the western film

Review

So, let's review our discussion of genre and film noir. We learned that genre's often develop in certain stages: primitive, classical, revisionist, and parodic.

Film noir drew from pulp fiction, gangster films, and German Expressionism in the establishment of its conventions. The films often included archetypal characters like the persistent male hero and the dangerous spider-woman. The stories were set in big cities and often represented violent crimes (in an amoral way). The use of highly-stylized design and archetypal characters (like in Expressionism) was used to illustrate the anxieties felt by American society. The horrors of war, poverty and industrialization seemed to introduce an existential crisis that was addressed in film noir.

Primitive Manifestations of the Western

So, a good while before the invention of film technology, the western genre was created. Literature like James Fenimore Cooper's "Leatherstocking Tales" and the more cheaply-produced dime novels were popular in the early 19th century. Westward expansion was a reality: pioneers were trekking across the country, conflicts among American settlers and Native American communities were occurring, and new territories were being claimed by the United States. These events made their way onto the pages of novels for the entertainment of readers who fascinated with the frontier adventure (but not typically experiencing it as reality).

When film technology was developed in the late 19th century, the subjects of the western were among the first to be documented on the motion picture. Thomas Edison's "Buffalo Dance" is a good example of an early 'spectacle' film (remember the cats boxing) that uses a Native American custom (a familiar subject in westerns) to entertain its audience. Sound has been added to this clip, but the original would have been silent.

Among the first narrative films (films that told a story--as opposed to the 'actuality' films that simply documented day-to-day events), there were the origins of the the western film. Watch how Edison's "Cripple Creek Barroom" seems to foreshadow some common conventions in the classical western.

Edwin S. Porter's The Great Train Robbery expanded upon these early narrative shorts, by including multiple scenes and using new editing techniques like cross-cutting (to demonstrate the simultaneous occurrence of multiple events or to encourage association between two shots). Again, many of the conventions of the western can be identified in the film in their early forms.


The Classical Western Film

While the classical western's official beginning is ambiguous (some argue for Porter and others will delay the beginning until D.W. Griffith's films or even until the development of sound technology) I would say that director John Ford established the western as a film genre. His earliest films, during the silent period, are stories set in the west. He is responsible for the stardom of Western icons John Wayne and Henry Fonda. And during his career, he directed such hugely successful westerns like Stagecoach (1939), My Darling Clementine (1946), She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (1949), Rio Grande (1950), The Searchers (1956), and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962). While John Ford is the only film director who was influential in shaping the western (directors like Howard Hawks, William Wyler, George Stevens, Fred Zinneman, and others made valuable contributions as well), his overwhelming presence in the genre cannot be denied.

The classical western film was set on the frontier. In the assigned chapter for this week, Belton discusses how the situation of the western on this border (much like the film noir's border setting) encourages narrative and thematic emphases on binary opposition. So, at the heart of the relationship between characters in the films is a conflict between the east and west, civilization and wilderness, fact and fiction, culture and nature, community and individual, man and woman. The frontier was the point of intersection between these polar opposites, and it was the place in which the east, the civilized, the cultured, the communal, the masculine must overcome that opposition. So, while the western film showed the inherent conflict in westward expansion, it emphasizes the overcoming of this conflict and champions the idea of manifest destiny.

This formula of binary opposition is seen in the genre's archetypal characters. The division between masculinity and femininity is super-emphasized in these films. I think the characters (or character, you could argue) John Wayne is the personification of the western's idea of masculinity: He's a cowboy. He is not very intelligent. He solves problem through physical conflict. When he is not enforcing the law, he is reaffirming the values of the old west. The western man shares some characteristics with the detective from film noir, but rather than disenchanted with the American institution, the western hero is a representative of it. When John Wayne isn't wearing a star, or a uniform, he wears the iconic cowboy costume, establishing himself as the personification of American ideals (patriotism, justice, imperialism, etc).

The women in the western are much like the women in film noir--they are divided into dual natures. Some of the female characters represent the dominated, colonized, civilized. They are much like film noir's "nurturing women", who are housewives and schoolteachers. They represent the success of America's civilization of the west. Other female characters, often represented as Native American or Mexican, often represent the challenge of American civilization. The characters are more powerful, sexualized, and exoticized, and they (like the land they inhabit and the communities they come from), must be properly civilized.

You can see how the idea of the "taming of the west" is inherently connected with very particular definitions of proper masculinity and femininity and with the domination of men over women. It's no surprise then that the male characters are the protagonists in westerns, while the women either give support or pose a potential threat to the men.

In his book Sixguns and Society, theorist Will Wright breaks down the classic western film into sixteen 'narrative functions':

1. The hero enters a social group.
2. The hero is unknown to the social group.
3. The hero is revealed to have an exceptional ability.
4. The society recognizes a difference between themselves and the hero; the hero is given a special status.
5. The society does not completely accept the hero.
6. There is a conflict of interests between the villains and the society.
7. the villains are stronger than the society; the society is weak.
8. There is a strong friendship or respect between the hero and a villain.
9. The villains threaten the society.
10. The hero avoids involvement in the conflict.
11. The villains endanger a friend of the hero.
12. The hero fights the villains.
13. The society is safe.
14. The society accepts the hero.
15. The hero loses or gives up his special status.

While not each function is present in every western, Wright was able to come to this conclusion by examining common structures of western films. As you can see, the typical narrative has very much to do with the oppositions of the individual and the community, the hero and the villain, and the physical conflict necessary to resolve these conflicts.

