What is a Protest Song? Go on, name one. Now, name a protest singer. Anyone thinking of a white guy with a guitar – or is that just me? Now, tell me what they are protesting about. Does it make sense that the author would take the time to write the protest? I mean, why did they bother? And did it have the impact that they wished for? Or to put it another way, was it a successful protest song? Did it contribute in some way to change? What was the context for the protest song? When and where was it written? Why? All these issues, and more, are raised in this lively book, which makes a valuable contribution to the broad field of music and politics.
This is a book of some ambition. Its focus is purely England, rather than the wider United Kingdom – parts of which make the occasional incursion. So, the geographical range is clearly limited. However, its historical reach is remarkable: 1600-2020. 420 years encompassing, amongst millions of other things, a revolution in which the king was executed, an industrial revolution which gave birth to the modern industrial proletariat, fights for suffrage, slavery and its abolition, the fight for women’s rights, various wars including two world wars, anti-racist campaigns, the battle for rights for sexual minorities and the recent campaigns against a neoliberal hegemony. And that list barely scratches the surface. As the book notes at the start, ‘almost every political event of any significance for England and its people over the last five centuries has protest songs associated with it’ (p. 1). That is quite a thing to try and cover, and one does not have to always admire the outcomes to appreciate the simple effort involved here.
The book is one outcome of a project funded by the UK’s Arts and Humanities Research Council, and overall, a ‘long list’ of 750 songs is listed on the project’s companion website (https://oursubversivevoice.com), 250 of which are singled out for a ‘short list’ of more in-depth analysis. The authors readily admit that their selection is ‘not scientifically defensible’ (p. 11), but state that the book is ‘the first long history of English protest songs’ (p. 12). They also note that an interdisciplinary approach is necessary here (p. 13). It should also be noted that to appreciate the full achievement of this project, at least one visit to the website is necessary.
The years covered are split into three eras, 1600-1789, 1789-1945, and 1945-2020 or early modern, modern and contemporary, and a song is chosen to ‘headline’ each era: ‘The Good Fellowes Complaint’ (1647), ‘The Gathering of the Unions’ (1832), and ‘Question Time’ (2017). While this is useful, it also raises questions about the choice of such songs. In addition, any project such as this will face the inevitable choice between breadth and depth. Here, while the useful series of case studies, which start in Chapter 4, provide some depth, the overall approach is to go for breadth. In addition, it is not clear what criteria were used in selecting the cases, interesting as they all are. So, when it is noted in Chapter 4 that ‘our three case studies illustrate the central argument of this chapter’ (p. 161), a suspicion may linger that this was the main reason for their selection.
In addition to an introduction and conclusion, the book consists of six chapters which deal with (i) the protest song’s history, (ii) its appearance as politics and political theory, (iii) rhetoric and oratory, (iv) the performance and claiming of representation (which emphasises the visual impact of performance and its role in establishing credibility), (v) the production of protest song, and (vi) its regulation and suppression (which illustrates the thin, often indistinguishable, line between regulating and censoring). Throughout, it is clear that these are not so much strict demarcations as ways of thinking through issues. Some examples appear in more than one chapter, illustrating the complexity of protest songs’ production, use, and reception.
A key theme throughout the book is that of technology. The period covered begins with printed papers being passed around over an extended period of time and ends with songs being made available instantly on the internet. The book’s start date was chosen as the authors suggest that 1600 ‘marks the transition towards a large-scale popular music industry’ (p. 15). As is noted, ‘the relationship between the conditions for protest song writing and the production of protest is a complex one’ (p. 26). One aspect of this is that songs can become protest songs whatever their writer’s original intent (p. 118). As is noted here: ‘Put simply: context matters’ (p. 130).
Another key theme running throughout is the social. Here, it is suggested that one way of viewing protest songs is as ‘the product of a moment in history’ (p. 164). Thus, as the social and political context changes, so do protest songs. The relationship between the social and the technological is largely under-theorised here, although it is clear that the authors are keenly aware that the production and distribution of protest songs depends on a complex interaction of forces of production, of power, and of resistance. As they suggest, ‘the protest song owes its existence to any number of processes, intermediaries, incentive and actors’ (p. 172). They draw on Crossley’s work on actor network theory to conclude that ‘protest songs are the results of individuals and their networks, of institutions and resources, and of movements and their ideas’ (p. 201).
