They should just call it ‘Phantom Dread’

*Spoilers for the American film Phantom Thread from 2017*

In Phantom Thread, a raging misogynist buckles under the claustrophobia of the oppressive system meant to protect him. Like all men in power, he’d rather lose control over his life than give up his power; he’d rather suffer punishment than treat others equally than choose to bring down the hegemony that made him deserving of punishment.

The world of Reynolds Woodcock, a 19th-century master dressmaker, runs on the productivity and professionalism of women. The workers use a back entrance, are on time and deliver superior quality work every time. Reynolds’ sister Cyril serves as a manager/show runner of this factory/house. Reynolds is portrayed as the talent; he designs great dresses. And as we have seen with portrayals of great men, he needs a specific set of circumstances to unfold like clockwork around him to achieve this “genius.” He is cold, arrogant, and ignorant of the feelings of those around him.

While on a trip to the country, Reynolds falls for the first sprightly, soulful woman (Alma) he meets. With Alma reciprocating his feelings with intense curiosity and the hope of youth, they quickly become lovers. His routine is winded, but Alma’s youthful cheer and unflinching loyalty to his work make her irresistible to him. Eventually, they fall apart, but she is not done with him. She draws him out, and she reins him in. Completely given over, he is happy again, around the arms of a woman who knows to control him, but permits him to live in his hegemonic structure. She even fantasizes of him as a changed man with whom she has a happy future; but for now, she will settle for controlling him using his need for punishment.

Thanks to the attention to detail in the film’s plot and making,  Phantom Thread turns into a sublime inversion of the classic drama of the male hero’s will and his unattainable conquest. It is a cynical and satirical work overall, but it falls prey to conventional male-film making in the saddest of ways– throughout its narration, the film has a backdoor of sympathy to its misogynistic male protagonist.

Sympathetic portrayals of men show us more than they intend to. When done as exquisitely as this, they showcase the structure of the world around them that enables their menace. 

The women who work for Reynolds respect and treat him with undeserved kindness. He has abused this kindness for long, failing to make friends with them, despite their kindness. When he first meets Alma, he intrusive and oppressive; she flinches, but is more bemused than bothered by it.  He warms up to her quickly, telling her all his vulnerabilities on their first date. His face is filled with the joy of a younger man falling in love, or a weary, lonely man unbeknownst an ally. 

Alma and Cyril belong to different classes. Reynolds benefits of it, so unquestioningly enables it. Alma seamlessly forms allies with the workers at the house of Woodcock. Cyril jolts every time she realizes the increasing control Alma has over Reynolds. I cannot tell if Cyril is a caricature or not. She is, as many other reviews call her, Mrs Danvers-esque. Is this a male filmmakers nod to Hitchcock? Is it a misogynist’s need to show that women also cause problems for women?

The quest for liberation is supposed to act as a great leveler. One class of women cannot be liberated while others are not. And this vicious cycle is starkly exposed in Phantom Thread. We watch as Reynolds follows Cyril’s word with all his relationships in society. We learn that she enables his ignorance as long they can use his hegemony to maintain their status quo. We ignore the parts that show liberated women of the upper class using the hegemony of men to assert their superiority over the women of lower classes. We accept that women with class privilege are forever at the behest of men.

As such, Reynolds does not understand much of anything, let alone the intersectional nature of liberation. He gets confused and agitated over the contradicting claims of Alma and Cyril over him. All he knows is that only these women can protect him. And so, he follows them. 

Phantom Thread is yet another (unnecessary?) tale of the crippling effect oppression has on the oppressor. It attempts to tell us about how men hold on to misogyny, living with the trepidation of a swift and unforgiving reckoning. As things stand in the film, it is  slow and demanding. Is one worse than the other? I am not sure it matters.

I simply cannot wait for Frozen 3

Frozen is a coming-of-age story quite unlike any other Disney animation movie because of its white feminist essence. Much like all other works (Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel), white feminist actors and filmmakers come at us with their technical proficiency and prowess and unleash their empowerment in the subtext of the white man’s template. But, you could choose not to see the essence and consume it as simply another Disney adventure.

