|
May 18, 2004
This is quite interesting in the light of the previous posts on the male gaze.
Don Anderson is following a line of argument that is
'...directly confronting is the long-standing idea that the male gaze is inherently sadistic/active while the feminine is passive. This style of theorizing derives from and is most often associated with Laura Mulvey, who in her article, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema outlines a model that fails to account for the female spectator's gaze while relying on the males sadistic gaze for its criticism. "The man controls the film phantasy and also emerges as the representative of power in a further sense: as the bearer of the look of the spectator, transferring it behind the screen to neutralize the extra-diegetic tendencies represented by woman as spectacle"'.
He adds that the reason for making the rupture is because the sexual politics of narrative cinema as well as those within Batailles story [Story of the Eye] are too complex for a phallocentric framework.
previous start
|
