Gender, Sex, and Power in the Postfeminist Romantic Comedy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
GENDER, SEX, AND POWER IN THE POSTFEMINIST ROMANTIC COMEDY Chloe Sarah Angyal A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of New South Wales School of the Arts and Media Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences June 2014 ORIGINALITY STATEMENT 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Originality statement 1 Contents 2 Abstract 4 Dedication and acknowledgments 5 Preface 7 Introduction 10 Postfeminism: a conceptual framework 10 Postfeminism as contested terrain 11 Alternatives to postfeminism: neo-feminism 15 Selecting a conceptual framework for this thesis 18 Postfeminism and neoliberalism 24 Postfeminism and irony 33 Locating the postfeminist cycle on postfeminist popular culture 36 Interdisciplinary approach 43 Analytical approach: on the exclusion of reception studies 45 Research questions 48 Chapter outlines 49 Chapter 1: Literature review 51 Defining romantic comedy: generic boundaries, subplots, and cycles 51 Extant analyses of romantic comedies 67 Conclusion Chapter 2: Methodology 69 Implementing multiple research methods 70 Representative sample selection 72 Representative sample of Hollywood romantic comedies, 2005-2011 77 Narrative textual analysis 77 Case study 80 Conclusion 90 Chapter 3: The postfeminist cycle in generic context 91 The screwball cycle 91 The neo-traditional cycle 104 Case Study 1: The Ugly Truth 112 Plot summary 112 The Ugly Truth in generic context 113 The Ugly Truth in extra-cinematic context 124 The Ugly Truth as postfeminist narrative 129 Conclusion 137 Case Study 2: Forgetting Sarah Marshall 140 Plot summary 141 Male nudity in the postfeminist romantic comedy 142 From chick flicks to dick flicks: the rise of the romantic comedy “for boys” 150 Forgetting Sarah Marshall in extra- cinematic context 157 Forgetting Sarah Marshall as postfeminist narrative 162 3 Conclusion 173 Case Study 3: Friends With Benefits 175 Plot summary 176 Friends With Benefits in generic context 177 Friends With Benefits in extra-cinematic context: “hook up culture” 183 Friends With Benefits as postfeminist narrative 195 Conclusion 207 Conclusion 209 Bibliography 221 Filmography 234 4 ABSTRACT This thesis argues that the Hollywood romantic comedies released between 2005 and 2011 constitute a new cycle in the genre, the postfeminist cycle, in which feminism is “‘taken into account’ but only to be shown to be no longer necessary” (McRobbie 2004, p. 255). Drawing on accounts and analyses of postfeminism by McRobbie (2004, 2009) and Gill (2007), and on applications of these analyses to popular culture by Negra (2004, 2008, 2009) and Tasker and Negra (2007), I argue that the romantic comedies released during this period represent gender, sex, and power in a manner consistent with – and informed by – postfeminist approaches to these themes. I do this by conducting close readings (case studies) of three films, selected from a representative sample of thirty, and examining how these three films screen postfeminist ideas about gender (Forgetting Sarah Marshall [Stoller 2008]), sex (Friends With Benefits [Gluck 2011]), and power (The Ugly Truth [Luketic 2009]). Following analyses of the Hollywood romantic comedy by Jeffers McDonald (2007) and Grindon (2011), I demonstrate how these movies form a new and heretofore minimally examined cycle which is shaped not only by what Gill (2007) terms the “postfeminist sensibility” in the United States, but by the history of the genre, that is, in response to previous cycles. In each of the three case studies in this thesis, I place the films in question in generic context, and in extra-cinematic context, demonstrating how the films are informed by – and in turn contribute to – larger cultural discourses about: the effect of feminism on masculinity (Forgetting Sarah Marshall), “hook up culture” (Friends With Benefits), and women’s professional authority and economic independence (The Ugly Truth). Taken together, I conclude, these three films demonstrate that the Hollywood romantic comedy has become yet another popular culture site in which postfeminist ideas are represented, and I consider the political and cultural ramifications of the entrenchment of these ideas in the sole movie genre that is made primarily for and about women. 5 DEDICATION Usually, when I don’t immediately succeed at something, I give up. Failure terrifies me. My sister isn’t like that. When she doesn’t immediately succeed at something, she just keeps working at it until she masters it. The process of writing a dissertation involves no immediate success, and an awful lot of failure – and the temptation to give up was, at times, enormous. In those moments, I tried to be more like my big sister, who isn’t afraid of failure, or hard work, or anything except insects of every kind. I love you, Claire Brooksley. