Showing posts with label adrianne rich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adrianne rich. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 9, 2024

The Films of Celine Sciamma: Water Lilies

 


The first film in my analysis of the films of Celine Sciamma, is the coming-of-age drama, Water Lilies. In this debut, Sciamma’s shot composition weaves a cinematic tapestry that heralds her as an up-and-coming auteur. Inter-stitched with a gender and sexually fluid color palette, Sciamma constructs a female gaze that captures the tumultuously turbulent acrimony of adolescence, where bourgeoning desire threatens to unravel fragile friendships. Water Lilies is the first in a loose trilogy about the slow transition out of childhood (along with Tomboy, and Girlhood). The production of this freshman film supports the consistent albeit mixed feminist messaging the director will be known for; however, upon greater reflection, some of the film’s specific sequences and overall choices may not have aged well in hindsight.

 


PLOT

When young Marie goes to a synchronized swim meet to support her best friend, she unexpectedly becomes enthralled with Floriane (Adele Haenel). As Marie gets more and more drawn in by Floriane’s charm and attention, she begins to question her sexuality, straining the relationship she has with her best friend who is also on a journey of sexual discovery. This film reminds us that regardless of the romantic path one takes, no matter how many twists and turns it makes, all roads lead to heartache.

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            To understand the historical impact of Water Lilies, both the production and the film’s setting need to be interrogated. Due to films being a human cultural product, movies become infused with the time period in which they are created. This can be seen in the technology that is used on screen, filming techniques, pop cultural references used, all the way down to the film grain and sound mixing. Each of these aspects of the industry, perceptibly or imperceptibly, leave a trace as to the film’s historical affect, like a smudgy fingerprint on glass.  Depending on the type of film being made, this can either be an avenue or a barrier to the story being told. Sciamma’s first film taking place contemporaneously with the time period of the film’s production, allows it to avoid any complicated temporal anachronisms that are possible in period pieces or future (set) films. Thus, Water Lilies production and the film’s setting represent French Independent cinema, and the sexual politics of the late 2000’s

            Gay and sexual politics of the late 2000’s

During the writing and the development of Water Lilies there were transformative events in the LGBTQAI+ community. Sciamma, herself a lesbian GenXer, understands the difficulty in navigating the sexual politics of an identity that, during the time that she was a teenager, was not only less accepted, but abhorred. Thus, given this context, Water Lilies is both subversive for the time, and a beacon for the rights, representation and acceptance that was to come.

            The gender and sexual politics of the late 00’s was a period of growing pains. The white heterosexual hegemony was weaning slightly. Thus, fearful of losing that power, there was an attempt at the clawing rollback of gay rights in the states (California passing Proposition 8 making Gay marriage illegal) and abroad. In France, civil partnerships had been made legal in 1999 which, at the time, felt like a segregationist tactic of “separate but equal.” On the surface, these bills would give those that filed for domestic partnerships the same rights as a heterosexual couple outside of the name. However, these exclusionary policies were not only used as a social buffer between gays, lesbian and “the straights”- it outwardly misrepresented a cultural tacit rejection of anything that was non heterosexual.

            In Sociology, there is a term called cultural lag. This is the understanding that when a behavior, object or idea is introduced or implemented into a society or culture, there is an unspecified amount of time during which cultural acceptance is developed before it is implemented into the Bureaucratic processes of the social structure.  Technology is usually the easiest example of this: the internet existed before it became a cultural necessity. Yet, because of the power imbalance between those who hold high status positions in valued social institutions (military Governments and Economy) and the people whom they are supposed to serve, there is an extra barrier to the implementation of change regardless of its cultural acceptance. This is the impasse that sexual politics found itself in during the late 2000’s.

 Even in 2007, most of the world’s population was either supportive of or neutral towards another person’s sexuality. Yet, those in power were resistant to the will of their people and consistently pushed back against the efforts of sexual equality. This pushback was usually couched in the same rhetoric of neutrality using it to keep individuals in the proverbial “closet” or “on the DL" to limit public presentations of their identity; effectively using the rhetoric of ambivalence as a shield from criticism. Though, it is hard to accept that anyone who goes out of their way to deny the personhood of another group is uncaring. Therefore, the 2007-2008 resistance to gay rights was the product of the powerful’s persnickety perniciousness to shore up their worldview in the levees of institutional authority, indicating not only their discrimination but admitting to the fragility of their own values.

