Deconstructing the Male Gaze: Masochism, Female Spectatorship, and the Femme Fatale in , Body of Evidence, and Basic Instinct By Miranda Sherwin

AlexAlex FForrestorrest (Glenn()Close) meetsmeets herher lover,lover, DanDan GallagherGallagher (Michael(),Douglas), Alex Forrest (Glenn Close) attacks Dan Gallagher aandnd hhisis wwife,ife, BBetheth ((AnneAnne AArcher)rcher) inin FatalFatal Attraction.Attraction. (Michael Douglas), in Fatal Attraction.

Abstract: Fatal Attraction, Basic Instinct, wife. In Basic Instinct (1992), Nick Cur- ogy that posited masochism as a central and Body of Evidence are three films that ran (Michael Douglas) willingly places mechanism of spectatorial viewing for forge a connection between the cinemat- himself in the same position as the vic- women. Female spectatorship was theo- ic femme fatale genre and an imagistic tim of a sex crime, allowing himself to rized in light of assumptions about the and narrative focus on masochism. The be tied up and seduced by the woman primacy of the male gaze and of a per- author argues that the foregrounding he believes to be the murderer, and later ception of masochism that stressed vic- of masochistic desire acts to compli- calls the experience “the fuck of the cen- timization and passivity. Thanks in large cate our understanding of the male gaze tury.” In Body of Evidence (1993), Frank part to queer theory, however, there has and female spectatorial pleasure; thus, Dulaney () discovers that been a reevaluation of this model. Revis- these films present a serious challenge to he finds it sexually pleasurable to have iting and challenging long-held assump- inherited theories of spectatorship. hot candle wax poured on his genitals. tions about sadomasochistic desire and Together, these three films forge a con- power dynamics, recent queer theory Keywords: feminist film theory, femme nection between the cinematic femme has proposed a more nuanced model that fatale, the male gaze, masochism fatale genre and an imagistic and narra- emphasizes strategy, control, and the tive focus on masochism. mutability of gender roles. Many femi- n Fatal Attraction (1987), Alex For- The past fifteen years of the twentieth nist and film scholars have contested the rest (Glenn Close) absentmindedly century saw a proliferation of films that, theory of the male gaze, but it has not Iand repeatedly slashes her own leg like these, foreground scenarios of mas- yet been examined within the framework before turning the knife on her lover’s ochism. Not coincidentally, film theory, of this different way of understanding especially as practiced in academia, was masochistic psychodynamics.1 Although Copyright © 20082006 Heldref Publications invested in a psychoanalytic methodol- film theory has in recent years moved 174 Deconstructing the Male Gaze 175

tle producer Lynda Obst (qtd. in Andrews spectators must either take a masochistic H22). Fatal Attraction tells the story of stance or adopt the male gaze, becoming Dan Gallagher, a happily married man spectatorial transvestites. who nevertheless has a brief affair with Fatal Attraction perfectly exempli- Deconstructing the Male Gaze: Forrest. Although Forrest assures him fies the filmic negotiation of castration that she is discreet, she refuses to leave anxiety that Mulvey asserts as central to Masochism, Female Spectatorship, and the Femme Fatale in Fatal Attraction, him alone when the weekend is over. He organizing spectatorial pleasure around ttriesries toto eraseerase herher fromfrom hishis life,life, butbut asas thethe thematically male psychoscenarios. Body of Evidence, and Basic Instinct By Miranda SherwinSherwin mmovieovie progresses,progresses, sheshe becomesbecomes increas-increas- She contends, “The male unconscious iinglyngly iintrusiventrusive aandnd tthreatening:hreatening: sshehe ccallsalls has two avenues of escape from this hhimim aatt wwork,ork, tturnsurns uupp aatt hhisis hhome,ome, ppoursours castration anxiety: preoccupation with aacidcid onon hishis car,car, cookscooks hishis daughter’sdaughter’s the re-enactment of the original trauma ppetet rabbit,rabbit, kidnapskidnaps hishis daughter,daughter, andand (investigating the woman, demystifying ffinallyinally triestries toto killkill hhisis wwife.ife. FForrestorrest iiss tthehe her mystery), counterbalanced by the qquintessentialuintessential femme fatale, the sexually devaluation, punishment or saving of the ddangerousangerous wwoman.oman. guilty object” (35). Forrest evokes the WWhathat makesmakes thisthis a “male“male myth,”myth,” pre-pre- fear of castration in Gallagher, but he is ssumably,umably, i iss t thehe c controlontrol t thathat t thehe m maleale able to investigate her and “demystify her pprotagonistrotagonist cancan exertexert overover thethe femme mystery.” He breaks into her apartment, ffataleatale and what she represents. In Laura looks through her medicine chest and her MMulvey’sulvey’s influentialinfluential essay,essay, “Visual“Visual scrapbook, and finally pronounces judg- PPleasureleasure a andnd N Narrativearrative C Cinema,”inema,” w whathat ment: she is “sick.” In fact, she is so sick wwomenomen representrepresent i iss s sexualexual d differenceifference that there is no possibility of “saving the iitself,tself, which,which, inin turn,turn, isis thethe principleprinciple guilty object”; instead, she is devalued aaroundround whichwhich spectatorshipspectatorship cancan bebe theo-theo- and punished, killed by his long-suffer- rrized.ized. AAccordingccording ttoo MMulvey,ulvey, ““Ultimately,Ultimately, ing wife, Beth (Anne Archer). tthehe mmeaningeaning ooff wwomanoman iiss ssexualexual ddiffer-iffer- This film appears to be quintessen- eence,nce, tthehe aabsencebsence ooff tthehe ppenisenis aass vvisuallyisually tially male: it narrates the male psy- aascertainable,scertainable, thethe materialmaterial evidenceevidence onon chodrama of the resolution of castra- wwhichhich i iss b basedased t thehe c castrationastration c complexomplex tion anxiety; it establishes identification eessentialssential fforor tthehe oorganizationrganization ooff eentrancentrance with the male protagonist, who controls ttoo thethe symbolicsymbolic orderorder andand thethe lawlaw ofof thethe events; and it objectifies and finally pun- ffather”ather” ( (35;35; s seeee a alsolso M Mulvey,ulvey, “ “After-After- ishes the woman who threatens him. The Alex Forrest (Glenn Close) meets her lover, Dan Gallagher (Michael Douglas), AlexAlex FForrestorrest (Glenn(Glenn Close)Close) attacksattacks DanDan GallagherGallagher tthoughts”).houghts”). InIn thisthis formulation,formulation, womenwomen attraction is, after all, fatal only to For- and his wife, Beth (Anne Archer) in Fatal Attraction. ((MichaelMichael DDouglas),ouglas), iinn FFatalatal Attraction.Attraction. oonn bothboth sidessides ofof thethe screenscreen becomebecome rest. Body of Evidence and Basic Instinct eelidedlided withwith absence.absence. AsAs filmicfilmic repre-repre- follow the same pattern, although the away from this primarily psychoanalytic sentations, women are the bearers