Abstract
In this article, I want to present trans(human) Cher and Anohni’s voice qualities. Both singers represent ambiguous and queer forms of femininity that denaturalizes the concept of gender and entangles the listener into a transgressive aesthetic experience. By using the cyborg metaphor proposed by Donna Haraway and the concept of the grain of voice by Roland Barthes, I want to show how a female voice can become a critical form of resistance to the patriarchal and misogynistic conception of femininity.
References
Auner Joseph. 2003. “Sing it for Me: Posthuman Ventriloquism in Recent Popular Music”. Journal of the Royal Musical Association no. 128.1. 98–122.
View in Google Scholar
Auslander Philip. 2008. Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture. Routledge. London, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Bakke Monika. 2010. Bio-transfiguracje: sztuka i estetyka posthumanizmu. Poznań.
View in Google Scholar
Barthes Roland. 1977. Image Music Text. Stephen Heath (transl.). New York.
View in Google Scholar
Butler Judith. 1996. “Burning Acts: Injurious speech”. U. Chi. L. Sch. Roundtable. vol. 3.
View in Google Scholar
Cadilhe, Orquídea. 2016. “Cher’s Music Videos. Gender as a Performative Construction”. CECS-Publicações/eBooks. 103–121.
View in Google Scholar
Cusick Suzanne G. 1999. Gender, Musicology, and Feminism. In: Rethinking Music. Nicholas Cook and Mark Everist (eds.). Oxford. 471–98.
View in Google Scholar
Dickinson Kay. 2001. “Believe’? Vocoders, Digitalised Female Identity and Camp”. Popular Music no. 20.3. 333–347.
View in Google Scholar
Dunsby Jonathan. 2009. “Roland Barthes and the Grain of Panzéra’s Voice”. Journal of the Royal Musical Association no. 134.1. 113–132.
View in Google Scholar
Goldin-Perschbacher Shana. 2008. Sexuality, Listening, and Intimacy: Gender Transgression in Popular Music, 1993–2008. ProQuest.
View in Google Scholar
Halberstam J. Jack and Judith Halberstam. 2005. In a queer time and place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives: 3. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Halberstam Jack. 2017. Trans: A Quick and Quirky Account of Gender Variability. Vol. 3. California.
View in Google Scholar
Haraway Donna. 2006. A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. In: The Transgender Studies Reader. Susan Stryker and Stephen Whittle (eds.). New York, London. 103–119.
View in Google Scholar
Hayles N. Katherine. 2008. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago.
View in Google Scholar
Knapik Rozalia. 2015. Sztuczny Bóg. Kulturowe wizerunki Osobliwości. Poznań.
View in Google Scholar
Loza Susana. 2001. “Sampling (hetero) sexuality: diva-ness and discipline in electronic dance music”. Popular Music no. 20.3. 349–357.
View in Google Scholar
More Max. 2003. Principles of Extropy. Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org (access: 13.10.2020).
View in Google Scholar
Muñoz José. 2009. Cruising Utopia: The There and Then of Queer Theory. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Preciado Beatriz. 2013. Testo Junkie: Sex, Drugs, and Biopolitics in the Pharmacopornographic Era. The Feminist Press at CUNY. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Reynolds Simon. 2018. How Auto-Tune Revolutionized the Sound of Popular Music. Pitchfork. https://pitchfork.com/features/article/how-auto-tune-revolutionizedthe-sound-of-popular-music/(access: 13.10.2020).
View in Google Scholar
Stryker Susan. 1998. “The Transgender Issue: An introduction”. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies no. 4(2). 145–158.
View in Google Scholar
Sullivan Nikki. Transmogrification: (Un) Becoming Other. In: The Transgender Studies Reader. Susan Stryker and Stephen Whittle (eds.). New York, London. 552–564.
View in Google Scholar
Tawa Nicholas E. 1990. The Way to Tin Pan Alley: American Popular Song, 1866–1910. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Wilson Carl. 2014. Let’s Talk About Love: Why Other People Have Such Bad Taste. New York.
View in Google Scholar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.