|
Latent Image - Spring 2000 The Oscars: Women's Constraint as Objects of DesireBy We all become anxious to see our favorite stars walking down that
crimson carpet. For the 72nd Academy Awards show and in the year 2000,
it was not surprising to find entertainment websites and television shows
building up the event. While the show is a well-known tradition that recognizes
the best in film, it is difficult to ignore the emphasis on style and
fashion that always arrives at Oscar time. The Academy Awards is partly
a ceremony and foremost, a fashion show. While it is predominantly females
that put their style on display it is important to When questioning the woman's role in the media, how it is portrayed,
and who is portraying her, we must examine Marxist feminism. Defined as
the "linking of specific female oppressions to the larger structure
of capitalism and to oppressions of other groups, Marxist feminism Who is receiving these economic benefits? At the Oscars you will usually hear reporters, entertainment news anchors, or the actors themselves making various comments about their attire that was designed by, for example, Jean Paul Gaultier, or Calvin Klein, or Versace. The actresses are, in a sense, marketing tools. While going to receive recognition for their hard work and talent they are at the same time advertising for the advantage or profit of an industry mostly run by males. Through the power of the media (both television and the Internet) companies are able to exploit the "desired object for their own capitalist concerns. The Academy of Motion Arts and Sciences
began in 1927 as a non-profit organization consisting of only thirty-six
members, who were mostly production executives and film luminaries of Women's fashion and style have been present since the very beginning. In the 1930's the stars would wear their own jewelry as a symbol of their wealth and status in order to "leave their fans in awe. The actresses at the time were quoted as "bringing out all of their available gems to reinforce their status as true screen legends. From the beginning there was a presence of vanity in female movie stars. It was this vanity that seemed to replace what was essentially beauty. When I say beauty, I am speaking of what it means to be a woman, womanhood. Let me quickly explain the difference of beauty versus vanity. One exists in nature and one is man-made. One requires freedom, and one is constrained by the social world. The beauty of the Hollywood actress is found in her art, her talent as an individual, as a human being. The vanity is found in her display as "the object of desire. We greatly damage ourselves by carrying the notion that this vanity is in fact beauty. We should now ask why it is that women must advertise on Oscar night, while men wear basically the same thing. The tuxedo remains simple, conservative, and timeless. Advertisers are not trying to sell tuxedos. When I went to the Academy's official website they had several links relating to fashion and one being much less detailed called, "Men's Style. When I went to "Men's Style there was only one article that discussed the evolution of the tuxedo. This section used words and phrases like "the creative black tie, "formal Hollywood, and "Bold personal statement of style. "Men's Style draws a strong contrast to the various comments found in "Women's Style. Next to a full bodied photograph of Kate Blanchett there is a caption that says, "Whether it's a woman's first, or first of many, appearances at the Academy Awards show, what she wears can say it all. Another stark contrast between males and females at the Oscars can be seen in the composition of photographs in magazines and on websites, and also on entertainment news programs. Men are usually shot from the shoulders up. Many of the pictures and videos show them conversing or laughing with other men or interviewers. While on the other hand, women's bodies are usually photographed completely. A lot of times you will see a picture of the actress standing all by herself in a pose. She has not been caught in the middle of something, but rather ready and eager to display herself. She smiles and turns. The only times that you will see a head-and- shoulders shot of a woman is if she has on an admirable piece of jewelry that requires a closer look at. So how is an actress defined? A trend analyst for the Oscars, Tom Julian, remembers a moment in film that he regards highly, "One of my favorite style moments in film occurs during Sabrina. when Audrey Hepburn (every designer's favorite icon!), looking drop-dead gorgeous in a white gown with black embroidery and a flowing train, enters the formal party just as she returns from Paris.” This is the way Hepburn's character is perceived, through her appearance. Again, we can see the influence of the fashion industry in what determines the capturing element in cinema. The female form is something to look at. And not only is she something to look at but she can be looked at for a profit. The "desired object” is actually used to sell objects, while using entertainment as its undermining vehicle. While the Academy was started in order "to advance the arts and sciences of motion pictures,” it is interesting to see where the advancement has moved towards. Art must be a viable outlet for expression and liberation. Liberation cannot be achieved through vanity. Beauty must be recognized. Is the media, or more specifically film, an area for women to find liberation or remain as "objects of desire”? |