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I feel inexpressible gratitude to my mother, whose ears surely burned every time I threw up my hands and cried, “Whose lunatic idea was this?” I have no idea how she wrote a dissertation while holding down a full-time job and raising two kids, but the fact that she did makes me very proud to be her daughter. To my father, who believes in quality popular culture, the importance of writing well, and me, I feel similarly endless gratitude. Dad, you still give the best hugs. I am filled with admiration and affection for my grandmother, who inspires me (and everyone she meets), and whose matter-of-fact form of cheerleading – “You’ll figure out what needs to be done, and you’ll do it” – was often exactly what I needed. How fortunate I am to have all three of you tell me, frankly and regularly, that you’re proud of me. The feeling is entirely mutual. I’m indebted to my original supervisor Catharine Lumby, my would-be supervisor Fiona Giles, and to David McKnight, Sarah Maddison, and Emma Jane for their helpful guidance throughout this process. My sincere thanks go to Kath Albury, for her judicious feedback and invaluable insights about male nudity. Thanks also to Viviana Zelizer, a remarkable mentor, who saw me through the thesis experience the first two times I attempted it, and to Rachael Ferguson and Betsy Armstrong, who inspired me as an undergraduate and have been cheering me on ever since I left the comfortable orange and black cocoon of Princeton. As for my wonderfully patient and encouraging supervisor Jane Mills, who guided me through this process with more wisdom, kindness, and good humour than a doctoral student has any right to expect: “Thanks” doesn’t even begin to describe what I owe you. Would you like my first born male child? Thanks to my transcontinental surrogate parents, Michael Kimmel and Amy Aronson (of the Department of Answering Anxious Phone Calls and Sending Reassuring Feedback on Drafts) and Ellen Gesmer (of the Sanguine Pep Talks and Homemade Baked Goods Division). You can’t pick your biological parents, but my hand-selected surrogate ones are top-notch. A million thanks to my amazing friends, family, and colleagues on four continents, those wonderful souls who hugged me, held me up, and helped me over the finish line. In alphabetical order: Lori Adelman, Adam Alter, Eleni Azarias, Court Baxter, Gwendolyn Beetham, Anna Bialek, Nancy Bloom, Molly Borowitz, Anthea Butler, Francesca Butler, Elizabeth Cruikshank, Cécile Dehesdin, Erica Duke Forsyth, Maya Dusenbery, Nina Funnell, Nancy Goldstein, Jess Grody, Arianna Haut, Judith Haut, Rachel Hills, Lovell Holder, Reilly Kiernan, Jordan Kisner, Osei Kwakye, Kate Landdeck, Anna Louie Sussman, Courtney Martin, Lucy Martin, Ruth McColl, Samhita Mukhopadyay, Katie Orenstein, Charlotte Pudlowski, Sue Rae, Lauren Rankin, Daniel Rauch, Steve Real, Anna Reoch, Pamela Scully, Dhwani Shah, Georgina Sherrington, Jamil Smith, Sandra Thomas, Jos Truitt, Vanessa Valenti, Spencer 6 Walle, Jon Weed, and Whitney Williams. Thank you to everyone who read drafts, and picked up the slack for me when I needed to take time off from work, answered my panicked middle-of-the-night emails and calls, and most valiantly of all, tolerated my ruining all their favourite rom coms with my endless editorializing. To the three men who, at various points in this process, shared their lives and their hearts with me: would that more rom com heroes were like you. Thank you for your patience, your kindness, and your unflinching confidence in me. Finally, I was most fortunate and very grateful indeed to receive funding for this research in the form of an Australian Postgraduate Award (APA) from 2011 until 2014. 7 PREFACE “If you want to win a man over, it’s called a blow job. And don’t forget to swallow.” – The Ugly Truth (Luketic 2009). So says Mike, the blustering, misogynistic relationship advisor played by Gerard Butler in The Ugly Truth. Mike is the host of a one-man low-budget television show, where he dispenses wisdom about men, women, relationships, love, and sex. “Men are simple. We cannot be trained,” he says, addressing his women viewers. “If you want to be a lonely hag, keep reading those [self-help] books. But if you want a relationship, it’s called a Stairmaster. Get on it and get skinny.” By the end of The Ugly Truth, the heroine, Abby (Katherine Heigl), a driven, uptight, and unlucky-in-love career woman, has discovered that Mike – though his advice on winning a man’s attention does prove accurate – is secretly a lovely man, who doesn’t really believe most of what he tells his viewers, and she has fallen in love with him. The Ugly Truth was poorly received by many feminist commentators online (The Feminist Texican 2009, Unapologetically Female 2009). “This is a movie for women who hate women,” wrote Sady Doyle, a columnist for the website of The Guardian (2009). In 2010, the year after The Ugly Truth was released, I embarked on a year-long writing project at Feministing.com, the feminist blog where I was at the time a contributor and am now Senior Editor.