Laura Mulvey argues that within a film text, the male characters are said to control the look while the female characters connote the ‘to-be-looked-at-ness’.
Laura Mulvey is a British feminist film theorist and her article ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’ (1975) outlines her concept of how feminism presents itself in Classical Hollywood film. Mulvey begins with explaining how Psychoanalysis – a theory founded by Sigmund Freud – is appropriate to use because film form has been structured by the unconscious of the patriarchal society. She takes Freudian research and applies it in order to back up her points. Mulvey explains that phallocentrism – male dominance – depends on the “castrated woman” (pg. 6). She writes “it is her lack that produces the phallus as a symbolic presence” (pg. 6) which means that women are seen to be lacking something, meaning the penis, whereas men are not. Mulvey also writes that women are used so men can live out their “phantasies and obsessions” with the woman as a “silent image” therefore meaning that they do not pose any other purpose apart from being an object.
Mulvey suggests two pleasures offered by cinema, which are also taken from the Freudian Psychoanalysis theory. The first is Scopophilia which is the pleasure from looking at other people as objects and “subjecting them to a controlling and curious gaze” (pg. 8). This means that women are used in films for male viewers and male characters in the film to experience pleasure in looking at them. This makes women part of the male gaze. It also relates well to voyeurism because the pleasure comes from the curiosity of looking at private and forbidden things when no one is watching. Mulvey gives an example of this by stating that the darkness in cinemas “isolates spectators from one another” (pg.9). Plus, they are looking in on a “private world.”
The second cinematic pleasure is Narcissism which derives from Lacanian Psychoanalysis theory. Jacques Lacan discussed the moment a child recognises themselves in a mirror. He explains that it is crucial for the establishment of their ego and happens at a time when the child’s physical ambitions outshine their motor skills and so they enjoy their own reflection and the fact that they can recognise themselves. He also discussed misrecognition with mistaking someone else’s image for their own. In this instance, the body is projected outside itself as an ideal ego. Mulvey uses this to convey how the pleasure of narcissism within cinema comes from the spectator identifying with the male protagonist on screen as they see that person as their ideal self, thus strengthening their ego in the process. Mulvey summaries by stating Scopophilia is a function of the sexual instincts and Narcissism is a function of ego libido.
As previously mentioned, Mulvey supports her theory by referencing Freudian and Lacanian Psychoanalysis theory. After offering some background of this, she then goes on to explain more of her key findings. The main points that Mulvey argues are that, within a film text, the male characters offer more control than the female characters that are there to be looked at. Men are active and women are passive. Women are styled accordingly for the male gaze, offering a strong visual and erotic image which signifies their “to-be-looked-at-ness” (pg. 11). Mulvey also explains that the look of a woman works against the development of the storyline, meaning that the presence of a woman in a film freezes the narrative, whereas men are the ones who push it forward and can make things happen. In summary, women appear to only have two functions on screen; the first as an erotic object for the characters within the film and the second as an erotic object for the spectator watching. Either way, they remain an erotic object and nothing more. In addition to this, with men controlling everything, the spectator can identify with the male protagonist. Mulvey explains that this gives the spectator a screen surrogate and gives a satisfying sense of omnipotence and they use the active male protagonist who is in control to participate in the pleasure of looking at the passive female who is an erotic object. However, the male protagonist does not become an erotic object of gaze themselves as they are seen as the ideal ego – they are more perfect and complete. This is because they can control events within the film better than the passive female and the spectator.
Mulvey explains that it is this way due to the unconscious mind of the male. Women pose a threat to men because of their lack of a penis and men fear castration so they must distract themselves by inducing voyeuristic or fetishistic mechanisms to evade the threat posed by the women.
Mulvey’s theory pertains to Classical Hollywood narratives and she references many Alfred Hitchcock films within her article. However, there are other films from this era, such as Sabrina (1954) which may or may not support Mulvey’s theory. This film follows the life of the young Sabrina who is the daughter of a chauffeur who works for a very wealthy family in which two sons – David and Linus Larrabee – are part of. Sabrina has been love with David all of her life and he only notices her once she returns from Paris.
During the film, the male spectator will portray their ideal ego upon David as he is the object of Sabrina’s desire and is, at the beginning, the male protagonist. David is also seen more than his brother Linus who is working all of the time running the family corporate empire, whereas David appears to be the entertaining womaniser. David does not notice Sabrina and does not particularly care for her as he is chasing other women. During Sabrina’s time in Paris, an elderly man told her that she seems unhappy in love and jokingly advises “to begin with, you must stop looking like a horse” due to how she has her hair. This implies that Sabrina looks wrong and she needs to look differently if she wants to get male attention, as if that is the only thing that a woman should focus on. This relates to the passive female presence which Sabrina does carry before she gets back from Paris because she is not noticed during that time. Sabrina often wrote letters back home to update her father and the other staff at the Larrabee home how she is doing. At one point the staff are all gathered reading one her letters when David asks what the commotion is. However, he does not care when they inform him that Sabrina sent a letter. One of the staff members asks “wouldn’t you like to read it, there’s something about you in it?” but David does not reply, he just gets in his car and drives away. This falls in well with Mulvey discussing how men are active and women are passive, because she is not actively part of his life.
