Watched this film today. Although having some links with the film 'Simba' i.e. indigenous people overthrowing their colonial masters the Battle for Algiers is told from the viewpoint of the people attempting to overthrow the colonialists. Not surprisingly the bias of the film is towards them although they do not shy from showing the atrocities they committed. Furthermore whereas 'Simba' concentrates on the battle between the Mau Mau and a small group of farmers 'Battle for Algiers' is a conflict between local freedom fighters (or terrorist if you are French) and a large military force.
What the film failed to take into account was the sub-plot of the French Army who suffered defeat at the hands of the Germans in the Second World War and at Dien Bien Phu in the Indo-China War. This latter battle had many similar aspects to the Battle of Algiers insofar as a colonial independence movement had successfully overthrown the rulers. It would seem that the opportunity to defeat the native population and restore French pride was an underlying cause for the behaviour of the French Army. It should also be remembered that the political leaders of France after Charles de Gaulle became President were minded to give independence to Algeria and this brought a bitter response from the Army who, it is alleged, planned to assassinate de Gaulle. Independence was achieved in 1962 but by this time the Algerians were pushing against an opening door.
A strange mix of films presumably chosen and interpreted by Dyer to aid in his search for 'whiteness'. As stated previously it is my view that he fails to do this largely because he feels that 'blackness' and 'whiteness' are the only opposing elements whereas the history of such places as Nigeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe and Algiers and the recent events in other parts of the Arab World show that their are many other loyalties that people feel other than to the colour of their skin.
Wednesday 15 February 2012
Sunday 12 February 2012
Night of the Living Dead
Watched the film through. The film is in contrast to the images presented of the two different ethnic groups as shown in Simba. Here the strong forceful character is black whilst the whites are depicted as weak ineffectual and in the case of the older man cowardly. We do have the interesting juxtaposition of the older of the two white men and the younger who is more ready to work under the control of the black man and the tension that this creates in the group.
As we are not offered Dyer's explanation of the film and its link to his desire to examine the concept of 'whiteness' in the extract in the reader (see reference in the blog immediate to this one) one can only speculate. I presume it is the way, in this case, where 'black' is shown to be ordered, rational and in control and 'white' is shown to be disordered, irrational and lacking control that is the opposite to the version in 'Simba'. However both are films and particularly in the case of 'Night' are fictional events that have no reality other than that created by the Writer and the Director. They are totally false images that rely upon the plausibility of the plot or story line to get the message across that they could be 'real'.
Can we draw any conclusions about the concept of 'whiteness' from what we have been shown. I suspect not. To experience 'blackness' or 'whiteness' (in Dyer's terms) it is necessary to be aware of your 'self' as seen by the other group and how they respond and behave towards you. This defines you in that relationship. I recall visiting a public house in Nottingham with a friend. It was in an area that I had known as a child (my grandparents lived there) but had not visited for some time. Every other person in the pub was black. There was no hostility just a sense of being examined as something different and unusual in that setting. It was my 'whiteness' that made me different and worthy of examination. It was the intensity of the gaze that surprised and discomfited me.
As I suggested in my previous blog I believe that Dyer's approach is too simplistic in that it does not take into account the differences within the larger groups that are equally as defining as the colour of ones skin. Dislike or open hatred of a group is not confined to the colour of a person's skin. Having been around at the time of the 'mods' and 'rockers' all that seemed to be needed for open conflict to erupt was for someone to be seen who was wearing the costume of the 'hated' group. Humans define themselves by thrusting onto others those things that are seen as 'bad'. Of course it is much easier if they are easily identifiable such as someone of a different colour but it does not stop there. The Nazis had a whole range of groups that were deemed untermensch with disastrous consequences.
Throughout this exercise I have been aware of an increasing sense of unease and distaste. I believe the reason for this is that the attempt, for academic purposes, to separate us all into 'black' or 'white' (I wonder how the Asian population sees themselves) or to talk of 'blackness' or 'whiteness' can only feed into racism. Implicit in such separation is that there is a difference that can be applied to a whole group. Whilst the academic (who survives through published works) can claim it to be an intellectual exercise these are feelings that are unique to a living person. They affect their every day lives in a meaningful way either positively or negatively.
As we are not offered Dyer's explanation of the film and its link to his desire to examine the concept of 'whiteness' in the extract in the reader (see reference in the blog immediate to this one) one can only speculate. I presume it is the way, in this case, where 'black' is shown to be ordered, rational and in control and 'white' is shown to be disordered, irrational and lacking control that is the opposite to the version in 'Simba'. However both are films and particularly in the case of 'Night' are fictional events that have no reality other than that created by the Writer and the Director. They are totally false images that rely upon the plausibility of the plot or story line to get the message across that they could be 'real'.
