scholarly journals Silent Subversions

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek Dubois

<p>Explores the concept of spectatorship in relation to gender in the earliest period of film history in the United States known as the silent era. Argues that a new mode of spectatorship emerges for women during the 1920s, which employs to advantage the extra-diegetic components of spectacle in theater design, new customized genres for female filmgoers, fandom, and exotic male film stars, such as Rudolph Valentino. Focuses primarily on feminist film theory and on cultural studies as methodological models.</p>

Author(s):  
Lucy Fischer

“Women and Film” encompasses numerous issues in academic film studies, including the histories of female practitioners in the industry; the works they produced; female audiences; female critics, historians, archivists, and theorists; and the portrayals of women on the movie screen. In the early years of cinema, women played a significant role in filmmaking (e.g., the director Lois Weber and the scenarist Frances Marion in the United States), but these individuals were soon forgotten as the industry became male dominated. Thus, it was not until the rise of second-wave feminism in the 1970s and 1980s that the work of these pioneers was revived and documented. By then, of course, another generation of female filmmakers had surfaced internationally (e.g., Lina Wertmuller in Italy and Margarethe von Trotta in Germany). Not only were the careers of these artists studied, but also their works were analyzed in monographs and articles, often focusing on whether or not they evinced a specific female point of view or style. Female critics and theorists were also known in the silent era (e.g., H. D. (Hilda Doolittle) in the United States and Iris Barry in the United Kingdom), but it was not until the contemporary period that a field of feminist film history, criticism, and theory emerged. This comprised several subareas: readings of the images of women in film—be it flapper or femme fatale; studies of women in particular film genres; monographs on individual artists; analyses of iconic actresses; analyses of female audiences; and formulations of feminist theory. In the 21st century, the field has expanded further to correct certain prejudices and limitations. An early emphasis on the white woman has been rectified by studies of race and ethnicity. The latest scholarship has also moved beyond a concentration on the United States and Europe to embrace studies of women and film in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa. Finally, while early writing on the topic privileged the heterosexual female (as screen subject and viewer), more recent writing has examined questions of lesbianism, bisexuality, and the transgendered body as applied to questions of women and cinema.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-154
Author(s):  
Sue Thornham

John Hill has described the ways in which male-centered narratives of British “working-class films” of the 1980s and 1990s mobilize the idea of the working-class community as “a metaphor for the state of the nation.” Writing on films of the same era by women directors, Charlotte Brunsdon deems it more difficult to see these films as “representations of the nation.” There are, she writes, “real equivocations in the fit between being a woman and representing Britishness.” This article explores this issue, arguing that the history of British cinema to which Hill's chapter contributes is not only bound up with a particular sense of British national identity, but founded on a particular conception, and use, of space and place. Taking Andrea Arnold's Red Road (2006) as its case study, it asks what it is about this sense of space and place that excludes women as subjects, rendering their stories outside of and even disruptive of the tradition Hill describes. Finally, drawing on feminist philosophy and cultural geography, it suggests ways in which answering these questions might also help us think about the difficult questions raised by Jane Gaines, in a number of articles, around how we might think together feminist film theory and film history.


2017 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-242
Author(s):  
Mariah Devereux Herbeck

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document