|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Lizzie
Borden: Born Woman You see a preview for a movie coming out
this weekend. It is a romantic-comedy, and from just the previews, you
can recite how the leads will know each other, have a conflict, and then
get together in a happy ending that just might leave you feeling nauseous.
Where is the creativity in this Hollywood movie? What kind of message
is the audience receiving? Women are no doubt receiving “information”
in how to act around men they are interested in romantically, and men
are being told how the perfect woman is beautiful, yet quirky. Where can
you go to get away from Hollywood hype and see some cinema that is thought
provoking? Independent films usually offer a more colorful look at situations
and remind us that cinema can be artistic. Betsy McLane, a contributor
to the book Moviegoing in America: A Sourcebook in the History of Film
Exhibition, reminds us that “American independent features have
been widely heralded as our cinema’s best hope for personal artistic
expression” (265). Taking this further, women in Hollywood cinema
are often represented as men see women or how women ought to be. Anne
Kaplan, author of Women and Film: Both Sides of the Camera, says, “Women
have been forced to develop semiotics of the cinema that would include
theory of reference, since our oppression in the social formation impinges
on us daily” (86). Kaplan means cinema, and many forms of media,
portray the image of how women should or should not be, and we deal with
these ideas everyday of our life. Independent women filmmakers try to
change this. Kaplan expands by saying, “For many women, therefore,
experimental cinema meant a liberation from illusionist representations
that were oppressive and artificial in Hollywood films” (88). Christina
Lane, author of Feminist Hollywood: From Born in Flames to Point Break,
agrees and explains further: “…feminist counter cinema appropriates
dominant codes in order to attend to female subjectivities and modes of
seeing—female spectacle becomes female point of view” (24).
Women filmmakers can do this using a variety of techniques, but avant-garde
techniques seem to be the most popular. Many films from independent women directors
borrow components from various artistic film movements. Some of the movements
which directors will borrow components are cinema verite, as well as the
three divisions into which Kaplan has broken avant-garde. The divisions
are as follows: formalist, experimental with roots in French surrealism,
German expressionism, and Russian formalism; realist political and sociological
documentary with roots in American and British documentaries from the
1930s; and “avant-garde theory (political) film” with roots
in Brecht and Russian directors like Eisenstein and Pudovkin (87). Generally,
films will be a mixture of these, but some may be pure in that they are
experimental or political. The decision on which style would be used is
directly dependent on the subject of the film and the tone the director
would like to portray. Independent filmmaker, Lizzie Borden, uses
avant-garde techniques in her first two independent releases, Born
in Flames (1983) and Working Girls (1986), to help convey feminist
or alternative messages to her audience in a serious manner. Born in Flames
uses what Kaplan calls a “realist political sociological documentary”
approach to relay a feminist message to the audience. Working Girls, on
the other hand, uses a mixture of documentary and “avant-garde theory”
to show and tell audiences her theme of women’s economic concern.
It is the use of this mixture that helps to link the two films together
as Lizzie Borden works. Each film displays sequences that act as a signature
for Borden while serving a purpose in relaying theme. Kaplan asserts, “Women attracted to
the experimental film were often searching for an outlet for their inner
experiences, sensations, feelings, [and] thoughts” (88-89). Borden
uses this film for this purpose. She uses film to convey feminist ideas
and to use the lesser-used gaze of women. Borden has released works both
independently and commercially. Commercially-release Love Crimes
(1992) felt the restrictions of studio influence, and is not one of Borden’s
better works. Ideally, Borden would like to work in the film industry
somewhere between commercial and independent so that issues could still
be addressed while still being widely distributed (Lane 147). All three
of Borden’s films focus on women and issues they face with society
and with themselves. Born in Flames addresses female oppression,
Working Girls looks at concerns women have with their employers
as well as concerns with their economic status, and Love Crimes
focuses on women’s sexuality. The main intent behind all these films
is to change how audience sees women in film. Borden says, “I try
to shift the point of reference so an audience has to identify with female
subjects through stories told from a woman’s point of view”
(qtd. Lucia 7). Borden realizes that many of the themes she takes on are
serious ones and, unlike some directors, she does not intend to draw in
young audiences to her films. Borden usually intends to have women over
thirty years-old relate to her films (Lucia 7). Even with middle-aged
women as the target, the themes and ideas Borden explores are important
in establishing the woman point of view as a valid gaze to use in films. Looking at Borden’s independent releases,
we can see the strongest messages relayed. Born in Flames and Working
Girls are completely different in style, but the themes are similar.