Can we draw any conclusions about the concept of 'whiteness' from what we have been shown. I suspect not. To experience 'blackness' or 'whiteness' (in Dyer's terms) it is necessary to be aware of your 'self' as seen by the other group and how they respond and behave towards you. This defines you in that relationship. I recall visiting a public house in Nottingham with a friend. It was in an area that I had known as a child (my grandparents lived there) but had not visited for some time. Every other person in the pub was black. There was no hostility just a sense of being examined as something different and unusual in that setting. It was my 'whiteness' that made me different and worthy of examination. It was the intensity of the gaze that surprised and discomfited me.
As I suggested in my previous blog I believe that Dyer's approach is too simplistic in that it does not take into account the differences within the larger groups that are equally as defining as the colour of ones skin. Dislike or open hatred of a group is not confined to the colour of a person's skin. Having been around at the time of the 'mods' and 'rockers' all that seemed to be needed for open conflict to erupt was for someone to be seen who was wearing the costume of the 'hated' group. Humans define themselves by thrusting onto others those things that are seen as 'bad'. Of course it is much easier if they are easily identifiable such as someone of a different colour but it does not stop there. The Nazis had a whole range of groups that were deemed untermensch with disastrous consequences.
Throughout this exercise I have been aware of an increasing sense of unease and distaste. I believe the reason for this is that the attempt, for academic purposes, to separate us all into 'black' or 'white' (I wonder how the Asian population sees themselves) or to talk of 'blackness' or 'whiteness' can only feed into racism. Implicit in such separation is that there is a difference that can be applied to a whole group. Whilst the academic (who survives through published works) can claim it to be an intellectual exercise these are feelings that are unique to a living person. They affect their every day lives in a meaningful way either positively or negatively.
Simba
Watched this film the other night. Felt that there should be an automatic award of credits for anyone who has managed to sit through the film. It is absolutely awful. As a piece of entertainment it is on a par with the very worst of amateur dramatics and as a reflection of history, whatever your point of view, it is as biased as is possible. The summation of the film provided by Dyer [visual culture: the reader; eds jessica evans and stuart hall; Sage Publications 2010; pp 461 - 466] is an interpretation that supports his particular approach by the selection of elements of the film whilst ignoring others. I have no particular quarrel with this approach but I do not think that he manages to throw any more light on the concept of 'whiteness' as was his stated intention.
Dyer states the film is "organised round a rigid binarism with white standing for modernity, reason, order, stability and black standing for backwardness, irrationality, chaos and violence." As a binary system has only two possibilities describing the film in this way ignores the differences both large and small within the two main groups as depicted in the film. We have positions in the 'white' camp that range from working with the black group to shooting them out of hand and the 'black' camp that ranges from those who sided against the Mau Mau and those who formed the greater part of the forces defending the status quo and the heroic acts of the individuals such as the black servant who, although, fatally wounded, fired the rocket to get help when his master and mistress were being attacked.
Dyer tells us that he was taught the scientific difference between black and white at primary school. [ibid p 458]. His explanation is still largely accurate (black is the absence of colour and white is the presence of all colours in equal proportions) and he remarks on the way that 'black' in racial terms refers to 'coloured'. What he fails to do is to follow his analogy further. The colour or lack of colour we see when viewing objects is a combination of the nature of the reflective surface and its interpretation by our brain. Crudely put a surface that is seen as black reflects none of the spectrum and one that is seen as white reflects all of the spectrum in equal proportion. Our interpretation of what we 'see' is very much affected by our expectations. For example we see a white shirt as white in tungsten light whereas if an image of the same shirt in the same conditions is taken by a camera that has not been programmed to take images in tungsten light it will have an orange hue. This was a particular problem with film cameras using standard film.
In other words the colour of an object is only an indication of its surface properties and tells us very little about its internal structures and what we 'see' is subjective being the product of our biological make up and our learned experiences. To use a more prosaic example anyone who has been shopping with his/her loved one or worst of all presented with clothes and asked "what do you think of this colour" will know that sinking feeling because you see colours close to each other in a different way to your spouse.
In colour there are no boundaries. Colour does not make a step change from one colour to the next. There is gradation. To describe something as 'white' is a convenient shorthand and because we have no need, in our general lives, to distinguish variations. However if it was important we would develop language that would allow us to communicate the difference to others. Somewhere I have read the Intuit have some 400 words for 'snow' because the different nature of snow is of vital importance to their survival.
What has this journey into the nature of colour to do with 'Simba'; 'blackness' or 'whiteness'. The way that we interpret the vast number of colours that we see is an internal act of ours that produces different results by different people. I would argue that this is equally true of seeing 'colour' in people. There is no simple option of joining one camp or another and most will find themselves torn between conflicting elements and both supporting and rejecting the main protagonists ( to continue the analogy of actual colour there is no defined boundaries between 'black' and 'white'). Based on my viewing of 'Simba' I do not believe that Dyer has taken account of this diversity and by failing to do so undermines the conclusions that he reached.
