For my essay question I want to deal with the ideologies I learnt about in the psychoanalytical gaze lecture. I hope to deal more specifically with film posters created purposely for feminist or all female cast movies. I hope to compare examples of these with compositions that were created to promote male orientated films and perhaps even those aimed at a misogynistic mind set. My intentions are to highlight the differences and the reason why the differences are so vital for subconsciously drawing in the right audience. Key areas I will discuss are: scopophilia, suture, intra and extra digetic gazes and more obviously feminist psychoanalysis.
I hope to concentrate largely on the films of Pedro Almodovar, a Spanish director who is well known for creating feature films with strong female leads and ensemble casts. The poster to the left is a prime example of what I want to discuss and compare to posters such as this and this. The stark difference in design is instantly obvious and therefore each film has an intended audience before the film has even begun. Thats why promotional posters are so important, they have to draw in the right people and if they don't communicate the right message then a large number of the audience would walk out in the middle of the film.
Initial bibliography:
'If there is any structural principle governing the organisation of feminist documentary film, it is that provided by autobiographical discourse: 'film after film shows a woman, telling her story to the camera'. ' Womens Pictures; Feminism and Cinema, 1982, A. Kuhn, pg. 148
'It has somehow escaped theoretical attention that sexual difference is the effect of dominant cinema's sound regime as well as its visual regime, and that the female voice is as relentlessly held to normative representations and functions as is the female body.' The Acoustic Mirror; The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema, 1988, K. Silverman, preface
'Advertising in this society builds precisely on the creation of an anxiety to the effect that, unless we measure up, we will not be loved. Every minute region of the body is now exposed to this kind of scrutiny of the ideal.'
The Look, Rosalind Crawford in Reading Images, J. Thomas, 2000, pg. 38
Despite Adorno writing his essay on popular music in 1941 before most of the 'pop music' we listen to these days was even imagined, his points remain incredibly relevant and poignant to this day. Straight away he assigns music into one of the two categories; popular or serious. Adorno much prefers these categories and feels the alternative 'lowbrow or highbrow' is not precise enough. He immediately praises the efforts of Beethoven and claims his Appassionata 'achieves the utmost dramatic momentum by omitting the exposition and starting with repetition'. However these principles could never be applied to popular music as the listener has already automised the 'framework' for themselves.
Adorno goes as far to suggest that by subjecting ourselves to purely 'standardised' music we enter into a 'system of response mechanisms wholly antagonistic to the ideal of individuality in a free, liberal society'. Here he also reinforces the idea that even though many would argue individulity can be achieved through the masses of different genres available, he suggests that popular music is simply a 'multiple choice questionnaire'. Adorno entitles this 'pseudo-individualisation' and states that although we think we have free reign over what we choose to listen to it is pre-determined in production and later in marketing and advertising techniques. This is pinpointed in his essay by saying all popular music has a 'fundamental identity of the material' and 'great similarity of presentation apart from their emphasized distinguishing trademarks'.
My personal choice for a modern day example of what Adorno would call a 'freezing of standards' is a song taken from The Kooks 2006 album Inside In/Inside Out. I chose this because by 2006 the genre known as 'indie' had already been around for nigh on 10 years and it was beginning to sound a little stale. For example bands like Razorlight, The Arctic Monkeys, The Killers and The Libertines all appeared and became popular artists within the same few years, with all their material sounding very similar in my own personal opinion. What was worse was the image of the bands; it seemed as though any one with bed-head, skinny jeans and an ill fitting t-shirt/leather jacket combo had guaranteed record sales. I'm sure when indie artists were first starting to get recognised in the early 2000's, such as Modest Mouse, the music was fresh and at least trying to 'circumvent standardisation', however it was inevitable that eventually the composition would begin to 'hear for the listener' instead of vice versa.
The social network site ‘Facebook’ could be considered a modern mechanism of Panopticism. It is an online hub where people can post almost anything about themselves, or others for that matter. According to Foucault in the Panopticon ‘the inmate is seen but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication.’ (Foucault, 1977, pg 65). Another aspect of Facebook panopticism is the constant updating of statuses, which users think are being viewed by everyone in their friend list, when perhaps not a single person has seen them. This can be better described by Foucault as the intention ‘to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility’ (Foucault, 1977, pg 65). Another way of phrasing this is the Facebook user ‘never knows weather he is being looked at, at any one moment, but he must be sure that he may always be so’ (Foucault, 1977, pg 65) and must therefore act accordingly.
When we ‘friend’ someone we make it ‘possible to see constantly and to recognize instantly’ (Foucault, 1977, pg 64). With this we also start to regulate each other and have the ability to report any content that we may feel is inappropriate, or as Foucault wrote ‘the panopticon may even provide an apparatus for supervising its own mechanisms’. (Foucault, 1977, pg 67).
Self-regulation is also a key Foucauldian theory present in the Facebook environment. Users are able to post any status they may wish, however most will choose selectively and only post things they feel will be appreciated or ‘liked’ by fellow users. With this they fall into the ‘docile bodies’ category becoming obedient and self-correcting.