This tug of war against the people and the powerful over sexual politics has caused a “seesawing” effect on the validation of Non heterosexual identities and everything under the LGBTQAI+ banner. In addition to the 2008 California law mentioned above, the US federal government was also under the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law back in 1997 that defined marriage as only between one man and one woman. This was later attempted to be codified by the Bush administration in 2004 with the Marriage protection Amendment that died in congress. Later, the Obama Administration supported bills in congress that would weaken DOMA, eventually being reversed through the US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell V. Hodges that saw Gay marriage legalized in 2015. It was with this landmark decision that there was finally an alignment between the law and the cultural acceptance of sexual identities outside of the vanilla hetero/cis normativity.

 However, as the United States has flirted with fascism with the presidency of Donald Trump, we’ve witnessed the end of federal protections for reproductive rights for women. Roe v. Wade being repealed just shy of its 50-year anniversary. The court (with 3 new Trump appointees at the time) ultimately overturned the 1973 decision by questioning its rationalization around privacy. A rationalization that was also used in Obergefell due to the precedence established in Roe; making the former now vulnerable to appeal. This is happening while a majority of Americans still support Gay rights and same sex relationships. Yet, recent and relentless Conservative attacks have fueled public skepticism and waned support for trans and nonbinary people in the US.  

Being of French nationality, it is reasonable to assume that Sciamma wasn’t impacted by these contradictions in the States. Although, historically France has been far more progressive than the US when it comes to issues of sexuality and gender, still, between 2012 and 2013 the battle between the conservative and socialist parties in France were ambivalent about same sex marriage; ultimately solidifying France as a liberal nation with the passage of the Gay marriage bill in 2013, 6 years after the release of the film.

As mentioned at the beginning of this section, because Water Lilies drew upon the director’s own experiences, the revelation of attraction and expression is inherently framed from a Gen X perspective during a far more conservative time, even in France. Thus, a lot of the film, especially the intimacy between Marie and Floriane, happens behind closed doors, in locker rooms, and secret places in public parks. While this is typical of youthful sexual transgressions regardless of identity (in part because young adults do not have access to many private spaces without parental or adult supervision) these practices were necessary in the gay and lesbian subculture during times when expression of such an identity was met with criminal prosecution, violence and even death. Sciamma deftly illustrates not only the confusion of an emerging unbridled sexuality, but the added vexation of navigating the underground codes of sexual identities and behaviors that are not accepted by the cisgendered vanilla sex breeders.

            


            Production

           The inspiration for Water Lilies came from Sciamma’s experiences with the sport of synchronized swimming. The original French title, which translates into “birth of the octopus” was later changed for an international release. Sciamma felt that the term ‘water lilies’ was an insightful analogy to the way that female synchronized swimmers need to present themselves: athletic and strong but with a performative femininity. Water lilies being both of the soil and water, thriving in the silt of rivers and lakes, with resiliency hardy enough to break the surface tension of the water to flower above. In either case, with water lilies or French synchronized swimmers, the real labor underwater is never seen.  

            Being an independent and a considerably low budget film, not much else is known about the production of the film, beyond the knowledge that, sometime after this film wrapped, Sciamma and Haenel began a romantic relationship. In hindsight, considering that Sciamma and Haenel met on the set of Water Lilies, and the age gap between them (Sciamma was between 29-30 and Haenel was 17-18 years old at the time they met), calls for a reexamination of the film through the framing of power.

Regardless of when the romantic relationship between Sciamma and Haenel began, the initial cultivation of their relationship was not one of equal power. And while these power dynamics are indeed fluid and can change, a relationship that has a foundation of an imbalance of power is hard to disrupt, especially when that imbalance of power in a professional relationship is reinforced by the imbalance of the age gap between them. Consider the difficulties in the shift in power dynamics between parents and children, and how even adult children kowtow to parents and their desires when that subjugation is no longer required, nor beneficial. This imbalance became foundational in the initial relationship between Sciamma and Haenel that complicates a feminist reading of the film. An example of this is Sciamma’s thoughts on the sex and nudity of the characters that are supposed to be below the age of consent (even though all of the actors portraying the teens were over the age of 18):

"In the casting, I told each girl the whole scenario, including that scene in which one girl deflowers the other. You can't just say to a girl, 'if you're naked, that's your character.' No, it's her body. So I was always honest. I said that I would not betray them, that I would not take anything from them, that they should give me something. By itself. If they wanted to participate, they knew how far they had to go. I was surprised that they were immediately excited. But the story was really about them, they felt connected to it. And those parents were just as excited. They even helped me to lie to the government because I had given them a clean version of the script to convince them. The parents supported that story," Sciamma recalled.[1]    

 

On the surface this is very inclusive and provides the girls with the agency and autonomy to collaboratively create the story that Sciamma wanted to tell. However, reframe this statement with the knowledge of Sciamma’s and Haenel’s subsequent relationship, and through this lens, these statements seem predatory.