However I plan to watch the 'Night of the Living Dead' later today (in daylight!) so I may change my views.
Dyer states the film is "organised round a rigid binarism with white standing for modernity, reason, order, stability and black standing for backwardness, irrationality, chaos and violence." As a binary system has only two possibilities describing the film in this way ignores the differences both large and small within the two main groups as depicted in the film. We have positions in the 'white' camp that range from working with the black group to shooting them out of hand and the 'black' camp that ranges from those who sided against the Mau Mau and those who formed the greater part of the forces defending the status quo and the heroic acts of the individuals such as the black servant who, although, fatally wounded, fired the rocket to get help when his master and mistress were being attacked.
Dyer tells us that he was taught the scientific difference between black and white at primary school. [ibid p 458]. His explanation is still largely accurate (black is the absence of colour and white is the presence of all colours in equal proportions) and he remarks on the way that 'black' in racial terms refers to 'coloured'. What he fails to do is to follow his analogy further. The colour or lack of colour we see when viewing objects is a combination of the nature of the reflective surface and its interpretation by our brain. Crudely put a surface that is seen as black reflects none of the spectrum and one that is seen as white reflects all of the spectrum in equal proportion. Our interpretation of what we 'see' is very much affected by our expectations. For example we see a white shirt as white in tungsten light whereas if an image of the same shirt in the same conditions is taken by a camera that has not been programmed to take images in tungsten light it will have an orange hue. This was a particular problem with film cameras using standard film.
In other words the colour of an object is only an indication of its surface properties and tells us very little about its internal structures and what we 'see' is subjective being the product of our biological make up and our learned experiences. To use a more prosaic example anyone who has been shopping with his/her loved one or worst of all presented with clothes and asked "what do you think of this colour" will know that sinking feeling because you see colours close to each other in a different way to your spouse.
In colour there are no boundaries. Colour does not make a step change from one colour to the next. There is gradation. To describe something as 'white' is a convenient shorthand and because we have no need, in our general lives, to distinguish variations. However if it was important we would develop language that would allow us to communicate the difference to others. Somewhere I have read the Intuit have some 400 words for 'snow' because the different nature of snow is of vital importance to their survival.
What has this journey into the nature of colour to do with 'Simba'; 'blackness' or 'whiteness'. The way that we interpret the vast number of colours that we see is an internal act of ours that produces different results by different people. I would argue that this is equally true of seeing 'colour' in people. There is no simple option of joining one camp or another and most will find themselves torn between conflicting elements and both supporting and rejecting the main protagonists ( to continue the analogy of actual colour there is no defined boundaries between 'black' and 'white'). Based on my viewing of 'Simba' I do not believe that Dyer has taken account of this diversity and by failing to do so undermines the conclusions that he reached.
However I plan to watch the 'Night of the Living Dead' later today (in daylight!) so I may change my views.
Friday 10 February 2012
Project Black part 2
Nelson's Ship in a Bottle
Artist Yinka Shonibare
On the fourth plinth in London's Trafalgar Square
The sculpture of the boat 4.7m long and 2.35m high from keel to the top of the main mast
The sails are made of African batik fabrics, one of the signature touches of the artist. The sails are representative of cultures absorbed into the african culture. The material is is of Dutch waxcloth, that itself is an import of an Indonesian method for wax printing, that arrived in Africa in the middle of the 19th century and became the cloth of choice for African clothing. Shonibare buys the fabric from Brixton market although it is manufactured mainly in Manchester, England or Helmond, Netherlands.
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/7758830/Nelsons-ship-in-a-bottle-unveiled-on-Fourth-Plinth.html) the artist said that his work considers the legacy of British colonialism. He said "Nelson's Ship in a Bottle will be the first project on the fourth plinth to reflect specifically on the relationship between the birth of the British Empire and Britain's present-day multicultural context"
I finish with a quote from the same article in the Telegraph -
"...diversity, when the word is used to describe arts policy, seems to be a different thing altogether. Indeed by trying to capture the essence of difference, it seems to snuff it out altogether. In this reading culture s not fluid, but defined in rigid categories. Artists are not artists but black, Asian or minority ethnic - "culturally diverse". There are specially publicly-funded bursary schemes for black artists, and for funding black-led art groups"
Whilst one has to take into account the political stance of the Telegraph could it be the case that by pigeon-holing particular groups identified by colour or race we are at risk of perpetuating the dominance of the western white culture?