Beyond the social, the authors show that certain themes – such as abuse of political power – are timeless. Thus, they can compare ‘Come all you Farmers out of the Countrey’ (sic, 1603) with Crass’ ‘How Does it Feel to be the Mother of a Thousand Dead’ (1982) as both ‘express a kind of political thinking’ (p. 66) relating to the relationship between political leaders and the people. However, they are also alert to changes in emphasis so that, for example, after the French Revolution, ‘the single most loaded word from the political vocabulary was not that of ‘democracy’…. but that of ‘patriotism’ (p. 73). It is claimed that protest songs can be seen as a form of political theory ‘in the wild’ as they make arguments about good and bad, right and wrong. However, this seems to overstate the case. As the authors acknowledge, songs are generally shorter in duration than political tracts. Moreover, the didacticism involved rarely leaves room for doubt or for discussion of others’ opinions. So, if – as is claimed here – protest songs are political thought, then they seem to be a somewhat reductive form of it.
Perhaps inevitably, the analysis is somewhat lyric-heavy. Of course, protest songs revolve around words, but the music utilised is also vital. This is recognised here, but not really pursued. Adding a musicologist to the interdisciplinary line-up of authors might have proved useful. I would also take issue with the authors problematising Leon Rosselson’s ode to England’s seventeenth-century revolutionary Diggers movement, ‘The World Turned Upside Down’, for allegedly portraying ‘a kind of permanent, unchanging, moral struggle’ (p. 81). Unfortunately, as Marx showed, this is the world capitalism presents us with, that of a perpetual struggle to survive.
In the internet age, instant availability does not automatically mean automatic access to protest songs, and the common problem that protest songwriters and distributors have faced across time is how to reach their desired audiences. This is a key objective. When an attack on a government is made in song, the songwriter rarely imagines that politicians hearing the song will immediately change their minds. Rather, they are envisaging engaging with and helping to mobilise (potential) supporters who may be able to rally and enable change in the longer term. Even if this fails, the song may be effective in building solidarity and sustaining the struggle. Or it might simply be a bloody good song.
The question of success is also raised. As the authors believe that protest songs are a form of political speech, they also argue that there is no reason why they should be any more or less successful in bringing about change than any other political communication (p. 21). However, there is an aesthetic side to protest songs which other forms of political communication often lack. Protest songs have to work as songs, as well as protest. Here, it would have been useful if, instead of describing the contents, we were given more information about the reception of the songs discussed.
It should be noted that to protest can also be an act of bravery. As I write, the media is full of reactions to Bruce Springsteen’s verbal takedown of Donald Trump and of the censoring of Kneecap following their pro-Palestinian statements. Doubtless, Springsteen and Kneecap face backlashes, but unlike the protest songwriters of seventeenth-century England, they will not face the death sentence if found guilty of such actions as ‘seditious libel’ (p. 211). In an era where artists fear the commercial repercussions of raising their concerns, it is salutary to read accounts of people who put their lives on the line to make their protests. Such people still exist, but generally in places other than England.
Tribute should be paid to the book’s (and the wider project’s) remarkable achievements. These include a welcome reminder that protest song is not something that began with the 1960s’ folk revival. What is shown here is that as soon as people had the ability to express discontent in music aimed at a mass audience, they did so. The authors also suggest that ‘England’s “golden age” of contemporary protest song was not the 1960s, but the 1980s’ (p. 38). Such revisionism is welcome.
Any idea that protest is simply the domain of the left is demolished here. The authors see protest songs as ‘a form of political communication’ (p. 7), although they also suggest that they belong ‘to multiple categories’ (p. 57) and can also be seen as ‘a particular form of political thought and expression’ (p. 58, emphasis in original). Such forms may be utilised across the political spectrum. The authors also note that prior to the industrial revolution, southern England and London were the main providers of protest songs (p. 34), a welcome reminder to this southern boy of its more radical past.
The book concludes by noting that it set out to do three things: (i) show a longer history of protest than is usually imagined, (ii) draw attention away from the US to England, and (iii) show protest song as a form of political communication. In all three areas it is successful. The longevity and geographical locus are easy enough to confirm. So what the book does is to show the particular form of political communication that the protest song encapsulates, something which incorporates informing, educating, moving, uniting, representing, organising, and imagining. Ending with such categorisations opens up a fertile ground for further debate.
I began this review with a series of questions. I will end by reiterating that all those questions are addressed in this book. However, the feeling is definitely given that this is meant to be the start of a debate, rather than the last word. The authors are too astute for that. They are confident in their own arguments, while also wanting to make protest songs the ‘object of debate and argument’ (p. 9). They know that they are contributions to the start of a conversation, and I, for one, very much look forward to the next contributions.
