Far From Heaven: Identity and Gender Issues

Pamela Chan

CTCS 412 Blog (Week 4)

As a filmmaker, Todd Haynes has been known to express the theoretical gap that feminist scholars filled for him as a young queer artist and a student. His critical approaches to feminism and gender issues have been present in most, if not all, of his critically acclaimed films, and are, unsurprisingly seen vividly in Far From Heaven.

All throughout the film, I couldn’t help but think about how Haynes’ melodrama powerfully visualizes and narrates many of the questions that Judith Butler’s theories of performativity have raised about the complex standards of socially constructed gender roles.

            The period piece displays the repressive and conformist character of the fifties-era. In a sense, the film juxtaposes the impossibilities of consummating an interracial romance to the seemingly impossible step of taking on a homosexual identity. For Cathy and Frank Whitaker, their social circle of whiteness, wealth, and heterosexuality are an implicit norm. Both, however, struggle with taboo desires that ultimately threaten their place within this privileged social structure. Through Cathy’s desire for Raymond and Frank’s own desire for men, Haynes introduces the twin themes of interracial romance and homosexuality in an era where these kinds of issues were considered truly deviant and extremely dangerous.

            With her work, Butler seems to argue that gender roles are performative identities created as a result of “compulsory performance.” She defines gender as “a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory frame,” that over time, seem to “produce the appearance of a substance, of a natural sort of being.” In this sense, the daily ‘performance’ each individual offers for society further establishes the deeply patriarchal ideals that continue to taint our understanding of gender and sexuality. Basically Butler reminds us that identity is something we demonstrate and act out—a sort of ‘performance’ we put on.

            A drunken Frank, for example, makes light of Cathy’s beauty, insisting, “It’s all smoke and mirrors.” Cathy replies with “Every girl has her secrets,” and this specific cocktail party exchange seems to further the ideas of appearance and performance within Haynes’ film. As a melodrama conceived in the feminist mode, Far From Heaven seems to be all about “smoke and mirrors.” Oppression and repression are concealed by the superficial-- the inner desires of both husband and wife are continuously suppressed by their consistent attempts to achieve a normal appearance. However, because of the world that surrounds them, both Cathy and Frank begin to encounter unwanted challenges regarding aspects of their own essential identities.

             Furthermore, society has invested much effort in keeping women confined within their respective roles—and Haynes poignantly displays Cathy’s position as a woman within a patriarchal society throughout the entire film. Being the embodiment of pure suburban domesticity, Cathy has nowhere to go and no way to escape once it becomes evident that the ideal she represents is all a sham. As a woman, she is the typical subject of judgment, and Haynes carefully portrays Cathy’s feelings of inadequacy and marginality within the world around her. For example, while with Raymond at a modern art show, she is not only stared at by the other women, but also by her neighbor’s gay uncles. At the African-American bar, the black people inside stare similarly at Cathy, and I believe this highlights on the often-contemptuous role held by the female sex.

          All in all, it was just really interesting to see how Haynes approached his 2002 award-winning film through such a unique frame of feminist film theory.

Authorship and "Blue is the Warmest Colour"

I've recently been wondering about the relationship between authorship and viewership in the way that we interpret feminist (and non-feminist) texts. I'm interested in whether a text can escape and/or transcend the design and intention of its maker(s). I briefly discussed this with our professor in the context of our exploration of pleasure in feminist cinema in relation to the recent Cannes Film Festival Palme D'or winner, "Blue is the Warmest Colour." The French film concerns the blossoming of two young adults' lesbian romance, and includes explicit depictions of female sexuality. It is based on a graphic novel by lesbian feminist writer, Julie Maroh. The film, however, is directed by a Tunisian-French man, Abdellatif Kechiche. "Blue is the Warmest Colour," the film, has been widely praised for its willingness to display desire not coded for cis-gendered heterosexual males, and yet it has also been accused of being voyeuristic in its prolonged sex scenes and lacking of a true lesbian perspective by none other than the original author herself. I've not yet seen the film myself, so I will reserve judgement, but I believe that there is some truth to the idea of an authenticity of experience that a presumably hetero-male couldn't quite show. I say all of this to say that there will be a free screening of "Blue is the Warmest Colour" on our campus at 7pm on Wednesday October 16. I've linked our SCA website's event page where you can RSVP if you're interested in attending. I've also linked an interview that Julie Maroh recently gave in which she discusses her identity as a feminist and as a queer person, and what she hopes to accomplish with her art.