Questioning the Classical Western

Now, starting in around the 60's, the conventions of the western have been reevaluated. In 'spaghetti westerns', a revisionist revival of the genre in Italian cinema, the old west is perceived from an international perspective. And while the films maintain many of the genre's conventions, some really substantial questions are raised about some of the principles on which the genre is founded.

Here's the opening scene from the (freaking awesome) Sergio Leone film Once Upon a Time in the West (1968). Check it out and see if you can identify any deviations from classical western convention.

Two of the men killed are played by western icons Woody Strode and Jack Elam. The classical characters are replaced by the new western hero. The new hero arrives by train, and the film's narrative emphasizes the violence and oppression that accompanied the building of the railroad. And finally, the main character, rather than be accompanied by a non-diagetic film score, plays his own theme music on his harmonica--a self-reflexive reference to both the awesomeness that is Ennio Morricone (the film's composer) and the prominence of musical accompaniment in the western film.

Other revisionist westerns like The Wild Bunch, Last of the Mohicans, Unforgiven, Dances with Wolves, Open Range, and Brokeback Mountain further question the ideological assumptions behind the classical genre. Cultural representations (of Mexicans and Native Americans, for example) are examined. Issues of violent oppression are addressed. And the definition of masculinity is reconsidered (especially in Brokeback Mountain).

The Final Frontier

And while people have repeatedly said for the last thirty years that the western film is dead, its elements have been appropriated by other genres. Many of the conventions of genre live on in historical epic films and war films (which we'll discuss next week). And perhaps more significantly, the western genre seems to have birthed the science-fiction film.

The western film's decline in popularity and the sci-fi film's growth popularity in the mid-20th century may have been due to the fact that west was already won. Then, with the Space Race, the next frontier was outer space, so the same conventions and values were transferred to a new narrative location. So, we have macho space-cowboys who combat alien races for control of land and power. (Consider Back to the Future III, Cowboy Bebop, Firefly, Toy Story, etc).

Consider this clip of our friend Han Solo, and see if you can see how the sci-film has adopted conventions of the western.

I think that it's interesting that in some recent sci-fi films, Earth has been the location of alien colonization. This premise situates the human population (often centering on the American people) as the colonized people (Mexican and Native Americans) of the classical western. Except in these films, the natives kick the settlers' butts.


And finally, some films parody the conventions of the western and sci-fi genres, further exposing some of the ideological contradictions found in the classic films. Here's a favorite of mine.

Mel Brooks' film Blazing Saddles addresses the racial stereotypes common to the western genre. And its great.

So What?

So, if the western is supposedly dead, why is this discussion important? Well, I think that our nation's identity is deeply rooted in the depictions of the west and the idealogical perspectives common to these depictions. Issues of gender and race, colonization and oppression are issues addressed in these films and issues that need to be addressed in our society today.

Assignment

Based on on our discussion of binary oppositions (like East/West, civilization/wilderness, etc) and your assigned readings, identify a text (novel, tv show, film, comic book, etc) that uses binary opposition to address an issue related to our studies. (Your text does not have to be a western, but it has to use binary opposition to an issue of race, class, gender, sexuality, etc). Discuss how the use of binary opposition may limit adequate understanding of the issue addressed. Be specific, using examples of plot, characters, and themes from the text (and what they indicate about the issue).

This is a heavier assignment, but you all have done well so far. Be particular about your choice of text. Think hard before you write. And be clear and specific in your writing. You'll do great.

Quiz

From Cooper Thompson's article, define homophobia and misogyny and discuss their relationship to traditional masculinity.

film noir

Here's a great little clip.

Review

So, last week we were introduced to the concept of genre. Genre films work within particular conventions (like character types, setting, iconography, narrative elements, themes, styles). So, when a romantic comedy is released, the film is sure to fulfill certain expectations held by the audience (there will be witty banter, some terrible misunderstanding, and ultimately some kissing) and by the film's producers (romantic comedies make money off of couples on dates).

The screwball comedy was one such genre that was popular during the Studio Era. "Fast-talking dames" and "little men" made masked sexual references, tripped each other, and ultimately fell in love. We learned about how the genre addressed issues of gender and class. And how our modern comedies continue this tradition of delivering social commentary in funny, accessible ways.

Introduction to Film Noir

So, you've read Belton's discussion of film noir, so you know it's origins. With an influx of Hollywood films in post-war France, French audiences were stunned by the films' dark subject matter and pessimistic perspective. So, they called them "black films." Now, film historians usually place film noir between 1940 (with the release of Stranger on the Third Floor) and 1958 (with the release of Touch of Evil). But a closer look at the genre, and how genres are developed in general, is helpful in understanding the evolution of the film noir.

The progression of a genre has often been organized into specific stages: 1) primitive, 2) classical, 3) revisionist, 4) parodic. During the primitive stage, the conventions of the genre are not fully established. The creators of the texts are not consciously trying to follow a set of narrative and stylistic guidelines. Rather, multiple texts, sharing certain similarities, are created around the same time. (A helpful example would be to think of early hip-hop music. Before the music went mainstream in the early 80's, their were primitive manifestations of the genre. James Brown's "Funky Drummer", Parliament's "Give Up the Funk", and Jamaican deejays like U-Roy all foreshadow hip hop music. So, then guys like Kool Herc, Africaa Bambataa, and Grandmaster Flash came along, incorporating those elements from funk and reggae and created hip hop.)

So before we had film noir, per se, there was its primitive manifestations in pulp fiction, gangster films and German Expressionism. Hardboiled crime novels (like the work of Dashiell Hammett) and pulp magazines (like the work of Raymond Chandler) were popular in the early 20th century. The stories emphasized crime, murder, sex--all the trappings of the film noir. The magazines (like the later films) were cheaply made and contained a gritty realism that was uncommon in popular culture of the time. Many of these stories were later adapted by filmmakers for the big screen.

