"Ludovic Fabre has no story of his own to tell" says Schiavi regarding narrative forms. This is an interesting concept because after watching it, I felt like I had just watched a story. It to me felt like a family's story, not Ludo's. I am going to bring up an old White quote, "To narrate is to moralize." What is the significance of the story's "narrative"?
I believe that they story is presented in a less narrative arc way to avoid that moralization that white talks about. If the story's values were completely against Ludo then we all would feel awful, maybe not buy into it. However, if the values were 100% for Ludo's feelings then it would not discuss this issue in an open sense. What is the significance of the issue being so open?
The movie is hardly a easy movie with a nice ending filled with closure. Ludo's daydreams of escaping into Pam's world become more and more grandeur. Ever, his mother climbs into the billboard and is able to see her child's wish. I think this movie is made this way to accurately show the complexity of gender today. What is the significance of Ludo identifying with Pam?
Pam is such an extreme. She is blonde with big boobs, who marries Ben (I think) and lives in a dream world with bright colors and the sun shining. Gender is so learned, trained, and forced upon us all with such authenticity that it seems real. If Ludo is merely switching genders then is the significance of that?
Is it that Ludo does identify as a girl and has only Pam as a way to express and show that? Or, it is that him wanting to be like Pam is more ideal to himself. The difference in identification and idealization is small, but big at the same time. We all claim a gender, sexuality, and identity. But why? I used to climb trees because my bother told me girls couldn't do it. Does this make me a tomboy, rebel, or lesbian? This idea of gender and idenfication is in actuality so complex but the world shoves it into little boxes and says you either this or that. This movie helps broaden our thinking of what all that means... I will get off my soap box now haha...
Monday, November 23, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
Far From Heaven
This movie, in my opinion challenges many things. When looking closely the movie examines race, sexuality, and the idea of "progress". Fanon states, "I move slowly in the world, accustomed now to seek no longer for upheaval. I progress by crawling. And already I am being dissected under white eyes, the only real eyes. I am fixed. ... I feel, I see in those white faces that it is not a new man who has come in, but a new kind of man, a new genus. Why, it's a Negro!" This helps us investigate the significance of race.
The movie obviously is set in the 50's and thus we are familar and easily appalled at the types of discrimination we see. Thinking to ourselves, "Thank God I live in advanced times." However, I strongly believe that Fanon nailed a key issue of the movie when he says, " I am Fixed." Yes the audience can say they live in better times but I would argue that race is still Fixed. Stereotypes work against everyone. The white world has accepted the black man, but not as a man, but a black man. The division is still there (HELLO OMAHA), just because the lines are blurry does not mean they aren't there. This idea of stereotypes transcends just race too. What is the significance of gender?
In the movie, the husband is a gay man. This is a taboo then, and a huge one. However, in today's times is it that much better? Like I said, it may be more accepted. But, take a gay man who does not act "gay" that is hard for people to understand. If a man is not effeminate but gay, it is still a big taboo. Same with a very pretty, feminine lesbian. They are not taken seriously or understood. The pride parade in Omaha is very underground for prejudice reasons. Now what is the significance of kathy?
"I am suggesting that we need to separate gender identification from sexuality, too often conflated in the name of sexual difference." Kathy is a hard person to peg. She possesses both female and male traits. She is also the one pursuing Raymond and it is HER gaze we see, with him being the spectacle. She does not become a man but is able to being a strong woman protagonist. Her desire for Raymond is much like the male gaze. This makes the movie take into question typical gender roles. The man should pursue the woman, yada yada. So, what is the significance of this all?
To me, the movie is a huge statement. It has been some 50 years later and have we really fixed these issues? In the movie it is tragic, she watches him leave on the train. The struggle is over, the characters are fixed. They cannot move. I think it is telling the audience to not let this happen.
