” In Feminist Cultural Theory: Process and Production, ed. Beverley Skeggs. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1995, 256–276.
Reynolds, Simon. Generation Ecstasy: Into the World of Techno and Rave Culture. London: Little, Brown and Company, 1998.
Rule, Greg. “William Orbit: The Methods and Machinery behind Madonna’s Ray of Light.” Keyboard (July 1998): 30–34, 36, 38.
Singer, Linda. “Bodies—Pleasures—Powers.” In Feminism and Sexuality: A Reader. Eds. Stevi Jackson and Sue Scott. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996, 263–275.
Small, Christopher. Music of the Common Tongue. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1988.
Strathern, Marilyn. “Less Nature, More Technology.” In Feminisms, ed. Sandra Kemp and Judith Squires. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997, 494–97.
Straw, Will. “Characterizing Rock Music Culture.” In On Record: Rock, Pop and the Written Word, eds. Simon Frith and Andrew Goodwin. New York: Pantheon Books, 1990, 97–110.
Terry, Jennifer, and Melodie Calvert, eds. Processed Lives: Gender and Technology in Everyday Life. London: Routledge, 1997.
Théberge, Paul. Any Sound You Can Imagine: Making Music/Consuming Technology. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1997.
Thornton, Sarah. Club Cultures: Music, Media and Subcultural Capital. Middletown, Conn: Wesleyan University Press, 1996.
Tong, Rosemarie. Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction, 2d ed. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1998.
Van Meter, Jonathan. “Björk: Animal? Vegetable? Mineral?” Spin. 13/9 (December 1997): 93–98.
Wajcman, Judy. Feminism Confronts Technology. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1991.
Walters, Barry. “Madonna Chooses to Dare.” Spin 14/4 (April 1998): 70–76.
West, Melissa. “The Aura of Madonna’s Ray of Light a ‘Progressive’ Concept.” Unpublished essay, 1999.
Björk. Debut. CD 61468. Elektra Entertainment, 1993.
Björk. Homogenic. CD 62061. Elektra Entertainment, 1997.
Björk. Post. CDE2 61740. Elektra Entertainment, 1995.
Björk. Telegram. CDE2 61897. Elektra Entertainment, 1996.
Madonna. Bedtime Stories. CDW45767. Maverick/Sire, 1994.
Madonna. Ray of Light. CDW46847. Maverick/Warner, 1998.
VIDEO
Walker, Christopher, producer and director. 1997. Bravo Profiles: Björk. South Bank Show. Video recording.