Before film noir was established as a genre, variations of these crime stories started to appear in films. But while including elements like detective characters and crime narratives, these early gangster films were not working within the established conventions of a genre (yet). So, films like Howard Hawks' Scarface and Fritz Lang's M laid some of the narrative and stylistic foundations for the genre.

These films were very much informed by the German Expressionist movement. After the first World War, Germany was in ruins and the German people were forced to cope with their horrible circumstances. Art (and specifically film, for our purposes) was one very important way in which they addressed the ugliness of war, poverty, and industry. The Expressionist movement sought to illustrate the violent emotions experienced by the people with the use of unconventional, often disturbing, artistic methods and subject matters (think of "express" as to make something inward manifested outwardly). So the films, for example, are highly stylized, using shadows in the lighting, diagonal lines in the design, overly theatrical acting, and static, symbolic characters. Robert Weine's The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920), F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu (1922), and Fritz Lang's Metropolis (1927) (three of the most popular German Expressionist films) avoid realism, but through the use of stylization are able to communicate the anxieties of the German people.

Here's a clip from Metropolis. The protagonist is recognizing the horrors of industrialized society.

When the Nazi regime was growing in power, many of these filmmakers left Germany and came to the U.S. to work in Hollywood. They were responsible for the classic horror films like Frankenstein, The Mummy, and Dracula (among many others), as well as many of the early gangster films. Film noir is so incredibly informed by the style and themes of the German films, probably because the film noir genre voices similar anxieties (but in an American context).

Eventually, probably around 1940, the potential popularity of the genre was recognized, and the genre entered its classical stage. During this period, the conventions were established and expanded upon. The film noir was commercially successful, in part for its realistic depictions of some of the harsh circumstances faced by the nation' people. (We'll talk more specifically about the genre conventions of the classic film noir a little later).

Now, we're going to have to break chronology for a bit, because while the next stage often comes after the classical stage, there is no clear shift from classical to revisionist. During the revisionist stage, the conventions of the genre are evaluated and often revised. So, for example, Orson Welles' Touch of Evil makes explicit the film noir's commentary on cultural conflict, establishing the story literally on the U.S./Mexico border. However, the standard scenario is mixed up a little. The film's protagonist is a Mexican detective (played by a mustachioed Charlton Heston) with a white American wife (Janet Leigh), who is pitted against a crooked American cop (a fat Orson Welles). So, there are some obvious reevaluations of convention going on here.

Here's the opening shot from the film. It is famous for its incredible length (without a single cut).

And finally, after the conventions have been identified and deconstructed, they are often parodied. So, Mel Brooks, the Monty Python crew, the guys behind Scary Movie (and its many, many subsequent films) are poking fun at the conventions of a genre. Films like Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, as well as Garrison Keiller's "Guy Noir" radio sketches are examples of parodies.

Here's a clip from Dead Men that you might enjoy. The film was created by splicing clips from the classic films with the performance of Steve Martin. See if you can identify some conventions of film noir (from your reading of the chapter in American Cinema...) that are being referenced.

Conventions of Film Noir

In order to understand the social significance of the genre, its necessary to be aware of some of the conventions. First of all, film noir can be identified by its use of specific character types and iconography. So, dark streets and tommy guns are so commonly used in film noir, that they become signifiers for the genre and its commonly expressed themes.

More importantly is the use of archetypal characters. In film noir, the protagonist is often male. He is relatively unintelligent, but persistent. He relies on instinct and physical force to survive. And he he is disenchanted with society. Oftentimes, the character is a detective that attempts to solve a crime (Laura, The Maltese Falcon, Touch of Evil).

These characters demonstrated a traditional masculinity that was valued during wartime: they were strong and determined. However, the atrocities of war awakened them to some consequences of this masculinity and its inevitable violence. They returned home, but were often unable to reintegrate into society. So, the male characters in film noir are often disenfranchised, only seeking to survive.

Female characters often fulfill one of two archetypal roles--the nurturing woman or the "femme fatale" or "spider-woman". The nurturing woman is beautiful but not sexualized. She functions to support the man and work in the domestic sphere. The spider-woman is the flip-side of femininity--she's sexually aggressive, intelligent, and has no place in the home.

This archetype indicates indicate a lot about the society's perception of gender. As we discussed last week, the American woman's increased involvement in public life during the early 20th century changed the societal conception of gender roles. The empowered female is positively manifested in the "fast-talking dame" of screwball comedy. However, American society was not altogether pleased with this cultural change. The general suspicion of this new femininity is evident in the dual representations of women in film noir. While this duality is not unique to the 20th century (the virgin/whore duality has been a trope since ancient times), the categorization of female characters as either nurturing, virtuous, and domestic or aggressive, sexual, and independent reveals how the newly empowered female was perceived as a threat by American society. The "femme fatale" is intelligent and autonomous like the screwball comedy heroines but this independence is seen as inevitably dangerous, especially to the welfare of the male characters. Whereas, the nurturing female character seems to demonstrate the society's longing for the traditional passive, non-threatening woman.

Watch a scene from the film Double Indemnity, and see how the representations of gender function in film noir. In this scene an insurance man has paid a visit to a housewife. It seems innocent...or is it???

Another convention of the film noir is its urban setting. The industrialization of America resulted in the growth of big cities. This migration to the metropolis had some definite effects on the American mentality, some of which are represented in the films. Poverty grew. The crime rate went up. The cities were often a place of cultural exchange and cultural conflict. Hugely populated cities and the influence of industry caused a sense of isolation to develop among individuals. While the nation was progressing economically and technologically, its people were left questioning the ultimate benefits of this progress.

