Nayani Vijayaratnam How has the representation of young females changed from the late 1940’s to present day in Hollywood films? My hypothesis explores how the representation of young females has evolved in films from the late 1940s to present day. I will be focusing on the social, political, economical and cultural reasons, which affect gender roles. Over the past 70 years there have been many stereotypical and countertypical representations of women analysed and demonstrated to the audience in various Hollywood films. [1] Females have been depicted as weak, fragile, domesticated and inferior to men; these ideologies create expectations of what women should be like in society, limiting them to mundane everyday tasks. In the recent years, females in films have countered these stereotypes and have been portrayed as strong, independent, prevailing figures, breaking free of the traditional gender roles inflicted upon them. The early 1940’s America was in the midst of World War 2 in which, both men and women served the country. Women were given the opportunity to work in factories, which was a milestone for both unmarried and married females as this allowed them to seek out employment and create a new financial freedom for themselves. The Equal Opportunity Act, which was enacted in 2010, prohibits discrimination in employment due to characteristics such as age, disability and gender. This has protected women from unfair treatment to an extent, as some forms of prejudice do still occur within a workplace. As World War 2 ended there was a shift in the American dream and what society considered being traditional as the focus now was on obtaining the perfect household. [2] Films such as “Father Knows Best” highly influenced the 1940/50s-romanticised perception of the perfect housewife as mass audiences, due to the performance of Jane Wyatt who embodied the character of the housewife and mother exceptionally, viewed it. [3] The Hollywood film, A Street Car Named Desire (1951) by Tennessee Williams portrays women similarly to Jane Wyatt, highlighting in particular the 'regular housewife' generalisation, which is portrayed to the audience through the use of diegetic dialogue as Stanley shouts ‘Catch!... Meat! This is aided by the mise-en-scene of the kitchen, which allows the audience to recognise her domestic role within the household, which represents her inferiority in comparison to Stanley. In addition to this, from the diegetic dialogue of short and blunt answers the audience can identify the lack of respect and care Stanley has for his wife, which would have been expected and considered as the norm within the patriarchal 1940s society. Stella Kowalski doesn’t challenge Stanley’s discourteous behaviour towards her depicting her as an accurate motif for the stereotype that women are possessions of men used for their desires, as she shows society's predisposition viewpoint of femininity during the period in which the text was composed. [4]
Nayani Vijayaratnam Stella is illustrated to be an obedient wife, which was conventional for women during the 1950’s to be. Stanley Kowalski, her husband, who she is compliant to, belittles her status by degrading her to playing a mediocre role in the ‘family’. This lack of freedom and speech was considered to be the norm for Southern women during the 50s as they were characterised by their roles and what they had to offer to the family. [5] This was stated by feminist Joan Schultz, in “Orphaning as Resistance” [6] This power which Stanley possesses over his wife is portrayed to the audience through a wide shot, as Stanley aggressively clears the table, towering over Stella to which, she immediately puts her head down – as a sign of respect. Stella’s vulnerability is further highlighted through the diegetic dialogue of “Don’t talk to me that way” and “I’m the king around here” as it allows the audience to identify that she has no say in anything, having to follow his orders mindlessly. This depicts the patriarchal period they lived in which women were considered as insignificant and lacked value within their own homes. This is further emphasized through the mise-en-scene of their clothing. Stanley is wearing a black shirt, which highlights his dominance which is juxtaposed by Stella’s’ white dress which symbolizes her innocence and fragility. This reflects the status of a “king” as it was a stereotypical ideology that men were of a higher position to women as they had jobs, money and property. This was a luxury women didn’t have as their maternity leads and household responsibilities were considered to be economically inconvenient for businesses. In the early 50s’ a ‘marriage bar’ was enacted which prevented married women from specific careers like clerical jobs and gave employers the right to sack them upon marriage. [7] Another perspective, which was present during the 40s/50s, was the stereotype that women were sexual objects. This supports theorist Laura Mulvey’s ideology of ‘The Male Gaze” which suggests females belong to men and are viewed as sexual entities. [8] This is highlighted through the diegetic dialogue of “I haven’t even powdered my face” in the scene in which Blanche Dubois meets Stanley Kowalski for the first time. This reinforces the pressure which society places on young women to look good in order to look more appealing to men, as their bodies was considered to be the only power women had. The two shot used allows the audience to see Blanche turning away and covering her face from Stanley, which suggests that she is conscious of her self and insecure as she feels as though she does not look beautiful. This portrays how women were represented as a mouthpiece for a stereotype, which has continued to alter over time due to the expectation that women must look beautiful in order to fit into society rather than being accepted as they are, naturally.