Project Black
In Fanon's "The fact of blackness" [ extract in visual cuture: the reader: eds. jessica evans and stuart hall: Sage Publications 2010 pp 417 -420] the following statements are made:
"As long as the black man is among his own, he will have no occasion, except in minor internal conflicts, to experience his being through others." [p 417]
"For not only must the black man be black; he must be black in relation to the white man" [p 417]
"...his customs and the sources on which they were based, were wiped out because they were in conflict with a civilization that he did not know and that imposed itself on him" [p 418]
"In the white world a man of color encounters difficulties in the development of his bodily schema. Consciousness of the body is a negating activity. It is a third person consciousness." [p 418]
".....the corporeal schema crumbled, its place taken by a racial epidermal schema" [p 419]
"I was at the same time responsible for my body, for my race, for my ancestors,. I subjected myself to an objective examination, I discovered my blackness, my ethnic characteristics; and I was battered down by tom-toms, cannibalism, intellectual deficiency, fetichism, racial defects, slave ships and above all else, above all: 'Sho' good eatin'.' [p 419]
" The Negro is an animal, the Negro is bad, the Negro is mean, the Negro is ugly;..." [p 419]
"I am given no chance. I am overdetermined from without. I am the slave not of the 'idea' that others have of me but of my own appearance" [p 420]
Whilst it could be argued that we are all defined by others and that we can only experience our 'self' through our relationships with others the key point is that expressed as a "racial epidermal schema". A black person is judged, in the first instant, by the colour of his skin and he is ascribed all the characteristics of the 'Negro' no matter how inappropriate or inaccurate. He or she is judged before they have spoken. Compare this with the white person. If he enters so called 'polite society' and has dressed in the proper costume he will be accepted. As soon as he speaks he will be judged on his accent, his alma mater and his work. His 'class' will be decided and all the characteristics of that class will be seen as part of his bodily schema. The 'class' issue is as negating as the colour of one's skin. It is however possible to avoid the problem but being 'black' is not changeable.
Furthermore for those who, for whatever reason, find themselves in a society that is dominantly white the pressure is always on to adopt the ideologies of that white society. Indeed all that surrounds him is the creation of the dominant element not least the education system and the public persona. What we find is the ghettoisation of the minority groups that is caused in part by the natural desire of those groups to live in a community that is supportive of their cultural background and in some cases language and place of birth.
How does this impinge on visual culture. It is a two way street. There is the artist who attempts through his work to visualise the culture of his ethnic origins albeit a culture that is not of the land of his birth. There is a risk that there will be an over-emphasis on a particular interpretation of that culture (consider the diversity in Nigeria and its many languages and cultures) and a failure to recognise that elements that are seen as a natural part of that culture are imports from other cultures. Then there is the viewer who will bring there own mindset who will interpret what is seen through 'eyes' that are coloured by pre-formed opinions. An exhibition that is dedicated to the work of the Black artist and is advertised as such will be affect the preconceptions of the viewing public whatever their colour or background. The pressure is on the artist to produce work that in some way reflects 'blackness' and that rejects the imposed culture of the dominant race. The pressure is also there on the visitor who in some way is asked to sign up to the idea that in some way being a black artist necessarily means producing a particular type of work.
For the black person there is a continuing conflict between what is presented as best and good by the white culture in which they now live and the strident demands of those who insist that they should support and fully appreciate a culture that is possibly at odds with that of those with whom they go to school, work or play. One only has to think of the third and fourth generations of young women whose families came from the sub-continent who find themselves torn between the western culture of their friends and the ethnic culture of their parents and grandparents.
"As long as the black man is among his own, he will have no occasion, except in minor internal conflicts, to experience his being through others." [p 417]
"For not only must the black man be black; he must be black in relation to the white man" [p 417]
"...his customs and the sources on which they were based, were wiped out because they were in conflict with a civilization that he did not know and that imposed itself on him" [p 418]
"In the white world a man of color encounters difficulties in the development of his bodily schema. Consciousness of the body is a negating activity. It is a third person consciousness." [p 418]
".....the corporeal schema crumbled, its place taken by a racial epidermal schema" [p 419]
"I was at the same time responsible for my body, for my race, for my ancestors,. I subjected myself to an objective examination, I discovered my blackness, my ethnic characteristics; and I was battered down by tom-toms, cannibalism, intellectual deficiency, fetichism, racial defects, slave ships and above all else, above all: 'Sho' good eatin'.' [p 419]
" The Negro is an animal, the Negro is bad, the Negro is mean, the Negro is ugly;..." [p 419]
"I am given no chance. I am overdetermined from without. I am the slave not of the 'idea' that others have of me but of my own appearance" [p 420]
Whilst it could be argued that we are all defined by others and that we can only experience our 'self' through our relationships with others the key point is that expressed as a "racial epidermal schema". A black person is judged, in the first instant, by the colour of his skin and he is ascribed all the characteristics of the 'Negro' no matter how inappropriate or inaccurate. He or she is judged before they have spoken. Compare this with the white person. If he enters so called 'polite society' and has dressed in the proper costume he will be accepted. As soon as he speaks he will be judged on his accent, his alma mater and his work. His 'class' will be decided and all the characteristics of that class will be seen as part of his bodily schema. The 'class' issue is as negating as the colour of one's skin. It is however possible to avoid the problem but being 'black' is not changeable.
