Feminism and the Women’s Film Movement
|
Throughout the 1960s
the significance of the media was emphasised more strongly than any other
period in history. The world of film
was no exception, and thus emerged as a major concentration for the second
wave of feminism. As with other
systems and processes, feminists recognised a subordination and oppression in
the predominately patriarchal film world.
The late 1960s and early 1970s therefore witnessed an influx of
feminist film production and circulation.
In combating the problems of ‘classic’ cinema, feminists established
both a new kind of film, the ‘counter cinema’, which in conjunction with
feminist film theory produced the wider feminist film movement. The role of feminist film groups and film
festivals popularised these productions, and established feminist cinema as
both a recognisable and political force. |
|
Women were
increasingly aware of the importance of film in both their political and
social struggle. There is
consequently a necessity to determine the offensiveness of ‘classic’ cinema. Throughout the 1950s film reflected a
world in which women lived in the masculine shadow. Hollywood cinema reinforced what was considered to be the only
acceptable image of women. Marriage
was an overriding concern, for example How To Marry A Millionaire
(1953), and films such as Annie Get Your Gun (1950) and Calamity
Jane (1953) emphasising the necessity of femininity and a tamed
independence in order to ‘get’ a man.
Female identity was dictated by male film directors, and women were
little more than a spectacle and object of sexual desire. Female presence was only necessary as a
means of reflecting the sexual hierarchy.
As S. Smith notes “From its beginning they [women] were present but
not in characterisations any self-respecting person could identify with”[1]. Thus women were increasingly
self-conscious of both their image and femininity. The standardisation of the desirable female as result of the
Sex Goddess, namely Marilyn Monroe, determined women as a group “particularly
susceptible to the media”[2]. |
|
With the power
and potential of film having been recognised, it is of little surprise that
feminist enterprise ventured into this field. Women’s struggle against the current system of representation
took a threefold form. Women either entered
the existing system with ambitions of breaking it, proceeded to make films
outside of the commercial system, and women developed a feminist film theory
- the overlap and interrelatedness of all three measures being obvious. Their challenge was to the traditional
representation of women in cinema, and the aim was the displacement of
patriarchal dominance in the cinematic world. Women such as Kate Millett, author of Sexual Politics
(1970) criticised the power relationships and traditional sex roles inherent
in film, and called for a more positive representation of women and attention
to women’s issues. Here was an
obvious way to extend women’s conjoined interest in art and politics, acting
as particularly visual communicators of feminist thought. |
|
Consequently, it
would perhaps prove interesting to briefly assess the role of the Sex Goddess
actress, attempting to understand her hindering, or perhaps contribution, to
feminism and women’s film. Veronica-Jane
Birley considers the life of Marilyn Monroe, questioning “What did she do for
the insecurity of Mrs Ordinary Housewife?”[3]. From both contemporary and recent feminist
writings, Monroe is something of a contradiction. On screen she exemplifies all that feminism protests. In her earliest films she was nothing more
than a spectacle, frequently having no biography or even no name, being taken
advantage of and humiliated, for example in Some Like It Hot
(1959). She was nothing more than a
gender, the object of sexual gaze and consequently the household word for
sex. Similarly her continued
appearances in Playboy since 1953 further exemplified the contemporary
feminists opinion of her as the ultimate victim. Women are not, however, capable of detaching themselves from
her. Monroe made people, if only
fractionally, believe in themselves.
She was a self made - though with male direction and discretion -
Cinderella proving the extent of possibilities for any and every woman. Fundamentally she was just a woman, and it
was with this that feminists empathised.