Nayani Vijayaratnam This ideology that appearances are important is also present within The Hunger Games in which, Jennifer Lawrence plays the strong female lead of Katniss Everdeen. She has a personal stylist to ensure that she looks attractive and therefore will be more appealing to society. She is often seen wearing colours such as red and white as it connotes passion, purity and love, which, portrays her in a positive light to the audience. This wide shot of her dress as she shows her beauty off allows the audience to see how amazed everyone around her is. This further highlights the fact that females are judged on the way they look. The burning of her dress, addresses to the audience the ideology that ‘beauty is temporary’, which counters the conventional portrayal of women. Furthermore this reflects the change in the representation of women in films over time as females are depicted as more than just sexual figures. This links back to Laura Mulvey’s theory of ‘The Male Gaze’ as Katniss Everdeen challenges her philosophy and breaks free of the stereotypical perception of women being nothing more than pleasing to the eye. The 1960s was a decade of change for females and was known by the term ‘swinging sixties’ due to the decrease of social restrictions relating sexism that occurred during this period. At this point, approximately 40% of married women went to work, rather than following the conventional housewife status. This is reflected in the film “The Help” which is set in the 1960s. [9] The story follows a white woman, Skeeter Phelan, who feels alienated within the privileged lifestyle, which she was born into. Her mother wants her to follow the traditional conventions of a sixties woman and marry to become a housewife yet Skeeter fails to meet these expectations as she aspires to be a writer. She has a voice within the film and questions the sexist and racist customs that existed during this era, which causes conflict within her group of friends. This establishing shot from a high angle portrays Skeeter’s rebellious side as she pranks Hilly, one of the upper-class women, by sending toilets to her house. The unpleasant connotations of the
Nayani Vijayaratnam toilets mirror Hillys’ horrid personality- who the audience grows to dislike within the film. As well as reflecting the character of Hilly, it insinuates that the role of a housewife, which is forced upon young women like Hilly during the sixties, is wrong and despicable. This is further highlighted by the high angle, which allows the audience to look down on the events, portraying Hilly’s vulnerability within the patriarchal society which she conforms to. While this depicts to the audience Hilly’s helplessness, it portrays Skeeter as a fearless and bold protagonist as she challenges the norms of society and individuals who are considered to be of a higher status than her, identifying with the audience as a countertype. Her bravery is further highlighted through the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, which Skeeter has been reading, which infers her disobedient and courageous behavior as the book was banned in Mississippi (1963) due to the obscene and unconventional content the novel contained. This would have been shocking for 1960’s society to witness as women were expected to obey. [10] In addition to creating a new norm and voice for herself, Skeeter aims to give other women a voice through the book she is writing, regardless of the consequences. This heroism is presented to the audience through a wide shot of Skeeter in Aibileen’s house which reinforces the fact that Skeeter is attempting to break free from society’s perceptions of how a woman should live life which the audience is able to identify through the diegetic dialogue which informs the audience that what she is doing is “against the law.” Additionally, the low key lighting in the room could reflect the trapped and dark position which 60s women like Skeeter and Aibileen find themselves in which, is further disputed by the lamp, which is the only source of light in the scene and could symbolize hope which Skeeter is a motif for- as she battles for the rights of coloured women in particular. This portrays a clear juxtaposition between Skeeter Phelan who fights for her freedom and choice, and Stella Kowalski who conforms to society’s expectations and conventions. This underlines the beginning of a transformation in the way in which women are represented within films, over a decade. Females are beginning to be portrayed as strong individuals that are recognized to be significant and essential to society rather than being undermined and oppressed. Within the film, Skeeter grows as a young female as the narrative unfolds depicting a binary opposition which, theorist Levi Strauss depicted, between a stereotypical and countertypical female. Although, throughout most of the film Skeeter is perceived as a strong woman who rebels against conventions, she does has moments of weakness, which represents her as a conventional female. She struggles to deal with the pressure, which is placed upon ladies during the 50s to look attractive and feels as though she does not meet these expectations. This is revealed to the audience through a two shot, which shows Skeeter looking down, which insinuates that she is ashamed of herself and exposes her