Furthermore for those who, for whatever reason, find themselves in a society that is dominantly white the pressure is always on to adopt the ideologies of that white society. Indeed all that surrounds him is the creation of the dominant element not least the education system and the public persona. What we find is the ghettoisation of the minority groups that is caused in part by the natural desire of those groups to live in a community that is supportive of their cultural background and in some cases language and place of birth.
How does this impinge on visual culture. It is a two way street. There is the artist who attempts through his work to visualise the culture of his ethnic origins albeit a culture that is not of the land of his birth. There is a risk that there will be an over-emphasis on a particular interpretation of that culture (consider the diversity in Nigeria and its many languages and cultures) and a failure to recognise that elements that are seen as a natural part of that culture are imports from other cultures. Then there is the viewer who will bring there own mindset who will interpret what is seen through 'eyes' that are coloured by pre-formed opinions. An exhibition that is dedicated to the work of the Black artist and is advertised as such will be affect the preconceptions of the viewing public whatever their colour or background. The pressure is on the artist to produce work that in some way reflects 'blackness' and that rejects the imposed culture of the dominant race. The pressure is also there on the visitor who in some way is asked to sign up to the idea that in some way being a black artist necessarily means producing a particular type of work.
For the black person there is a continuing conflict between what is presented as best and good by the white culture in which they now live and the strident demands of those who insist that they should support and fully appreciate a culture that is possibly at odds with that of those with whom they go to school, work or play. One only has to think of the third and fourth generations of young women whose families came from the sub-continent who find themselves torn between the western culture of their friends and the ethnic culture of their parents and grandparents.
Thursday 9 February 2012
Project Images of woman - Naked Nude
In the last part of the blog we are asked to make a collection of nakedness and the nude and to annotate them to indicate which they represent and how. Implicit in this is that there is a difference between nakedness and nude. I would suggest that it is a false difference or at least a difference that is uniquely of the viewer. In Ways of Seeing [BBC and Penguin Books 1972 pp 47 - 48] John Berger quotes from Genesis the story of Adam and Eve and their fall from Grace in the Garden of Eden. After Eve had taken the apple the story continues:
"And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons....And the Lord God called unto the man and said unto him "Where are thou" And he said, "I heard thy voice in the garden , and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself..."
By eating the apple they became aware of their nakedness. Yet it is not clear why, having seen their nakedness, shame should follow. If 'nakedness' is the natural state of humans Adam and Eve and all the rest of humanity that followed must have felt something, in seeing the naked form of someone else, that they instinctively felt was wrong and sinful. I do not propose, nor do I feel competent, to raise the question as to where the sense of shame that they felt came from.
What is important and as stated by Berger (ibid p 48) "Nakedness was created in the mind of the beholder" It is the viewer who 'decides' whether a picture is 'innocent' of elements that create feelings leading to shame or social condemnation. It matters little what the intent of the artist or creator was - it is the reaction of each individual viewer at the time of looking. Not only is this unique to that individual (different people respond to different elements of an image in different ways) at that moment but his/her reaction can change over time as awareness increases or satiation occurs. We cannot know directly although we may draw conclusions from the body language of the viewer.
If the foregoing is correct, as I believe it to be, then my choice and annotation can only tell anyone else my personal approach to particular images at the time of my selection. There can be no 'right' or 'wrong' answer and therefore to pursue the matter further is otiose
"And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons....And the Lord God called unto the man and said unto him "Where are thou" And he said, "I heard thy voice in the garden , and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself..."
By eating the apple they became aware of their nakedness. Yet it is not clear why, having seen their nakedness, shame should follow. If 'nakedness' is the natural state of humans Adam and Eve and all the rest of humanity that followed must have felt something, in seeing the naked form of someone else, that they instinctively felt was wrong and sinful. I do not propose, nor do I feel competent, to raise the question as to where the sense of shame that they felt came from.
What is important and as stated by Berger (ibid p 48) "Nakedness was created in the mind of the beholder" It is the viewer who 'decides' whether a picture is 'innocent' of elements that create feelings leading to shame or social condemnation. It matters little what the intent of the artist or creator was - it is the reaction of each individual viewer at the time of looking. Not only is this unique to that individual (different people respond to different elements of an image in different ways) at that moment but his/her reaction can change over time as awareness increases or satiation occurs. We cannot know directly although we may draw conclusions from the body language of the viewer.
If the foregoing is correct, as I believe it to be, then my choice and annotation can only tell anyone else my personal approach to particular images at the time of my selection. There can be no 'right' or 'wrong' answer and therefore to pursue the matter further is otiose
Wednesday 8 February 2012
Images of Woman 2
These images were chosen because the women portrayed in them are shown as people in their own right. This has been achieved by including in the overall image symbols of power or by the posture of the woman.