            Additionally, using the framing of Sciamma’s and Haenel’s relationship, the praise for the film becoming the template for a feminist female gaze in filmmaking is also tainted. Throughout the film, Floriane (Haenel) is the subject of Marie’s desire, often illustrated through the lens of the camera. Yet, because it is Sciamma behind the camera, and she is the person whom inevitably chooses which shots to use from hours of footage, any image that presents Floriane’s sexuality, regardless of the presumed agency that is presented, again seems predatory. It is difficult to believe, given both the final product and the history of filmmaking, that Sciamma wasn’t sexualizing Haenel well-before they became a couple. Thus, it is odd for a film to be praised for its depiction of girls, women and the agency afforded to them to express their sexuality, when the person who was ultimately responsible for constructing that narrative was objectifying one of them at the same time.

If I can be afforded some latitude for speculation, one of the reasons that this framing isn’t more commonly lauded at this film is due to the same sex nature of the relationship. Currently, as of this writing, allegations of sexual misconduct have been leveed against author Neil Gaiman. Gaiman (similar to Sciamma and Haenel) began a relationship with a 20-year-old victim after meeting them at a book signing 2 years prior. Almost instantaneously, Gaiman is “being canceled.”, and rightfully so. Yet, Sciamma remains a pillar of feminist filmmaking. A partial explanation for this could be the simplicity of popularity. Gaiman is more popular than Sciamma and thus garners more public attention. Additionally, the relationship between Sciamma and Haenel began and ended without attention or fanfare before social media became a factor in a majority of celebrity lives. Finally, one cannot discount the additional factor of the common age gaps and complicated entanglement of same sex relationships; many of which are based in a foundation of sexual mentorship. In this context, we can understand how Sciamma’s possible transgressions are made invisible, but no less problematic.

 


SOCIAL ANALYSIS

            Water Lilies is a story about the blossoming of sexuality in teenage girls and the emotional torrent that accompanies its revelation. Many of the sociological themes that this film encircles are ones of learning, self-discovery and introspection. Each of the three protagonists have to navigate this new (to them) gender and sexual landscape, coming to different solutions, conclusions and revelations between them, themselves and the rest of the world. To understand this further, the concepts of gender socialization, the eroticization of youth and the intersections of love and sex need to be examined.

            Gender Socialization

             Socialization is rudimentally defined as a social learning process, begins before birth and contains multitudes: the learning of both the self, and society; its rules, regulations and ways of acceptable behavior. This process needs to be engrossingly all-encompassing because it is used as a mechanism of social control. The internalization of its process and learned socially acceptable behavior(s) maintains the social order by constructing a law-abiding productive member of society. Yet, since most societies value patriarchal and white supremacist rule, the social order that emerges, and the learning process that is developed to ensure its reproduction, becomes inherently racist and misogynistic.

            Gender Socialization: the process by which individuals understand what it means to be male, female, and trans, along the gender spectrum within a particular society. Some societies see and expand upon the gendered spectrum, while others, most others, organize around a traditional, exclusionary binary.  Through the gender binary, gender stereotypes and assumptions emerge as concrete facts: boys are boys and girls are girls, to eventually become men and women.  Girls get the message that their value is chiefly located in their body and their relationship with boys and men; learning to cultivate their bodies, dreams and desires around the needs of others. It is from this that they are convinced they only find worth. If they dare to dream for themselves, they are consistently sanctioned and pressured to return to behaviors of subservience.

 Under such surveillance women lose their identity, becoming strangers to themselves (de Beauvoir 2011). Any identity outside of the roles of being wives and mothers is an identity which is perceived as one that a girl/woman steals for themselves. However, if these two identity conditions are mandatory and must be fulfilled prior to anything else, what is then framed as stealing, is instead a conditional perk of incarceration. Female childhood and adolescence are seething with the rage against their imprisonment in these roles, often thrashing themselves against the bars of their social prison, inflicting self-harm (de Beauvoir 2011).              

Because girls and women are valued in their bodies through the binary, the detention of society’s daughters begins around the subject of sex.  Beyond the simple objectification of women as sex objects or vessels for the next generation (through reproduction) this valuation frames women’s existence as being in service to others, typically men. Therefore, all these mechanisms by which girls and women are policed, are for the benefit of men. Laura Carpenter (2005) discusses this through the prism of virginity loss.

According to Carpenter (2005), girls and boys are socialized to perceive virginity differently. While boys are socialized to see their virginity as a stigma, something that needs to be gotten rid of as soon as possible, girls are socialized to see their virginity as a gift. However, it is not a gift that the girls give to themselves, to indicate body autonomy and agency, but a gift to their (presumed) heterosexual partner. This places undo attention and value on female virginity to the point that the perception of a girl/women’s morality is tied to whether or not they have had sex (Valenti 2009).

