|
by Bllu Catalano
Emerson College
The
film industry spouted largely from the masculine bastion of the industrial
revolution, where men such as Muybridge, Edison, and the Lumiere brothers
raced to top each other's experiments. Early films were funded by those
with cash and connections-men (remember, women didn't even vote until
1920). Thesc men produced images that reflected their desires-leading
men dominating controllable women, or their fears-uncontrollable women
who must be recontained or punished. Women's images (and men's) were properties
to be fully exploited as products by the new moguls whose names were becoming
famous: DeMille, Griffith and Zukor. A few women filmmakers existed then,
the most famous being Mary Pickford. Yet these names had been left out
of history until recent feminist scholars resurrected them. Unfortunately,
and tellingly, it is still necessary for the interested to dig when seeking
other names out.
Even recently, few places have been made for women in mainstream film.
The women who have made names for themselves are cited as tokens. Women
voices have been effectively absorbed and smoothed over by the mainstream.
This has altered slightly in recent years with more women producing, directing,
and crewing big-budget and popularly acclaimed Rims. Some may attribute
this change to a more flexible and accepting mainstream system; however,
it has been the independents working outside the system-many of whom are
women-and the rising demand for their work that have been responsible.
Nevertheless, the framework for the dominant cinema which was crafted
by the male moguls in the early l900s remains intact. Their experiments
became the conventions that last to this day: the hierarchical crew; camera
techniques, such as soft focus; the glamorization of female appearance;
and linear narrative structure, to name but a few. Embedded in all of
these techniques is a silent repression of women voices.
One answer to the lack of women's voices in the mainstream is alternative
or independent cinema. Yet, even among the alternative, choices between
absorption and resistance must he made. These two branches of alternative
cinema correlate respectively to the feminist camps which have been explained
by Jan Rosenberg as the "women's rights" and "women liberation branches."
The "rights" branch emphasizes reforming the dominant culture, while the
liberationists put their energies into creating alternative cultural forms
(Rosenberg 1).
The women's rights branch believes in the mainstream's ability to become
sensitive to women's concerns. These women wish to remain in the dominant
film forum, to help mold it to include their skills and concerns. These
women believe in synthesizing, that is, non- separation between the dominant
and the alternative.
The women's rights alternative group holds a certain amount of safety
by holding on to the dominant, for their experiments and/or ideology are
largely theoretical in nature.
The liberationist feminist movement, however, feels it has more to gain
by challenging the dominant. This type of alternative is much more difficult
to assimilate into or accept by the dominant. The uniqueness of their
film-making come from life experiences, and from cultures whose ideological
structures may he at complete odds with the dominant.
One form of the liberationist alternative cinema is which encourages not
only women s voices to be spoken and listened to, but also trains women
to be technologically literate
is women's film collectives. As co-founder and representative of the three-year-old
production group Women In Motion at Emerson College, I have learned firsthand
what it means to be a part of a group for, by, and about women film-makers.
Women In Motion is foremost a collective production group. As a collective,
we have had four film shoots and have finished one Rim titled A Womb
of One’s Own. As with most feminist film groups our emphasis has been
on process, learning how to make Rims in a way that speaks to us as women.
However, our goal is a finished product. We want to be more than experimental-we
want to be viable.
Throughout the evolution of our film, most founding members left. Finding
a collective system that works has been an ambitious and difficult process.
Luckily, we have maintained a group of core members. All of the women
who made it to our shoots speak of them very positively, often as pivotal
to their decision process as film-makers. For example, each crew position
was Riled by a knowledgeable woman and an apprentice. In addition, members
were able to flow to different positions if they wanted to learn about
more than one. Far from being confusing to the women, this led to a greater
understanding of film-making as a whole. Instead of creating chaos, this
created community.
Also, all members were present when the camera people cleaned and put
together the camera apparatus. They could take a turn, and ask questions.
The same policy was used when editing began. Each interested member was
taught both video and film editing. As a result, the final version was
edited by a group of members.
This is not to give the impression that no leadership exists in Women
in Motion. As with many feminist filmmakers, for our group. the question
of leadership has been a pivotal issue from the start. However, I believe
the question is not of leadership, but rather of leadership's focus. While
I may have held leadership positions, the screenplay, plan, and decisions
were all consented to by group vote. Leadership in Women In Motion, as
it should he in any collective, is as a facilitator.
The bottom line with any film project, whether it be a mainstream or alternative,
is talent and dedication. Neither system of power can cover the deficiency
of either element. In Women In Motion we believe that everyone has a talent,
it simply must he allowed to cultivate. Every member's voice is respected.
When given respect, ego's become small, and people become more willing
to contribute to the group goal. At the same time, we teach women to he
confident in their voices and power.
Teaching woman-centered values is another crucial area Women In Motion
tries to cover. We have regular feminist discussions that pertain to our
careers, and the potential problems awaiting us. We also discuss the present
inequalities we already face. This support-the knowledge that comes from
relating-is crucial to our success. Through supported responsibility we
prove to ourselves that we can succeed.
In addition to film shoots and discussions, Women in Motion has programmed
and executed a Film and Video Festival, as well as an International Women's
History Month Performance Series. In addition, we have hosted filmmakers
to screen their films and speak about the process of filmmaking. As a
result, members have had the opportunity to learn all phases of film production.
Women In Motion members are still working on the questions inherent to
drastic change. Where do we go when we leave school? How do men fit into
our group (we have had men who fit in quite well)? How do we balance working
on theory and production? But, the strides we have managed to make are
worth celebrating. Because of them 1 do not question my steps once I graduate.
I will not join the mainstream. I do not need to. There are viable and
vital options open to me. We can create collective films that people will
want to see. We can find the resources if we band together. Women in the
alternative cinema can succeed and remain true to their voices. Women
In Motion has given me this certainty.
The power inherent to the dominant structure is unhealthy for anyone forced
to wield it. However, men are taught to, given the blue-print from infancy.
Women are not. While men inherit a history chock-full of names and deeds,
and a very visible support system that ensures self-confidence, women
inherit much the opposite: a system that is structured against their interests.
Women film-makers today must take up the challenge of seeking out the
few voices that exist in our film history, and, more importantly, create
voices today. through this, women can find the true strength inherent
in their voices. For it will be their own, not something borrowed, nor
constructed to insure their inequality.
WORK CITED
Rosenberg, Jan. Women Reflections: The Feminist Film Movement. Ann
Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1979.
|
|
