Film Spectatorship Debates
Psychoanalysis
In accounting for the process of how a spectator experiences a film,
theorists drew on Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan's theories of
early childhood development, suggesting that the process of watching a
film recreates a similar dynamic between what Lacan called the imaginary
and symbolic worlds. Because film language works so effectively to make
the viewer feel as though he or she were enmeshed in its world, the
spectator is able to relive the pleasurable state of being in the
imaginary stage again.
Psychoanalytic theories of spectatorship make
several assumptions that raise doubts about its ability to serve as a
suitable model for understanding film viewing. First, in this model the
spectator is always rendered a passive subject of the film text, subject
to its meaning system. This suggests that film spectators do not have
control over the ways in which they view films and the meaning they take
from them—that, in fact, every spectator receives the same
meaning from a film.
Lacan's notion of Oedipal
development is experienced only by the male child, psychoanalytic
theories of spectatorship are pertinent only when applied to
(hetero-sexual) male spectators. Furthermore, these theories do not take
into consideration cultural and historical variants, implying that all
(male) film viewers will respond to film language in the same way
regardless of their historical, cultural, and political context.
Queer Gaze
Queering the gaze: Psychoanalysis and homosexuality in Main Hoon Na from gnovis on Vimeo.
The Gaze revisited
Gay and lesbian theorists have also made significant contributions to
the "rereading" of film spectatorship. Teresa de Lauretis,
Andrea Weiss, and Patricia White, among others, suggest that lesbian
spectatorial desire challenges the traditional heterosexist paradigm.
No comments:
Post a Comment