Linda Williams, 'Film Bodies: Gender, Genre and Excess'
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Film Bodies: Gender, Genre, and Excess Author(s): Linda Williams Source: Film Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Summer, 1991), pp. 2-13 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1212758 Accessed: 21/11/2010 21:23 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Film Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org Contributors Linda Williams in this issue RichardAbel, author of two distin- Film Bodies: Gender, guished works on French film and theory, teaches at Drake University. CarolynAnderson teaches at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. EdwardD. Castillois a CaliforniaCahuilla Indian and chair of Native American Studies at Sonoma State University. son and I Darius Cooper teaches at San Diego When my seven-year-old go Mesa College. to the movies we often select from among cate- David Desser, our Book Review Editor, gories of films that promise to be sensational, to teaches at the University of Illinois, give our bodies an actual physical jolt. He calls Urbana. these movies "gross." My son and I agree that the John Fell, of our editorial board, is the authorof Film and the Narrative fun of "gross" movies is in their display of sensa- Tradition(UC Press). tions that are on the edge of respectable. Where we Dan Greenbergteaches in Michigan and disagree-and where we as a culture often disagree, keeps a sharp eye on the film reference along lines of gender, age, or sexual orientation-is book field. in which movies are over the edge, too "gross." To RobertP. Kolkeris the authorof A son the "gross" movies are those with Cinemaof Loneliness. my good monsters like the Sarah Kozloff wrote Invisible scary Freddy Krueger (of Night- Storytellers: Voice-OverNarration in mare on Elm Street series) who rip apart teenagers, American Feature Film (UC Press). especially teenage girls. These movies both fasci- George Lellisteaches at Coker College, nate and scare him; he is actually more interested Hartsville, SC. in talking about than seeing them. L. Neibauris a film historian. James A second category, one that I like and my son at State Leland Poague teaches Iowa doesn't, are sad movies that make you cry. These University, Ames. are gross in their focus on unseemly emotions that Dana Polan, editor of Cinema Journal, teaches at the University of Pittsburgh. may remind him too acutely of his own powerless- LeonardQuart is the co-authorof ness as a child. A third category, of both intense in- American Film and Society Since 1945. terest and disgust to my son (he makes the puke MarkA. Reid teaches at the University sign when speaking of it), he can only describe eu- a book on of Florida and is finishing phemistically as "the 'K' word." K is for kissing. black film-making. To a seven-year-oldboy it is kissing preciselywhich Gregg Rickmanteaches at San Francisco State University. is obscene. AlanRosenthal is a film-makerand teaches There is no accounting for taste, especially in at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. the realm of the "gross." As a culture we most EdwardBaron Turk teaches at MITand often invoke the term to designate excesses we wish wrote Childof Paradise,on MarcelCarn6. to exclude; to say, for example, which of the Rob- WilliamC. Wees's Light Moving in ert Mapplethorpe photos we draw the line at, but Studies in the VisualAesthetics Time: not to what form and structure and function of Avant-GardeFilm will be published say early next year by the UC Press. operate within the representations deemed exces- LindaWilliams wrote Hard Core, and is sive. Because so much attention goes to determin- a member of our editorial board. ing where to draw the line, discussions of the gross Tony Williamsteaches at Southern are often a highly confused hodgepodge of differ- Illinois in Carbondale. University ent categories of excess. For example, pornography Don Willis is the author of several film deemed excessive for its vio- reference books. is today more often lence than for its sex, while horror films are exces- sive in their displacement of sex onto violence. In 2 what more nebulous category of melodrama has long been hampered by assumptions about the clas- sical nature of the dominant narrative to which Genre, and Excess melodrama and some individual genres have been opposed. Altman argues that Bordwell, Thomp- son, and Staiger, who locate the Classical Holly- wood Style in the linear, progressive form of the Hollywood narrative,cannot accommodate "melo- dramatic" attributeslike spectacle, episodic presen- tation, or dependence on coincidence except as contrast, melodramas are deemed excessive for limited exceptions or "play" within the dominant their gender- and sex-linked pathos, for their naked linear causality of the classical (Altman, 1988, 346). displays of emotion; Ann Douglas once referred to Altman writes: "Unmotivated events, rhythmic the genre of romance fiction as "soft-core emo- montage, highlighted parallelism, overlong spec- tional porn for women" (Douglas, 1980). tacles-these are the excesses in the classical nar- Alone or in combination, heavy doses of sex, rative system that alert us to the existence of a violence, and emotion are dismissed by one faction competing logic, a second voice." (345-6) Altman, or another as having no logic or reason for exis- whose own work on the movie musical has neces- tence beyond their power to excite. Gratuitous sex, sarily relied upon analyses of seemingly "exces- gratuitous violence and terror, gratuitous emotion sive" spectacles and parallel constructions, thus are frequent epithets hurled at the phenomenon of makes a strong case for the need to recognize the the "sensational" in pornography, horror, and possibility that excess may itself be organized as a melodrama. This essay explores the notion that system (347). Yet analyses of systems of excess have there may be some value in thinking about the been much slower to emerge in the genres whose form, function, and system of seemingly gratuitous non-linear spectacles have centered more directly excesses in these three genres. For if, as it seems, upon the gross display of the human body. Pornog- sex, violence, and emotion are fundamental ele- raphy and horror films are two such systems of ex- ments of the sensational effects of these three types cess. Pornography is the lowest in cultural esteem, of films, the designation "gratuitous" is itself gra- gross-out horror is next to lowest. tuitous. My hope, therefore, is that by thinking Melodrama, however, refers to a much broader comparatively about all three "gross" and sensa- category of films and a much larger system of ex- tional film body genres we might be able to get cess. It would not be unreasonable, in fact, to con- beyond the mere fact of sensation to explore its sys- sider all three of these genres under the extended tem and structure as well as its effect on the bod- rubric of melodrama, considered as a filmic mode ies of spectators. of stylistic and/or emotional excess that stands in contrast to more "dominant" Body Genres modes of realistic, goal-oriented narrative. In this extended sense The repetitive formulas and spectacles of melodrama can encompass a broad range of films film genres are often defined by their differences marked by "lapses" in realism, by "excesses" of from the classical realist style of narrative cinema. spectacle and displays of primal, even infantile These classical films have been characterized as ef- emotions, and by narratives that seem circular and ficient action-centered, goal-oriented linear narra- repetitive. Much of the interest of melodrama to tives driven the desire of by a single protagonist, film scholars over the last fifteen years originates one or involving two lines of action, and leading to in the sense that the form exceeds the normative definitive closure. In their influential study of the system of much narrative cinema. I shall limit my Classical Hollywood Cinema, Bordwell, Thomp- focus here, however, to a more narrow sense of son, and call this the Staiger Classical Hollywood melodrama, leaving the broader category of the style (1985). sensational to encompass the three genres I wish to As Rick Altman has noted in a recent article consider. Thus, partly for purposes of contrast with (1989), both genre study and the study of the some- pornography, the melodrama I will consider here 3 will consist of the form that has most interested sive women, and with contemporarygross-out hor- feminist critics-that of "the woman's film" or ror aimed at adolescents careening wildly between "weepie." These are films addressed to women in the two masculine and feminine poles, in each of their traditional status under patriarchy-as wives, these genres the bodies of women figured on the mothers, abandoned lovers, or in their traditional screen have functioned traditionally as the primary status as bodily hysteria or excess, as in the fre- embodiments of pleasure, fear, and pain.