Born in Flames is done in a documentary style complete with a news-like
stand-up by a narrator (Lane 135). Working Girls, on the other
hand, is done in the style of 1970s counter cinema (135). The differences
in styles were intentional to fit each film’s theme. Born in Flames
was intended to be seen as a scenario of what could happen if women and
men achieve true equality, and was intended to lift the spirits of those
worried about negative feelings that had arisen against feminism (Lane
126). Born in Flames took five years to make on a $40, 000 budget,
and employed non-actors and real feminists playing themselves (127-128).
The effect of the use of non-professional actors lent a true documentary
feel to the film and was reminiscent of neo-realism. The generous amount
of time used to complete the film allowed Borden to put the film together
precisely as she wanted so that her exact idea could be relayed. While working on Born in Flames,
Borden discovered that some of the women employed also worked as prostitutes
(Lane 133). This discovery inspired Borden to write and produce Working
Girls. About Borden’s approach to the film’s theme of middle-class
prostitution and the economics of it, Lane says, “[Borden] demystifies
the myth and taboos that enshroud paid sex by routinizing the work of
a middle-class prostitute” (134). Basically, the sex is taken out
of paid-sex, and what is left is the economics of why this business, while
morally debatable, is appealing to women (Lane 126-127). Working Girls
had a working budget of $110, 000, which may have lent to a more polished
look of the film. When making Born in Flames, it seems
that Borden intended to abruptly capture attention by describing it as
an “in-your-face political treatise” (Lucia 6). Further, while
Born in Flames sent out a feminist message, conflicts between various
feminist groups broke out because of Borden’s “militant visions
of women bearing arms” (6). It seems that Borden’s first attempt
at film making was motivated by the objective of having people react to
it, whether it be favorably or not. Born in Flames is set in New York
City after a socialist revolution which supposedly results in men and
women being completely equal. Women have a new power as they are not discriminated
against when looking for jobs, yet the harassment women have always endured
still occurs on some street corners. Adelaide Norris (Jean Satterfield)
is involved in an organization called the Women’s Army which is the
main protector of women’s rights in the government regime. After
an incident in which the Women’s Army on bike patrol stops the rape
of a woman, women known to be apart of the group are fired from their
jobs, including Adelaide. The film follows the thought process and actions
of Adelaide to take violent action against the government for this decision.
Along the way, Adelaide appeals to two under-ground disk jockeys, Honey
(herself) and Isabel (Adele Bertei), who are proponents of women’s
rights but differ on their thoughts about the Women’s Army. After
Adelaide’s imprisonment and assassination, Honey and Isabel come
together to carry out Adelaide’s plan. Besides the openly feminist message of the
film, the style of it attracts attention. It has a very news/documentary
feel to it, and the film opens with a reporter who appears on camera.
This opening of the film immediately sets up the mood that what is about
to happen is serious and, to someone, it is truth. Along with this, at
times it sounds as though the natural sound of the set is being used.
