whoa

thedreadvampy:

male gaze is not ‘when person look sexy’ or 'when misogynist make film’

death of the author is not 'miku wrote this’

I don’t think you have to read either essay to grasp the basic concepts

death of the author means that once a work is complete, what the author believes it to mean is irrelevant to critical analysis of what’s in the text. it means when analysing the meaning of a text you prioritise reader interpretation above author intention, and that an interpretation can hold valid meaning even if it’s utterly unintentional on the part of the person who created the thing. it doesn’t mean 'i can ignore that the person who made this is a bigot’ - it may in fact often mean 'this piece of art holds a lot of bigoted meanings that the author probably wasn’t intentionally trying to convey but did anyway, and it’s worth addressing that on its own terms regardless of whether the author recognises it’s there.’ it’s important to understand because most artists are not consciously and vocally aware of all the possible meanings of their art, and because art is communal and interpretive. and because what somebody thinks they mean, what you think somebody means, and what a text is saying to you are three entirely different things and it’s important to be able to tell the difference.

male gaze is a cinematographic theory on how films construct subjectivity (ie who you identify with and who you look at). it argues that film language assumes that the watcher is a (cis straight white hegemonically normative) man, and treats men as relatable subjects and women as unknowable objects - men as people with interior lives and women as things to be looked at or interacted with but not related to. this includes sexual objectification and voyeurism, but it doesn’t mean 'finding a lady sexy’ or 'looking with a sexual lens’, it means the ways in which visual languages strip women of interiority and encourage us to understand only men as relatable people. it’s important to understand this because not all related gaze theories are sexual in nature and if you can’t get a grip on male gaze beyond 'sexual imagery’, you’re really going to struggle with concepts of white or abled or cis subjectivities.

  1. starfaringships reblogged this from broadlybrazen
  2. valmun reblogged this from madame-mongoose
  3. wherenightmaresroost reblogged this from jounetsunosymphonia
  4. jounetsunosymphonia reblogged this from veverydayisanewday
  5. veverydayisanewday reblogged this from aoiyuuzora
  6. aoiyuuzora reblogged this from obsidianstudy
  7. ceruleann-berry reblogged this from tumultuwus
  8. juuuno2048 reblogged this from tumultuwus
  9. tumultuwus reblogged this from woodwool
  10. sky-fi-fangirl reblogged this from cthulhu-with-a-fez
  11. sir-dweeblet reblogged this from odd-ratz
  12. babell reblogged this from thedreadvampy
  13. sparkierose reblogged this from holdyourghost
  14. fiverfrank reblogged this from dogmotifs
  15. random-autie-fangirl reblogged this from themoonking
  16. ahhxl reblogged this from cactopies
  17. skaiandestiny reblogged this from radioactivecrush
  18. radioactivecrush reblogged this from jackquell
  19. small-cog reblogged this from photonmike
  20. helluvamystery reblogged this from lordkingsmith
  21. kirararr reblogged this from kisilinramblings
  22. kesavibesxxx reblogged this from dogmotifs
  23. mistyheartrbs reblogged this from dykerightsmp3
  24. orcpussy666 reblogged this from salamancialilypad
  25. thedreadvampy posted this
    male gaze is not 'when person look sexy' or 'when misogynist make film'...death of the...
Blog comments powered by Disqus