Auteur Theory & The Love Scene

Alla Nazimova and Rudolph Valentino, "Camille"
(source: leblogdamz.blogspot.com)

This essay is a continuum of my last one “ Blog 4, Hollywood Celluloid, Minority Women and The First Person,” (April 18 2012) where I explored female voice in the first person in alternative media and the material absence of the “she” voice in main stream film. I reference the literary work of Maggie Humm and her critique of the “male signature” in film, coupled with her conversation on “auteur theory.” Humm presses forward the idea of auteur theory, that is, a director’s film can reflect the director’s creative and distinct vision and not be affected by the Patriarchy and its industrial “yoke,” as long as the vision, voice and creativity of the director shines through this “interference” (Maggie Humm, “Feminist Literary Theory and Feminist Film,” Chapter 4 [Author/Auteur: Feminist Literary Theory and Feminist Film]).

As an extension of her conversation, Humm explores the work of Dutch film director, Marleen Gorris, particularly four films (see, Blog 4, et al., supra), and focuses on the female signature in these films, particularly with respect to vision, experience, exploitation, violence, friendship and liberation. Humm amplifies on the auteur theory and threads the main principle exhibited in Gorris’ films, that is, as director and film maker, she has total control over the creation of her movies, which in the end flower into distinctive works of art.                                                        

                                                                                                         Alla Nazimova

But, Gorris is not the first nor the only film maker who has graced celluloid with the female signature. I reference “grace,” with poetic license, to denote the beauty, dignity, elegance, and smoothness of form and movement of her films as well as the films of the late Alla Nazimova (1879-1945), a Russian American actress and screenwriter; Dorothy Arzner (1897-1979), an American, both - arguably - the first publicly recognized lesbian film producers; and contemporary film makers, Martha Stephens and Amy Seimetz.

Dorothy Arzner


Their works clearly “posit a female gaze that is radically different from the male gaze of standard Hollywood films . . . “ (Debra Zimmerman, "Women Makes Films,"Redding/Brownsworth, p 264).

How is that so? Because as female film makers they bring to the fore an art form and mystique that exudes from an internal conscious and psyche that is unique and interior to the female; it is transitive by way of both the female gaze and signature; their distinct vision is not affected by the Patriarchy or the male “yoke” (Maggie Humm, “Feminist Literary Theory and Feminist Film,” supra).  For example, how does a  male director capture the essence of the "love" scene?  Well, the male director can only "exteriorize" what he has felt or understood or experience as a male, not as a female.  The female gaze that he "captures" is the gaze that he has surveyed.  Men look at women, and believe women see exactly what men see (John Berger, Ways of Seeing).  

But, in reality, women see from a another angle and through a different prism. For example, Arzner's work has been described as strong examples of aggressive, free-spirited and independent women and much like the contemporary Marleen Gorris, explored womens’ perspective and experience as well as liberation (see also, Dorothy Arzner's Trousers, Jane Gaines, Jump Cut, no. 37, July 1992, pp. 88-98).  However, it is important to note, would a male director have made similar works and even if that was the case, would he capture the essence of the independent women displayed by Arzner?

                                

        (Image: Google; torrentbutler.eu, Dance, Girl, Dance, 1940)

Alla Nazimova's approach to film making techniques was considered daring at the time. She produced several drama films: "Toys of Fate" (1918); "The Red Lantern" (1919); "Madame Peacock" (1920); her only comedy, "The Brat" (1919); and in 1921, "Camille" which she starred opposite Rudolph Valentino. Her most recognized film, “Salome” (1922) has been described by feminist film critics as a historical presence of lesbian in film and illuminated by current film research as an articulation of female sexuality. Here, too, the query is whether a male director of  Nazimova's time could have captured the female signature that is prominent in "Salome"?  Arguably, only Nazimova and her contemporary, Arzner, could have captured under their critical gaze the veiling and unveiling of the female mystique.  

                                         (You Tube: hkukz7w3JLc).

By way of auteur theory, one can conclude that female film makers are able to identify and extrapolate from the "script" the female character that is often buried by male directors. As a further extension of the auteur theory, are they better at shooting nudity, the vulnerable male, the love scene?

Two recent and successful films at the SXSW Festival reveal such insight.  The SXSW Film 2012 Festival featured films by female writer-directors: Martha Stephens’ Pilgrim Song and Amy Seimetz’s Sun Don’t Shine.  Director Stephens describes her film as a profound portrayal of the male figure; she stays away from portraying a strong female lead.  As a female director, she purposely sought to portray the male psyche in the representation of the male tendency to run away from problems rather than talk about them. But, Stephens was not engaging in any sort of "guess work."  She explains that from personal experience, living with three older brothers, she experienced first hand the very thing she wanted to film.  Furthermore, she noted that as a woman she found "watching a man endure vulnerability and heartache to be very gripping. To make a generalization, women are expected to be good social communicators. Society allows them to deal with pain in a more open and honest way than men. When a man has his break down on the screen, cries and shows emotion, I feel like I’m being let into a very secret, intimate moment" (Five Questions with "Pilgrim Song" Director Martha Stephens, Dan Schoenbru in News, SXSW, 03/09/12).

                                           "Sun Don't Shine" (artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com)

Film director Amy Seimetz looks into male development in her film and explains that the ideal is to move away from the strong male, silent type of the 1970s' films.  Seimitz explores the explosive and confrontational female character in her film and much like Gossin, centers on female abuse, experience, exploitation, violence, and friendship, but couples the male and female characters' experience following the murder of the female's abusive husband that causes both of them to revert to acting like children, finding a semblance of unison while they travel together and through a very traumatic event. 

Arzner, Gorris, Nazimova, Seimetz, and Stephens have contributed to the female signature in film and provided a gaze that is dissimiliar from male-gender mainstream film.  Their distinct and varied approach to film making have re-defined the female auteur in distinct ways.  They have re-defined "female subjectivity" and have added an "authorial" voice to the text (see, Kaja Silverman "The Acoustic Mirror: The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema (Theories of Representation and Difference)," Indiana University Press 1988, 272 pages).