COP Lecture -The Gaze and The Media
helen.clarke@leeds-art.ac.uk - Ba Photography
‘According to usage and conventions which are at last being questioned but have by no means been overcome - men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at’ John Berger 1972
The most misrepresented quote. In this quote he is not saying women are vain, but berger comments on how women carry around an idealisation where men look at them.
We start with oil painting. Hens Memling ‘Vanity’. The mirror in this painting is used as a device of justification and moral condemnation. The mirror is there so that we can imagine that the woman is vain and looking at herself, therefore the onlooker has permission to look at her body. In context, this is the period of time when women were isolated in communities as they were deemed as a witch if she is single, or in any shape or form empowered with knowledge or prosperity. For example with knowledge of herbs and medication.
In contemporary imagery (advert fashion shoot mimics the arrangement). Shows self absorption. Lost in a moment of vanity. In the gaze our permission to look is empowered by the fact the woman doesn’t look back. In this piece we can see her gaze looking back but it is softened by the shadowing of the eyes, so there isn’t a direct challenge. Also there is an interesting arrangement of her body, casual legs open environment, which focuses on her sexuality.
Alexandre Cabanel ‘Birth of Venus’ (1863)
Here the gaze is prevented by the shielding of her eyes and shadowing. Reclining pose shows purity. John berger says that you put the mirror in the womans hand to condemn the vanity. Here it is not the mirror but another manner of shielding.
Sophie Dahl for the Opium perfume by Yves Saint Laurent, mimics the birth of venus in the reclining pose. However was condemned for being overtly sexual. Therefore was banned from being used as an advertisement. However when placed vertical, there was less focus of the hand on the breast and more focus on the face so was passed. I find cases like this really interesting, for me personally I've been raised with an etiquette where nudiety isn't acceptable in social situations, it comes with a connotation of not being respectful, if you don't respect your body how can you respect others. Yet how is it that walking round in public in practically no clothes on a night out is judged but adverts like this aren't. This is like something you would see in vogue therefore it automatically becomes classy. As a young person it's very confusing and I think this is why the line in society between what's crude and nude and what's classy and acceptable has become so blurred. I actually really like this advert I think it would sell the product because it is sexy and provocative, she looks good so it's easy to believe that she would smell good. I think as well that this particular advert is heavily influenced by the famous Marilyn Monroe quote where she only wears Chanel no. 5 to bed. Who wouldn't want there perfume to have that effect on women. At the end of the day perfume is a primal thing it represent pheromones to attract a mate it's supposed to sexual. I just think that young people can very impressionable and I don't want to see the average person doing this. I think it should be more clear that it unattainable to do that and have a decent lifestyle with privacy but then it wouldn't sell as well. It's all very confusing.
Titian’s Venus of Urbino, 1538
A traditional nude, Venus in this image is giving such a provocative look that lures the viewer in, as a spy or a peeping tom. In Berger's work he comparatively then looks at:
Manet’s Olympia ‘1863’
He compares them through a modernist perspective. Initially the pose is very similar, reclining propped up on cushions. But notes that there are subtle differences. Titians venus is subtly provocative comparatively Olympia is more direct. She doesn't give permission, she is aware the viewer is there. There is also a subtle difference in the position of the hand, in Titian’s it is soft and passive and Olympia’s is a more direct clutch. Berger makes the point the Olympia is a prostitute and that’s why she’s more direct and challenging because she’s more sexual. There's also a lot of hidden detail that can be taken as symbolism. Titian's venus is eating grapes and she has servants this clearly an empowering portrait. But Olympia is receiving flowers and has gold bands on her arm showing off her wealth through what men have bought even the new dress she's laying on. I think if you were to meet the two women Olympia would be a lot more self conscious because she's going out of her way to show off where as Venus looks comfortable in her own skin. I also read the cat on Olympia's bed is a symbol of femininity. I don't really buy into this viewpoint. I think it is very interesting however how Venus has a sleepy puppy at the bottom of her feet and Olympia has an alert cat.
Ingres ‘Le Grand Odalisque' (1814)
An image reused by the guerrilla girls in 1985 in MOMA of female vs male artists. Made a poster to represent the imbalance in the history of art, the fact that signficantly more paintings in classical galleries are that of men's. A movement to make the imbalances more visible in the classic forms. Ironically this poster was meant to go on buses, but was pulled for being too sexual with the duster.
