Changing Ideas About Women
In art, women have almost always been perceived as sexual objects. Whether the artist intends for the painting, picture, or film to portray women as vain nymphomaniacs, it can be argued that this is how most viewers see them. This lead to people not only believing this of the women in the artwork, but women in general. Beginning in the mid 60's and throughout the 70's, people began to make more sexually explicit films. These films showed women in more compromising sexual situations. Throughout time women have been shown as secretly seductive. In pieces in the eighteenth century, a painting of a young women writing a love letter might have been considered scandalous. People would believe the surely this girl is thinking impure thoughts, as all women do. As these films in the 60's and 70's were being made, women were no longer only thinking impure thoughts but acting them out as well. It may have seemed to the creator of the film that he was making women seem more independent, but instead it made women look even worse. It gave males in society even more of a reason to look down upon them. In her book, Vision and Difference Griselda Pollock explains that being a women is not necessarily an inborn trait. She explains that another writer, Elizabeth Cowie, writes that to be a woman is not decided by biology or society but rather to be a women is the act of not being a man. These beliefs are further shown in biology and society by the products of media and art. If an artist wishes to change the ideas and beliefs that femininity entails then they have to portray a women in a way that cannot be seen as purely sexual objects, but rather as actual beings.
Julie Christie starred in the film Shampoo released in 1975. This film was about a man who had sexual relations with many women, while maintaining a “personal” relationship with one particular woman. The women committed adultery and chased after the man in the film. They were not portrayed particularly modest or chaste fashion. The women all chased after men and relied on them in their lives. Christie played the role of a women who escaped the clutches of the hairdresser that had so many sexual relations. The writers, Robert Towne and Warren Beatty may have thought that by liberating this woman they were showing women with more independence and status in society, however she was actually shown as a gold digger who only cared about money rather than actual love. Pollock quotes Elizabeth Cowie, “'Film is a point of production of definitions but neither unique and independent of, nor simply reducible to, other practices defining the position of women in society.'”(Pollock, 43). In saying this, Cowie shows that although filmmakers may try to project different views of women, they are no different than the works of art that are displayed in museum. They will portray women in the way that they are perceived in society, whether that was the intention or not. In this particular film, Christie is still shown as a narcissistic nymphomaniac just as the paintings of Eve, or the eighteenth century painter Pietro Antonio Rotari's “Young Girl Writing a Love Letter” were perceived during the time that they were painted. Although films were generated during the twentieth century, and became most popular during the most prominent years of the women's movement, they have done nothing to help the image of women in society. Although they have made the idea of sexual independence for women more feasible, these films did not make women seem independent in other aspects of life; such as financially or emotionally.
Recently, artists who have seen the perceptions of women remain unchanging have attempted new types of art that portray women in different ways. These pictures are generally not sexually related, but make women look odd and in some cases ugly. In one untitled photo by a recent artist named Cindy Sherman, a woman is shown in a distorted way. The area around her eyes is painted white, and her stomach is protruding as if she is pregnant. Her facial expression is intense, and somewhat frightening. Her hair is spiked up in a androgynous fashion. Although her skin is shown, and nipples are visible, it is not shown in a sexual way. She is not over sexualized as many paintings and photos show women. She is distorted and would be considered ugly by popular culture. Apart from her breasts she does not seem to be of any biological sex. Her hair could be short like a man's, or put up like a woman's. Her shirt is collared like one that a man would wear. When looking at this photo a viewer might see it as sexual, but most likely people will view her with curiosity, and have to take a second look to decide whether it is a man or woman. This kind of art has become a way to show women in a new way. She is not in a vulnerable position nor is she over exposed like most women in art. Now, when this photo is being looked at, viewers will not look at is and think immediately of feminine stereotypes. They will have to concentrate on the photo to understand its meaning and look at the woman as an individual rather than part of a group that has never been well perceived.
With this sort of contemporary art surfacing, women might not only be seen as sexual beings. The independence and individuality of women is better shown through these pieces than they had ever been in any other forms of art. These feminist artists are using the distorting of images to make people think more about the actual existence of females rather than the idea that to be a woman is to not be a man. Women will become recognized for their impact on society around the world. Film has become better at portraying women in this way, however these ideas still need to progress, and these forms of art will only assist this process.
No comments:
Post a Comment