In “Visual Pleasure and Narrative
Cinema,” writer and filmmaker Laura Mulvey analyzes how gender and sexuality are
codified in classic Hollywood cinema. She concludes that since males dominated film
production during 1930-1954, they utilized this medium to create narratives
that feed the male-structured sense of pleasure and beauty. Through the
Freudian term “scopophilia”—the unhealthy pleasure in looking at a woman but
not touching or interacting—women become the object of a male’s controlling
gaze. Mulvey also elaborates on how Lacan’s “mirror stage” is reflected (pun
intended) in filmmaking because men derive satisfaction from identifying with
an ideal image on the screen. This is a form of narcissism, which, according to
Mulvey, ultimately becomes unbearable to the male viewer, forcing him to
“deflect the tension by splitting his gaze between spectacle and narrative.”
(2082) Furthermore, this erotic figure is threatening because the female represents
the fear of castration in a male. The main method in disarming this threat is
through voyeurism, “investigating the female, demystifying her, and either
denouncing, punishing, or saving her.” (2082)
In Alfred Hitchcock’s 1958 romance
thriller, Vertigo, Mulvey’s theories
are exemplified through John’s relationship with and behavior toward Madeleine
Elster and/or Judy Barton. John “Scottie” Ferguson is asked by Madeleine’s
husband to follow her and find out where she goes everyday because the women in
her family have a history of mental illness that causes them to attempt suicide.
Thus from the very beginning, once John sets eyes on the beautiful Madeleine, women
are portrayed as mysterious, alluring, and in need of a man’s protection. This
reflects how men enjoy the experience of scopophilia (Madeleine does not know
she is being watched), and must utilize voyeurism to justify their fascination
of the woman. He finds pleasure in investigating this female, yet he believes his
motives are just because he ultimately stalks her to save her, which he
does.
The
cinematography matches John’s “peeping Tom” point of view since there are many
camera shots of Madeleine from the back. This narrative and camera work creates
a deeper message, exploiting how women are always being watched, observed and
judged by men on a critical level...and this is just fine because that is a
female’s purpose—to be manhandled mentally, emotionally and physically. This is
exemplified when John saves Madeleine when she falls in the water. He then puts
her in his car, takes her to his bachelor pad, undresses her, puts her in his
bed, and lights a fire. When she wakes up, she is naked in his bed, as he
stands over her, gazing at her. She then puts on his robe, sits in the living
room by the fire, while he, again, stands near her. By falling into a trance, John
was able to live his fantasy without her knowing.
Again, this is a great example of voyeurism, yet it is at a higher level of
intimacy (and creepiness): he is actually going through the motions without her
knowing.
This scene also addresses this male
ideology that all women are desperate, helpless, clueless, and always accepting
of a man playing the role of their rescuer, hero, protector, and provider…or
they are unaware of it because this is the societal structure, and there is no
un-knowing it. There is no way to NOT be desired or desirable by a man so you
must just go ahead and accept his advances and feed his hunger and selfish
desires. This message is heightened because of Madeleine’s serene nature and
her desperate cries of needing him and loving him. This fits the male dream of
having complete control over the desires of a woman. I believe there is a
strong sense of male pride here in that Madeleine is married to another man,
and John is most likely gloating in her choice of him over her husband.
John’s obsession and entrancement
of Madeleine is enhanced through the comparison to Midge, John’s good friend
and ex-fiancée. Midge appears to be more masculine with her glasses, outspoken
personality and less-alluring clothes. I loved the scene were Midge makes a
portrait of herself to reflect the woman in the painting from the museum (the
one Madeleine idolizes). When John does not find it funny, Midge gets so upset
with herself. On a metaphorical level, she is creating a piece of art to
reflect what she thinks John wants her to be—alluring and engaging. In a way,
she is also making fun of him for being so fascinated with this woman that he
does not know. Yet the biggest note here is that Midge feels she has to change
her normal methods of communication to speak THE MAN’s language to try and make
him want her. Since “the pleasure of the look is transferred to others” in
Freud’s scopophilia, she was hoping his “looking” would be transferred to her.
This
theme is amplified when Madeleine “dies” and John meets Judy Barton (the
actress who was playing the fake Madeleine) and his “look” is transferred into
her actual look; in other words, he wants her to look like Madeleine from top
to bottom; therefore Judy instantly becomes John’s makeover project. In the
clothing store, there is a “mirror” scene, which supports Lacan’s theories
previously mentioned. John pushes Judy onto the mirror, where he can see himself looking
at her and how they look together. Here he is also forcing her to look at herself,
looking at him. So no matter where she looks in the mirror, there is no her without him; she is a reflection of his desires.
While Judy first resists this
transformation, hoping that he can learn to love her (the real person under the
façade of Madeleine) she finally gives in and says, “I’ll wear the clothes if
you want me to. Just like me.” He says he will, but he truly doesn’t, due to the
way her treats her when he figures out how he was duped all along. John never stops wanting the fantasy girl, the façade, the actress,
the character, and he cannot handle the truth that he fell in love with a lie. Truly
all John desired was to live in scopophilia, finding “pleasure in using
another person as an object sexual stimulation through sight” (2087-2088). It was never about the person; it was
always about the projection of her, and the male sexual empowerment he felt by simply
looking at her.
Through this analysis of an
onscreen woman’s influence over the egos of male viewers—in the movie theater,
behind the camera, or on camera—Mulvey invites screen theorists to examine how
the location of the male “look” defines sexist cinematic themes and narratives.
She also desires that we question how these effects could be altered to change
our experience with film, particularly regarding the portrayal of women as the
object and language of erotic male desire.
No comments:
Post a Comment