This urban setting is depicted in film noir with a certain style reminiscent of German Expressionism. Much of the standard narrative takes place at night, with the city divided between dark shadows and bright neon lights. This contrast between dark and light is emphasized, some may argue, to emphasize the moral conflict going on in the films (and in the American mentality). Diagonal lines (caused by the shadows of window blinds, for example) divide the frame. The narrative is divided up with the use of flashbacks, often accompanied by a voice-over narration of one of the characters. All of these stylistic elements demonstrate the fractured mentality experienced by the characters (and some of society).

Finally, the film noir narrative usually follows the investigation of a crime. Its characters engage in physical conflict and are often killed. The film noir departs from the classical Hollywood narrative structure in its often pessimistic conclusions. Characters often betray and kill one another. But rather than this behavior being represented as immoral (for example, in a Greek tragedy or revenge play), the violence is depicted very amorally. The consequences that follow the characters' actions seem arbitrary. The crimes often go unsolved, or are only resolved with further violence. These narrative and thematic elements give a sense of helplessness and despair that was previously unrepresented in American film, but was absolutely linked to some existential dilemmas of the time.

This is the last scene from the neo-noir film by the Coen brothers, The Man Who Wasn't There. The film follows a barber who accidentally kills his wife's lover, unwittingly sends his wife to jail for the murder, and is then sentenced to death for a murder he didn't commit. How's this for a happy ending?


Neo-noir

Nowadays, film noir is no longer considered a living genre. The historical and cultural context from which the genre emerged is long gone. Americans have in some ways overcome their alienation, in other ways have embraced it. We are desensitized to depictions of violence and moral ambiguity. So, while the creation of film noir-esque work continues in films like Chinatown, Batman, and Sin City (among many, many others), the impact of these films is less substantial.

Here's a clip from a great neo-noir film The Big Lebowski. The Dude is, I think, the quintessential film noir protagonist. The clip won't embed, but you can watch it here.

This does not mean, however, that the societal commentary made by film noir is no longer of value to us. Ideas of gender, demonstrated in film noir, are alive today. The alienation of the urban (and now suburban) individual still exists. The presence of violence (on micro and macro levels) in society has only increased. So, I think that examining how our culture responded to these issues at the beginning of last century may be used to inform our response to similar issue at the beginning of this century.

Assignment

Look for an example of a representation of "dangerous femininity" in popular culture (that can be a novel, tv show, film, graphic novel, video game, popular song or music video). Your example cannot be from a film noir. Include a link to a website that corresponds to this work. Discuss how this representation of women corresponds with film noir's "femme fatale." What are the similarities, the differences. (You may want to refer to the Mary Astor character from The Maltese Falcon if you have trouble making specific comparisons between your example and the archetypal "spider-woman").

Please do not use an example previously posted by another student.

Quiz

In the assigned chapter from American Cinema, American Culture, Belton discusses how film noir may function as a genre, a movement/style, or a mode. Please explain how film noir corresponds to each of these categorizations.

Please email the quiz (as always) to our T.A. Jennifer Armston (not me).

Reminder

On October 12th, your first Film Analysis paper is due. Check out the assignment description in the "Assignments" section for details. You may want to do that soon.

the screwball comedy

Review

So, let's quickly review our discussion of stereotypes. Judith Andre defined stereotypes as being generally held, rigid, oversimplifications or misconceptions of a cultural group. She identified the functions of a stereotype as 1) being fundamental to one's conceptual scheme, 2) protecting one's self-esteem, 3) bringing about a desirable situation; or 4) shielding one from facing an unavoidable, negative fact.

Films often include stereotypes, for a few reasons. Films, and narratives in general, emphasize characters and their actions (unlike poetry or visual art). When these characters are inadequately developed (for example, when the studio system churned out simple, marketable films as quickly as possible), they have the potential to use stereotypes. People go to the movie theater, hand over their money, suspend their disbelief, and often accept the representations onscreen (if not the literal representations, at least the ideologies informing those representations).

Discussion of genre

The next few weeks, we'll be discussing how issues of race, class, gender and sexuality were addressed in various film genres. Think about some of films you saw this summer, and see if any fit into a standard genre (romance, comedy, action, horror, western, etc). Why do we enjoy these films so much and continue to see them even though they are so similar to so many of their predecessors (come on, is Live Free or Die Hard that much of a departure from the other three films in the series?). While some films are praised for their inventiveness or unconventionality, genre films are especially popular because of their adherence to conventions. The film studios bank on them being somewhat popular because they're reusing a formula that has proved successful among audiences. Viewers go to them because certain expectations are fulfilled--we know going to the theater that a romantic comedy will end with a heterosexual union of sorts and that a musical will include a bunch of people dancing and singing in the street for no apparent reason. (Alright, I'm not the biggest fan of musicals. So sue me.)

While genre films have always maintained their popularity, they were especially prevalent during the Studio Era. The assembly-line methods of filmmaking encouraged the use of narrative and stylistic formulas that would bring monetary success. The crew members (employed by Paramount or Warner Bros or another big studio) would often wrap a film on Friday and start another on Monday. The fact that the films within a genre were so similar allowed for these individuals to transition from one film to the next to the next.

I think there existed both positives and negatives to the Studio Era's emphasis of genre films. The films were often repetitive and often included stock characters that lacked depth. However, since the genre formulas were used so frequently (often by the same actors and filmmakers), certain individuals were able to work on their roles to the point of perfection (Katherine Hepburn is the fast talking dame, John Ford is the western film director).

So, why comedy?