Sciamma inverts this importance of virginity in the film through Floriane, who is a virgin but has a slutty reputation among boys. When she is no longer able to delay the advances of one of her many male suitors, and to avoid the humiliation of being discovered as a virgin, she convinces Marie to deflower her through digital stimulation/penetration. This non heterosexual act is done in the service of men, specifically to give Floriane access to male power. Floriane does this without any reluctance or consideration for Marie’s feelings, which end up being hurt through Floriane’s emotional manipulation and lack of compassion.    

Since women get the message that their value is in their bodies, girls and women often conclude that one way to glean power, autonomy and authority is through the patriarchal bargain- when women lean into patriarchal, and ultimately unequal systems of power for the stability and security that behavior will provide. This is done in part through girls and women recognizing their body as currency. Yet, while girls and women can wrestle away power from men and the patriarchy in general, this behavior, even though it is framed as a subversion, or a rebellion, it is still in the service of men. The control that women assert over their heterosexual partners and the general domestic sphere is purposefully designed to provide men with women to support them. The patriarchal system conditions men to not be socialized to a variety of basic domestic duties while sanctioning women more harshly for those same behaviors. Thus, to avoid being sanctioned by others (and perceived as a “bad” wife and “mother” the roles from which Society draws girls and women’s value) many women feel pressure to exhibit control over the home and participate in this patriarchal bargain; convincing themselves that it is the only way to access power. This is contrary to the truth that the patriarchal structure conditions boys and men into a state of arrested development (often framing girlfriends and wives as “mothers they can fuck”) which then conditions women to fill/exploit that weakness to gain power that they were denied by virtue of being girls/women. Then, because this system is also misogynistic, even when women do the very things society tells them they need to do to gain value, they are still sanctioned for it. This is typically done through slut shaming or framing their behavior as manipulative and controlling.

Water Lilies shows Floriane as beginning to understand the patriarchal bargain and her body as currency. Not only does she understand the value of a sexual reputation in getting interest and attention from men, from which she can gain status, but the way that she uses access to her body as “payment” for services rendered (Giving Marie a kiss after she deflowers Floriane for the purpose of male attention). Also, by framing this as a transaction, she keeps an emotional distance from these behaviors and unfortunately does not recognize or care about the emotional fallout of her actions; for Marie, or anyone around her.  Floriane’s use of erotic capital is the mechanism by which these misogynistic traps of false consciousness, learned through the process of gender socialization, hurt everyone around her, regardless of gender or sexual identity.




Uses of the Erotic and The Lesbian Existence

            Because women have been taught to use their erotic capital and their bodies as currency for the support of men, this strips the inherit power of the erotic that women can use to validate themselves. According to Audre Lorde (2007) part of the social control of women in a misogynistic patriarchal system is the suppression and appropriation of the erotic, ignoring it as a source of information and power in women’s lives.  (p 53-54)

            [Women] have been warned against [the erotic] all [their] lives by the male world, which values this depth of feeling enough to keep women around in order to exercise it in the service of men, but which fears this same depth too much to examine the possibilities of it within themselves

This is especially true when looking at the way the patriarchal system discourages female friendships, often framing each other as competition for male attention. This is born out of the fragility of masculinity at the core of any misogynistic patriarchy. Because the culture has organized the value of women to be in the service of men, the latent fear that underlines this domination and oppression is the lack of value and importance men have in women’s lives. Women become instrumental to men’s lives and their livelihood (part of the mechanism to control men too) especially in heterosexual relationships to their benefit; men who are married with children report higher rates of happiness and wellness. Yet, cis/het women consistently report higher levels of health, happiness and wellness when they are unmarried and childless. This not only shows that men and women are socialized into norms and behaviors in opposition to their overall happiness, but it also consciously separates women from the source of their power; each other. The alienation and competition of women is a socially constructed mechanism of social control, because empowered women are a danger to the patriarchal social order. Their erotic power is a lifeforce that can be cultivated through girls and women’s relationship to each other (Lorde 2007).

