To define the male gaze is not all that difficult, however
the why, and how it is accomplished and how it has evolved is interesting at
the very least. The first thing one must understand in the nature of human psychology,
and how humans process information. The simple act of looking has connotations
of challenging the unknown, and conquering it as understanding occurs, even if
flawed. Animals use looks as well to assert themselves, and often physical
confrontations are avoided, only using looks.
So it is no surprise to see that man has developed similar
practices regarding viewing, as a sign of dominance. However, as society
evolved from a hunter mentality, to an agrarian culture, then later to
feudalism and so on, this dominance was no longer backed on primal factors,
such as strength, aggression, but rather status, wealth, position, all of which
that do not have a primordial response associated with them.
In Chadwicks book “Women Art and Society” she poses that
religion plays a key role in patriarchy (p 44). Religion and more the church,
plays the role in instilling a new fear, one that transcends primordial fears,
where physical strength, aggression become less important. This allows the gaze
to no longer be backed by a certain risk of violence through confrontation.
So now, as in the feudal era, we have power of the nobles
over their subjects, and power of subjects over the women in their lives. These
through religion become unquestioned, and more importantly unchallenged.
How do the pictures above affect you. You can sense an immediate
response, and while looking at the young man in the photo, you may have fear,
but you may also have doubts whether or not he may be successful in a direct
confrontation. Now think that with the wolf. It may seem sily, but the idea is
that the gaze is backed by the certainty of a response, including a violent
one.
As far as the oppositional gaze, it was a matter of time
until the, at the time current male gaze, was challenged, even if under veil,
since physical strength no longer became the dominant factor in conveying a
message. The Guerilla Girls mention in “Bedside
Companion to the History of Western Art” (p25) how Hildegard Von Bingen started
to “upset” the church, resulting in her ultimate confinement in house arrest
for her ideas, conflicting with the church’s message of female subservience.
It may have been silenced at the time, but this and so many
other messages eventually do make their way to their intended targets,
regardless of how some groups try to prevent it, just to maintain a status quo
of allowing them to be in control, veiling their lack of strength for a divine
right look and own
You did a very good job at including the pictures you did. The picture of the wolf is very potent, and it really helps bring your point across. His gaze is one that we would not want to meet upon. Consequently, no one wants to be gazed at in that manner. It's a great illustration of what we would imagine an oppositional gaze to be like. An angry black woman would not have a gentle look, she'd have a rebellious angry one, like the wolf.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the comment above, wonderful job, not too long, straight to the point, just like I like it...hahaha. I did like the comparison in the intro the an animals' glare/look. I also liked how you used to pictures to your benefit and further explained the oppositional and male gaze.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Im new to this online thing, but im learning. Still, i always feel that i have to push the less taken approach. And sometimes we forget about certain aspects, like how anyone can have the "male" gaze. Of course some would like to keep some groups to NOT have it. Being male alone hasnt been enough to have this gaze. Just think of the peasants back in feudalism. They could NOT look at a woman that was of noble blood, regardless of his skin color. So the oppositional gaze cane be had by the male too...go figure.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that instead of really talking about how the male gaze is in relation to women and how they are perceived, you took it to a new level of taking it out of its element. The idea that you included fear and dominance still gets its point across but in new contents. I find that this was a very effective way of describing your understanding of the readings from Berger.
ReplyDeleteIn a lot of the posts people (including myself) have pointed a finger toward the bible as a reason the male gaze exists. I'm not sure if I'm completely missing the point but your post seems to imply that it predates the bible and that it is inherent in humans as instinct. Now I question whether the male gaze can be dealt with at all.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting how you incorporated the two complementary images and engage the viewers into your blog post by asking how they feel about the images. A gaze is a very powerful statement, and with your images, I feel like it really sends that message home.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with Hildegard Von Bingen being an example of oppositional gaze. Guerilla Girls(p25) says that she was put under house arrest because of her "independent ideas" but not that these ideas went against male dominance. Chadwick (page 59) clearly states that Hildegard was able to express herself only because she was a mystic; her word was not her own but of God. By being just a vessel this did not challenge the view of women instead it added to the Churches ability to deny power to women. "Hildegard did not challenge the Church's view on the subjection of women". Instead of rebelling against the male gaze Hildegard goes along with it and is even rewarded by getting the pope's approval and blessing. Hildegard's case how a woman derived reward by going along with the male gaze.
ReplyDeleteI like how you made the comparison to animals and how they use certain looks to make statements. All in all the human being is just an animal with knowledge of the spirit and what differentiates us is how closer to that side of us we are. Great write up.
ReplyDelete