When we're dealing with issues as serious as poverty and racism and oppression, we may not think that examining comedy films would be helpful. But in fact, humor can often give some interesting insight into our society. We often use comedy as a means of addressing otherwise taboo subjects, releasing tension or frustration, or critically examining our social behaviors (in a not-so-threatening manner).

Here's a bit of humor. Watch it and see if you can make some connections.What does the humor used indicate about our society? I think it's helpful to place the clip in the context of a some other popular comedies of the last few years: The 40 Year Old Virgin, Wedding Crashers, Old School, School of Rock, School for Scoundrels, Hitch, Meet the Parents/Fockers, etc, etc. Each of these films have protagonists who are dealing with the difficulties of entering adulthood--getting a job, maintaining a successful relationship, starting a family, etc. It seems like (the oh-so-young-and-cool) Generation X is now edging into their thirties and forties and are having some serious growing pains. These films allow the thirty-somethings to acknowledge and examine their fears and frustrations in an less-threatening, therapeutic, funny way.

This isn't anything new either. Ancient Greek comedy, the French neo-classical comedy (Moliere's Tartuffe, for example), and some Victorian comedies (like Oscar Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest) all make pretty pointed (and pretty hilarious) commentary on gender relations, class conflict, sex and power.

Silent film comedy continued this tradition and used slapstick as another means of social commentary. Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Harold Lloyd often played protagonists who were somewhat emasculated men of lower economic class. And while the film technology of the time didn't allow for spoken dialogue, these comedians were masters at performing social commentary with their body language.

Here's a clip from Chaplin's film Modern Times. See if you can identify some of the societal criticism that he makes.
The Screwball Comedy

The screwball comedy film, made popular in Hollywood's "golden age", continued the tradition of using humor to address societal issues. In order to understand how the genre corresponds with our discussion of race, class, gender and sexuality studies, it's important to understand some of the genre's conventions and their relation to the historical and cultural context.

Most prominently, screwball comedies dealt with gender roles and relations. The films would introduce a male character and a female character. The plot would follow their attempts at having a successful romantic relationship. And the film would inevitably conclude with the two characters overcoming all odds to join in heterosexual union (marriage or remarriage).

While this scenario may seem dependent on cultural norms, the films use this standard romance narrative to challenge these norms. First of all, the characters defy conventional gender roles. The women are intelligent, sexually empowered, "fast-talking dames" while the males are often characterized as emasculated and ineffectual "little men". Here's an example from Preston's Sturges' film The Lady Eve. Henry Fonda is an aloof heir to a fortune and Barbara Stanwyck is a seductive con artist.
So, this clip pretty obviously (and awesomely) exemplifies the genre's use of non-traditional gender representations. The women's suffrage movement and the ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920 provided American women with the ability to vote. The U.S.'s involvement in World War I and II promoted the involvement of women in the military and work force. The role of women in American society was shifting and the films demonstrate this shift. In screwball comedies, the women play much more commanding roles. They exemplify the newly-liberated 20th century woman--educated, articulate, sexually aware, often athletic, and definitely more capable than their male counterparts.

During the course of the characters' navigation of their relationship, they encounter some obstacles. The tension that is created between the two characters is manifested in the use of both verbal and physical sexual innuendo. After the introduction of sound film technology, film writers took advantage of their newfound ability to put words in their characters' mouths. However, the campaign of the Catholic League of Decency and the establishment of The Hay's Production Code limited the content that could be included in the early films. So, in order to reference sexuality, the screenwriters relied on the double entendre--the characters cleverly alluded to sex, but were not in violation of the codes.

The use of sexual innuendo was not limited to the words spoken by characters. Because of slapstick's inherent connection to the performer's body, that physical comedy had been long associated (at least subconsciuosly) with sexual behavior. So, often in screwball comedies (and in comedy in general) slapstick comedy is used to communicate a character's developmental retardation or sexual frustration (think Will Ferrell shooting himself in the neck with a tranquilizer dart, Jack Black attempting to crowd surf but crashing to the ground, Steve Carrell having his chest waxed). So, when Barbara Stanwyck's character from The Lady Eve repeatedly trips Henry Fonda's character, not only is the physical conflict in some ways associated with other, more intimate physical encounters, but the embarrassment and frustration of the characters is also linked to their inability to create and consummate a successful relationship.

If you think I'm going too far, I'm not. Comedy often really functions on these subconscious levels. Just take a look at this clip from Preston Sturges' The Palm Beach Story.
Finally, screwball comedies depend in many ways on role reversals. Female characters are sexually aggressive and intelligent while the male characters are sexually and intellectually oblivious. These reversals are not limited to gender roles either. The screwball comedy was especially popular during the time of The Great Depression, when poverty and economic class conflict was a particularly difficult issue. And so, the genre films often emphasized (and commented on) this division in its narratives. For example, in Preston Sturges' Sullivan's Travels, a wealthy filmmaker travels the country as a drifter in order to better understand the social realities of his day. The mixing, and re-mixing, of rich and poor in the films acknowledged and often criticized the economic struggles faced by its viewers. On the other hand, the protagonists of these stories are often members of the upper class. Some of the films (The Philadelphia Story, Woman of the Year) do include journalists, who were identified as distinctly middle class, among the economic elite. But most films emphasize the luxury achieved by only the very wealthy (especially during the Depression). These representations could definitely be interpreted as a means of escapism for the suffering working class audience.

Here's a clip from Leo McCarey's The Awful Truth (which is my favorite screwball comedy). In this scene Carey Grant's character is visiting with his fiancee's family when his soon-to-be-ex-wife (their divorce is not completely finalized) arrives, pretending to be his sister. Notice how Irene Dunne's performance, and the other characters' responses, indicate a certain superiority over the lower economic and social classes.
So what?