Manet - Bar at the Folies Bergeres, 1882.
Open pose on the bar with hands spread. If you look in the mirror an incorrect reflection of the body shows her back side on, you can see the viewer of a man onlooking. Although the lecturer made the point of the reflection being incorrect I think actually it's not. The next time I have looked at it I have realised that if she is stood at the edge of the bar and the mirror's on an angle then it would actually be right. A complicated impressionist brush style with artistic licence to explore a complicated viewpoint. The detail of the man stops us being an invisible onlooker. Goes in hand in hand with painting of women being for men. Actually looking at this poor women's gaze she looks like she has been slapped in the face with a fish it's hardly a nice picture. If I stare at it too long I can feel myself welling up I think she looks that sad, I really don't like this picture I just think she looks far too overdressed to be a bar maid. And why is her waist so skinny from the back and her reflection so podgy? I think it's too fussy the artist was trying too hard to capture all the detail I think as an impressionist he should of let loose a little bit.
Jeff Wall ‘Picture for women’ 1979
Inspired by the bar at the follies burgers, a multitude of gazes going on, instead of a
Divided up the mirror, dividing the image. A very constructed pose with carefully placed character. An image with many mini images. Subtly different in that the woman isn’t open. Perspective of the room draws the viewers eye to the camera, slopes of the wall and the lights drawing the eye to the camera. Drawing the attention to the camera and the function of the camera. Onlooker invited to make there own narrative, typical of post modernism, so the viewer has an active role. I wonder why, if this photographed was so carefully constructed she's got closed off body language yet still so sorrowful. I think the lighting on her makes her look artificial like she could be a cut out photo. I don't really understand you're supposed to derive your own narrative from the scene but I just think as a scene, it would be so much nicer without jeff and the female model and without the camera you could have a really nice animation background there why have they ruined it.
"The camera in contemporary media has been put to use as an extension of the male gaze at women on the streets"
The idea of nudity in a public place is normalised by fashion campaigns as they are seen in streets where everyone goes about their own business.
Nudity has been normalised also in advertising for example wonder bra billboards with Eva Herzigova Stopped traffic. In the nineties lads magazines came into population. Also laddettes became common who stood for not being sexually objectified. Realises the power of the naked body in this billboard in a playful way. One way of reading the billboard is how she herself isn't gazing at us giving us permisson to look she's looking down, is she looking at her own body or at our judgement of her body and advertising in general?
"The profusion of images which characterises contemporary society could be seen as an obsessive distancing of women... a form of voyeurism."
Peeping Tom, 1960, Directed by Michael Powell.
The problem with the objectification of women is not a light hearted issue, it is not something that you can brush off with humour. Explored in the film 1960, peeping tom. Dated sixties film. Things in it are also referred to when looking at the gaze. In the above film still the man is a voyeur who gets his kicks by filming women in the moment of death. Rosaline Coward is saying theres real consequences for this in reality, if you objectify women they become disposable objects.
The Male Gaze
This things do occur with male men to attract attention, however there is a dramatic difference in the quantity. Gender ad’s [http://www.genderads.com/] is a sight that have collected the objectification of male and female bodies. But generally there are more adverts that objectify women more so than men. I think it bothers women more and men are a bit more blase about it, so if it provokes a reaction it's more likely to be a successful/memorable campaign. Do you think this is because females are more likely to be consumers than men?
Dolce & Gabbana advert, 2007
Here the men are very domineering and have very challenging gazes a lot more powerful and very directed at the photographer/ potential consumer. This is very common for male gaze images in comparison to the passive potentially seductive woman. I don't really understand why this was such a successful campaign for D&G, obviously there was a lot of controversy around the menacing looks but who seriously would want to be associated with those undergarments, the guy on the left looks like a child's potato stamped his arm.
Laura Mulvey - Visual pleasures of the Narrative Cinema.
Analysis the male gaze and particularly in hollywood film. An essay in which dissects and analyses the way shots are composed in 1940's and 1950's cinema. Which led to the discovery of the classic portrayal of the female body in cinema of this time, being that the body is always dissected as well. Never shown whole clips regularly show sections of the body. A female was a thing to be looked at rather than being a drive of the plot. Applied Freud’s pyscho-analytics, the cinema invited the audience to a private space to identify with the characters, but women were normally accessories and not directing the storyline. Active male, passive female.
