Feminist Film Theory - Essay Example

Feminist Film Theory Name Course Institution Tutor Date Introduction Feminism can be termed as a social movement that has over time had numerous impacts and more so when viewed from the film theory perspective. The feminist usually views the cinema as being a cultural practice that represents the myths about femininity and women in addition to aspects related to masculinity and men. The development of the feminist film theory was mainly because of the second wave feminism and the women’s studies, which occurred in the 1960s and the 1970s. Thus, the film theories set out to analyze the manner in which a great number of women are portrayed in the various films and how it relates to a broader historical context. The theories further analyses the common stereotypes that are depicted in the films, the extent to which the women in the film as shows as being passive or active in addition to the amount of screen time that the women in the film are given. This paper sets out to discuss how the feminist film theory understood cinematic spectatorship. This will be followed by a discussion of how later theorists such as Kарlаn, dе Lаurеntis, Studlаr аnd еvеn Lаurа Мulvеy herself move beyond this towards а more соmрlех understanding of роwеr аnd thе mаlе. Discussion A great number of commenter’s and criticizers usually directed their criticism to the stereotypes of women. There were fixed as well as continuous repeated images of the female actors and this was viewed as being an objectible distortions and it would have numerous and negative impact and more so on the female spectator (Denzin 1995). Thus, there was a call for the positive images of the females in the cinema. When researching on cinematic spectatorship and the feminist film theory is inevitable to contend with the force exerted by, experience the early audiences since they played crucial roles when it came to the creation of early film. The modern day audiences failed to comprehend the level of fear that the beginning cinemas brought to the audiences. The early spectators did not attend the films with an expectation to be anonymously absorbed into the narrative of the film as what happens in the classical narrative cinema. Despite the fact that the moving images seemed to be very captivating and at times, they acted as a frightening factor, the cinematic spectators did not attend the film with the aim of being lost in the narrative reality but actually, they were very conscious of the role they played as spectators. In discussing, the issue of masculinity the issue of homosexual desire is raised (Dyer 1982). A great number of critics are of believe that the spectatorial look in the cinemas is mainly male. When argued from the perspective of Dyer 1982, the images of the men cannot automatically work for the women. The disagreement of the homoeroticism of mainly looking at the men entails sado-masochistic scenes, themes and fantasies. Therefore, the highly ritualized scenes of the struggle of the male that draws away from the male body and to a scene of spectacular fight. Cinematic spectatorship when viewed from the feminist film theory perspectives addressed the sexual representations readings and identities as being composed of a disparate as well as incommensurate strands. In this respect the woman were termed as being the consumers or the signifiers of modernity (Doane 1987). The woman is termed as object and it is used a system of positioning. In this respect, subjectivity is not in any way reducible to the image, narrative, readings but it can be produced through a number of intersecting discourses and the fragments attempts to male construct wholeness. Based on this analysis of the wide range of competing construction of woman, the figure of the female spectator can be seen. . The feminist film theory understood cinematic spectatorship and mainly addressed the female audience and thus it motivated the incitement of the female gaze as well as the feminine image and this usually resulted in proximity and narcissism (Doane 1987). In the cinemas where the masculine spectator are privileged, the image of the female is usually held with fetishitically distance looking and voyeuristically while at the same time it is narrativity is usually prioritized over the closure over the disequilibrium, image. Pribram 1988, in Female Spectators tend to shift attention from the idea of the spectator as the subject that is produced through the representational address. As an alternative, the spectator in this case is viewed as being produced in representation through a three-sided encounter Despite the above understanding of the cinematic spectatorship later theorists such as Kaplan, De Laurentis, Studlar and Laura Mulvey have moved beyond this view and moved towards a greater understanding of power and the male characters in the film and cinemas.’ Mulvey 1989, have been a great contributor to the feminist film theory and the understanding of cinematic spectatorship. His work has greatly influenced this since he has shifted the orientation of the film theory to a psychoanalytic framework. Prior to the work of Mulvey, other film theorists such as Christian Metz and Jean-Louis Baudry had made use of the psychoanalytic ideas and mostly in their theoretical accounts of the cinema. However, it can be noted that the contribution of Mulvey was of great help since it initiated an intersection of feminism, psychoanalysis and the film theory. Kaplan 1983, have further contributed to the understanding of the film spectatorship and more so to a more соmрlех understanding of роwеr аnd thе mаlе and he has effectively achieved this by elaborating on the psychoanalytic constructions working of the power associated with the male gaze and gender. In his work, women and Film, he argued that the male gaze usually defines and the dominates the women and female in a film as erotic object and through this he manages to repress the relationship of the women as being a mother figure, and this usually leaves a gap that is not mainly dominated by the man. Through this, the women can be able to create a voice, discourse as well a place for herself on the film as a subject. In this work and in his subsequent works Kaplan 1997, have been able to integrate both the psychoanalytic methodologies and the semiotic so as to portray the numerous implications of the gender construction in and through the use of the films and more so the Hollywood movies. Kaplan 1983 usually takes and considers psychoanalysis very essential when it comes to the clear and concise understanding of the genders patterns, which