of the “investigation” of the woman is situated focus toward a more historicized meth- bleeding wound of castration, the signi- within a legal discourse, as one male pro- odology, it is worth reexamining both fication of the lack of penis/phallus. As tagonist is a lawyer and the other a police the films that take masochism as their spectators, women are forced into either detective. In theory, then, there should be subject and the theories about masoch- passive masochistic identification with no female spectatorial position that is not istic spectatorship. This article, then, the female protagonist, always depicted masochistic; and indeed, Susan Faludi, undertakes a closer examination of these as the object of male desire, or into mas- arguing that Fatal Attraction is part of a theories and their manifestations in these culinized identification with the male backlash against women, depicts women three films. This exploration will com- protagonist and his controlling look. viewers as uncomfortably silent, voice- plicate notions of the male gaze and pas- In what has become one of the most less, while the men around them urge sive masochistic female spectatorship as quoted passages in feminist film theory, Gallagher to “[p]unch the bitch’s face in” well as open up new possibilities in the Mulvey argues, “In a world ordered by (112). Yet, a closer examination of these theorizing of male and female spectato- sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking films reveals narrative and cinematic rial pleasure. has been split between active/male and strategies that undermine male identifi- passive/female. The determining male cation and dislocate the male gaze. Deconstructing the Male Gaze gaze projects its fantasy onto the female Andrews’s review of Fatal Attraction “I’d love to find a film with a strong figure, which is styled accordingly” (33). illustrates this point: “Did this movie premise that isn’t as sexist as Fatal Because identification with the objecti- ever explain what was so great about the Attraction but that taps into a girl myth fied and controlled female protagonist Michael Douglas character? Yet a bril- as powerfully as that movie tapped into a must be painful and because the male liant, accomplished career woman went boy myth,” comments Sleepless in Seat- gaze is active and controlling, female stark raving mad and boiled a bunny just 176 JPF&T—Journal of Popular Film and Television because of her passion for him. Despite as the objects of desire. As Andrews course of the investigation, Curran, the the two strong women’s roles, this is a implies, Forrest’s obsession with Gal- detective in charge of the case, starts an man’s film” (H15). Andrews implies that lagher is inexplicable in light of what affair with her, despite his initial belief what makes this a “man’s film” is that it we know of his character, and closer that she is guilty. As the affair continues, is a vehicle for stroking the male ego— analysis reveals that it is not him that she he becomes convinced that Tramell is Douglas’s, in this case, and by extension, desires, per se: she wants, she says, “a innocent and that the real murderer is his the audience members’ who identify with little respect.” Over and over, Alex insists psychiatrist, Elizabeth Garner (Jeanne him. Douglas has a propensity to star that her behavior stems from a rebellion Tripplehorn), with whom both he and in films that cast him as the object of against his treatment of her, against his Tramell have had a sexual relationship. desire for a beautiful but deadly woman, attempt to erase her from his life. When The case hinges on which of the two but Douglas lacks whatever quality it is he berates her for showing up at his women became obsessed with the other that makes a star into a sex symbol. For apartment, she responds, “Well, what am after a one-night stand in college: if Gar- men, the titular attraction is facilitated by I supposed to do? You won’t answer my ner pursued and harassed Tramell, then the casting of Close in Fatal Attraction, calls; you change your number. I’m not Garner would be guilty, and vice versa. in Body of Evidence, and Sha- going to be ignored, Dan.” The object of Curran comes to believe Tramell’s ver- ron Stone in Basic Instinct; for women, her desire is not him so much as it is non- sion of the story—that Garner staged the the basic instinct when confronted by invisibility—a particularly appropriate murder to frame her—and thus, after his Douglas’s body of evidence is ambiva- desire for a female filmic subject often partner is stabbed to death in Garner’s lence. One can only conclude that hetero- defined through absence and lack. vicinity, he shoots her. sexual desire is not what the filmmakers In Body of Evidence, too, the object The film ends with Curran and Tra- are trying to evoke in women. One could of Rebecca Carlson’s desire is decep- mell in bed, discussing their future: he even argue that the casting choice of tive. Carlson (Madonna) is on trial for wants to “fuck like minks, raise rug rats, Douglas itself places heterosexual women the murder of her lover, a rich older and live happily ever after”; he believes in a masochistic position, in that their man who has left his considerable for- in her innocence and in her love for desire to desire will be thwarted. tune to her and whom she has alleg- him. But the film does not end with To some extent, then, the “boy myth” edly fornicated to death. During the trial, the words “happily ever after”; instead, that this and other femme fatale films she initiates an affair with her lawyer, the camera pans down from the bed to invoke is the myth that men are sexu- Dulaney, introducing him to masochistic reveal an ice pick. If Tramell is the real ally desirable to women. This reading practices; when his wife reads the signs murderer, then it becomes apparent that is suggested not only through the cast- of the affair on his body (he has been cut Garner was her real victim and that the ing of Douglas but also through these by glass and burned by wax), she throws retired rock star and Curran’s partner films’ plots. In Fatal Attraction, Galla- him out. Throughout the film, Dulaney were killed to frame Garner. Moreover, gher cheats on his wife without qualm, seems to inhabit a privileged space in in this new scenario, Curran is not the and the movie does little to suggest Carlson’s sex life: whereas her other object of Tramell’s desire so much as the that he is otherwise likable; in Body of lovers were all elderly multimillionaires tool by which she enacts her real desire: Evidence, Dulaney, too, cheats on his with bad hearts and thus potential vic- revenge against the woman who rejected wife. Moreover, in both Body of Evi- tims, he is young and healthy, with mid- her in college. Although it appears that dence and Basic Instinct, the male leads dle-income earnings. The assumption is, Tramell’s bisexuality has been converted only appear to be the objects of female then, Carlson’s desire for the others was into heterosexuality, her heterosexuality desire; as the