However, Sabrina eventually disappears for two years whilst attending cooking school in Paris, and when she returns she finally catches the attention of David. David is incredibly drawn to her now because of how different she is when she comes back. Sabrina has turned from an awkward, shy girl into a beautiful and sophisticated young woman. Due to this, she becomes part of the “to-be-looked-at-ness” and is the erotic object of David’s desire. It is also important to note that she wanted to be looked at this way by David as she has loved him for a long time. The male spectator is also invited – through David – to look at Sabrina objectifying. David does not recognise her as Sabrina at first as though women are only worth noticing if they appear to the male gaze. David cannot believe Sabrina has changes this much, referring to her as a “scrawny little kid” which implies that women are not worth looking at unless they look really sophisticated and womanly. He then says “look at those legs now, aren’t they something?” which again reflects how he is viewing Sabrina as a sexual object and almost not as an actual person. This is an example of voyeurism and shows how David controls the look and Sabrina signifies the to-be-looked-at-ness.
It is revealed that David has been married and divorced three times and he wants to run off with Sabrina even though he is currently engaged to another woman who is called Elizabeth. This suggests that he does not think too highly of women and can just get discard of them when he is no longer interested. David does not even hesitate to kiss Sabrina when she asks him to do so. In addition to this, David shows no consideration for Elizabeth’s feelings during the time he wants Sabrina. Instead, he just makes sure she does not find out because of his needs as his dad will cut him off and send him elsewhere. David’s father also exclaims his concern for him wanting to be with a servant’s daughter, and even states what was wrong with all of the other girls David has been with as though none of them have ever been good enough. This implies that women are lacking something if they are not reasonably successful or come from a poorer background and Sabrina, a chauffer’s daughter, is not good enough to meet his standards. This is also to do with class rather than just how women are viewed in general because those of the upper class are considered more highly and all women should be viewed equally regardless.
Within the film, men try to control the narrative and also what happens to Sabrina. It is Sabrina’s father who has her go off to cooking school in Paris to be like her mother. Plus, Linus attempts to get Sabrina to board a boat with him so they can sail off to Paris, but he plans to not meet her on there after all as a way of just getting her out of David and the Larrabee family’s lives. Whilst on the phone, Sabrina tells Linus that she is not going to meet him and he tells her to tell him what is bothering her claiming that he is there to listen. However, Linus lays the phone down and walks away so she is speaking to herself. Even though he does go to her, it still shows how Linus has no respect for Sabrina because it was important that she explained how she felt and he did not particularly acknowledge it because he thought his own presence would make it better which also illustrates his control as though he is entitled to it.
It is also interesting to note that the male ideal ego is focused on David at first because he is the one who controls the gaze at the start with the women he is with and also because he is the one Sabrina loves. However, the male ideal may be left out of the loop or shift over to Linus when they both fall in love with each other instead. There is more than one male protagonist which does not particularly meet Mulvey’s theory. At the end of the film, David decides to marry Elizabeth and he tells everyone else that it was Linus fooling around with Sabrina who he refers to as the “chauffer’s daughter.” Sabrina is referred to as this more than her own name throughout the film as though she does not have her own solid identity. She is viewed more as a servant’s daughter rather than as her own person. Linus goes after Sabrina and they end up together, which again demonstrates the switch of the main male protagonist.
In conclusion, Mulvey’s theory is problematic in stating that women are lacking because that suggests that women are incomplete when they do not actually “lack” anything. In addition to this, Mulvey does not speak for female spectators who behave differently to the male spectator. Mulvey is a woman herself and so it makes no sense for her to use this basis as support for her theory when she has not considered her own – the female – viewing. Women do not identify with the male protagonist as they identify more with the female protagonist instead, but this does not mean that all female spectators will put themselves in Sabrina’s shoes in the ideal ego sense. However, in some Classic Hollywood films, the to-be-looked-at-ness is connoted by women because the men in the film treat them as though they are only there to be looked at, especially when they are made to change clothes or look a certain way so that men will notice them. Some of Mulvey’s are valid but her theory is outdated and does not apply to the entire audience. For example, not only does it leave out women, but those of transgender and even different sexualities. A lesbian woman may put her ego ideal with the male protagonist and use him as a way of controlling what happens and also looking at the female protagonist in a voyeuristic manner. This is why the theory needs updating. Another flaw is perhaps Mulvey’s use of psychoanalysis as it goes beyond what is displayed in film. For example, the men are egotistic and often objectify women, but it is wrong to say that this is solely due to their lack of a penis because women are much more capable and men probably do not treat them this way because they feel threatened with a woman’s lack of penis. Men and women are definitely not always equal in film and so feminism needs to be applied within films where necessary so women can be viewed as more than just a symbolic of voyeurism that freezes the narrative. Women have more to offer.
Bibliography
MULVEY, L. (1975) Visual Pleasures and Narrative Cinema. Screen. 16.3. (Autumn) P. 6-18
Filmography
Sabrina. (1954) Film. Directed by Billy Wilder. [DVD] US: Paramount Pictures.
Leave a Reply