Project - Images of Woman
In this series of images I have attempted to show women either in a position of subordination as in the first image where the wife of the presidential candidate is included in the photograph solely to support the image of the man as a family man through to her objectification either in advertising or as in the Page 3 girl shown last.
The opposite approach will be shown in the next blog
Monday 6 February 2012
Women Artists
Sarah Lucas National Galleries Scotland ref GMA 4679.jpg
1 A masculine unsmiling face directly looking at the viewer
2 Clothing dirty looking with ripped jeans and trainers without socks. Probably a contra-point to the traditional view of women (decided by men) of dainty clothing that is essentially feminine and underlines her inherent 'weakness'.
3 Two ?fried eggs placed placed on her breasts. A reference to the oft heard comment about two fried eggs referring to breasts that do not meet the criteria of the speaker. Forces the viewer to consider their own views about the perfect female figure.A defiant note saying I don't care if I haven't got the tits you desire - it is your problem not mine!! Danger is that it is seen as case of the lady doth protest too much.
4 Difficult to decide whether the line has been drawn deliberately to draw attention to the crotch area or the line was there anyway. Given the pose I have presumed the former. That raises the question - Why? Is it that the message is to men - you will stare at my crotch anyway so I decided to show you where it is.
5 The angle and position of the camera distorts the size of her feet. Again challenging the 'dainty' image usually associated with women.
The image of women whether she is shown as an 'object' of male desire or of the dainty woman needful of the protection of the strong male even today is the most common depiction across all media. Here we have a challenge to that view in a direct and uncompromising way.
Roxanne Swentzell "Kosha appreciating everything" 1997
Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art ref: erez.jpg
http://www.nelson-atkins.org/art/CollectionDatabase.cfm?id=34199&theme=amer_ind
Seen as a leading contemporary Native American artist Swentzell continues the long tradition of Pueblo Figurative Sculpture.
1 The figure shown is that of a Kosha - a sacred being seen in religious ceremonies and dances. A kosha is said to teach through actions.
2 The kosha here is seen staring at its hand as though recognising it, possibly for the first time, as being part of him. It may also be seen in a wider context - that through contemplation of the wonders and complexity of our own body we obtain knowledge of ourselves and our place in the wider world.
There are clear links between this image and the work of Lacan about the development of the child. By recognising parts of its body as belonging to him the child learns to see himself as a separate entity and through that the existence of others.
Catherine Opie Self Portrait/Nursing
Hammer Museum L.A. ref 450.jpg
http://hammer.ucla.edu/exhibitions/detail_id/95
1 Gaze of woman directed towards the baby emphasising the link between the two.
2 Gaze of the child directed towards the mother completing the link underlying the dependency relationship between the two.
3 Hands support the young child providing the comfort and assurance that the child needs and which is so much part of the relationship.
4 The tattoo introduces a jarring note to the otherwise harmonious picture. This is my reaction and may not necessarily be the case for others. The rubenesque figure of the woman is at odds with the portrayal of nursing mothers in present day magazines and books devoted to motherhood. The child who seems to be between 9 months and 12 months old is yet a further element that does not match much of our conditioned thinking.
If my supposition is correct that the child is between 9 and 12 months old it is interesting to speculate on how Lacan would fit this image into his view on the development of the child. Here there would be the potential for conflict within the child's mind caused by the very close 'caring' image of the mother as he/she feeds at the breast and the by now well formed fear of castration.
Fiona Banner Nude Standing 2006
Museum of Modern Art ref cri_192448.jpg
http://www.moma.org/collection
1 The writing gives a full written description of the figure that we only see partially and in faint shadow behind the written element.
2 The shadowy figure of a nude.
I chose this piece of art because for me it captures the difficulty we have in "seeing" when we are offered a verbal or written description or offer our own analysis. "Seeing" is far more than an analysis and verbal or written description no matter how painstaking that analysis is. In doing the analysis we lose sight of the essence of the thing at which we are looking and our emotional response. Words are inadequate and in using them, either to ourselves or others, we fail to recognise those things that we cannot describe but nevertheless 'see'.
Friday 3 February 2012
Ways of Seeing
Managed to find a couple of extracts from Berger's original television broadcast on YouTube. One was approximately 8 mins long from what was presumably the start of Episode 2 and the other short clips from the same episode. It is difficult, at this remove, to see why Berger's pronouncements made such an impact. I was left with the feeling that he started with a statement about the difference between 'naked' and 'nude' that was a statement of the obvious. Of course this is because it has now become part of the accepted wisdom and so is simply seen as an obvious truth. Unfairly I also found it difficult to take seriously what was being said because of his direct look at the camera and the use of a tone of voice that suggested that what was happening was dramatic (as it may well have been) and earth shattering (which I doubt).