Nayani Vijayaratnam vulnerability to the audience. This is further emphasised by the mise-en-scene of her grey top and dull pastel-coloured hairband, which connotes misery and reflects Skeeter’s dispirited mood. Furthermore, the diegetic dialogue of “All the boys say I’m ugly” exposes the societal expectations of the 1960s that women had to be attractive in order to entice men and achieve the traditional status of being a housewife. This links to Laura Mulvey’s theory of “The Male Gaze” as it implies that women are nothing more than sexual objects meant to please and meet the needs and desires of a man. A stereotypical character within the film is Celia Foote, played by Jessica Chastain, who desires to be a conventional housewife. She even goes to the length of hiring ‘Minny’, played by Octavia Spencer, to work for her, without her husband’s knowledge, as Celia doesn’t know how to cook and clean. This further emphasises the pressure the 1960s society had enforced on young women to please the breadwinner no matter what and highlights Skeeter’s courage, as she breaks free from this ideology. [11] This eagerness to satisfy her husband is portrayed through the use of a medium close up of Celia from when her and Minny first meet which, allows the audience to view her facial expressions clearly, which suggests that she is desperate for help. Furthermore, her hopelessness and need for help is exaggerated through the use of diegetic dialogue of “I just want him [Johnny] to think I can do this on my own.” This suggests to the audience that women were expected to know how to cook, clean and preform other household chores and if they weren’t it was seen as embarrassing, which is why Celia is so determined to keep it a secret from her husband. Celia Foote’s character is vital to the narrative as it allows the audience to gain an understanding about the roles of women, as she is a stereotype, which is what theorist Richard Dyer states. [12] Another stereotypical female who is oppressed in A Streetcar Named Desire is Blanche Dubois who is raped by her sisters’ husband, representing her as weak and incapable of protecting herself. It also insinuates that men are allowed to do what they desire without being questioned for their reputation/honour. My thesis is further supported by feminist film-theorist Ann Kaplan who states, “being a woman, her desire has no power”[13]. This reinforces my view, as Blanche has no supremacy, allowing herself to be raped
Nayani Vijayaratnam by Stanley. A shot reverse shot is used to show Stanley’s desire for Blanche in contrast to her fear, which demonstrates the difference in dominance, both of the have. This is emphasised by the diegetic dialogue of “lets have a little rough house”, which possesses sexual connotations and portrays the lack of choice Blanche has as Stanley is superior to her as well as highlighting how simple it is for Stanley to overpower Blanche because of his gender. This shot is followed by a close up of the mirror smashing which symbolizes the breaking point for Blanche as her innocence is taken away from her by force. Laura Mulvey’s theory aids this viewpoint, as it is representative of the submissive roles of females within films and that being the more dominant individual enables them to live up to their “fantasies and obsessions through linguistic commands.” This is the case for Stanley as it is his control over Blanche, which has allowed him to take advantage of her. Blanche is an example of how women were viewed as “provoking objects” used to fulfil the needs and desires of a man, which is what Blanche Dubois and Stella Kowalski, had been reduced to within the film. This illustrates to the audience that females had inconsequential roles in the film in comparison to men who had much more important roles, which is an ideology which Bell Hooks critiqued Hollywood for as, she believed there was a “lack of substantial roles” in particular focusing on ethnic minorities. However, the complexity of the representations portrayed to the audience allows the theory to be relevant to women as a collective rather than filtered to one race (black), which is why the characters of Blanche and Stella, although they are Caucasian, are identified as irrelevant and lacking in significant roles within the film. [14] However, female roles have grown over the past years and although the representation of women in films may still contain aspects, which sexualises and objectifies women, in recent years films such as The Hunger Games (2012) and Lucy (2014) have presented women in a more masculine light. Lucy is depicted as having an immense amount of strength after the intake of a new drug. She is able to defeat anyone and anything due to it and in this case she is almost portrayed as God-like. This is a counter typical representation for a female as God is stereotypically associated with a male. This further highlights Lucy’s supremacy, which, contrasts female characters such as Blanche Dubois, Stella Kowalski and Celia Foote, and emphasizes the way in which the representation of women is constantly changing. An extreme close up of her eye is used to bring attention to her transition, which, is insinuated, through the change in her eye colour. Blue is regarded as a masculine colour and is associated with knowledge and power; this further supports my judgement that Lucy is depicted as a counter-type. Moreover, the use of the colour blue
Nayani Vijayaratnam insinuates that women are just as strong and intelligent as men.