The use of natural sound is common in many newscasts and documentaries,
and the content deals with social issues that directly affect women. An
overall sense of authority or truthfulness seems to surround the film,
but it also feels like political propaganda with its blatant feminist
statements. While being educated in a different point of view, audiences
may feel they are being attacked by feminist thoughts that they must accept
as right. Adding to the documentary-style is how the
tale of peace to violence is not glamorized. When the decision is made
that the Women’s Army must be armed, there is no montage depicting
cartons and cases full of weapons and ammunition arriving. Instead, the
painstaking decision of whether or not violence is necessary is drawn
out and the details of using and buying weapons are shown. The women must
be taught how to use the guns they are given. In a Hollywood film, the
decision to use violence would be compressed into two sequences and the
arrival and knowledge of the weapons would be almost instant. This film
also lacks shot-reverse shot in some dialogue scenes. Instead of using
this common technique, both characters are left in the frame facing the
camera. Instead of only being able to observe the facial expressions of
each character one at a time, the audience is able to see the characters’
body reactions to statements and questions. It looks more real and the
audience is given the choice whom to look at, not forced to concentrate
on one character’s reaction because of a close-up. While the documentary style is intriguing,
what calls attention to itself is the progression of several close-ups
of women’s hands doing traditional women “jobs”. Most of
the rest of the film focuses on women doing traditionally male jobs, such
as construction work. The insertion of this sequence of hands doing familiar
tasks related to women calls for consideration. The sequence involves
the following: giving a bottle to a baby, filing work, wrapping chicken
in a factory, putting a condom on a penis, washing dishes, preparing surgical
instruments, cutting hair, and handing out political fliers. These are
all jobs that women commonly do today, but seems like it may not be as
common as it once was in the film. While we accept them as typical female
tasks, Borden uses the sequence to call attention to how the society in
the film is different than the one we live in. The sequence is around
the middle of the film, and by that time, the viewer has knowledge of
how the film society works and is familiar with some of its characters’
ideals. To see this sequence, you realize how odd it is to have these
jobs associated with females exclusively. You watch the sequence and think,
“A man could do this. Why don’t they?” The sequence highlights
the trivial tasks women are made to think they have to do on a daily basis
because they are female. It is in direct opposition to the rest of the
film and makes the feminist message clearer. Another interesting point of Born in
Flames is the use of the opposite. In the attempted rape scene, instead
of watching the men attack the woman, the audience is put in the middle
of it and experiences it through a series of close-ups that are shaky
and confusing; much like how a real rape victim feels. Further, it is
mentioned at one point in the film that women and minorities would be
given preferences in jobs. It is an unspoken knowledge that white males
almost always are preferenced for jobs. The reversal is surprising at
first because of its complete opposition to the normal expectation of
white males being favored for most jobs. Yet after hearing it, the thought
is why is that not always the case, or why does anyone have to be in favor.
Borden’s second independent film release
was Working Girls. Inspired by some of the women she worked with
in Born in Flames, Borden set out to explore the experiences of
a middle-class prostitute. Paul Jude Beauvais, author of the article “Lizzie
Borden’s Working Girls: Interpretations and the Limits of Ideology,”
succinctly describes Working Girls as “…her attempt to take
[prostitution] from the realm of sex to the realm of work…”
(51). This is Borden’s attempt and the techniques she uses portrays
prostitution in a completely different way. Working Girls is the story of a typical
day of a middle-class hooker in New York City. Molly (Louise Smith) is
the character who the audience gets to know. We follow her as she gets
up and prepares for work just as any one else would. At the brothel, we
meet some of her co-workers, Gina and Dawn, as well as some of the clients.
The audience is able to follow Molly even into some of her sessions with
clients. Molly’s fatigue and frustration with her job is clearly
visible by the end of the film, and her decision to quit is warranted
by her demanding madame and the men. Beauvais points out how Borden is able to
shift the emphasis of prostitution from sex to economics saying, “In
Borden’s analysis, the real problems in prostitution exist between
the madame or pimp and the prostitutes, paralleling the problems in other
employer/employee relationships” (53). This is illustrated specifically
in Molly’s wanting to go home, but Lucy (Ellen McElduff), the madame,
asking her to stay and then refusing to let her go so that her establishment
will not be short a girl. Many people experience this same sort of dilemma
in their careers; they want to go home, but because of some circumstance
are forced to stay later. Another ploy used by Borden to deemphasize sex
is the costuming. The women are dressed like upper-class women, not in
showy outfits commonly associated with hooking. Some of the women are
college-educated making the story more comparable to women working in
an office environment, and then adding to this, the women must interview
to work in the brothel. As in Born in Flames, Borden takes widely
believed ideas and reverses them. The effect of this is a new perspective
equally as possible as the accepted idea, but some truths are able to
be revealed, such as why the reversal cannot work outside of the film.