are associated with the production processes of Hollywood movies, and films in that there is usually the inscription of the experience of the spectators in the films. This is clearly evident when he argues that psychoanalysis have over time become a crucial aspects when it comes to the explaining of the desires, needs and the female and male positioning that are usually reflected in the films. In such instances, a number of questions such as what does it mean to be a female spectators can be asked. By asking such a question in consideration of the psychoanalytic framework, individuals can feel the existing fissures and gaps and through it, the female and women characters can be inserted into the historical discourse which have been excluded women and which is mainly male dominated (Kaplan 1983). In the theorizing the working of the films from a very different perspective, Studlar 1985 views the psychoanalytic film theory by placing a lot of emphasis on the understanding of human relationships and emotional interactions as portrayed by Freud. In his work, Studlar 1985 aimed at accounting on the film is supposed to function for both the female and the male spectators in diversified way other than in the voyeuristic relationships. Mulvey 1989, on the other hand posited between the characters, the events on the screen and the viewers. Mulvey 1989 is of the opinion that the pleasures in viewing the film is usually because of the male spectators through the essentially sadistic relationship that is developed between the cinematic object associated with his gaze and the film viewers as being the voyeur. Studlar 1988 offers a different opinion when he asserts that pleasure in cinemas can also arise as a result of an imagined masochistic as opposed to the sadistic relationship between the screen object and the spectators. Studlar 1988 therefore positions her work and breaks the limitations that Mulvey 1989 had placed by stating that there seems to be a need of focusing more on the pre-oedipal stage as opposed to the oedipal stage. Through this individuals and players in the film, industry can break the impasse that has been inherited from the work of Mulvey 1989 when it comes to visual pleasure. This will enable them to reach to a point where the film will be seen as an essential tool when it comes to the forming of spectatorial pleasures that are divorced from other issues such as the feminine lack, sexual differences and castration (Studlar 1985). To explain and support his point Studlar 1985, make use of the Josef von Sternberg’s Blonde Venus, starring Marlene Dietrich and through this, he demonstrates that there are certain visually realized masochistic relations which can act in fantasy and also when it comes to viewing of movies. By structuring a masochistic as opposed to sadistic position of the film viewers, the film can therefore position the spectators as being submissive when it comes to controlling of the female characters and thus she can be viewed as being a dominant and important mother figure. Based on Studlar the submissive state on this case can generate pleasure for the female and the male spectators and thus there is a development of a pre-oedipal stage when viewed from the perspective of the psychic development (Hansen 1986). De Lauretis is not very optimistic as compared to Mulvey 1989 on the concept of cinematic spectatorship. Based on him there are two different processes of identification in the cinema. The first is seen as an oscillating or both identification and it comprises the passive feminine identification with the images and a masculine active identification with the gaze. The second process is viewed as a simultaneous and it entails double identification with the figure of the narrative image and the figure of narrative movement. The figural identifications acts as an enabler to the female spectators and thus they are able to take up both passive and active positions of desire. This double identification usually yields immense pleasure and through it the narratives usually seduces the women into the aspects of femininity and solicits the consent of the spectators. In this respect, the female subject is seen as been a contradiction to a great extent and De Lauretis at times refers to the female subjects as being non-subjects (Lauretis 1984). The feminist theory mainly revolves around the concept of un-represent ability of a woman as being a subject that can be desired and historical women who have viewed themselves as being subjects for a long period. Conclusion In conclusion, the film theories set out to analyze the manner in which a great number of women are portrayed in the various films and how it relates to a broader historical context. The theories further analyses the common stereotypes that are depicted in the films, the extent to which the women in the film as shows as being passive or active in addition to the amount of screen time that the women in the film are given. From the above discussion, the feminist film theory understood the cinematic spectatorship in the view that there were fixed as well as continuous repeated images of the female actors and this was viewed as being an objectible distortions and it would have numerous and negative impact and more so on the female spectator. It can be noted that later theorists such as Kарlаn, dе Lаurеntis, Studlаr аnd еvеn Lаurа Мulvеy herself move beyond this towards а more соmрlех understanding of роwеr аnd thе mаlе. References Denzin, N 1995, The Cinematic Society: The Voyeur's Gaze. Sage, London. Doane, M 1987, The Desire to Desire: The Woman's Film of the 1940s, Macmillan Press, London. Dyer, R 1982, ‘Don't Look now: The Male Pin-Up', in Screen, vol. 23, no. 3-4, pp. 61-73. Hansen, M 1986, ‘Pleasure, Ambivalence and Identification: Valentino and Female Spectatorship’, Cinema Journal, vol. 25. no. 4. Kaplan, A 1997, Looking for the Other: Feminism, Film, and the Imperial Gaze, Routledge, New York. Kaplan, A. 1983, Women and Film Both Sides of the Camera, Methuen, New York. Lauretis, T 1984, Doesn't. Feminism. Semiotics. Cinema, Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Mulvey, L 1989, 'Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema' (1975),Visual And Other Pleasures, Macmillan, London. Pribram, D 1988, Female Spectators: Looking at Film and Television, Verso, London and New York. Studlar, G 1985,’Visual Pleasure and the Masochistic Aesthetic’, Journal of Film and Video, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 5. Studlar, G 1988, In the Realm of Pleasure, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois. Read More