stories unfold, the women “staged” to induce them to leave her their is a disguise concealing her lesbianism: use them to accomplish their own ends money, but that her desire for Dulaney is Garner was the object of her desire, not posing the question as to whether their “real.” It is only at the film’s denouement Curran or the rock star. Heterosexual- desire is “real” or “staged.” In fact, the that the audience discovers that even her ity functions in relation to lesbianism in narrative structure of these films sug- desire for Dulaney was staged: she was this film much as Joan Riviere argues gests that female heterosexual desire sleeping with him because she believed that femininity functions in relation to is always staged, that female desire is that his passion for her would positively masculinity: “Womanliness [. . .] could an “act” designed to deceive men. By affect his defense of her. Just as in Fatal be assumed and worn as a mask, both to extension, the cinema is the stage on Attraction, the male lead only appears to hide the possession of masculinity and to which female desire is simultaneously be sexually desirable to the female lead; avert the reprisals expected if she were constructed and revealed as constructed; here, Carlson’s “real” desire is for zeal- found to possess it” (213). The movie or, to use a more appropriate metaphor, ous legal representation. appears to foreground heterosexuality: the cinema is the screen on which the Basic Instinct offers a more radical Tramell seems to lose interest in her lover, illusion of female heterosexual desire is displacement of female desire. Catherine Roxy, as soon as a man—Curran—comes projected and exposed as both illusion Tramell (Stone) is, like Carlson, the sus- along, and Tramell’s affair with Garner is and projection. pect in a sex crime: a retired rock star, portrayed by both women as insignificant. These films do not deconstruct female her former lover, was fatally stabbed However, lesbian desire lies at the heart of desire so much as they deconstruct men with an ice pick during sex. During the the murder mystery, and heterosexuality Deconstructing the Male Gaze 177 is merely a mask that at once conceals and ed two women, Roxy and Hazel, who actually control events. In Fatal Attrac- enacts her true desire. have killed their entire families. When tion, Gallagher is rendered passive and In these films, the substitution of values Curran discovers Roxy’s bloody history, helpless in the face of Forrest’s terrorism such as visibility, money, power, lesbi- he asks what her motive had been and for much of the movie, and ultimately anism, and revenge for heterosexuality his partner, Gus, explains, “This young it is his wife who succeeds in killing provides the psychosexual backdrop from farmgirl got tired of all that attention her where he could not. In Body of which masochism will emerge as a fea- going to her little brothers, so she fixed Evidence, Dulaney is utterly deceived tured desire, in addition to narrativizing them. Just like old Hazel Dobkins fixed by Carlson; he appears to control the female polysexuality. As Luce Irigaray her whole family, except young Roxy courtroom drama, but she is manipulat- notes, male sexuality has traditionally here didn’t use a wedding present: she ing the evidence and the testimony from been defined monolithically, in relation to used Daddy’s razor.” This explanation is behind the scenes. Like Gallagher, he the penis, but female sexuality, “always interesting on several counts. First, Gus is unable to control her even after her at least double, goes further: it is plural” interprets Roxy’s killing as motivated by deception is exposed: instead, another (28; emphasis in original). Sexual plu- jealousy of her male siblings, invoking spurned lover shoots her. (Interestingly, rality, like the polysexuality depicted in a patriarchal family structure that favors she dies exactly as Alex does in Fatal femme fatale films, suggests that men and boys over girls. Second, the language that Attraction: sadistically, she is shot and heterosexual intercourse are not neces- he uses—”so she fixed them”—positions then drowned.) sary to fulfill female desire. According to the crime as, symbolically, a castra- Basic Instinct captures this dynamic Irigaray, man is dependent on an other for tion enacted by appropriating “Daddy’s most clearly. Curran never wavers from sexual satisfaction, while woman is auto- razor”; again, he constitutes her anger as his faith in his own abilities as an investi- erotic and therefore needs no one. This, directed against men, against the phallus. gator, and at the film’s close, he is secure in addition to castration anxiety, is what Finally, he reveals that Hazel, Tramell’s in his belief that he has solved the crime. woman represents for man: autoeroti- other murderous friend, killed with a In truth, however, he has killed an inno- cism, sexual independence. knife she had received as a wedding cent woman, unknowingly acting as Tra- Body of Evidence makes this symbolic present, thus connecting her rage to her mell’s agent, and is sleeping with the real representation explicit. Toward the end marriage. Even Tramell has killed her murderer. Not only has he been utterly of the film, Dulaney begins to lose faith parents, although Curran cannot prove deceived but also has acted as a character in Carlson’s innocence and tries to end it. It is no wonder, then, that when Cur- in her script, a script inscribed literally in their affair. She lies down on the floor and ran proposes that they “fuck like minks, the film as a plot device: Tramell wrote starts masturbating; he is riveted, rooted raise rug rats, and live happily ever a book, Love Hurts, about the murder- to the spot, unable to leave. Her sexual after,” Tramell’s only response is “I don’t by-ice-pick of a rock star that predates autonomy is too threatening to his mascu- like rug rats.” In the three cases, female the murder. Indeed, the movie’s premise linity: he wrestles her into handcuffs and violence is enacted within and directed is that whatever she writes comes true: forcibly penetrates her, reinstating genital against the family—specifically, the men as the movie unfolds, she explains that intercourse as the primary and ultimate of the family. her new book is about a detective who function of sexuality. The femmes fatales The fact that the male protagonists “falls for the wrong woman,” which is, in these films are fatal because they do in these films do not act as true erotic in essence, the subject of the movie. not really need men. Even if they engage object choices for the female protago- Here, however, Basic Instinct deviates in intercourse with men, they are noto- nists serves a dual function. It enacts from the traditional femme-fatale film, riously sexually liberated, emphasizing their desexualization, thus protecting the in that it neither establishes Tramell other non-genital forms of pleasure such male spectator from homosexual identi- as the “right” woman, innocent of all as and . Thus, fication. However, it also