Mulvey

Mulvey’s thoughts on the “scopophilic instinct” are interesting to analyze, but really overanalyzed in my opinion. I agree, especially in Western culture, that women most often play the passive role of “object” and men most often play the active role as “gaze,” but I find this more an observation than dogmatic theory. When certain male stars go on stage or appear on screen, how many female fans swoon over them? In the 1999 film Titanic, Kate Winslet’s character could of course been seen as on object in this context, especially in 1912, but when the sexes are reversed, doesn’t Leonardo DiCaprio play the same role as object to women? When Justin Beiber gets on stage and millions of twelve year old girls scream their heads off, it’s not because he “cannot bear the burden of sexual objectification.”

I disagree with Mulvey when she says that men narrate the story, can only narrate the story, and women are the objects that tie the story together. Maybe this was true in 1975, but we’ve come a long way in 36 years, and wonder what Mulvey would amend or delete if her essay were to be rewritten today.