    The erotic empowerment of women through their relationships was coined by Adrianne Rich as “The lesbian Existence.” As I explained in a previous essay:

Rich exclaims:

“The Lesbian existence comprises both the breaking of a taboo and the rejection of a compulsory way of life. It is also a direct or indirect attack on male right of access to women. But it is more than these, although we may first begin to perceive it as a form of nay-saying to patriarchy, an act of resistance. It has of course included role playing, self-hatred, breakdown, alcoholism, suicide, and intrawoman violence; we romanticize at our peril what it means to love and act against the grain, and under heavy penalties; and lesbian existence has been lived (unlike, say, Jewish or Catholic existence) without access to any knowledge of a tradition, a continuity, a social underpinning. The destruction of records and memorabilia and letters documenting the realities of lesbian existence must be taken very seriously as a means of keeping heterosexuality compulsory for women, since what has been kept from our knowledge is joy, sensuality, courage, and community, as well as guilt, self-betrayal, and pain”

As the term "lesbian" has been held to limiting, clinical associations in its patriarchal definition, female friendship and comradeship have been set apart from the erotic, thus limiting the erotic itself. But as we deepen and broaden the range of what we define as lesbian existence, as we delineate a lesbian continuum, we begin to discover the erotic in female terms: as that which is unconfined to any single part of the body or solely to the body itself, as an energy not only diffuse but, as Audre Lorde (2007) has described it, omnipresent in "the sharing of joy, whether physical, emotional, psychic," and in the sharing of work; as the empowering joy which "makes us less willing to accept powerlessness, or those other supplied states of being which are not native to me, such as resignation, despair, self-effacement, depression, and self-denial.” (p54)[2]

            In Water Lilies, it is heavily implied through genre conventions (of the coming-of-age story tropes) that Floriane, like Marie, is trying to understand and navigate her own sexuality; her eroticization by cis/het boys and men allowing her to experiment. This “freedom” is afforded to her because she is a cis/het fem presenting female. An identity whose sexuality, and its exploration, has been co-opted and appropriated by both cis/het men and the porn industry. Because of this, girls and women can more easily experiment with non-heterosexual behaviors openly and in public without much sanction, as long as it is framed as being performative for male attention. This causes many gay and bisexual girls to go through a period of trying to pass as straight (Orenstein 2016). It is possible that this is what Floriane is contemplating and working through in the film, without an understanding of how her actions are affecting others around her. It comes down to whether the audience interprets her actions as being with calculated malicious intent, or as confusion, ignorance and oblivion to her own charisma.

  


CONCLUSION

            Celine Sciamma’s debut film, Water Lilies, is the opening volley in a coming-of-age trilogy that investigates social, gender and sexual development through an attempted feminist lens using the female gaze. Sciamma mostly achieves this with dialogue, genuine reactions from actors and shot compositions that try to get inside the mind of teenage Parisian girls as they navigate the trials of gender socialization and tribulations of their “flowering” sexual identity. Yet, Sciamma’s later relationship with one of the film’s stars, reveals that like the history of the male gaze in cinema, the female gaze can also be predatory.

 

REFERENCES

de Beauvior, Simone 2011. The Second Sex New York: Vintage Books.

Carpenter, Laura M. 2005. Virginity Lost An Intimate Portrait of First Sexual Experiences. New York: New York University Press.

Lorde, Audre 2007.  Sister Outsider Essays and Speeches by Audre Lorde Berkely: Crossing Press

Orenstein, Peggy 2016. Girls and Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape. New York: Harper Press

Valenti, Jessica 2009.  The Purity Myth: How America’s Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women Berkely: Seal Press.  


Monday, December 10, 2018

The Feminism of “Suspiria” terrifies the Patriarchy




INTRODUCTION

Luca Guadagnino’s “Suspiria” is a remake of the classic psychedelic horror film of the same name directed by Dario Argento in 1977. Due to the affection for both the original film and Argento himself, Guadagnino crafted (a sometimes literal) spellbinding film that both honors the original, updates the themes, and deeply explores the diversity of the female experience and the power of female unity in what Adrianne Rich calls the lesbian existence. It is through these themes, cinematography and Foley art that casts Suspira as a modern horror masterpiece. It is unfortunate that regardless of the brilliance of this hewed piece of artful cinema, this film has yet to catch on with audiences; critics and audiences alike citing the run time ( a hefty 151min) and pacing problems as some of the chief complaints with many a review calling the movie dull. The film’s tepid reception is not a reflection of the quality of the film, instead it is indicative of a culture that has become addicted to spectacle[1], and more acutely, unaccustomed to dark disturbing tales of femininity and the ascendency of women through a matriarchically hierarchy, as they vie for power. In short, this is a film completely about women and their relationships with themselves that has nothing to do with men, and for those with fragile masculinities, reinforces deep seeded cultural fears of female empowerment.[2]


PLOT

Set in 1977 against the backdrop of a hostage crisis in a still divided Germany, Suzie Bannion (Dakota Johnson) auditions for The Markos Company a prestigious, yet mysterious modern dance troupe in Berlin. Once accepted she is taken under the wing of choreographer Madame Blanc (Tilda Swinton) to be groomed as one of the group’s star dancers. As Suzie becomes deeply entrenched in the inner workings of the Markos house, she discovers a hidden world of Occultism, magic and witchcraft, fracturing from a power struggle between the organization’s top two matriarchs.    



