Women in Noir films and books tend to be either the doe-eyed innocent or the sexually manipulative vixen. It is an interesting development, and one which also reflects the times.
In the 1950s, women in America came into their own. During the war, they worked in factories, they held jobs men once held, and they started bringing home money into the household. They threatened the world of the male psyche, intruded into mens' worlds, and began to become equals in the workforce and daily life.
One could paint the doe-eyed innocent woman in Noir as the traditional woman, the sub-servant housewife, the fair maiden who needs a valiant knight to protect her from a terrible and nasty world. The crying innocent widow who comes into the detective's office looking for help is that traditional woman, the princess in need of a strong hero, and reflective of a woman in a role that men in the 1950's were accustomed to. There is a reason the innocents are painted as good, because this fits in with the role that men wanted them to be like. It is the classic princess of fairy tales, and the prize to be won with heroism and sacrifice.
The vixen is where it gets interesting. The vixen is the modern woman, the woman as the man's boss, and the woman coming into the workforce and bringing home the bacon. The vixen is the sexually liberated woman, the unfair manipulator, the powerful woman who's motives aren't clearly defined by the classic role of motherhood. In the 1950's women were gaining power in society, and they were becoming more liberated and independent. I feel the role of the vixen in Noir films represented that change in society, and the fact they were painted as 'evil' and 'manipulative' tended to align with a perceived threat to the traditional role of the man as protector and bread-winner in the family.
Add to this the vixen freely used sex and her good look to get what she wanted. No doe-eyed princess would ever do that! There is this reflection of society in these roles too, one where a vixen used sex to get what she wanted, and this power was used to corrupt society, ruin good men, and cause great ills to the social order. The Hays Code dabbled in thought control when it came to women's roles, which is why I am a fan of pre-code films where the princess and vixen roles were blurred somewhat. There were no censors, and the films of those times were a bit more honest with the role of a woman in film, and sex could be talked about and the roles of females examined more freely before the hammer of censorship came down.
It feels like the vixen role is appeasement to the Hays Code, but also a reflection of something more truer in life at that time. There was this 'threat' by women in society, and the vixen reflected her. I feel the code's implementation set the exploration of women and gender roles back about 50 years in film, and we are still dealing with the consequences. The princess and vixen roles do feel a little like comic-book character stereotypes to me, and I like more complicated characters.
Yes, in a way it feels like the Hays Code had an anti-feminist and anti-progressive side to it, at least for me. Certain stories could not be told past that point, and a chilling effect was laid into place that we live with to this day as a legacy of cinema. Read more here on the Hays Code and the anti-feminist effect it had, and how times were before the Code came into effect.
The role of women is one of those things that differentiates "what we know now" versus "tribute" works, at least for me. With a homage or Noir tribute work, we should probably adhere to the traditional role of women during the time, either princess or vixen. If we are doing a more modern work we want to reexamine the role of the woman in our Noir story, and more accurately reflect the story we are trying to tell. We may want our princess to sleep around and walk that path, or we may want to break the mold and create a more complicated and realistic character who reflect the message of our story better.
With more modern works, we may want to avoid princesses and vixens entirely. We need to be careful though, because some people do not like change and like their princesses and vixens in Noir works. We have seen so many to break conventions and change things would anger people, and our work would be derided by critics as derivative and "not Noir." People hate change, and if you start fooling with genre conventions you play with fire.
But then again, sometimes conventions need to be shattered to come up with something new.
You will see the fight between tribute work and modern work come up in this discussion again and again, because I feel this is one of the essential qualifications of works being created today. Are you creating a Noir tribute, or are you creating a more modern work? I feel understanding which parts of a work are tributes versus which parts of the work are more modern reflections will give you a better understanding of how you critique both the classic and the new works.
Without that distinction you will often be talking in circles. Yes, a part of a work will be different than works from the period, but why? Is this a mistake or an intentional choice by the artist to break with convention? Parts that are tributes that don't fit in with today's norms can be judged as such and understood.
With women and their roles, it becomes critical to understand then, and to understand now, and come up with a plan with how you are going to deal with these differences. Will you put them into a classic role? Will you put them in a more modern role? Will you twist things around some? Why?
Sometimes conventions are rooted in the times, and we need to be aware of what influenced them. We can use this information to better shape our characters and stories with this information, because if we wanted to subtly twist the role of vixen or princess it helps us know the how and why. Better knowing the background helps us avoid falling in to a trope or stereotype, and to smartly use the pieces in which we use to create our stories and films.
