Yes, Really
Nov. 24th, 2004 12:49 pmOne of the stimulating things about LJ is that you never know when the Messerschmidts are going to come diving at you out of the sun.
Mainly you're among friends, but it's a public arena and anything is possible.
I like it that it's public. Yeah, I do really.
Ouch
Ouch
Ouch.
Mainly you're among friends, but it's a public arena and anything is possible.
I like it that it's public. Yeah, I do really.
Ouch
Ouch
Ouch.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 03:33 pm (UTC)i think that:
-she does make an interesting point about buffy, etc being male constructs. because that calls into question the motives behind strong female characters-- if they're created by men, are they created out of respect for female strength, or out of a sort domination fantasy? what are the intentions? (on the other hand, women could just as easily create strong female characters for the same reasons)
-but all the same, it's unfair of her to say that you shouldn't approve of them for that reason. and also, it's not your fault or (i assuming) your wish that women are marginalized as creative forces in the entertainment industry.
lastly, and most importantly, isn't it ironic that you get attacked for sticking your neck out and exploring these sort of issues? the stereotyped "male" she seems to want to hate would never even think about these things.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 04:02 pm (UTC)And I think it sucks that women are so marginalized in the entertainment industry. I am sick of being fed boys-own fantasy. I don't want Bruce Willis in a vest or Stallone in a vest or Brad Pitt in a vest. I want stories in which the women are more than the vest-wearing hero's fashion accessories. Tarantino may be doing it for all the wrong reasons- who knows?- but he has now made three films in a row with a woman doing the heroics. At the very least, it's refreshing.
And it would be even more refreshing if there were female writers and directors making comparable films.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 04:27 pm (UTC)There is a sentence that I'm trying to write over and over again, in order to maintain an intellectual air. I think this, which I've heard from a lot of boys whose parents actaully let them see the movie:
"I wish I could kick butt like Uma." And so on to that effect. She's not seen as a model for women, for strong women, or any of that. She is now a model of non-gender, universally acceptable, vicious-yet-merciful, heroic-yet-flawed strength. Period. That she is in fact a "she" almost never plays into it.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 04:35 pm (UTC)Is it only science fiction where we see this?!
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 04:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 04:41 pm (UTC)In the past almost all these archetypal figures were male. It's a sign of the times, and a hopeful sign, that some of the ones who are coming through now are female.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 07:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 09:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 10:45 am (UTC)Forgive me for just catching up with this thread, and perhaps that is why I have no idea if you're speaking of yourself or the boys you mention who adore The Bride. But how can the fact that she is a woman never play into this interpretation? That is ridiculous. The entire film(s) is about female strength, connections (however subtle) between women, and the fact that a man she loved tried to kill her while she was with his child. She is a woman. She is a mother. And she is strong.
But how can anyone claim that the fact that she is a woman would not "play into it" unless they were 12 years old and had no training nor experience in terms of gender and power in our society right now?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 11:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 07:59 pm (UTC)You're probably right.
Unfortunately.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 08:16 pm (UTC)with most media, "the viewer" is generally assumed to be male (unless the medium in question is romance novels or something of that sort). so while uma thurman may kick butt as the bride, she also has to be sexy uma thurman to appeal to the "male gaze". i guess the best example of this is lara croft from tomb raider. i would say linda hamilton from terminator had one of the most progressive female roles- because she was tough and determined and survived- and yet also had a sexual relationship without (in my opinion-- but then i also havent seen it in several years) really having her sexuality exploited for the audience.
also: when i imagine myself as a protagonist, i imagine myself as a dude. however, i think this has more to do with the fact that we're all conditioned to regard male-ness as neutral, and female-ness as something different.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 08:33 pm (UTC)It irritates me that Sean Connery is still playing action heroes at 70 while most women get stuck with little old lady roles by the time they're 50.
Why can't we see Meryl Streep hanging off buildings or wielding a light sabre?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 05:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-25 09:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 08:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 08:34 pm (UTC)