dislocates them charges against her (although it pretends in Dulaney’s first sexual encounter with from a heterosexual context, in that they to do so by piling up “evidence” against Carlson, the moment of climax comes also are not desired by their own object Garner), nor punishes her for her guilt. when she pours molten wax on his penis; choice, the femme fatale. Moreover, That Curran only appears to control the their affair is initiated on her terms, and in addition to challenging their status action or to hold her desire suggests that she does not require vaginal penetration. as sexual objects, these films work on male control of the look or of the action Although female sexual experimentation another level to undermine the male pro- has always been illusory and something provides obvious pleasure to the men, it tagonists’ place as subject, as the person that patriarchy must fight to maintain. is also immensely threatening. For these around whom the narrative is organized The mere fact that the spectator knows autoerogenous, polysexual women, men and controlled. Mulvey asserts that sco- more at the film’s end than does the are expendable—a point hammered home pophilia derives first from identification protagonist with whom he or she has literally by the plot device of murder. with the male protagonist and second supposedly been identifying breaks that In Basic Instinct, women kill in acts from vicarious control over the film’s identification and undermines the male of rage directed specifically against men events, achieved through that identifica- gaze. In fact, Tramell’s script can be and the family. Tramell is not the only tion. These films, however, problematize understood on a metaphorical level as murderess in this film; she has befriend- the extent to which the male protagonists well, in that she is writing what we 178 JPF&T—Journal of Popular Film and Television might think of as a new cultural script, herself). In these films, however, the istic practices serves to foreground the a feminist script that reveals the threat joke is against the men, both spectator very “erotic elements” that Neale claims that an independent, working, bisexual and protagonist, who falsely assume must be repressed. Doane articulates the woman represents to man, as well as the their own centrality and control. Those dilemma of the female spectator: “Given fragility of the control that man can exert identifying with the male protagonist the structures of cinematic narrative, the over her. will find in the end that they have been woman who identifies with a female In these films, men do not inhabit the deceived, whereas those identifying with character must adopt a passive or mas- space that they seem to inhabit. Both the female protagonist will find that ochistic position, while identification through the displacement of men as the they have been controlling the action with the active hero necessarily entails objects of female desire and through the all along—which, if they are good read- an acceptance of what Laura Mulvey subversion of their agency as subjects, ers, they will have suspected anyway, refers to as a certain ‘masculinization’ the protagonists are repositioned in rela- for the signs are there, coded for the of spectatorship” (24). But if women tion to the films’ narrative structure: female gaze. Following the narrative are identifying masochistically with the they are decentered, marginalized. Their displacement of the male protagonist as female protagonist (a formulation already desirability is delusion; their control is both subject and object of the story, it is problematized by the extent to which the illusion. What these films really inscribe clear that the films assume a complic- female figures actively control the nar- is thus an absence in the space the male ity between the female protagonist and rative action), how are men identifying protagonist is supposed to inhabit at the female spectator, a complicity that in films in which the male protagonist the films’ center. This is particularly stages the male protagonist as the butt is, literally, a masochist? As masochism ironic when considered in relation to of the joke. has always been assumed to be a female the role women have been theorized as The absence-in-presence of the male stance, are men, both as spectators and inhabiting—an absence-in-presence, in protagonist at the film’s center does not as characters, being forced to assume a that they embody the lack of penis, the so much prohibit identification with him female subject position? Are men being threat of castration. Significantly, this as render such identification more diffi- feminized through identification with a absence-in-presence that establishes a cult; it does not transform the gaze from masochistic subject? And what of the link between male and female occurs not male to female so much as displace the already masculinized female spectator? at the beginning of the films but at the terms on which the gaze is constructed. end. For example, in the much-analyzed Mulvey placed “the power of the male Theorizing Masochism final scene in Fatal Attraction, Gallagher protagonist [to] control events” as the In his influential study “A Child is and Beth leave the room after Beth has cornerstone on which spectatorial identi- Being Beaten,” Freud hypothesizes that killed Forrest and the camera zooms in fication and the male gaze is constructed; men, “in their masochistic phantasies [. . on a photograph of the Gallaghers. Thus, it follows that if the protagonist’s control .] invariably transfer themselves into the the film’s final emphasis is not on the over events, and even his own cen- part of a woman; that is to say, their mas- family, but on the representation of the tral positioning within the narrative, is ochistic attitude coincides with a femi- family. This, in turn, self-referentially unstable, then the dynamics of identi- nine one” (126; emphasis in original; evokes the nature of cinematic represen- fication and the production of the gaze see also, Freud, “Economic”). Indeed, tation and doubly inscribes the effect of must be similarly unstable. According many analysts have equated masoch- absence-in-presence, lingering over an to Steve Neale, “Cinema draws on and ism and femininity, primarily because image of a filmic space shared by the involves many desires, many forms of of the assumed passivity of both roles. two sexes. desire. And desire itself is mobile, fluid, It is even argued that masochism is an A male absence-in-presence is partic- constantly transgressing identities, posi- intrinsic element of femininity; Sandra ularly problematic for theories of spec- tions and roles. Identifications are mul- Lee Bartky distinguishes between the tatorship presumed, following Mulvey, tiple, fluid, at points even contradictory” “perverse” masochism propounded by to be male identified. Struggling with (278). Neale argues that “the elements Samois, a lesbian feminist organization the issue of female spectatorship, Doane [Mulvey] considers in relation to images of sadomasochistic