We may look at the representations of gender and class in the screwball comedy and laugh about how funny people used to be. (We may even go so far as to dismiss the films, and any film in black-and-white as old and therefore worthless. If that's the case, I think we should think about the prejudice inherent in that attitude--something that is different, that doesn't stimulate me like today's music videos and blockbuster films do, that is enjoyed by people as old as our grandparents (and are as old as our grandparents) is dull or old-fashioned. Maybe we can live a successful life without watching black-and-white films, but hopefully that prejudice doesn't keep us from valuing older ideas (like religion or philosophy), older works (like the writings of Mark Twain or Jane Austen or the paintings of Vermeer), or even older generations of people. But anyway...)

The point that I'm trying to make is that despite the differences between our cultures and films, we have some real connections to screwball comedy and the issues it addresses. Hopefully, the news article assignment from week 2 gave you a chance to recognize the reality of these issues of class and gender in today's society. And so since we're still dealing with these issues, we're still going to address them in our comedy. Here's a clip from a contemporary screwball comedy.
So, Intolerable Cruelty's use of color and familiarity with the actors may make the film a little more accessible to our contemporary tastes, but the same formula is at work, addressing the same issues.

After I finished writing this post, I was visiting some links posted on www.imdb.com and I came across a few articles that specifically discuss the progression of gender roles and relations in romantic comedies, from Bringing Up Baby to Knocked Up. Here are the links. I really think you guys will find the articles interesting.

"A Fine Romance: The New Comedy of the Sexes" by David Denby

"If Knocked Up is the Future of Cinema, We're in Trouble" by Joe Queenan

"It's a Boy-Girl Thing" by Helen O'Hara

Assignment

Pick a comedy film that you enjoy (old or new, but one that I didn't discuss in the blog). Find a published (not blogged) review of the film and read it. Include a link to this review. Building on our discussion and any relative points in the film review, discuss how the film's humor reflects an issue (not necessarily one of race, class, gender, and sexuality) dealt with in society. Be sure not to repeat your fellow students' film choices.

Quiz

What does DiBattista discuss about the film characters' transition from silence to vocalization in regards to gender identity (male and female)?

Both the quiz and assignment are due by midnight Friday night as always!

stereotypes in film

Check this out.

Review

So, before we jump into our discussion of stereotypes, let’s review some of the information that we discussed last week.

In our society there exists certain divisions that result in the oppression of certain groups of people by other groups. The systems of oppression that we’ll address most in the course are those associated with issues of race, class, gender and sexuality. Weber helped us approach these cultural studies by giving us a conceptual framework: 1) these issues are contextual, 2) socially constructed, 3) associated with relationships of power, 4) simultaneously occurring, and 5) function on both socio-structural (systematic oppression) and socio-psychological levels (individual prejudice). Lastly, Weber emphasizes the importance for informed individuals to exercise their knowledge of these issues by engaging in activist efforts.

We also learned how Marx, and later Althusser, identified the societal division and social stratification that results from industrial capitalism. In order for the economy to be maintained, the working class must remain oppressed by the upper class. (Remember that Marx is introducing this theory in response to the horrible living and working conditions he witnessed after the industrial revolution). So, to "reproduce the relations of productions" repressive ideology (defined by Marx as "false consciousness") is encouraged in the society. So, ruling and working classes do not question their social division because the dominant ideological perspective (enforced by RSA's like the police and judicial courts and reinforced by ISA's like family, religion, and school) encourages their passivity.

The cinema (and the media, in general) functions as a huge ISA, influencing our perception of issues of race, class, gender, and sexuality and often perpetuating the societal divisions associated with these issues.

Introduction to Stereotypes

Now, to jumpstart our discussion of stereotypes, here’s Miss Teen South Carolina.

I think that this clip serves as an excellent example of how stereotypes function in our society. We laugh because we are surprised by the contestant’s inability to answer the question. But many of us, rather than consider the fact that this is a singular occurrence of a specific individual (about whom we know virtually nothing), may be influenced by this experience in our general perception of people. This girl may serve as a representation of certain designated groups (blondes, southerners, beauty pageant contestants, “pretty” women, women in general, teenagers, South Carolinans, or even Americans) and her unfortunate response to that question may create or reinforce negative stereotypes of these groups.

“But isn’t this clip evidence to support the stereotype that blondes are unintelligent or southerners are uniformed?” you might ask. Judith Andre distinguishes stereotypes from other generalities, noting that stereotypes are commonly held, rigid, pejorative beliefs that oversimplify or ignore certain elements or reality. So, while stereotypes may be informed by real individuals and their behaviors, the danger is in projecting these general conceptions onto groups of people.

Stereotypes in Film

Stereotyping is one of the most easily identifiable ways in which cinema can unfairly represent issues of race, class, gender and sexuality. As identified by Aristotle in his Poetics, the traditional narrative is founded on plot and character (who are the key players and what do they do?). So, since the traditional narrative is character-driven, the reader or viewer is very much linked to the characters. (Think about how your childhood dreams of being Han Solo or April O'Neil or one of the Power Rangers). And when a narrative presents a stereotype, the audience is still influenced by the character, but perhaps not in the best way. And while film is not the only medium that may utilize stereotypes(literature, visual art, television, new digital technologies, and even music may stereotype), the common practices of the Hollywood institution foster their use.