In Frozen, an ingenue becomes aware of herself through her choice of partner, and a matronly sister afraid of her own superpowers comes into her own by letting it go. The villain is male, and the strongest male character is in a supporting role, but they get more to do than most movie supporting characters. And there is a reindeer, a snowman, and mountain trolls with magical wisdom and quirky wit. Wondering whether people with marginalized racial-ethnic backgrounds are identified as these “magical creatures” lands us in a murky zone; but gender-wise, they are an amazing way of identifying the marginalized in Disney movies.

Frozen 2 picks up on this essence and rolls with it, changing and evolving into a hopeful narrative for the future. It is once again a white feminist narrative, but quite overtly so. Disney was likely pushed by the fear of Jennifer Lee (co-writer, co-director), Idina Menzel (lead singer and star), and Kristen Bell (pioneer of the teenage feminist narrative in Hollywood) leaving the project if they gave up this feminist essence. The villain is male and much more sinister, and the previously ‘leading’ male character comes to accept and assume a supporting role. What gives us hope is the white guilt of the Disney princess urging her to see the past and usher us into a better future.

We know the past, or know of the past. A bunch of power-hungry, white men tried to take over the world and failed, leaving in their wake a summary desecration of the very essence of being human. We don’t necessarily see this past. That is because we inherited much of the comfort we live in through this privilege. In Frozen 2, Queen Elsa listens to herself and takes an odyssey into her past to see where her privilege comes from. And like us, she knew of it, and she probably knew it was evil, but chose to live on, facing her day-to-day obstacles. Now, she chooses to do the difficult thing, and sees the past and relives a betrayal so colossal by the evil white man, that nature retreated into itself. Nature shook the earth and darkened her city to urge her to see. And she inherited her power to rule from this and she falls into herself unable to, in all her physical power, find an antidote to move on. But the ally Anna comes into her own, pushing herself into every quest, calling Elsa out on her individual/existential adventure (it is the history of all white people). Anna moves forward, her male allies finding it in themselves to embrace the supporting role, and sees it through to the end. This act of great courage and empowerment makes Elsa come back, and she saves the day (for everyone, this time).

In Frozen 3, if all goes according to overt white feminism here, Queen Anna, now ruling the nation, will need to take down all her grandfather’s statues and change the honorary titles and places named for him. With this act, a majority of her people will turn against her. Why won’t they? Elsa has the great privilege of following her voice. But even among us who are similarly privileged, we have to work for a living and cannot leave our cats unfed to take on a grand odyssey to reshape our identity. Anna will also face the dilemma of whether her claim to power is legitimate and if she chooses to democratize now, the majority who want the grandfather’s name reinstated will win.

Will she trust her people to change? How will she persuade them thus? Her sister has become a nature warrior, and on foreign shores, the authority of evil, white men is continuing to lead the world on a destructive path. Will she take the fight to them (Greta Thunberg, essentially)? How will their paths cross? More importantly, will we see them empower someone less privileged, and take them to the top?

I simply cannot wait for Frozen 3.

What are women singing about themselves anyway?

by Iswariya

Context: A couple of weeks ago, Genderally Cinema ran this piece: https://genderallycinema.com/2016/03/09/six-tamil-heroine-introduction-songs-actually-about-the-heroine/ about Tamil movie songs that introduce female protagonists, and actually describe them and their feelings, vs being used as prop to further a cis-male focused story. One of our readers wrote in this excellent piece, she questions if women in Tamil cinema are really singing about themselves the way men do. 

I completely agree with your commentary on the positioning of women in cinema: “Often, they are characterized to sing about men, or about having to experience love or romance, and are often used as a prop for the male protagonist in the film”. I hardly get to see heroines playing roles of significance or roles that break the female stereotype in existence today.

However, to be honest, I am not very sure if the list of songs that have been put together here portray or cherish womanhood. In some sense it also falls prey to the stereotype of how lyricists pen down women in their poetry. Whilst songs such as ‘En Peru Padaiyappa’, ‘Naan adicha thaangamaate’ ‘My name is Billa’, and ‘Maari’ describe the power and strength of men and depict them as the superheroes with no force standing a chance against them, women are always characterized to see themselves as as a happy-go-lucky blissful girl who seems to care only about her day to day living or her unison with nature.