women,2 and what discusses a photograph taken by Robert of women can and should also be con- she calls “ordinary feminine masochism Doisneau in 1948 as a metaphor for sidered in relation to images of men,” [. . .] so characteristic of women that it the mechanisms by which the female but he is forced to concur “with her has been regarded by all psychoanalysts spectatorial gaze is problematized. She basic premise that the spectatorial look and many feminists as one of the typi- argues that “in line with Freud’s analysis in mainstream cinema is implicitly male: cal marks of femininity in this culture” of the dirty joke, the photograph insures it is one of the fundamental reasons why (150). Bartky goes on, however, to col- a complicity between the man and the the erotic elements involved in the rela- lapse the difference between “perverse” presumably male spectator, operating to tions between the spectator and the male and “ordinary” masochism, stating that exclude the woman and that ‘Doisneau’s image have constantly to be repressed the two have in common the sexualiza- photograph is not readable by the female and disavowed” (286). tion of domination and submission, albe- spectator—it can give her pleasure only Interestingly, the thematic insistence it to different degrees. Feminine mas- in masochism’” (40; Doane is quoting in these femme-fatale films on masoch- ochism, like femininity in general, is an Deconstructing the Male Gaze 179 economical way of embedding women with his: we are seeing what he is seeing. what we are actually seeing. The image in patriarchy through the mechanism The film then cuts again, to show state becomes clearer, but at the moment of desire, and while the eroticization of prosecutor Robert Garrett (Joe Mantegna) when we identify what is happening, the relations of domination may not lie at the and the police arriving at the house; when camera pans down, and we realize that heart of the system of male supremacy, we next see the man, he is dead. This we had been looking not at the “real” it surely perpetuates it. (50–51) Accord- scene replicates Freud’s first stage of couple, but rather at their reflection in a ingly, masochism can be understood as a the masochistic personality, only Freud’s ceiling mirror. As in Body of Evidence, cultural construction, as a subject posi- beating is here conflated by the sex-death the woman is on top and the man is tied tion created by the prevailing patriarchal opposition; the “beating,” configured as a up; also as in Body of Evidence, this man power structures and by the discourses possible murder, exists in the cut and is is not the protagonist, and he is shortly to that produce sexual difference. reconstituted in the juxtaposition of sex die. Unlike in Body of Evidence, howev- Theories on the development of mas- with death. Our own spectatorial gaze is, er, the moment of “beating” is not elided; ochistic behavior have traditionally been for the first of many times, dislocated: as the couple reaches climax, the woman linked to spectatorship. In “A Child Is we thought we were to align our gaze takes an ice pick from under the cov- Being Beaten,” Freud delineates three with the man’s, but he is dead and cannot ers and stabs (beats) him repeatedly. A stages of the masochistic fantasy. In the be the protagonist with whom we are to final similarity is worth noting: although first, which Freud characterizes as sadis- identify. In fact, through our initial iden- the protagonist is a homicide detective tic rather than masochistic, “the child tification with him, we, too, have been who appears to be aligned with the law, being beaten is never the one produc- punished; even in the first moments of the he is under investigation by Internal ing the phantasy” (113). The fantasy is film, identification with the male subject Affairs for shooting some tourists; thus, instead produced by an observer to the is constituted as masochistic. like Dulaney, he too is associated with beating—in other words, by a spectator. It is also interesting to note the many criminality. As the person doing the beating is always ways in which the film insists on the Appropriately enough, Curran’s and a father figure, the initial phase of the male absence-in-presence discussed ear- Dulaney’s criminal investigations coin- fantasy can be represented by the phrase lier. Our first exposure to a male subject cide with an investigation into their own “My father is beating the child whom I is to his image on a television screen; he sexuality, which corresponds to the sec- hate” (113; emphasis in original). The is an image, not a reality. Our next expo- ond phase of Freud’s beating scenario. watching child feels jealous of the beaten sure reveals him to be dead: he is not In this phase, the child-spectator has child, because he or she has captured the our protagonist; we are not to identify experienced jealousy over the attention father’s attention. In the second stage, with him. Our next exposure to a male shown to the beaten child and desires the child now imagines that “I am being subject presents Garrett, and, because him or herself to be beaten. Whereas the beaten by my father”; the fantasy is he arrives on the crime scene with the previous phase engaged mechanisms of now “of an unmistakably masochistic police and an attendant air of authority, sadistic voyeurism, this phase calls for character” (113). In the final stage, it we assume that he is the protagonist; the active masochistic participation, and in is no longer entirely clear who is beat- film immediately starts to channel our the two films, both Curran and Dulaney ing whom, although the fantasy is once seeing through him as he controls the place themselves in the same situation again sadistic; other unknown children investigation, as he, in turn, looks at the as the men who were just beaten/killed. are being beaten by someone who is not videotape. But this identification, too, is Carlson’s victim/lover supposedly died the father of the original fantasy. Freud a false one and is shattered shortly there- from a heart attack induced during or summarizes, “The situation of being after, when Dulaney, a defense attorney, immediately following sadomasochis- beaten, which was originally simple and who is the “real” protagonist, arrives. tic sex; Dulaney allows Carlson to tie monotonous, may go through the most Our spectatorial gaze has, just minutes him up and pour hot wax on his chest complicated alterations and elaborations; into the film, already been constructed and genitals. Tramell’s victim/lover died and punishments and humiliations of and deconstructed three times. Identifi- when she tied him to the bed with a another kind may be substituted for the cation with the male figure is rendered white silk scarf and then stabbed him beating itself” (114). problematic from the onset and not just with an ice pick during ; Curran It is startling how structurally similar through the deconstructed gaze; whereas allows Tramell to tie him to the bed with this scenario is to both Basic Instinct and we assumed an