“She paid a higher and higher price for being Marilyn”[4],
it was Norma Jeane
Mortenson and her troublesome private life that feminists identified with
admired. Her death was a feminine,
not a cinematic, tragedy. |
|
Feminist filmmakers were not attempting to deny the past glories
of such Hollywood stars. Theirs was a
new orientation. Feminism became a
movement of liberation rather than reform, a movement of breaking away and creating
the new. The media was a resourceful
tool for consciousness-raising, and feminism was now preparing to utilise
this to the full. Similarly, film was
a forum for bringing female issues to the forefront. Feminist films strongly and seriously approached
matters of women’s social and economic status, gender characterisation and
the struggle of juggling both family and career roles. Matters of abortion, divorce and marriage
were simultaneously considered from a specifically feminist point of
view. The sheer anger The early 1970s therefore saw a massive increase in the
production of feminist films, and by 1976 it is estimated that there were
well over 200 feminist filmmakers[5],
due in part to the increased teaching of film and filmmaking skills in
colleges and universities. The birth
of feminist filmmaking was not, however, restricted to - though it may be
dominated by - America. European
feminists made equal, and at times anticipatory, contributions to the women’s
film movement. Britain’s filmmakers
produced Darling, Georgy Girl, and A Woman’s Place
between 1965-9 and similarly Swedish filmmaker Mai Zetterling had great
success with The Girls (1969), all being films that served to raise
consciousness amongst their audience. |
|
Whilst independent women filmmakers were at work, perhaps the
most outstanding contribution came from the specifically feminist production
and distribution groups that were established. Finding little support from commercial companies, patronised
and insulted by men of the business, the establishment of specifically
feminist production and distribution companies was in every sense beneficial
to the women’s film movement. Women
In Media and the Women’s Film Project, together with the newly established
film co operations, for example New Day Films and the Women’s Film Coop,
allowed specifically feminist films to be produced both efficiently and
professionally, whilst having the added advantage of interpersonal
dynamics. Group activity and
collaboration generated discussion and new political ideas, emphasising the
notion of struggle within the movement. For artists of any medium, production
is not nearly as trying as successful promotion and popularity. Without the efforts and published
guidebooks of the distribution groups, feminist film would have reached only
a marginal success of that it actually achieved. |
|
In accommodating
the massive upsurge in women’s film production came the birth of the feminist
film festival. Hugely overshadowed by
commercial Hollywood cinema, these occasions were invaluable to women’s film,
as B. Ruby Rich comments, “They were the only chance, like those signs for
gas before crossing the desert - in this case, emerging from a century long
desert”[6]. Held in New York in June 1972, the first
International Festival of Women’s Film may be termed as the ‘debut’ of the
feminist film movement. Here was the
most visible form of publicity available.
For not only feminist films but the entire movement was brought into
the spotlight, the efforts of communicating information were matched by the
emphasis on solidarity amongst all present.
Over 100 films from America, Canada and Europe were screened, and
occasions for panel discussion were utilised. Between the first and second International Festival, 1976, it
is estimated that between 40 and 50 further festivals took place in America
alone[7]. However, the festival was by no means a
strictly American phenomenon.
Organisation of feminist screenings by Laura Mulvey at the Edinburgh
Film Festival in 1972, and the 1974 International Women’s Film Seminar in
Berlin created further opportunities for consciousness-raising and the
possibility for filmmakers to meet and discuss. The instant success of the festivals made for their immediate
trend throughout the feminist world.
They were something of a mission, and their participants possessed a
missionary zeal. These were not
simply recreational pastimes, but rather the events of a political
calendar. Every step in the planning
and completion of a festival was a political step. The event provided a historical perspective to the issues
raised within feminist film, and opened up the occasion for the serious study
of this area of cinema that was previously ignored. Evidence of this comes in the 1973 critical publications of
women in film by M. Haskell, M. Rosen, and J. Mellen. The most valid criticism of the festivals
comes, however, in the observation that the nature of one-off showings was
unlikely to produce substantial bodies of support for either female directors
or individual films. True this may
be, however the value of the festivals as an outreach effort can not be
replaced nor easily substituted. The
fact remains that the festivals and
the films that they screened were both popular and influential. |
|
Throughout the
1970-80s feminism was to be preoccupied with the new visual issues in
cultural and intellectual thought, and continued to find expression through
the medium of film. The feminist film
movement was, as M. Humm notes, “a progressive cultural force”[8],
what began in the late 1960s was only to grow and develop into something
bigger and better. The extent to
which Hollywood gave it’s own version of female emancipation will always be a
matter of debate. The fact the
women’s sights slowly began to veer towards the ‘feature’ film, lured by the
commercialism and capital of Hollywood, is not to say that they abandoned
their feminist beginnings. The
influence and impact of the women’s film movement survived the test of time. |
Bibliography
Birley
V., Spare Rib, March 1974.
Fischer L. Shot/Countershot
(USA, 1989).
Humm
M. Feminism and Film (Edinburgh, 1997).
Kaplan
E. A. (ed.) Feminism and Film (USA, 2000).
Rosen
M. Popcorn Venus (USA, 1973).
Rosenberg
J. Women’s Reflections: The Feminist Film Movement (USA, 1983).
Ruby
Rich B. Chick Flicks (USA, 1998).
Todd J. (ed.) Women and
Film (USA, 1988).
Walters M. ‘Marilyn’, Spare Rib, September 1972.