This week’s readings by John Berger and Bell Hooks describe the sociopolitical implications of what are described as the male gaze and systemic patriarchal norms. After being posed with these subjects and participating in the subsequent lecture and class discussion I thought it best to re-read these arguments several times so as to familiarize myself with their specific objectives and intention. Thereby I could more accurately compare it to the sentiments expressed during our class period so I could arrive at a clearer distinction between the two. After giving both the lectures and the readings careful consideration I feel adequately prepared to express my understanding of these readings as they relate to the lecture and more importantly as they relate to the larger cultural discourse that we are currently engaged in.
John Berger in the text Ways of Seeing observes the way that women have been depicted in visual art throughout history and in the course of his analysis he arrives at the conclusion that women have been depicted almost entirely from the perspective of a man. The theory asserts that women in these photographs and illustrations are represented in a way that is most appealing to men and does not reflect the totality of their human complexity but rather only the sexual aspect of their character. He makes a useful distinction between the quality of “nudity” and “nakedness”. This distinction relates the classical artistic tradition of the nude painting, Berger says “To be naked is to be oneself. To be nude is to be seen naked by others and yet not recognized for oneself.” Berger goes on to explain that the quality of female nudity within the context of these paintings directly relates to male sexual appetite and more interestingly insinuates male ownership of the illustrated subject. I think that these observations are useful and self evident as it relates to contemporary visual art, we as a culture inundated with advertisements need look no further than the nearest magazine cover or billboard to identify proof of this reality. The sexualization of both men and women in print media as well as various other visual mediums express a suggestion of sex and very often appeal to a male sensibility. Perhaps this relates to an era of sexual repression where interactions are strained by technology and human beings aware of the apparent risks of such interactions have grown increasingly reluctant? An era where the ubiquity of sexually explicit content belies the number of people who are regularly having sex? The perpetuation of this myth perhaps exacerbating an increasing sense of frustration particularly among men who are biologically predisposed to have a higher sexual drive than their female counterparts. Whatever the particular cause, the fact of this demonstratively male perspective remains as it relates to images of women. Evidence of this exists in the pointed eroticism of pornogrpahic magazines where the female subject often looks directly into the camera as if to invite the viewer (who is assumed to be male) to have access to her body. These visual characterizations seem to misprioritize and obscure the inherent human complexity that all women possess by reducing them to simply sexual objects that exist primarily to gratify men. As a result gender relations have become confused as it is clear that any relationship between human beings must include recognition of a partners inherent human depth and complexity. This issue permeates all world cultures and must ultimately be resolved if we are to engage in the meaningful relationships that we all strive to realize in our own lives.
Additional to Berger’s assertions Bell Hook’s writes eloquently about gender normative conditioning as it relates to her childhood specifically and as it relates to society as a whole. She tells a deeply felt story relating to an instance of corporal domestic violence that related to her expression of more masculine personality traits within the context of her family. The objective being to discourage her from an identity that would defy patriarchal behavioral norms. Patriarchy being a societal structure that is founded by men and adheres to their specific ideas and perspectives. Hook’s posits that America is an example of a “White Supremacist Capitalist Patriarchy” as it is this specific group who exert control and express authority. These characterizations could conceivably apply to any hierarchical institution that exists within the context of a patriarchal society, including but not limited to corporations, schools, hospitals, and otherwise. Ultimately the most important distinction made within the assertion of the patriarchal theory lay in Hooks distinction between “masculinity” and “patriarchal masculinity” as she warned of the problem of confusing the two, saying “The crisis facing men is not the crisis of masculinity, it is the crisis of patriarchal masculinity”. This was a valuable delineation and really does well to salvage her rhetorical position as at least a remote possibility, given the fact that she is not advocating war against an entire gender who are at least partly responsible for the procreative process and the continuation of our existence as a species.
-Milan Robinson
Works Cited
Berger, John. Ways of Seeing: Based on the BBC Television Series with John Berger. British Broadcasting Corp., 2012.
Hooks, Bell. The Will To Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. Simon & Schuster, 2004.
No comments:
Post a Comment