association with “the a white silk scarf, exactly replicating Body of Evidence. The latter film opens law,” as represented by Garrett, our real the conditions of the murder with him- with a staging of the primal scene. The association is with Dulaney, defender of self positioned as the next victim. This camera roams through the darkened hall- the alleged criminal, Carlson. scenario is twice repeated in the film, way of a house and finally alights on a Basic Instinct’s opening sequence is and neither time does she kill him, but video camera and then a television screen, remarkably similar to that of Body of he experiences great sexual satisfaction which shows a man and a woman having Evidence. The film’s first scene is of because of his fear and calls it “the fuck sex; we are clearly watching a sex video. a couple having sex, but our gaze is of the century.” The film then cuts to show a man watch- literally fragmented through a camera For the male subjects in Basic Instinct ing the video, and our gaze is thus aligned effect that makes it difficult to determine and Body of Evidence, their masochism 180 JPF&T—Journal of Popular Film and Television engenders an exploration of a feminine kind of reversal, however, in that her a man, sexual prowess is something to stance, and their personal investigation spectators’ arousal reads as discomfiture brag about; for a woman, it is a crime. of masochism coincides with their crimi- and lack of control; she seems to be Garrett spells out the conflation of nal investigation into their suspects’ sex- completely in control, despite her dual “body” and “weapon” in his opening uality. Indeed, the investigations in both role as suspect of their investigation statement at the trial: films revolve around the sexual beliefs and object of their desire. This scene Andrew Marsh made what turned out to and practices of the women under sus- enacts Mulvey’s formulation of the sym- be a fatal mistake: he fell in love. He fell picion; what is being investigated is not bolic role of woman, only it renders that in love with a ruthless, calculating woman so much murder as female sexuality and role literal: Ultimately, the meaning of who went after an elderly man with a bad sexual difference. Basic Instinct makes woman is sexual difference, the absence heart and a big bank account. You all can this explicit in the notorious scene where of the penis as visually ascertainable, see the defendant, Rebecca Carlson, but as this trial proceeds, you will see that she is the police interview Tramell: the material evidence on which is based not only the defendant; she is the murder CORELLI. Would you tell us the nature the castration complex essential for the weapon itself. If I hit you, and you die, I of your relationship with Mr. Boz? organization of entrance to the symbolic am the cause of your death. But can I be order and the law of the father. Thus the called a weapon? The answer is yes. And TRAMELL. I had sex with him for woman as icon, displayed for the gaze what a deadly weapon Rebecca Carlson about a year and a half. I liked having made of it. The state will prove that she sex with him. He wasn’t afraid of experi- and enjoyment of men, the active con- seduced Andrew Marsh and manipulated menting. I like men like that, men who trollers of the look, always threatens to his affections until he rewrote his will, leav- give me pleasure. He gave me a lot of evoke the anxiety it originally signified. ing her 8 million dollars. That she insisted pleasure. (35) Here, the “material evidence” of on increasingly strenuous sex knowing he CORELLI. Did you ever engage in any castration is figured literally in Tramell’s had a severe heart condition, and when that sadomasochistic activity? didn’t work fast enough for her, she secretly exposure of her vagina and is further- doped him with cocaine. His heart couldn’t TRAMELL. Exactly what did you have more figured as “evidence” in a criminal take the combination, and she got what in mind, Mr. Corelli? investigation that itself renders literal she wanted. She is a beautiful woman. But when this trial is over, you will see her no CORELLI. Did you ever tie him up? Mulvey’s metaphorical reference to the “law” of the father. Moreover, the detec- differently than a gun or a knife or any other TRAMELL. No. instrument used as a weapon. She’s a killer, tives’ gaze combines “enjoyment” and and the worst kind: a killer who disguised CURRAN. You never tied him up? “anxiety” precisely because the sight of herself as a loving partner. TRAMELL. Johnny liked to use his her vagina “always threatens to evoke hands too much. I like hands and fingers. the anxiety it originally signified,” just Implicit in this statement is the idea as Tramell herself at the movie’s conclu- that Marsh had no control over his own WALKER. You describe a silk scarf in sexuality or choices. She “insisted” on your book. sion will always threaten to kill again, for the ice pick will still be under the “increasingly strenuous sex,” in which TRAMELL. I’ve always had a fond- bed, ready to be wielded again. he, apparently, had no choice but to ness for silk scarves. They’re good for all participate. She “manipulated” him into occasions. Body of Evidence takes the threat posed by woman’s body even more liter- changing his will, and although there is CURRAN. But you said you like men ally, as is evidenced by the title. As in no evidence of coercion on her part, he to use their hands, didn’t you? Basic Instinct, the investigation focuses is still not held accountable for his bad TRAMELL. No, I said I liked Johnny on Carlson’s sex life; she is arrested after decision. Marsh apparently character- to use his hands. I don’t make any rules, Garrett asks her whether she considers ized himself in such passive terms, for, Nick. I go with the flow. herself a , a sadomasochist. according to his secretary (Anne Archer) During this interrogation, the detec- Here, however, her body itself is theo- he felt that his sexual activities were too tives become aroused. The camera rized as the weapon: strenuous but placed the responsibility for this solely on Carlson: “[He said] that pans from face to face, showing the DULANEY. You don’t know it was men perspiring and licking their lips; homicide. he was worried. [. . .] He said that if she their mouths become so dry that they kept it up, she was going to kill him, that GARRETT. The method’s self- his heart couldn’t take it.” each must fetch water from the cooler. explanatory. As the questioning continues, Tramell One of the funniest scenes in the uncrosses her legs and reveals that she DULANEY. What are you going to movie plays on the ludicrousness of is wearing no underwear; the detec- do, bag the body as a murder weapon? such assumptions about the lack of male Exhibit A? It’s not a crime to be a tives start to stutter and lose the thread good lay. control when confronted with female of the conversation. As in the opening sexuality. In this scene, one of Carlson’s sequence, the spectator’s gaze is aligned GARRETT. Well, sure, I’d have to have former lovers, Jeffrey Roston (Frank myself indicted. with theirs through the mechanism of the Langella), another older man with a bad video camera recording the proceedings, This last exchange, although flippant, heart, is called to the witness stand. Gar- and Tramell is positioned as the subject betrays a distinction made by the film rett asks him questions about his sex life of that gaze. The film enacts a strange between male and female sexuality—for with Carlson: Deconstructing the Male Gaze 181