http://cinema.usc.edu/events/event.cfm?id=13732

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/21/blue_is_the_warmest_color_author_im_a_feminist_but_it_doesnt_make_me_an_activist/singleton/

Far From Heaven

"Far From Heaven" was a very interesting film, particularly in terms of the subject of gender roles. Due to the preceding lecture, I found myself asking whether or not the portrayal of women was progressive. Cathy is the perfect wife and mother. She stays at the house throughout the day and welcomes home her working husband at night. When her perfect life hits a bump in the road and she finds her husband cheating on her with a man, everything is shaken up. She goes to therapy to try to turn him around and bring things back to the way they were, but it's hard to tell if this act is solely because she longs for his love again, of if she cares primarily about her reputation. When she throws the party at their house, she tries to paint a picture of the ideal American family and is clearly thrilled to receive compliments about what a perfect couple she and her husband are. Based on all of this criteria, the film is far from progressive. It simply displays a female doing a "woman's" job and then attempting to cover up her imperfections. On the contrary, the plot point with her African American gardener is definitely progressive. Here, Cathy stands up for what she believes in and doesn't conform to the differing opinions of those around her. However, this, too, turns around when the public finds out a bit more than Cathy wished, and she cuts Raymond out of her life until the end, when she is lost and alone and decides she wants him again. Because of all of the film's many layers and twists and turns, I would almost say that the portrayal of women is ambiguous, but when it all comes down to it, I really do think that Cathy is a stereotype and that nothing about her, in the end, is at all powerful.

Feminist approach and victimzed men

In “Women and representation: Can we enjoy alternative pleasure” Gaines examines the gaps between feminist approach in terms of suggesting a new relation of the gaze on screen and the pleasure of women- spectators. As Gaines points out, feminist film theory in an attempt to struggle for the equality of the sexual representation in mainstream cinema and television suggests an alternative representation of woman; rather than being represented as “to-be-looked-at” object, women should be the subject of the gaze. While film feminists have intellectually pursued the “correct” formula for film practice, it is the fact that women – averaged spectators- enjoy the traditional representation of themselves and are not ready for an alternative representation because the former has brought them pleasure. Therefore, Gaines concludes “the “correct’ formula for alternative feminist film practice, the rearrangement of the “relation of looking,” and the rejection of closure offer feminists a rather tight-lipped satisfaction.”

Gaines’s work productively engages with Negra and Tasker’s article, Neoliberal frames and genres of inequality. Their focus in this article is on the gender representations in the two sub-genre, recession – era chick flicks and male-centred corporate melodrama. In these genres, men are usually represented as victims; they are in economic and emotional crisis and ask women around them for help. The images of victimized men can be found in the two shows that we watched in class -  Ray in Hung and the nurse’s boyfriend in Parks and Recreation. Their redundancies are comically exploited in the favor of feminist senses. While enjoying the feminist quality in the representation of men as victims in these shows, I cannot help thinking that women like the poet and Ray’s wife in Hung and the nurse and Leslie are also victims because they have to “forced” to be heroes for men. To understand my feel, it might be helpful to turn to Gaines’ point: as a female spectator, I am not ready for the subversion of the representation of women; so I did not have the “pleasure” in its true sense when watching the shows.

I completely agree with the user Sashastock, in that there are double standards within gender. If the protagonist in "hung" was a women, she would automatically be criticized and be lost respect as most people tend to feel toward women prostitutes. However, because Ray is a male and given his struggling situation, viewers do not view him in a negative light and instead even support him and feel sort of bad for him. Also within society, it is common for men to get with a lot of women which is something men tend to boast and praise, so when we think of Ray going to meet with different women, viewers see this as something not completely out of the norm. Showing a male instead of a female turning to prostitution in a time of need, was something not depicted widely within media before. This was something no one really even considered because it would be going against the masculinity and nature of a man, but because there is less knowledge about men in this industry, it is so fascinating and completely absurd that us viewers find it humorous. the writers took an idea that broke societal and social norms to be seen as a funny thing to those first experiencing something of this sort. In addition, however, Tanya, on of the leading female characters within this show, is depicted as a sexually driven individual who would be willing to fall at the feet of a man at any given moment. This shows the double standards, in that Ray, who could be considered as even worse than Tanya, is not viewed down or negatively upon but instead are intrigued.

It’s All About the Representation.

Ting Ting Liu

Over the past three weeks, a lot of materials were given to us: we watched “Orlando”, talked about recent news regarding Miley Cyrus and Robin Thicke, read a couple of readings on Feminism, and watched an episode of Parks and Recreation, The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, and Hung.  