Jyothika in ‘Kushi’ is all about stopping the rain at her will; yes, she does compare herself to the wind with no wings (a.k.a limits) but in the movie, right after this song she is seen forced into marriage. “Konjum Mainaakale” from Kandukonden is an all-time favorite melody, sadly again the song talks only about the woman’s association with nature; where all Aishwarya Rai wants is to celebrate Diwali and to see through that her roses bloom right after she plants them. I am not saying that it is wrong as a premise, but all the song is conveying to me is women are soft, innocent, gullible day-dreamers who live in a world of fantasy where men can walk right into us and our lives.

With cinema creating a huge impact on people’s lives today, it is sad to see songs such as, ‘Adidaa Avala Othadaa Avala Vidra Avala Thevayae Illa’ and not the ones like ‘Uyire Uyire Vanthu Ennodu Kalanthuvidu’ capturing the audiences.

One cannot just blame the Indian entertainment industry, songs from the Western world also describe women as lost in love or waiting for love. But at least, there, I can name a few songs that promote female empowerment where women are shown as strong and independent beings, who have their own accomplishments. Just on top of my head: “Independent Women” from Destiny’s Child, “Confident” by Demi Lovato, “Warrior” by Kesha, “Roar” by Katy Perry, “Run the world (Girls)” by Beyoncé, “Girl on fire” by Alicia Keys and of course not to forget Pink!
I would like to sign-off with one last question with reference to a famous quote: “Behind every successful man there is a woman” , but where is your success story Girl?

 

Iswariya is a researcher; Chennaiite at heart, German by profession. Chocoholic and shopoholic.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens: Emergence of men as the second sex

*Major spoilers ahead* to Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and Finn abandon their imposed responsibilities as men and flee. They are not protectors of “their” women anymore. They find it difficult to protect themselves and are often stranded and beleaguered. The movie starts with Finn wanting to flee the coup, unable to take the slaughter of innocents. Clearly insufficiently armed for a fight against the regime, Finn chooses to run. He also turns to a childlike charade of heroism when he is posed with the challenge of protecting his woman the first time. This is how he is represented, and it is a sign of things to come. The traditionally feminine characteristics of unyielding, stoic behaviour under imposed morally contradicting choices has been assigned to men. Finn chooses to flee again later, leaving behind his woman, as he finds his role in protecting himself more essential than protecting any other.
The women settle into the role of protectors, guardians and authority figures with ease. There are no real dilemmas as to where their loyalties are, but the men seem confused, and because of the childlike representation, attention seeking. This goes with the traditionally female argument that “all men are children”. The onus is still on men, but it is one of ridicule. Han Solo is represented as an older Finn, pursuing crazy endeavours, often self-sabotaging. Luke Skywalker is simply absent, for whatever higher purpose or for want of courage in facing the consequences of his actions. Rey, Maz and Leia build their fortresses and fight for all who will take their help. The enormous pressure of fighting against fellow men and the weight of being identified with the same gender as the oppressors seem to deeply unsettle every man.
The men in Star Wars: A Force Awakens are taking responsibilities for men previously represented in movies, not as individual characters. These are the sins of their forefathers and contemporaries who are represented as chauvinistic, heroic or anti-heroic because they are men. Their representation is not merely an apologetic caricature,  but a sign of gender oppression turning on itself. Either men are represented as reckless in their guilt-ridden escapes, or as simply evil oppressors. There is no action that seems redemptive for men; the women emerge as leaders with poise. The transition of men as the second sex with roles supporting women in their fight against tyranny and evil is strained, but it does happen.
While the men are abandoning their posts at the first sign of existential crisis, women are not over compensating, or even compensating. This is a role women have played for centuries. They are battle-hardened and self-assured about their ideas and skills. Their only doubts are regarding which course of action to take. Whereas the men are frozen in the face of action; undermined by their history of oppressive behaviour, doubtful of their stained identity as men genderally. They are pushed into possibly thinking that the only course of action is fleeing because they want to protect the women from themselves. This is just the beginning. The women are motherly, nourishing, supportive of this freezing and fleeing. This is natural for women, to accommodate for the men and fight the war.
Luke Skywalker is offered the lightsaber at the end of the movie. Will he overcome his existential crisis and second “his” women in the fight? The force has awakened,  we will find out how it transforms and endures.

Associated Links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_The_Force_Awakens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bytDctZ2g6o

Image link:
http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/starwarstheforceawakens_teaser_trailer2_12.jpg

Contribution by: H. Prasanna