Gazing at You
~ A Final Look and Then Goodbye
Sheila Fram-Kulik
The eyes see so much and
have taken on a power of their own via
"the gaze". The power that the dominating
gaze holds imitates our societal structure.
Our individual structures, are represented
by the gaze that we use. Several Feminist
film theorists have come up with their
own definitions of the gaze that began
its entrance into cinema in the late 80’s
and early 90’s. Originators like Laura
Mulvey and Mary Anne Doane, saw the power
of the eye and the impact that it had
on society. Others to follow, like Judith
Mayne and Constance Penley, took it one
step further and to redirect the question
from a different perspective. As a summary
essay, several theories on the gaze from
some of these ladies will show the foundation
that has been built because of the many
feminisms and where our current feminist
filmmakers have their origins. As an Independent
filmmaker myself, these theories are but
some of the ones that I learned as I began
my education into the worlds of Film and
Women’s Studies.
Laura Mulvey began the
questioning in her book and essay, "Visual
and Other Pleasures." She approached the
cinematic apparatus from the point of
view of Freud and Lacan and giving a definition
to the woman as an object. Mulvey states,
"In a world ordered by sexual imbalance,
pleasure in looking has been split between
active/male and passive/female. The determining
male gaze projects its fantasy onto the
female figure, which is styled accordingly.
In their traditional exhibitionist role
women are simultaneously looked at and
displayed, with their appearance coded
for strong visual and erotic impact so
that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness.
(p.19)" Mulvey’s main question was, How
can women’s film-viewing pleasures be
understood?
Mary Ann Doane, felt that
the female viewer was in a role of cross-gender
identification that caused a distance
with the text. She saw woman as wearing
a costume in a sense. Chris Straayer quotes,
"In 'Film and the Masquerade: Theorizing
the Female Spectator' she argues that,
because woman's preoedipal bond with the
mother continues to be strong throughout
her life (unlike man's), the female viewer
- unless she utilizes artificial devices
- is unable to achieve that distance from
the film's textual body which allows man
the process of voyeurism: 'For the female
spectator there is a certain over-presence
of the image—she is the image.'" This
is where the woman becomes narcissistic.
Doane offers an a way for woman to distance
herself from the image - through the masquerade
of femininity.
Doane summarizes the female
spectators position as the viewer adopting
the masculine position in relation to
the cinematic sign, where the female is
left with two options, "the masochism
of over identification or the narcissism
entailed in becoming one’s own object
of desire, in assuming the image in the
most radical way. The effectivity of masquerade
lies precisely in its potential to manufacture
a distance from the image, to generate
a problematic within the image is manipulable,
producible, and readable to woman."
Judith Mayne, in "The Woman
at the Keyhole", takes the gaze further
and approaches the gaze from a "keyhole"
perspective that was prevalent in early
cinema and still show a presence in current
Film. She states, "For when we imagine
a 'woman' and a 'keyhole', it is usually
a woman on the other side of the keyhole,
as the proverbial object of the look,
that comes to mind....but rather asking...what
happens when women are situated in both
sides of the keyhole. The question is
not only who or what is on either side
of the keyhole, but also what lies between
them, what constitutes the threshold that
makes representation possible. (Mayne,
p. 9)"
The foundation that these
theories as well as other theories offer
is one that women filmmakers need to start
on a path of speaking in their own voice,
having their own gaze, and BE-ing a woman
in a world that they generate themselves.
For it is not power that is important
but becoming and being a woman and individual
that can never be defined exclusively.
Sources:
THE WOMAN AT THE KEYHOLE
~ JUDITH MAYNE
VISUAL AND OTHER PLEASURES ~ LAURA
MULVEY
DEVIANT EYES, DEVIANT BODIES ~
CHRIS STRAAYER
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LAST ISSUE
Dear Readers,
As of this month, "woman/Cinema
~ Women/cinema" will be printing its last
issue. Due to financial problems, we were
forced to end the newsletter. We appreciate
all the support that we have gotten this
year as well as the interest. I wanted
to thank all of the students who contacted
me with questions and interest, it felt
good to know that we were reaching someone
and giving them knowledge as a foundation
to continue from in their endeavors as
writers and filmmakers.
As Editor, I have always
felt that there was a need for publications
like this one and I will stick to this
opinion until more come about. I have
always dedicated this publication to all
the future and present women writers and
women filmmakers out there. The underlying
purpose of the newsletter is and was for
the benefit of the collective of Women
and for the individual of woman. I have
moved on into the world of Film in hopes
of applying all of my French feminist
theories to my works.
This is never an end but
a perpetual beginning that will some day
begin again at some point in the future,
if not by me, then by another woman. So,
hold on society, it is going to be a bumpy
ride for you and I don’t plan on slowing
down .
Sheila Fram-Kulik
[email protected]