How else can you explain
this, quite possibly the most ridiculous thing Jimmy Draper of the San Francisco Bay Guardian has ever written?
This is exactly why the backlash has been so brutal. By straying from the so-called fake and feminized realm of pop music to make a rock album, Simpson and her prefab persona threaten to sully the supposedly authentic rock pantheon – a canon that, despite the inclusion of a few women, largely remains the domain of men like Robert Plant, Bob Dylan, and Jack White. As a result, Simpson's detractors have maligned her as a talentless interloper in rock. Rather than come right out and say that, though, they mostly complain that she's unworthy of attention because she can't sing well – as if the wounded-boy warbles of "rock saviors" White and Conor Oberst are somehow more palatable and artful than Simpson's vocals. Such accusations merely distract from the fact that many people hate her for daring to crash rock's boy-clique culture.
So Ashlee Simpson is right up there with Robert Plant and Bob Dylan, who knew? Rock's boy-clique culture may exist, but Ashlee Simpson, purveyor of bland pop music (yes, just because it's got guitars doesn't make it rock music) as a rebel woman rocker? PJ Harvey makes rock music, Von Iva makes rock music, Chrissie Hynde, Sleater Kinney, Patti Smith, Joan Jett, Kim Deal, Exene Cervenka, The Go-Gos and a hundred other women make rock music. Draper seems to think that we should accept Ashlee Simpson as a rocker, even though she is manufactured, just because she is a woman. He seems to think that we should accept bland, bland singing and songs from someone who is only famous because her sister can sing, just because she is a woman. He seems to think that we should be okay with backing tracks just because a lot of singers do it. That too me is what's offensive.