FILM ANALYSIS

            Guadagnino’s Suspiria is a masterclass in filmmaking. Every aspect of this film is painstaking and meticulously planned out, there is nothing here that seems accidental. Guadagnino has stated that as a soft remake of the Argento film, he made choices about color, light music and mood that would separate the film from the much beloved Argento classic. Where Argento was colorful, Guadagnino was muted, Where Argento was blackly comedic and gonzo in the zeitgeist of the time, and Guadagnino was introspective and subtle. In fact, Guadagnino worked tirelessly to separate his film from the original in hopes to reducing comparisons due to the films specific diversions.  Suspiria (2018) is not Argento’s film and Guadagnino knew that any imitation would not be welcome. So he decided to make the film his own.  Unfortunately, we seem to still be stuck in the gravitational pull of popular nostalgia and the form of comfort that it can provide a mass audience. Thus, it is clear that many people were looking for an Argento update rather than the rich, layered, allegorical narrative that Guadagnino provides through the Cinematography, sound and soundtracks art and film directing, and a trifecta of performances by Tilda Swinton makes this version of Suspiria superior to its predecessor.

Cinematography

 It is though the film’s cinematography that Guadagnino solidifies the differences between this rendition of Suspiria and Argento’s vision.  As mentioned above, Argento’s film is full of bright neon and psychedelic colors that is more invoked by Panos Cosmatos’  Mandy than its own remake whereas cinematographer  Sayombhu Mukdeeprom subdues the gonzo maniacal intensity into something grimier and grainy that is far more evocative for a film about ethereal supernatural forces. Guadagnino’ s film seems to tap into a different style of the Post Civil Rights Zietgiest before the era of Reganist excess thus being more reminiscent of 1970’s crime thrillers[3] than the original film. The use of shadows and dark browns gives the audience a feeling of constant dread. It is this look that gives texture to the backdrop into which the story unfolds; adding to its bleak perspective. The harsh reality of an economically shattered and divided Germany weighs on the film and intensifies the story before us. Mukdeeprom and Guadagnino give us no respite and nowhere to hide. That results in a nail biting psychological tension that grips the audience like the taunt muscles of someone being drawn and about to be quartered.


Foley Art

            The other constructive style of this film that intensifies the atmospheric tension that Mukdeeprom creates is the use of sound.  The music for Suspiria was composed by Radiohead singer Thom Yorke and while his contributions to the films soundtrack and music are important in keeping the tone of the film, the more awe-inspiring work that adds to the distinctive ambiance is the work from the Foley team of Nicolas Becker, Olivier Guillaume, Carsten Richter, Hanse Warns and Olga Pasternak. Foley is the film term for the sound effects of everyday life named for sound effect artist Richard Foley.  It is their job to recreate the ambient sound within the film. Therefore, the Foley artist is attempting to create and or maintain a film’s mood through ambient noise.  However, the Foley team on Suspiria is not only integral in maintaining the bleak haunting texture of the film, but adding to the social commentary of the film’s prose.
            One of the best examples of the impact of the Foley art on the overall film is during Susie’s dance audition for the company. Guadagnino smartly strips all of the sound out of the scene which emphasizes the work of the Foley artists.  In the scene, the creaking and groaning of the wooden floor as Susie moves through her routine with a force that epitomizes the strength in her body.  We hear her deliberate and controlled breath as she strikes each pose hearing the twisting of her body, the whipping of her hair, and the magnitude of the density of her body as she crashes upon the floor. The result of the Foley’s work is the reinforcement of the power and athleticism of ballet dancers and the female form in general. While this power is on display throughout the film in other small ways (I am thinking of the “jumping” scene) none compare with this first scene.


            The other example that takes this inherit power of the female form and takes it into the realm of the Supernatural is the scene of Olga’s destruction. Here the power of Susie’s dancing is displayed through the violence upon Olga’s body.  The scene of Susie’s dancing of the lead of the new piece called “Volk” is intercut with the destruction of dissident and disillusioned dancer Olga. With each movement, Susie systematically breaks down Olga from the inside; until she is nothing but a contorted heap upon the floor. The Foley art on full display echoes each break of Olga’s bones and heightened screams as she is mangled through Susie’s movements. Through this Foley work the power of Susie and the power of the coven is on full display.