To understand how Hollywood is so capable of (and culpable for) stereotyping, we’re going to have to be aware of this and last week’s readings from the American Cinema, American Culture book. Powdermaker's description of the American cinema as a "dream factory" is perfect--it demonstrates how the cinematic institution works very efficiently to create films that, in turn, produce specific responses in its viewers. Hollywood's studio system adopted the assembly-line production methods introduced during the Industrial Revolution and constantly produced, distribute, and exhibited films. Genre films were particularly popular because the conventions that they utilized were already so familiar to the audience. So, the film production companies were whipping out formulated, accessible films (think "medean agan") and the audiences were willingly suspending their disbelief--accepting both the constructed narratives as "real" and (at least subconsciously) accepting the ideologies that informed these narratives. And since the filmmaking methodologies of the time emphasized clarity and simplicity and the films often followed the narrative tradition of melodrama, the use of stereotypes was very common. And while this system was particularly efficient during the golden age of American cinema, even after the Paramount Case in 1948, the film industry (note the word industry) has continued to perpetuate negative stereotypes. Here's just one example.


I noticed that a number of you listed Zack Snyder's film adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novel 300 among your favorite movies. I think that this film serves as another example of negatively stereotyping eastern (African, Asian and specifically Arab nations). The characteristics of incompetence, disloyalty, corruption and barbarism (all referred to in the last clip) are present. But the depiction of the Persian ruler Xerxes adds a whole other set of stereotypical associations. The character is depicted as totally androgynous (in regards to both gender and sexual orientation). So, not only are the Persians not honorable and humane (as supposedly are the Spartans, but I think that’s debatable), but they’re not even masculine! (in the traditional sense) All of these negative characteristics of the Persians justify the Spartans (and maybe our) hatred of them and desire to kill them.

Functions of Stereotypes

Now, what purpose do these stereotypes serve? You'll summarize Andre's response to this question in this week's quiz. I think that the question is pretty complex...

Sometimes, a film negatively stereotypes the villain to justify their defeat or to discourage the viewer to identify with the "evil" character. Disney is pretty notorious for this method--making the villain overweight...







...or otherwise unattractive....








...supports certain stereotypical associations between the physical appearance and the "goodness" or "badness" of a person.

Sometimes a character may initially seem like a stereotype, but his actions during the course of the narrative may distinguish them as having depth. So, Pedro from Napoleon Dynamite may initially seem like a stereotype of a Mexican-American, when he is elected student-body president, that stereotype is transcended. Or when Mario is first introduced, he is a pretty obvious Italian-American, male stereotype, but during his continued adventures, he becomes our hero.

In other examples (like the Michael Jackson video we watched above) the creators are not deliberately intending to stereotype, but they nonetheless perpetuate misconceptions about social groups. I mean, the video explicitly speaks against racial division, but its depictions of cultural groups is super reliant on stereotypes (Native Americans dancing in the desert, Russians dancing in the snow, and Indian woman dancing in the subwa--wait, what? subway?). Even the American nuclear family is depicted as consisting of an angry, lazy father, a submissive mother, and a facetious child.

Political and social satire often uses exaggerated depictions of stereotypes in order to poke fun at them. The Simpsons, South Park, Dave Chapelle, the Blue Collar Comedy group, and now D'Mites music video for "Read a Book" (among many, many others) all include stereotypes in a way that's self-reflexive. Homer Simpson is the overly angry, incredibly lazy father. Larry the Cable guy is so ridiculously redneck. And this self-mocking satire isn't new either--Polonius in Shakespeare's Hamlet is a great example of a stereotype--a self-important, conniving old member of medieval the ruling class. The stereotype is so obvious that the viewer, rather than accepting it as an accurate depiction of reality, begins to question the representation.

But while some of these self-acknowledging stereotypes are helpful in helping society recognize their false assumptions about people, I think in some cases these depictions still perpetuate stereotypes. Dave Chapelle's super-publicized trip to Africa a few years back was the result of Chapelle's realization that his satire may produce some unintended consequences (listen to a short NPR piece about the situation here). And the current controversy over the "Read a Book" video is another example. The depictions of African-Americans and hip hop culture are so over the top, and the fact that the video is animated, it's hard to argue that the video is not going to reinforce negative stereotypes among its (especially younger) viewers.

Ultimately, stereotypes (whether are not they are intended) are an indication oppressive social relations. This oppression may be be evident in individual prejudices (hate speech, for example) or by greater, more systematic means (example?).

Check out this clip from Spike Lee's film Do the Right Thing. Know that the clip includes some pretty intense profanity and some really offensive racial slurs. Don't feel obligated to watch the clip. However, I do feel that it pretty effectively depicts the real danger of stereotyping.

Assignment

Pick a character from a film or television show that you feel is portrayed stereotypically. Your post will include:

• a hotlink (we've all learned how to link, right?) to the show or film's official website or your favorite not-so-official fansite/wiki entry
• a description of the character. Include in your description the characteristics that you feel are stereotypical.
  
• your opinion on what function this stereotype fulfills (whether its from my discussion of melodramatic, satirical, and transcended stereotypes OR from Andre's four functions of a stereotype).
  
• a discussion of how the representation of this character has influenced your perception of individuals of a certain cultural group. Posts due Friday at midnight. Before you post, be sure to check the other students' comments to make sure you are not duplicating the same stereotyped character.
  

society divided in film

I'm looking through CNN.com's top news stories over the weekend and among the most notable articles is the two year anniversary of hurricane Katrina. Please take a few minutes to visit the site, read some articles, view some photos and videos, and follow some links.

The difficult situation that the people of the gulf coast are faced with is one example (among many) how our lack of unity as a society contributes to our suffering. And I think that it is would be worthwhile to examine how issues of race and ethnicity, economic and social class, education, and financial viability have influenced the treatment of this situation by the government, the media, and the individuals involved.