Looked through chapter 2 in 'Ways of Seeing' [John Berger BBC and Penguin Books first published 1972]. I followed this by looking through a couple of newspapers and magazines. It would seem that little has changed. It was easy to find women depicted as objects for a variety of purposes including in some political shots. It was far less easy to find positive images of women. One thing that struck me was in the two newspapers that I had (Guardian and The Sun ) on Thursday 2nd Feb there was a noticeable absence of women in the sports pages. As I increase my collection for the project I will pay special attention to this element.
As it will take a little time to accumulate the minimum of 24 images required in this project although I am not sure what is the "opposite position" of 12 that illustrate "the visualisation of women today" I propose reading on and completing other projects where material is easier and quicker to acquire (at least I hope so).
Looked through chapter 2 in 'Ways of Seeing' [John Berger BBC and Penguin Books first published 1972]. I followed this by looking through a couple of newspapers and magazines. It would seem that little has changed. It was easy to find women depicted as objects for a variety of purposes including in some political shots. It was far less easy to find positive images of women. One thing that struck me was in the two newspapers that I had (Guardian and The Sun ) on Thursday 2nd Feb there was a noticeable absence of women in the sports pages. As I increase my collection for the project I will pay special attention to this element.
As it will take a little time to accumulate the minimum of 24 images required in this project although I am not sure what is the "opposite position" of 12 that illustrate "the visualisation of women today" I propose reading on and completing other projects where material is easier and quicker to acquire (at least I hope so).
Wednesday 1 February 2012
Manet's Olympia
1 The head is raised from the pillow as though someone (the viewer) has entered the room and she is greeting them. The position of the head also introduces a tension into the image and complements the intensity of her gaze.
2 Directness of the gaze straight at the viewer both involves the viewer in the image but also suggests a woman who feels in control despite her nudity and her apparent vulnerability. It is though she is saying this meeting is on her terms.
3 Left arm placed as though it is draped over her body . It is oddly disproportional to the rest of her body. (Compare it to the arm nearest to us.) It also draws the eye to the genital area of the woman.
4 Her hand covers the area that has been drawn to our attention by the positioning of the arm perhaps suggesting that their are terms to be discussed or relationships established before all is revealed. Critics at the time described her hand and other parts of her body as 'dirty' as indeed the hand appears. Again there is a disproportionality between the hand and her arm.
5 Black servant girl whose gaze draws us back to the main subject of the painting - Olympia. The figure provides balance to the picture whilst the overall dark colours of that side of the image also contrast with the light of the area that encompasses the naked woman.
6 One shoe remains on her feet suggestive of a quick disrobing on hearing someone at the door. She has prepared herself for the viewer.
7 Black cat on bed. Often used as symbol of magic or evil.
8 The asymmetry of her body (see also the difference in size between her two eyes) either adds to or distracts from her beauty. Not only does this separate her from the perfect beauties of such works as Titian's Venus but also suggests that she is attainable by ordinary mortals and not just the Gods.
The viewer who is not seen in the picture is drawn into it by the artist's use of lines and symbols. We are almost commanded to gaze upon her beauty, living out our fantasies with a woman who apparently is making herself available.
Manet used the conventions of the nude seen in paintings by Titian and others but by changing the emphasis in key areas such as the gaze and the position of the body broke those conventions. For him the unattainability of the goddess like women of earlier nudes was replaced by something with which we could directly relate. She is of this world and challenges our view of how she should behave in our presence.
Vertigo
Watched the film last night on DVD in my own home. I mention this because this is significantly different from the cinema situation where we sit in semi-darkness and have the images projected onto a large screen. It must necessarily effect how I reacted to the film. There is also the question of how my awareness of cinema techniques has changed over the years. Compared with present day in your face sex and violence this film was tame and it was not helped by the 'wooden' acting of the two main actors. In fairness both were considered good actors in their time but we have become much more used to 'natural' acting. Take the kissing for example - it looked and was contrived - fake passion.
I saw it in its original version back in 1959 in a cinema. Unfortunately I cannot remember the impact it had then and certainly I never considered whether we were being fed the Hollywood version of women.
I have no real quarrel with Mulvey's analysis of how women were and still are portrayed on screen. However her voice is strident and she looks for examples that really are not there. One discordant note reads:
"Although the film is really being shown, is there to be seen, conditions of screening and narrative conventions give the spectator an illusion of looking in on a private world. Among other things, the position of the spectators in the cinema is blatantly one of repression of their exhibitionism and projection of the repressed desire onto the performer". [Visual Pleasure and narrative cinema in 'visual culture: the reader' ed jessica evans and stuart hall Sage Publications Ltd 2010 p. 382].