In the 1950s, women in America came into their own. During the war, they worked in factories, they held jobs men once held, and they started bringing home money into the household. They threatened the world of the male psyche, intruded into mens' worlds, and began to become equals in the workforce and daily life.
One could paint the doe-eyed innocent woman in Noir as the traditional woman, the sub-servant housewife, the fair maiden who needs a valiant knight to protect her from a terrible and nasty world. The crying innocent widow who comes into the detective's office looking for help is that traditional woman, the princess in need of a strong hero, and reflective of a woman in a role that men in the 1950's were accustomed to. There is a reason the innocents are painted as good, because this fits in with the role that men wanted them to be like. It is the classic princess of fairy tales, and the prize to be won with heroism and sacrifice.
The vixen is where it gets interesting. The vixen is the modern woman, the woman as the man's boss, and the woman coming into the workforce and bringing home the bacon. The vixen is the sexually liberated woman, the unfair manipulator, the powerful woman who's motives aren't clearly defined by the classic role of motherhood. In the 1950's women were gaining power in society, and they were becoming more liberated and independent. I feel the role of the vixen in Noir films represented that change in society, and the fact they were painted as 'evil' and 'manipulative' tended to align with a perceived threat to the traditional role of the man as protector and bread-winner in the family.
Add to this the vixen freely used sex and her good look to get what she wanted. No doe-eyed princess would ever do that! There is this reflection of society in these roles too, one where a vixen used sex to get what she wanted, and this power was used to corrupt society, ruin good men, and cause great ills to the social order. The Hays Code dabbled in thought control when it came to women's roles, which is why I am a fan of pre-code films where the princess and vixen roles were blurred somewhat. There were no censors, and the films of those times were a bit more honest with the role of a woman in film, and sex could be talked about and the roles of females examined more freely before the hammer of censorship came down.
It feels like the vixen role is appeasement to the Hays Code, but also a reflection of something more truer in life at that time. There was this 'threat' by women in society, and the vixen reflected her. I feel the code's implementation set the exploration of women and gender roles back about 50 years in film, and we are still dealing with the consequences. The princess and vixen roles do feel a little like comic-book character stereotypes to me, and I like more complicated characters.
Yes, in a way it feels like the Hays Code had an anti-feminist and anti-progressive side to it, at least for me. Certain stories could not be told past that point, and a chilling effect was laid into place that we live with to this day as a legacy of cinema. Read more here on the Hays Code and the anti-feminist effect it had, and how times were before the Code came into effect.
The role of women is one of those things that differentiates "what we know now" versus "tribute" works, at least for me. With a homage or Noir tribute work, we should probably adhere to the traditional role of women during the time, either princess or vixen. If we are doing a more modern work we want to reexamine the role of the woman in our Noir story, and more accurately reflect the story we are trying to tell. We may want our princess to sleep around and walk that path, or we may want to break the mold and create a more complicated and realistic character who reflect the message of our story better.
With more modern works, we may want to avoid princesses and vixens entirely. We need to be careful though, because some people do not like change and like their princesses and vixens in Noir works. We have seen so many to break conventions and change things would anger people, and our work would be derided by critics as derivative and "not Noir." People hate change, and if you start fooling with genre conventions you play with fire.
But then again, sometimes conventions need to be shattered to come up with something new.
You will see the fight between tribute work and modern work come up in this discussion again and again, because I feel this is one of the essential qualifications of works being created today. Are you creating a Noir tribute, or are you creating a more modern work? I feel understanding which parts of a work are tributes versus which parts of the work are more modern reflections will give you a better understanding of how you critique both the classic and the new works.
Without that distinction you will often be talking in circles. Yes, a part of a work will be different than works from the period, but why? Is this a mistake or an intentional choice by the artist to break with convention? Parts that are tributes that don't fit in with today's norms can be judged as such and understood.
With women and their roles, it becomes critical to understand then, and to understand now, and come up with a plan with how you are going to deal with these differences. Will you put them into a classic role? Will you put them in a more modern role? Will you twist things around some? Why?
Sometimes conventions are rooted in the times, and we need to be aware of what influenced them. We can use this information to better shape our characters and stories with this information, because if we wanted to subtly twist the role of vixen or princess it helps us know the how and why. Better knowing the background helps us avoid falling in to a trope or stereotype, and to smartly use the pieces in which we use to create our stories and films.
Comments
Post a Comment