Our society is divided along so many lines. Just think about how we divide ourselves in regards to race and ethnicity, political affiliation, economic class, religion, sexual orientation, gender roles, age, education, physical appearance and ability, and issues like the war in Iraq, the war on terror, immigration, health care, gun ownership, abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, affirmative action, the environment etc, etc, etc.
Some of these divisions are acceptable, promote diversity, and allow for democracy. However, some divisions lead to oppression and violence, and those are the divisions we're going to focus on confronting in the course. I think that we have an obligation to seek for ways in which we can overcome oppressive practices and perspectives and promote unity (while maintaining our diversity).
Here's a fun example.

So, our friend from The Daily Show (which even if you don't enjoy it's political satire, you've got to admit that it can be funny) points out the damage that this particular division is doing to our nation. The problem isn't our contrasting opinions, but rather it's the polarization and oversimplification of political perspectives. John Stewart acknowledges how the media emphasizes and capitalizes on this division. And while The Daily Show may poke fun at political figures and their actions (some more than others), when we see this food-fight-like exchange going on on legitimate news channels and in the actual debates leading up to the presidential primaries, I think there's reason for concern.

Race, Class, Gender and Sexuality

Now, I want the class to be open to addressing all of these divisions, but we are going to emphasize the oppression associated with issues of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Let's follow some links and check out the definitions of these terms. (Don't skip the links, because its essential that you understand these foundational terms).

Check out the second set of definitions for the term race.

I think all of the definitions of class are helpful in understanding the term and its implications.

Now, check out the explanations for the term gender. Notice how gender, while associated with sex (male/female) and sexual orientation (heterosexual/homosexual/bisexual), is different from these classifications.

And finally the term sexuality, by which we mean sexual orientation.

Now, if you haven't already read Lynn Weber's article on approaching RCGS studies, please read it. Weber discusses at length the importance of cultural studies and she provides 6 points that are really helpful in understanding these issues. (You're going to briefly discuss these points in this week's quiz.)

Remember, though, that while we want to address the oppression present in our society, we must acknowledge the complexity of the issues. Weber is sure to point out how each of us are implicated in these oppressive relationships: "Having students address the simultaneity of race, class, gender, and sexuality can help them to understand that there are no pure oppressors nor oppressed people, and that each of them must reflect on their own privilege as well as on their experiences of oppression. They cannot deny their privilege or claim absolute victim status."

Now these are pretty radical concepts we're discussing (and I mean that both in the Ninja Turtle "radical"-as-"awesome"-sense, as well as the political "radical"-as-"revolutionary"-sense). We're talking about challenging some assumptions and practices and perspectives that lie beneath the surface of our society, and that's a seriously important, difficult task.

Check out what Princeton professor Dr. Cornel West has to say about this task.

"...to leave the world just a little bit better than it was when they entered." That's what we're talking about.

Althusser and Ideology

"...the catastrophic and the monstrous, the scandalous, the traumatic that are often hidden and concealed in the deodorized and manicured discourses of the mainstream." That's what Althusser is talking about.

Louis Althusser is working in the Marxist theoretical tradition, so its helpful to understand a bit of Marx's ideas. Karl Marx was confronted by the division of economic and social class that occurred in Europe during the industrial revolution (the proletariat the bourgeois, and the aristocrats.
In this system of early capitalism, the laborers were reduced to "productive forces" whose sole purpose was to maintain the "material conditions of production" (they were valued not as human beings, but according to their ability to work and guarantee economic progress to the upper class).

However, Marx points out, and Althusser further emphasizes, that in order for these "relations of production" to be maintained, the laborers must be unwilling or unable to challenge their oppressors. So, status quo is maintained by what Althusser terms as Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) and Repressive State Apparatuses (RSAs). (You can find the definitions for these terms in the reading).

Since you've read the article, watch this clip from The Matrix and see if you can determine how this theory proposed by Althusser applies (in a metaphorical sense) to the film's narrative.

Oppressors providing a perceived reality to the oppressed, so that the status quo can be maintained (think ISA). This perception is enforced through violent actions of the "agents" (think RSA). The film has some real application to the issues that we're dealing with.

So, we're taking the red pill, and we're going to see how societally accepted ideologies may perpetuate oppressive relationships. And we're going to examine how American cinema (one big freakin' ISA) plays a part in our perception of these issues.

Next week, we're going to address stereotypes in film. So, we'll discuss how films' often oversimplify and misrepresent cultural groups in their representations of characters. Hopefully, as you complete the assigned readings, reflect on the points brought up here, and begin to write your Filmic Experience paper you can start connecting some dots: the powerful influence film (and the media, in general) is in our lives; the oppression that continues to occur in our society today; and the opportunity we have to confront these issues in real, even revolutionary ways.

Here's a clip from V for Vendetta that could serve as this class's metaphorical "call to arms."


Assignment

Find an article from a legitimate news source (like Katrina articles I posted) that you feel demonstrates a division along lines of race, class, gender, or sexuality in our society. Read the article carefully, 1) create a link to the site* and in a paragraph or two 2) summarize the article and 3) discuss how the article demonstrates an issue we'll approach in the course. The post is due Friday night at 12. No late posts will be accepted.

*You're going to learn some basic Html in this activity. So, visit this link to Blogger help and read the part that says "Here's an example scenario." If you have any questions, email me.

Quiz 1

Discuss the 6 points of Lynn Weber's conceptual framework for addressing issues of race, class, gender and sexuality. Email your quiz response to jmarmston@gmail.com by Friday night at 12. No late quizzes will be accepted.