In both Lucy and The Hunger Games, the audience view the female protagonist lead the action this further highlights their counter typical roles within the film. This juxtaposes the 50s film, A Streetcar Named Desire, in which Stanley Kowalski hits his wife Stella an act which symbolises his male dominance and control over her, who is inferior to him. This medium close up of Katniss Everdeen allows the audience to identify her powerful through the use of mise-en-scene of a bow and arrow, which has connotations of violence which, is associated with masculinity and strength. Furthermore, the mise-enscene of her all-black clothing adds to her representation of being a dominant female lead as the colour black connotes supremacy and authority. Overall, representing her to the audience as a countertypical female protagonist. Similarly, in Lucy a medium close up is used to show the mise-en-scene of the gun in Lucy’s hands in the first fight scene of the film, which connotes power and control that immediately portrays her as a countertype to the audience. The mise-en-scene of a white top, which has connotations of purity, contrasts the violent connotations depicted by the gun and the dark setting she is in. This could symbolize her innocence being tainted, as she is now capable of
Nayani Vijayaratnam murder. As well as this, depth of field and a low angle is purposely used to allow the audience to focus on Lucy, representing her supremacy and symbolizing her importance in comparison to the gun, which we would not stereotypically expect to see a female hold. However, there are aspects in the film in which she is presented as a stereotypical female in which John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing” [15] is relevant. In order to escape the main protagonist uses her body and the male antagonists’ sexual desire to trick him. This relates to the theory, as the protagonist is aware of being seen by a male spectator and uses that to her own advantage to seduce him. As well as this, it suggests that she is intelligent as she uses her body as a tool yet the fact that she relies on her sexual hold over men portrays her weakness. This is portrayed to the audience through the use of a worms’ eye view, which allows the audience to identify her body language as she opens her legs. This contains sexual connotations depicting her as a sexual objects whose purpose is to fulfil a males’ desire, which is what is stereotypically expected of a female. In some ways the representation of females has changed over time yet in other ways it hasn’t. Often within films it is common to see females portray elements that are both stereotypical and countertypical as it makes it more interesting and intriguing for the target audience. Although the objectification and sexualisation of women still prevails in films, during recent years women are also represented as being respected, strong and smart which allows the audience to view the capabilities of a woman as they take on protagonist roles within films. Word Count: 3240
Nayani Vijayaratnam [1] Delaney. (2014). Societal roles and expectations through the 1940’s-50’s. [2] http://www.ultraswank.net/kitsch/american-dream-1940s-1950s/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Knows_Best [4] Role of gender in A Streetcar Named Desire. (2011). Books Rags Essay. pp. 2-4 [5] Filipo, M, A. (2002). Representation of the family in Southern drama. University of Georgia. pp. 44-54. [6] Schulz, J (1993) The female tradition in southern literature: Orphaning as Resistance. (36) [7] Anitha, S. and Pearson, R. (2014) Striking Women- striking out. Feminist Review 108: pp. 61-70. [8] Mulvey, L. Visual pleasure and narrative cinema (1975) [9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960s [10] Doyle, P, R. (2010) Banned Books: Challenging our Freedom to Read. ALA. [11] Dutt, R. (2013). Behind the curtains; women’s representations in contemporary Hollywood. Dr. Bart Cammaerts, Dr. Nick Anstead& Ruth Garland, LSE Department of Media and Communications. pp. 5 [12] http://www.slideshare.net/niajones1/week-4-stereotypes [13] Kaplan, A. (1988) Women and film: both sides of the camera. [14] Hooks, B. (1996) The Oppositional Gaze; Black Female Spectators. Reel to Reel: Race, Sex and Class at The Movies pp.19 [15] Berger, J. (1972) Ways of Seeing. Penguin Modern Classics.