SOCIAL ANALYIS

Laying the Ground work

This film is dense and rich with distinct content that is ripe for Sociological analysis. There have been many reviews that reinforce the film’s social importance. Some comparisons to holocaust analysis and the parallels to the Alt-Right to a repudiation of masculinity. That being said, the major criticism that is levied against the film is just how feminist it is. There have been some arguments leveed against the film it is misogyny masquerading as feminism that, as one review noted:

[There is an] unintended, undercurrent of misogyny, epitomized not only by the theme of witchcraft (a manifestation of men’s fear of women’s power, if ever there was one), but in the film’s frequent nudity and violent objectification of women’s bodies. Two scenes feature female characters being grotesquely contorted by supernatural forces. There’s a thin line between indicting the male gaze, as Guadagnino claims to have intended, and reveling in it.”[4]

In social analysis, especially about gender, it is difficult to parse out whether the use of the male gaze and sexist troupes are subverting it or reinforcing it. This all comes down to individual interpretations on the execution of that theme.  For instance, Luca Guadagnino, in an interview with Jezebel outlines his feminist intent for the film[5], but that does not negate the fact that most of the individuals behind the scenes, the architects of the film are men. This then leads into the basic and fundamental questions of how well can men tell female stories, and can those stories be feminist?
Generally, if I could make a crude summation of the literature that I have head and been privy to, the answer is complicated. Yes, men can tell stories about women, and those stories can be feminist, as long as they involve women behind the scenes, making them integral to the process with the understanding that there is no one singular female voice. One of the most important roles of this collaboration is to make visible the internalized masculinity and or misogyny that the male creators have been socialized to. It is important for any male creative to be self-reflexive about their understandings of gender and be able to be challenged by others allowing the piece of art to be as egalitarian as possible.[6]  This is in addition to having a whole host of racially, economically and ability diverse female creators of new content.  But if men want to create, they also need to be inclusive. However, it is unfortunate that regardless of this increase in inclusivity, there are some, (granted a loud and vocal minority) that the feminist fundamentals of a film like Suspiria terrifies them; and this is where I believe the movie shines.



Witchcraft, Feminism and Rich’s Lesbian Existence



There has been a long history of Witchcraft being a feminist allegory in media The current resurgence of pagan attitudes and feminism can be traced back to fallen feminist ally Joss Whedon and his use of Witchcraft to not only reinforce feminist sentiments but also as an allegory for Queer identity.  There is an attraction to these pagan beliefs for any marginalized group, but especially for women. Witchcraft provides an independence and power to women that is often denied them in oppressive male dominant structures like the patriarchy.  To that end, actual witchcraft, has positioned itself as a trending alternative to more traditional and historically masculine religious institutions. Witchcraft has a collective component that is less emphasized or absent in those systems and plays on the strength of what Adrianne Rich calls “The Lesbian Existence”. In her article, Rich exclaims:

“Lesbian existence comprises both the breaking of a taboo and the rejection of a compulsory way of life. It is also a direct or indirect attack on male right of access to women. But it is more than these, although we may first begin to perceive it as a form of nay-saying to patriarchy, an act of resistance. It has of course included role playing, self-hatred, breakdown, alcoholism, suicide, and intrawoman violence; we romanticize at our peril what it means to love and act against the grain, and under heavy penalties; and lesbian existence has been lived (unlike, say, Jewish or Catholic existence) without access to any knowledge of a tradition, a continuity, a social underpinning. The destruction of records and memorabilia and letters documenting the realities of lesbian existence must be taken very seriously as a means of keeping heterosexuality compulsory for women, since what has been kept from our knowledge is joy, sensuality, courage, and community, as well as guilt, self-betrayal, and pain”
As the term "lesbian" has been held to limiting, clinical associations in its patriarchal definition, female friendship and comradeship have been set apart from the erotic, thus limiting the erotic itself. But as we deepen and broaden the range of what we define as lesbian existence, as we delineate a lesbian continuum, we begin to discover the erotic in female terms: as that which is unconfined to any single part of the body or solely to the body itself, as an energy not only diffuse but, as Audre Lorde has described it, omnipresent in "the sharing of joy, whether physical, emotional, psychic," and in the sharing of work; as the empowering joy which "makes us less willing to accept powerlessness, or those other supplied states of being which are not native to me, such as resignation, despair, self-effacement, depression, self-denial[7]