Perhaps Mulvey has never observed the audience in a cinema when a feature film is showing. There are not too many signs of repression amongst the audience of either gender and quite a lot of 'acting out' their fantasies as evidenced by their body language. Amongst many jobs that I have had,particularly after retirement,was that of an auditor for a Cinema chain in the UK. Part of this task was to count the members of the audience. I could if I wished watch the featured film but found it far more interesting to observe the audience. Sometime they were far more fascinating.
I failed completely to see the objectification of women in the film Vertigo. It is true that the two main female characters play the expected role of the support to the main character and that by present day standards this was subservient and yet both retained their own individuality. After the 'death' of Madeline and Scotties breakdown we have the attempts by Scottie to turn Judy Barton, a woman he meets later, into Madeline by changing her external appearance. Although not made immediately clear to the audience, although you would have to be fairly thick not to work it out, Judy is Madeline insofar as she played the part of her in a murder plot created by the real Madeline's husband.
It is legitimate to ask whether Scottie at a subconscious level 'knew' that they were one and the same and at what point his realisation became concrete. Although full realisation comes when Judy wears a necklace that Madeline wore and that Scottie had not given her it is difficult to ignore the fact that apart from a change of hair colour it was obvious to any one that Judy was ' Madeline' (particularly obvious to the viewer as the parts were played by the same actress). What we are witnessing is a man who was hospitalised because of the events that happened meeting a woman who is so like his true love (not surprising given that they are the same person) that he wants to change her physical appearance to that of his lost love. Although there is a reluctance on the part of the female this is because of her fear that once he discovers the truth he will reject her. We do not have an example of the usual dominant male who for his own reasons wants to change women into his idealised picture.
As I have said earlier I have no quarrel with Mulvey's theory but using Vertigo as an example fails to demonstrate her argument. The odd thing is that there were so many more films at that time that were evidence of her argument. Virtually every film that starred Marilyn Monroe, Gina Lollibrigida or Jayne Mansfield offered the audience the female as the fantasy woman whose sole purpose in life was to meet the stated or unstated desires of men.
I saw it in its original version back in 1959 in a cinema. Unfortunately I cannot remember the impact it had then and certainly I never considered whether we were being fed the Hollywood version of women.
I have no real quarrel with Mulvey's analysis of how women were and still are portrayed on screen. However her voice is strident and she looks for examples that really are not there. One discordant note reads:
"Although the film is really being shown, is there to be seen, conditions of screening and narrative conventions give the spectator an illusion of looking in on a private world. Among other things, the position of the spectators in the cinema is blatantly one of repression of their exhibitionism and projection of the repressed desire onto the performer". [Visual Pleasure and narrative cinema in 'visual culture: the reader' ed jessica evans and stuart hall Sage Publications Ltd 2010 p. 382].
Perhaps Mulvey has never observed the audience in a cinema when a feature film is showing. There are not too many signs of repression amongst the audience of either gender and quite a lot of 'acting out' their fantasies as evidenced by their body language. Amongst many jobs that I have had,particularly after retirement,was that of an auditor for a Cinema chain in the UK. Part of this task was to count the members of the audience. I could if I wished watch the featured film but found it far more interesting to observe the audience. Sometime they were far more fascinating.
I failed completely to see the objectification of women in the film Vertigo. It is true that the two main female characters play the expected role of the support to the main character and that by present day standards this was subservient and yet both retained their own individuality. After the 'death' of Madeline and Scotties breakdown we have the attempts by Scottie to turn Judy Barton, a woman he meets later, into Madeline by changing her external appearance. Although not made immediately clear to the audience, although you would have to be fairly thick not to work it out, Judy is Madeline insofar as she played the part of her in a murder plot created by the real Madeline's husband.
It is legitimate to ask whether Scottie at a subconscious level 'knew' that they were one and the same and at what point his realisation became concrete. Although full realisation comes when Judy wears a necklace that Madeline wore and that Scottie had not given her it is difficult to ignore the fact that apart from a change of hair colour it was obvious to any one that Judy was ' Madeline' (particularly obvious to the viewer as the parts were played by the same actress). What we are witnessing is a man who was hospitalised because of the events that happened meeting a woman who is so like his true love (not surprising given that they are the same person) that he wants to change her physical appearance to that of his lost love. Although there is a reluctance on the part of the female this is because of her fear that once he discovers the truth he will reject her. We do not have an example of the usual dominant male who for his own reasons wants to change women into his idealised picture.
As I have said earlier I have no quarrel with Mulvey's theory but using Vertigo as an example fails to demonstrate her argument. The odd thing is that there were so many more films at that time that were evidence of her argument. Virtually every film that starred Marilyn Monroe, Gina Lollibrigida or Jayne Mansfield offered the audience the female as the fantasy woman whose sole purpose in life was to meet the stated or unstated desires of men.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)