GARRETT. How would you describe The implications of this argument are she seems to wind up enjoying herself; your sex life with her? startling when viewed in light of the gen- nevertheless, the spectator is left with the ROSTON. It was very intense. dering of masochism. Consider the fact impression that whereas female sadism is that the masochistic position is female and erotic, male sadism is dangerous. GARRETT. I know this is very per- sonal, but I’m going to ask you to be more that the sadistic position is male, regard- Fatal Attraction stages a similar specific. less of the biological sex of the subjects. moment, although the rape occurs meta- Smirnoff claims that “the real meaning of phorically. The first time Gallagher and ROSTON. She was always trying to get me more and more worked up. [. . .] the masochistic contract” is to “render the Forrest have sex, she is perched on the executioner’s task more oppressive”; in kitchen sink. When he tries to kill her, he GARRETT. When you say your sexual other words, the masochist wants to ren- does so at the same sink; he attempts to relations with Miss Carlson were intense, in what way? der the sadist uncomfortable with his own strangle her, and when he finally stops, sadism. Applying the gendered model of both are panting, gasping for breath, as if ROSTON. Well, it was as if she were masochism to Smirnoff’s equation, the they have just had intercourse again. The trying to push me as far as she could. corollary is that the masochistic woman scene is staged so that even the camera GARRETT. Can you give the court an is trying to render the man’s sadism more angle replicates the earlier sex scene. example? oppressive to him. Given the conflation In Basic Instinct, Curran too erupts into ROSTON. Sex was a game to her. She that takes place in the sadomasochistic violence. Tramell has been teasing him got off on the control. She always used to relationship between female-masochist but has not yet initiated sexual contact, tell me it had to be her way. A few nights and male-sadist, it becomes clear that the and he reacts by raping his ex-lover, Gar- before my bypass I woke up and she tied goal of the relationship, from the woman’s ner. Unlike Carlson, she does not struggle, me to the bed.[. . .] perspective, is to render the man’s mascu- but neither does she derive pleasure from GARRETT. And what did she say? Mr. linity more oppressive to him. Pain and the experience; instead, she is furious and Roston, I know this is difficult for you, but humiliation can thus be understood to be hurt. Again, male sexual aggression is it is important. Please, tell the court. the means rather than the end: by enacting shown to be sadistic and nonconsensual. ROSTON. She said she was going in a greatly exaggerated form the pain and Even if the rape were positioned as a to fuck me like I had never been fucked humiliation inherent in gendered relation- female fantasy, which is at once implied before. ships, the masochist hopes to force the and problematized, it is not a fantasy that At this point, the courtroom erupts man to recognize and renounce the sadis- Garner chooses in the same way that Cur- and has to be cleared before the ques- tic nature of masculinity. Masochism is ran chooses to allow Tramell to tie him up tioning can continue. The odd thing thus a kind of performance of the tyranny with her silk scarf; rather, it is a fantasy he about this testimony is that it is consid- of gender. imposes on her. Although female sadism ered extremely damaging to Carlson. The femme-fatale films invoke this and male masochism are thus shown to be She is depicted as a stimulating lover, but tyranny through the repeated use of erotic and consensual, female masochism this is seen only in negative terms; her scenarios of rape. For the most part, the and male sadism are depicted in a context sexual control over her lover is viewed male protagonists have played the mas- of rape and violation. as evidence of her guilt. ochist to the female’s sadist. However, This inversion of roles invokes Freud’s The issue of control cuts to the heart it is quite clear that Tramell and Carlson formulation of the beating fantasy. In the of the theorizing of masochism. Whereas the sadist as part of a fantasy shared third and final phase, it is no longer clear the sadist is expected to be in control, by both of the sexual partners. There who is beating whom, although the fan- theorists have noted that the masochist is never any suggestion that the men tasy is once again sadistic. In these films, manipulates the sadist into doing what are forced or coerced into participating too, the final effect is not to reestablish he or she wants. As Lenzer asserts, “what in the fantasy, from which they both fixed gender roles but instead to collapse is affirmed [in the beating fantasy] is derive pleasure. Nevertheless, there is them. By invoking sadomasochism, these the power of the protagonist over the a moment in these films when the men films narrativize a constantly fluctuating one maltreating him. The creator of the become threatened by the passivity of system by which gender identity is signi- phantasy is the one who controls reality their roles and respond with rape. fied. Rather than inscribing difference, in phantasy, although he simultaneously For Dulaney, the moment comes when these films emphasize the psychosexual allows the phantasy to express his weak- he begins to question Carlson’s innocence. similarity between the male and female ness” (320). Victor Smirnoff points out, In his testimony, Roston describes a sexual protagonists. as does Deleuze, that “there is no comple- scenario almost exactly like the one Carl- In Fatal Attraction, therefore, Forrest mentary agreement between the sadistic son had enacted with him nights before. and Gallagher alternate as victim and and the masochistic desire”; only one of Dulaney clearly feels that he has been victimizer: Forrest slashes her wrists; the partners is in control, and only one deceived and is unimportant to her, and he Forrest hounds and harasses Gallagher; achieves fulfillment. Smirnoff concludes, reasserts control and dominance by wres- Gallagher tries to kill Forrest; Forrest “This is the real meaning of the masoch- tling her into handcuffs and then entering tries to kill Gallagher. Discussions of the istic contract, which tries to render the her from behind. Although she struggles film have focused on the extent to which executioner’s task more oppressive.” at first, like many cinematic rape victims, it is possible to identify with Forrest. 182 JPF&T—Journal of Popular Film and Television