The movie obviously is set in the 50's and thus we are familar and easily appalled at the types of discrimination we see. Thinking to ourselves, "Thank God I live in advanced times." However, I strongly believe that Fanon nailed a key issue of the movie when he says, " I am Fixed." Yes the audience can say they live in better times but I would argue that race is still Fixed. Stereotypes work against everyone. The white world has accepted the black man, but not as a man, but a black man. The division is still there (HELLO OMAHA), just because the lines are blurry does not mean they aren't there. This idea of stereotypes transcends just race too. What is the significance of gender?
In the movie, the husband is a gay man. This is a taboo then, and a huge one. However, in today's times is it that much better? Like I said, it may be more accepted. But, take a gay man who does not act "gay" that is hard for people to understand. If a man is not effeminate but gay, it is still a big taboo. Same with a very pretty, feminine lesbian. They are not taken seriously or understood. The pride parade in Omaha is very underground for prejudice reasons. Now what is the significance of kathy?
"I am suggesting that we need to separate gender identification from sexuality, too often conflated in the name of sexual difference." Kathy is a hard person to peg. She possesses both female and male traits. She is also the one pursuing Raymond and it is HER gaze we see, with him being the spectacle. She does not become a man but is able to being a strong woman protagonist. Her desire for Raymond is much like the male gaze. This makes the movie take into question typical gender roles. The man should pursue the woman, yada yada. So, what is the significance of this all?
To me, the movie is a huge statement. It has been some 50 years later and have we really fixed these issues? In the movie it is tragic, she watches him leave on the train. The struggle is over, the characters are fixed. They cannot move. I think it is telling the audience to not let this happen.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Dancer in the Dark
So, it won't let me post the picture, but if you go online and find the album cover for the soundtrack of Dancer in the you'll see a close up view of Selma and it is soo pixelated that it looks blurry or hard to clearly see. She is wearing her glasses and it is titled, "Selma's Songs." This made me ask the significance of vision?
Selma is blind in several senses. She physically can't see but is also oblivious to the world around her. For example, she is oblivious to the director keeping her there (for the police). The other characters, however, see just fine allowing us to SEE her clearly. So what is the significance of her not being able to see while everyone else can?
Marx states, "Therefore we have to grasp the essential connection between this whole estrangement and the money system." Through his essay we see that the worker feels alienated and estranged. The sense of false consciousness adds/helps create this false feeling of alone. We see the other characters see her struggles. We see them be kept at a distance. What is the significance of this distance?
The audience feels detached from Selma just like all the other characters. The movie is filmed making us feel not part of the story, but as a witness to the story. This alienation that she feels seeps into our understanding of her and how we relate to her. The call to arms is to us "witnesses." What is the significance of alienation?
This might be a stretch but Marx says, "the worker puts his life into the object; but now his life no longer belongs to him but to the object." It seems to me that the object in this movie is not her work (that is a cause of the alienation but not the product) but her son, Gene. She literally gives him all she has. She works and works and saves and saves and even lies for her son. Gene is her product or commodity.
Selma is blind in several senses. She physically can't see but is also oblivious to the world around her. For example, she is oblivious to the director keeping her there (for the police). The other characters, however, see just fine allowing us to SEE her clearly. So what is the significance of her not being able to see while everyone else can?
Marx states, "Therefore we have to grasp the essential connection between this whole estrangement and the money system." Through his essay we see that the worker feels alienated and estranged. The sense of false consciousness adds/helps create this false feeling of alone. We see the other characters see her struggles. We see them be kept at a distance. What is the significance of this distance?
The audience feels detached from Selma just like all the other characters. The movie is filmed making us feel not part of the story, but as a witness to the story. This alienation that she feels seeps into our understanding of her and how we relate to her. The call to arms is to us "witnesses." What is the significance of alienation?
This might be a stretch but Marx says, "the worker puts his life into the object; but now his life no longer belongs to him but to the object." It seems to me that the object in this movie is not her work (that is a cause of the alienation but not the product) but her son, Gene. She literally gives him all she has. She works and works and saves and saves and even lies for her son. Gene is her product or commodity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)