Analysis the male gaze and particularly in hollywood film. An essay in which dissects and analyses the way shots are composed in 1940's and 1950's cinema. Which led to the discovery of the classic portrayal of the female body in cinema of this time, being that the body is always dissected as well. Never shown whole clips regularly show sections of the body. A female was a thing to be looked at rather than being a drive of the plot. Applied Freud’s pyscho-analytics, the cinema invited the audience to a private space to identify with the characters, but women were normally accessories and not directing the storyline. Active male, passive female.
Artemisia Gentileschi
Judith Beheading Holofernes, 1620.
Griselda Pollocks Old Mistresses.
Lecturer at Leeds uni, address female classical painters in history. Pollocks states the female is powerful as a painter by depicting the actual moment as normally the story is depicted after when the woman is holding the head.
Views from Pollock circa 1980.
Women ‘marginalised with the masculine discourses of art history.' This marginalisation supports the 'hegemony of men in cultural practice, in art.'
Women not only marginalised, but supposed to be marginalised.
Women not only marginalised, but supposed to be marginalised.
If we don’t acknowledge that this is a missing part of art history it will be always an issue so we need to address it now.
States her work is not about feminism, or the female gaze. But whether she likes it or not it is associated with dealing with feminism because of how controversial the composition is the female is partially dressed, seductive coverage, so even though she’s reclining the image has been composed vertically so she doesn’t look like she’s reclining. The eyes aren’t shielded by the hand is artificially to the face making it awkward, making it look more staged. Refers to the classic poses without copying, which is why they challenge the gaze. Also the mirror is there its facing down and strewn. Therefore it contradicts the vanity portrayed in the earlier paintings.
Barbara Kruger
‘Your gaze hits the side of my face’ 1981
using text looks like its been cut out from newspaper, means it has not personality. Hit’s is a violent word as a visual slap. The issues around the representation of women have a real life consequence. I refuse to even put a picture of this on because I personally am not a fan, I think there's far too much effort gone into trying to provoke a reaction from the audience and I just have no time for the big piece like "I shop therefore I am." I feel although she's complying to the mordernism theory of having an active audience her work is like the annoying person in your life whose just a bit self absorbed and attention seeking, her work isn't from a design perspective or great composition or technically and innotively out there. It's just in your face and not in a pretty way. That's why they get GCSE students to look at it because it's so easy to replicate.
Sarah Lucas, Eating a banana 1990
Self conscious act in public, with very challenging aggressive gaze. Self portrait with fried eggs. Masculine pose, challenging pose, use of humour as an undertone.
Reality Television.
Complex set of gazes, appear to offer us the position as the all-seeing eye , the power of the gaze - i.e Big Brother. Heavily edited shows, often fixed. Contestants know they are on tv so often perform for the audience. No active role for the viewer, passively look at peoples bodies.
Allows us a voyeuristic passive consumption of a type of reality.
The truman show, born into a reality show from birth and realises something isn’t quite right.
Looking is not indifferent. There can never be any question of ‘just looking.’ Victor Burgin 1982
Theres no such thing as just looking theres always going to a political impact.
Caroline Lucas, 2013. Went to the house of commons in a tshirt comdemming page three which is onsale outside the building. However she was asked to change as it wasn't appropriate work wear. Which I can understand, if it had been a shirt fair enough but I think she did just want to make a statement. I don't think you can look at the gaze and not mention page three models. At the end of the day it's up to the model them self and if they aren't bothered by creepy men buying a newspaper to see a topless photo of them for them to get it sticky later that's their choice but it certainly wouldn't be mine!
Susan Sontag
To photograph is to appropriate the thing photographed
Paparazzi is cyclical there fees are so high because so many people buy the rubbish magazines.
Nude leak 2014, desired and loathed, who deserves privacy? Because they are in the public being successful are we entitled to see them? No male bodies hacked because they weren’t valuable.
Vanity.
By making people appear vain this reminds women of their vulnerability, and this can damage the women at the top and the ordinary women.
Laura Penny
“The power to watch men back is something that the web affords women, but men haven’t quite realised that yet”
Social networking, bullying related to body shape/size.
No comments:
Post a Comment