On the one hand, she is insane, violent, ship. The narrativization of masochism Bartky, Sandra Lee. Femininity and Domi- predatory, and finally, dead. On the other disrupts easy identifications along gender nation: Studies in the Phenomenology of hand, she controls the film’s action until lines. Is a male spectator more likely Oppression. New York: Routledge, 1990. Deleuze, Gilles. Coldness and Cruelty. 1969. the end, when another woman gains to identify with a male protagonist like Rpt. in Masochism. Trans. Jean McNeil. control; she enacts a revenge fantasy that Dulaney or Curran, who, through his par- New York: Zone, 1991. 7–140. anyone who has ever been rejected can ticipation in masochism, is inhabiting a Doane, Mary Ann. Femmes Fatales: Femi- enjoy; and she is given some powerful female subject position? Or with a female nism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis. New lines. Equally interesting, though, is the protagonist like Carlson or Tramell who York: Routledge, 1991. Faludi, Susan. Backlash: The Undeclared extent to which identification with Gal- takes on the male-sadistic position and War against American Women. New York: lagher is rendered problematic: he is an who controls the action and the male Anchor, 1991. adulterer, a liar, and a lawyer; he is vio- protagonist both? Are we to identify with Freud, Sigmund. “A Child Is Being Beaten.” lent and attempts murder; he is played by figures who duplicate our biological sex Sexuality and the Psychology of Love. Ed. Douglas. Between the two protagonists, or with figures who embody our experi- Philip Reiff. Trans. Alix and James Strachey. 1919. New York: Collier, 1963. 97–122. there is no comfortable identification to ence of gender? These films render easy ———. “The Economic Problem in Masoch- be made. Instead, identification is con- identifications along sex-gender lines ism.” Collected Papers. Vol. 2. Ed. Ernest stantly shifting as each in turn takes on problematic, in that they assign and reas- Jones. Trans. Joan Riviere. 1924. New sadistic or masochistic stances. sign masculine and feminine values and York: Basic, 1959. In Basic Instinct, too, differences positions regardless of biology. Irigaray, Luce. This Sex Which Is Not One. between the male and female protagonist For women viewing these films, mas- Trans. Catherine Porter and Carolyn Burke. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1985. are collapsed. Curran is slowly revealed ochistic spectatorial identification with a Lenzer, Gertrud. “On Masochism: A Contri- to be as much of a killer as Tramell is: he female protagonist is not experienced as bution to the History of a Phantasy and Its has killed tourists, and Tramell’s theory a passive and victimized stance; rather, Theory.” Signs: Journal of Women in Cul- that he was “sucked into” it and “like[d] it it is an active, engaged stance taken in ture and Society 1.2 (1975): 277–344. too much” has a ring of truth. Moreover, opposition to a male position associ- Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narra- tive Cinema.” Screen 16.3 (1975): 6–18. as the film progresses he is more and ated with domination and sadism. Such Rpt. in Issues in Feminist Film Criticism. more elided with her, repeating her lines a stance does not liberate women from Ed. Patricia Erens. Bloomington: Indiana and mirroring her experiences: like her, he gendered spectatorship, but at the very UP, 1990. has used cocaine and beaten a lie-detec- least, it dislocates identification with the ———. “Afterthoughts on ‘Visual Pleasure tor test; like her, he resumes smoking male gaze. Instead, masochistic specta- and Narrative Cinema’ inspired by Duel in the Sun.” Framework 6.15–17 (1981): and drinking. He even is subjected to the torship becomes an active position taken 12–15. Rpt. in Visual and Other Pleasures. same kind of inquiry she underwent in in response to and dialogue with images Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1989. the interrogation scene, only this time, representing gender binaries. Moreover, Neale, Steve. “Masculinity as Spectacle.” The he is the suspect, the object of the gaze. by highlighting masochistic psychody- Sexual Subject: A Screen Reader in Sexu- Although this scene almost exactly dupli- namics, these films depict these binaries ality. London: Routledge, 1992. 277–90. Riviere, Joan. “Womanliness as a Masquer- cates the scene of Tramell as suspect, here as constantly shifting and fluid rather than ade.” 1929. Psychoanalysis and Female a lone woman, Garner, is included in the rigidly predetermined and fixed; there- Sexuality. Ed. Hendrik M. Ruitenbeek. New proceedings, as if to suggest that he is the fore, although not destroying the binaries Haven: College and UP, 1966. 209–20. object of a gaze constructed as at least per se, these films expose gender as con- Samois. Coming to Power: Writings and Graph- partially female. Indeed, just as Tramell structed and performative while simul- ics on Lesbian S/M. Boston: Alyson, 1981. Silverman, Kaja. “Masochism and Subjectiv- was literally exposed to the male gaze in taneously deconstructing heterosexual ity.” Framework 12 (1980): 2–9. the interrogation scene, he is exposed to desire and the controlling male gaze. ———. “Masochism and Male Subjectivity.” the female gaze when Roxy, Tramell’s Camera Obscura 17 (1988): 31–66. lesbian, leather-clad lover, confronts him NOTES Smirnoff, Victor. “The Masochistic Contract.” as he stands naked in the bathroom. 1. I am indebted to Laura Frost and to International Journal of Psycho-Analysis She has apparently watched them have her work on masochism for the inspiration 50 (1969): 665–71. for this essay. She generously shared her Studlar, Gaylyn. “Masochism, Masquerade, sex; as Roxy asserts, “she likes me to and the Erotic Metamorphosis of Marlene watch.” Again, heterosexual sex functions insights, her bibliography, and her time, all of which have had a material impact on the Dietrich.” Fabrications: Costume and the as a front for lesbian desire: Tramell has formulation of my ideas. For other note- Female Body. Ed. Jane Gaines and Charlotte been performing for her lover’s gaze. As worthy exceptions, see especially Silver- Heroq. London: Routledge, 1990. 229–49. in Fatal Attraction, stable identification man, “Subjectivity” 2, 8; Silverman “Male” is rendered difficult through constantly 31–66; Studlar 229–49. Miranda Sherwin is an assistant professor shifting gender positions that go beyond 2. See Samois for a feminist defense of sadomasochism for women. in the English department at the College of mere inversion of roles to deconstruct Staten Island, CUNY, where she specializes sexual difference and establish trans-sex WORKS CITED in Women’s Studies. Her book, Confessional Writing and the Twentieth-Century Literary identification. Andrews, Suzanna. “The Great Divide: The These films thus present a serious chal- Imagination, is forthcoming from Palgrave Sexes at the Box Office.” New York Times Macmillan. lenge to inherited theories of spectator- 23 May 1993: H15, 22.