Rich identifies in this stitched together passage, (as in the article as a whole) that in a patriarchal system women are taught to see other women as a source of contention and competition for male attention (Thus making heterosexuality compulsory through socialized behaviors, reinforced by rewards from social structural institutions (Marriage, family, Military economy etc.)), and denying the reality of the power women have among and with each other by placing undue emphasis on the type and nature of a relationship rather than what that relationship provides for the individuals involved. Thus, women are socially trained through compulsory heterosexuality and patriarchal oppression that the most important relationships that they have are with men, and that all other relationships are secondary within this structure. This is fundamentally the opposite of what Witchcraft is, and the very thing that Guadagnino’s Suspiria challenges in its story and character representation.   
                 In the story, we find out that the coven was created as a refuge for women after WWII and the Nazi regime. This places the coven in direct opposition to war which is an obvious thinly veiled allegory for masculinity. Additionally, the only male character Jozef Klemperer in the film doomed his wife by not listening to her protests and prophetic statements about the spread of Nazism and in the story he only functions as a witness to the unbridled power of the coven, doomed to forget everyone, including his wife. As Klemperer, is being dragged down to bear witness to the final ritual, the coven’s feminist thesis is succinctly spoken. Miss Huller (Renée Soutendijk) states “When women tell you these things, you don’t believe them. Instead, you call them delusional.”  Additionally, Guadagnino’s remake has no principle male actor’s in any major role. All of the roles, are played by women including Klemperer played to perfection by Tilda Swinton (in one of three roles in the film: the others being Madame Blanc and Madame Markos) thus it is a feminist story portrayed entirely by women[8].
  


Male Panic disguised as Criticism

There have been critiques of this film, usually by men, that attempt to use feminist thinking to “out” this work as being offensive and antifeminist. This technique is called “Abstract Liberalism”.  A technique that is often associated with a critique of Anti-Racism, it is when individuals invoke a liberal idea as a way to justify the dismantling of a behavior, policy or action that would eliminate oppression. A famous example is from Sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s book White Supremacy and Racism in a Post-Civil Rights Era where he identifies abstract liberal language as such “I am for equality that is why I am against affirmative action.” When we apply this notion to the critique of feminism in Suspiria the issues that are often invoked are shallow understandings of feminism (such as people critiquing the female on female violence in this film) or feminist understanding still steeped in a heterosexual male gaze perspective.
 One such instance was when the aforementioned male reviewer believes that the amount of female nudity in the film is offensive and oppressive. This is only offensive and oppressive because, due to the male gaze, the writer cannot see, because our society has not taught him, to see female nudity as anything but exploitative. The writer does not recognize the possibility that female nudity could be empowering, and that his distaste for it, is not a feminist ally critique, but a representation of oppression. He didn’t like the nudity in the film because it wasn’t sexualized in the context of the film. By displaying female nudity as not only something powerful, but also to have nothing to do with men shatters the construction of fragile masculinity that our culture pieces together; Thus, by lashing out at a depiction of the female body that is not designed for sexual titillation of men, reinforces the patriarchal structure rather than dismantles it. Additionally, this male panic was legitimized, and validated in the way that many of the promotional materials for the film visually depicting a source of power in the film as vaginal was later obfuscated in the final film.


 Anecdotally, I saw this disguised male panic happen in every screening I went to. As I would exit the theater, there would be one of my fellow male audience members that would be complaining about the film, (initially citing the film’s length or pace) and as the complaint continued is very quickly shifted into a thinly veiled sexist rant. However, if this film illicit such a visceral response in insecure mediocre white men, then it must be doing something right.



CONCLUSION
In his article The Globalization of Nothing[9]  Sociologist George Ritzer defines nothing as anything that is general mass produced and which ultimately is devoid of distinct and rich content; conversely he identifies “Something” that is uniquely created and that is rich in content and structure. The problem that people have with something is that usually it both has a built in audience that may or may not include a specific individual’s tastes and that it is making a particular statement. Thus, Ritzer concludes that most people believe that they want something rich and distinct, but in reality, based upon consumption patterns, we instead want a large variety of nothing.  The variety of nothing gives the illusion of something while retaining a mass market appeal, and making those products impermanent so they can be replaced. It is a process that supports continuous capitalist consumption and commodification.  To this end, those who were just looking for a carbon copy, updated version of Argento’s film were looking to be satisfied with Nothing. However, it was through the cinematography, art and film direction to the Foley work and casting coupled with rich and dense themes that accompany it, Guadagnino’ s film makes a statement about feminism, women’s relationship with other women and its inherent power. It is the embodiment of Something over so many other films that disappointingly turn out to be nothing.


[1] The only movies that are making money anymore are the big superhero tent poles. This causing an overall reduction of the numbers of films being made from original content.
[2][2]  Thus, if men find that they cannot relate to what is happening on screen, they assume that it is a fault of the film, rather than their own fallibility, and the oversaturation of male stories within our culture.
[6] Though if you listen to the cheeky brilliance of Chief Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, she believes the only way to have equality on the Supreme Court is if you have an all-female court structure for as long as there was an all-male supreme court. J
[7] Compulsory Heterosexuality and the Lesbian Existence by Adrianne Rich
[8] This of course means that is also passes the Bechdel test with flying colors, in terms of representation.