And the way I’m understanding all of this is through the Representation of everything; so here’s my two cents about all these different subjects:

1) Everyone had different reactions to Miley Cyrus and Robin Thicke’s performance at the VMAs - some were shocked, some were disgusted. People can say “Let Miley do whatever she wants”, and I agree. Yes, Miley should have the freedom to do whatever she wants with her life, she has the freedom of expression, if she wants to represent herself with twerking than that’s good for her. However, I am a little bit sick and tired of the amount of attention and fame we’re giving to Miley Cyrus and Robin Thicke for this incident. Yes, it is an incident that needed to be addressed, but not by doing a mass media coverage over it. Maybe in my eyes I just have been noticing the media do an excessive amount of coverage on the royal family’s new born baby and 20-year-olds twerking than other important news. I honestly cannot condone the way Cyrus and Thicke were representing themselves, it just isn't appropriate when you have young fans watching and imitating you.

2) With the film “Orlando”, this movie was presenting a lot of different references and themes on Feminism. However, the key representation I understood from the film “Orlando” is with a line that actress Tilda Swinton said as she transformed from Lord Orlando to Lady Orlando, “Same person. No different at all. Just a different sex.” Swinton’s character was representing that technically we are all the same human beings, the only difference between us (males and females) is just our biological sex. However, because of the way our society has progressed, we have assigned our biological sexes genders, and gender roles. Thus, the representation we get from the film “Orlando” is that because of our assigned genders and gender roles it has created limitations and restrictions on both sexes. Immediately when Lord Orlando was transformed to Lady Orlando, she was treated much differently. When she was Lady Orlando, two men told her that first of all, she was technically "dead" so she can't own any properties and that second of all, she is now technically a "woman" thus she really cannot stay and own these properties. The man right after that pointed out that the two (being "dead" and being a "woman") were practically "the same thing".

3) The latest three episodes we watched: Parks and Recreation, The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, and Hung, all had representations of stereotypes being depicted in our society for different gender and their gender roles. Parks and Recreation, although witty and hilarious, had many 'stereotypical' characters in this pilot episode (I have never seen Parks and Recration before this). The Adventure of Ozzie and Harriet is a 1952 TV show, and gender roles back then were very set on what a male does and what a female does- males are the bread-winners, females stay at home and take care of the children and house chores; and that is what was shown on the episode. Even in Hung, both Tanya and Ray play modern stereotypes of genders/gender roles. 

4) Lastly, Jane Gaines’ paper, “Women and Representation: Can we Enjoy Alternative Pleasures?”, discusses about how films and filmmakers are setting representations of women. At one point Gaines talks about a limitation of feminist film criticism, which is the lack of diversity of women. She mentions that “Black women filmmakers…have as a whole chosen not to produce any media work that diverges from standard formats and calls attention to its own formal devices”(Gaines, 82). This gives the representation that filmmakers do not feel comfortable or feel powerful enough to abstain from the mainstream traditional ways. And from this, it's clear that Gaines does not want this representation of women to remain the same. 

"Hung" and The End of Men

            After reading Gilligan’s “It’s the End of Men. Again,” my mind immediately turned to Hung and its characterization of the down-on-his-luck male in the recessionary era. While Ray did not outright lose his job, he has fallen on hard times and a series of unfortunate events, most notably his house burning down, has left him living in a tent in his backyard, seeking financial stability. Like Gilligan suggests, Ray losing his finances is equivalent to losing his manhood. His kids move back in with their mom and he can’t even spare 50 dollars for his son to go to a concert. He stoops as low as asking his ex-wife for money, placing the female in the more dominant, financially stable role. This is a prime example of Gilligan’s idea of a “female takeover of the male role” when the end of men is framed.   

Additionally, Tanya is given very feminist qualities. She always holds a very positive attitude and believes that she can make something of herself with her idea of lyric bread. She was also very quick to defend herself when Ray accused her of sleeping around. Most importantly, the fact that Tanya wants to be Ray’s pimp proves that she is not just the female, friends-with-benefits character. She is going to play a crucial role in Rays new “job” and will essentially help him get clients.

While there are many feminist qualities to the show, I can’t help but watch Hung and feel as though there is a waft of anti-feminism to it as well. While Ray’s job as a prostitute strips him of his male qualities and can be seen as making him more sympathetic to women, it can also be seen as reinforcing sexual power dynamics. If Ray were a woman, he would most likely be judged for being an escort ten times more than he is now as a man. As the previous poster pointed out, women are very often considered sluts for sleeping around while men high five each other. Ultimately, Hung could be seen as expressing the idea that men can get away with more than women.