In Working Girls, if the common idea of a prostitute or hooker
was a decently dressed woman who was college-educated, it may be a more
acceptable career because a low-social class status would not be associated
with it. But because our culture is anti-promiscuity, prostitution will
never be an acceptable career and the reversal Borden uses makes us reconsider
our stance. The most noticeable element that connects
Borden’s Born in Flames and Working Girls is the use
of hand close-ups. While in Working Girls, there is not a sequence
of hands doing female-assigned tasks, there are recurring shots of female
hands doing typically female jobs. In Working Girls, the close-ups
of hands include the following tasks: making breakfast, writing, lighting
birthday candles, hands grasping each other, pouring brandy, and counting
money. With the exception of making breakfast, each of these tasks are
jobs done in businesses, sometimes done by men. In Born in Flames,
to see male hands doing the tasks in that sequence would go against our
cultural aesthetic, meaning it would disturb our sense of what is normal.
However, in Working Girls, to picture male hands doing the same
tasks is acceptable. Borden’s use of hands doing small jobs presents
an interesting decision. The hands carry out the work of the mind and
pay attention to details. Sometimes these details may make a difference
in the bigger picture of things, for example if a hand writes down a wrong
number in a ledger, it will certainly cause problems later. But, the use
of hands in these instances help to present the irony Borden sees in world
as far as women are considered. The sequence in Born in Flames
is put in the middle of a film where the traditional role of female is
non-existent. Without the familiar female models in the film, to suddenly
see hands doing the tasks of the model seems silly and degrading. With
Working Girls, the close-ups indicate that women are as capable as
men to play the business game complete with the details of keeping numbers,
presenting gifts, and making clients feel they are the stars of the venture.
The shots are subtle, but indicate so much, and are almost like Borden’s
signature on her piece of artwork. Borden’s independent films are politically
and/or socially motivated, and the techniques she uses to express the
themes of the films are different than those of commercial cinema. The
reversal of common ideas is most effective. This technique makes the audience
think differently about an idea. It also instigates analysis and criticism.
The audience subconsciously tells itself why the reversal would not work
as a norm, and then the possibility to discover cultural prejudices is
opened. The most important reversal Borden uses in both films is the woman’s
perspective. Typically, when the male gaze is engaged, women know that
is how men view the situation, but with Borden’s films, women can
relate because the gaze is in a woman’s mindset. More films should
be done from a woman’s perspective so that the contrasts in male
and female thinking are made more apparent and viewers can evaluate their
perceptions and ideas on subjects. In the future, I would hope to see Borden
release more films like Born in Flames and Working Girls.
To be able to further develop her use of the female gaze in more modern
situations would be extremely interesting and informative as women continue
to push for equality. While today is far from the reality painted in
Born in Flames, I do feel that women have the control and dignity
displayed in Working Girls. In future works of Borden’s, I
would also like to see if she would continue to use close-ups of hands
to indicate various points in her theme. I believe this could be a recognizable
mark for Borden, as well as a subtle way to drive a point home. Works Cited Born in Flames.
Dir. Lizzie Borden. Icarus Video, 1983. Kaplan, E. Anne. “The avant-gardes
in Europe and the USA”, Women and Film: Both Sides of the Camera.
New York: Methuen, 1983, p. 142-170. Lane, Christina. Feminist Hollywood: From
Born in Flames to Point Break. Detroit: Wayne State University Press,
2000. Lucia, Cynthia. ”Reading Female Sexuality
in the Cinema: An Interview with Lizzie Borden”, Cineaste: America’s
Leading Magazine on the Art and Politics of the Cinema, v. 19 issue 2-3,
1992, p. 6-10. McLane, Betsy. “Domestic Theatrical
and Semi-Theatrical Distribution and Exhibition of American Independent
Feature Films: A Survey in 1983”, Moviegoing in America: A Sourcebook
in the History of Film Exhibition. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 2002,
p. 265-267. Working Girls. Dir. Lizzie Borden. Miramax Films, 1986.
|
