Saturday, March 23, 2013

Male Gaze and Oppositional Gaze



The male gaze is a term that has been used to describe how various forms of media, such as painting, television, and movies, assume the male perspective. In most of these forms, the perspective that is being used is not openly revealed; one must recognize the demographic that the media is trying to reach. From Renaissance nudes to 21st century car advertisements, it's very clear that media calls for the attention of those in power, and unfortunately in the world that we have lived in thus far, that has not included women, especially not women of color. Through the writings of Laura Mulvey, John Berger, and bell hooks, we can uncover the truth behind the Male Gaze, as well as the Oppositional Gaze, as described by hooks, and see why the Male Gaze is a pervasive form of vision in popular culture.

The Male Gaze is the easiest demographic to notice in popular culture. An excellent example of media using the Male Gaze is one that seems the most counterintuitive. It is the choice of advertisements in fashion magazines. Tom Ford, Dolce and Gabbana, Marc Jacobs, Calvin Klein, all of these designers aim to influence the female market, usually affluent females between the ages of 25 and 40. But, if you take a look at some of the advertisements that they have put out, one can notice that they are trying to influence women by having them appeal to the fantasies of men (something that is anything but original and unique, but still notable.) Use these ads as examples:





From treating women's bodies as objects to overtly displaying sex (and RAPE) in advertisements, it's quite certain that designers who cater to the female form through their clothing have a severe lack of respect for the female form in society. As Mulvey mentioned in Film: Psychology, Society and Ideology, the media caters to the Male Gaze by displaying men as active and women as passive (Mulvey, 837). She also writes “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,” (Mulvey, 837). This all suggests that women, in the eyes of popular culture, are to be seen and not heard; they are to submit to the “phantasies” of men and that in the end, it’s their fault for being looked at. “Why does she look so enticing? No one says that she has to dress that way. She’s dressing that way for attention,” is what some members of society say about the objectification of the female form. But in truth, WE tell her to look that way. We validate a woman’s worth by how tantalizing she is to males and how challenging she makes it for herself to be won.

It was mentioned previously that the media aims to attract the attention of those in power (males). As Berger discussed in Ways of Seeing, “Men watch women. Women watch themselves being looked at,” (Berger, 47). This notion of being looked at, of being watched, is the key to understanding the power of the spectator. bell hooks speaks of the power of spectatorship in Black Looks: Race and Representation. hooks describes the viewership of the colored woman to be the least powerful audience in society. The Oppositional Gaze is the denouncement of the stereotypical representation of colored women in media by colored women in society. hooks encourages this criticism and rejection of representation by presenting the idea that the colored woman has a job to go against the prevailing notion that she is a spectacle to be gawked at. Black women don’t have to worry about punishment brought on by looking and have to know that they are have to look the media in the eye and criticize what is seen. They are responsible for representing themselves and to not let anyone else stereotype them into false roles.

The Male Perspective is the wall that subliminally obstructs the public from seeing the truth behind their favorite paintings and magazine advertisements. The Oppositional Gaze gives power back to the most neglected faction of society and provides a sense of agency within its members. I have come to understand the structure of the Male Gaze as unfair and restricting to the potential of women in society. With the male perspective as the norm in media, we as women will have to fight endlessly to defend our place as equals. In the eyes of the public, a woman defaults as the submissive individual; she is dainty and she can always be won with the right kind of wooing and persuasion. A woman does not have her own voice. She must earn a voice through becoming a wife, a mother, or a woman in a “masculine” role. She cannot simultaneously be a mother who bakes cookies and wears sundresses while still being a disciplinarian and the matriarch of a household. A woman is either silently passive or she is trying to be a man. The objectifying displays of women in various forms of media leave little to no wiggle room for women to overthrow the patriarchal paradigm of our society. This is not a factor that I am willing to accept lying down. I will not allow my potential to be stifled at the hands of some median heterosexual Caucasian male who somehow got a hold of the freethinking world. I am not here to be subservient to anyone. I am not an object. I am a female who, through determination and dedication, expects the same compensation as any male for the same caliber of work. At the end of all this, we as a society must educate ourselves with scholars outside of the traditional cannon and, as women, we must represent who we are in a just light. This is the only way that the pervasive Gaze can be blinded once and for all.
This is a good video that explains the male gaze particularly well http://youtu.be/0lxLhcmhPp0
This is one of my favorite paintings of ALL time. It is Grand Odalisque (1814) by Jean August Dominique Ingres. I've always thought that the colors and composition were beautiful but I never really thought about the story behind the painting as much as I did once I finished reading Berger's Ways of Seeing. She's a concubine (odalisque) who is waiting for her suitor (or master, whatever you prefer). I never realized that she was only there waiting for a man. That took away a small chunk of interest from the painting. I still think that it's one of the most beautiful paintings to be created in the 19th century in France. I just always thought that the proportions were strange and that it was unusual that her boob was jutting out of her underarm, but HEY Ingres was French so he must know a thing or two about fancy paintings, right?


No comments:

Post a Comment