CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITIES
How the spectator perceives a character that deviates from the
illusionary gender core
MASTER THESIS
Name: Niek Tönissen Date: 09 Juli 2014
Supervisor: Dr. Catherine Lord
Second Reader: Dr. Sudha Rajagopalan
3
CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITIES
How the spectator perceives a character that deviates from the illusionary gender core
Content
Content ... 3
ALTERING THE ILLUSIONARY GENDER CORE ... 5
THE HUNGER GAMES: A GAME OF GENDERED ACTS ... 15
COOL KIDS DON’T CRY: A STRONG FEMALE AGAINST THE BOYS ... 25
THE COGNITIVE RECEPTION OF A CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITY ... 35
A NEW APPROACH ... 47
5
ALTERING THE ILLUSIONARY GENDER CORE
Akkie, a twelve year old blond girl is shown in medium close-up, her eyes are directed to her left side in disbelieve. Her classmate Joep, a tough and tall boy, just claimed in front of the class that their team will not be able to win at the upcoming final soccer tournament, since the rule is that every team that is submitted must have as many boys as girls and he adds, addressing the words to Akkie specifically shown through an over-the-shoulder from Akkie to Joep, ‘girls cannot play soccer!’.1 The comment stirs up the emotions in class, the last class of elementary school, and especially Akkie who is actually good at playing soccer is insulted and protests. Joep silences her by another mockery: ‘Why don’t you just draw some more of those dolls together with your little boyfriend?’,2 making Laurens, a small blond boy that sits opposite of Akkie, also target of his jokes. Joep celebrates his successful pun with his friend. When Miss Ina, the class’ teacher, asks why he thinks that girls are not capable of playing soccer, Joep is not able to name a specific reason, but his aggressiveness and unmistakeable disappointment in the tournament rules expresses a true belief in his opinion. Joep’s apparent reason is that according to him girls are ‘different’. Another boy, Bram, tries to emphasize this difference by grabbing his shirt at the level of his nipples and pulling it forward, imitating to have breasts. He comically agrees that girls are different since they have breasts, resulting in laughter from his classmates. The class falls silent again when Joep offensively remarks that ‘flat boards’3, indicating that his female classmates do not have the feminine bodily curves yet, are equally incapable to play soccer.
This scene shows that the class’ dynamics in the Dutch film Cool Kids Don't Cry (Achtste Groepers Huilen Niet; Dennis Bots, 2012) are mainly based on a gender hierarchy, in which the male and associated masculinity frequently tries to exercise their dominance over females and
subordinate males. In this scene Joep, as representation of masculinity, explicitly attacks the females, especially Akkie, and the subordinate male, in this case Laurens, with his verbal mockeries to exercise power over the considered weaker categories. The gender hierarchy is naturalized by cultural
hegemony, a concept that is addressed frequently in Gramsci’s work, who mainly focussed on political theory with a Marxist line of thought. The term describes the relation between culture and power, and is defined as ‘the ‘spontaneous’ consent given by the great masses of the population to the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group; this consent is ‘historically’ caused by the prestige (and consequent confidence) which the dominant group enjoys
1 Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Discussion in class about the soccer tournament, translation from Dutch: ‘En
meiden kunnen helemaal niet voetballen!’ (00:04:36)
2
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Discussion in class about the soccer tournament, translation from Dutch: ‘Ga jij maar lekker poppetjes tekenen met je vriendje he.’ (00:04:44)
3
6
because of its position and function in the world of production’.4 The sexual jibes and name-calling in student cultures, as is explicitly shown in the scene from Cool Kids Don't Cry, defines the
‘appropriate’ from the ‘inappropriate’, the ‘normal’ from the ‘deviant’, the ‘moral’ from the
‘immoral’ and thereby produces ‘complex and dynamic heterosexual hierarchies in which the lives of subordinate males, girls and young women were most open to sexual scrutiny especially from more dominant male students’.5 Soccer, as a contact sport, is seen as a definite symbol for masculinity
(Connell and Messerschmidt 2005: p. 833) and therefore considered inappropriate for girls by the dominant group. Cultural hegemony explains that the ruling group imposes a direction on social life and manipulatively persuades to board the dominant fundamental norms (Lears 1985: p. 568), simply because in the cultural discourse females and femininity are considered inferior and
oppositional to males, as is emphasized by Joep’s mentioning that girls are ‘different’. It shows that the term ‘masculinity’ does not exist except in contrast with ‘femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 69) and that ‘masculinity’ is actually defined as ‘non-femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 71). Hegemonic masculinity tries to force females and subordinate men to accept these hegemonic masculine norms, which are not merely posed on considered appropriate behaviour, but also on appropriate bodily appearances, as the breast imitation and Joep’s final insult about ‘flat boards’ portrays.
In The Hunger Games (Gary Ross, 2012) and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (Francis Lawrence, 2013) a dominant, fundamental group is explicitly shown to have the power to formulate and even naturalize gender norms for subordinate groups. The Capitol’s residents, as representation of the wealthy and dominant, desire lead character Katniss to be a feminine beauty and desire Peeta to be the protective masculine man. Simultaneously the dominant Capitol practically forces the sixteen year old boy and girl to get involved into a heterosexual love affair. It is ironic that when it comes to the sense of altered self-presentation, men and women in the Capitol seem to live according to the exact same rules and use the same gendered markers (Mitchell 2012: p. 12). Their drag presence, including for instance colourful clothing, golden tattoo’s and make-up for women as well for men, blurs the distinction between femininity and masculinity. However they desire the inferior groups to conform to, what Judith Butler describes in her book Gender Trouble (1990) as, the heterosexual matrix, in which the categories of sex, gender and desire are supposed to conform to the social construction of compulsory heterosexual norms (Butler 1999: p. 42-43). Through cultural hegemony a man has to be masculine and desire heterosexuality, while a woman needs to behave feminine and also desire heterosexuality.
4
Gramsci in Lears, T.J. Jackson. ‘The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities’. The American
Historical Review, vol. 90, no. 3 (Jun. 1985): p. 568.
5
Nayak, Anoop, Mary Jane Kehily. ‘Gender Undone: Subversion, regulation and embodiment in the work of Judith Buter’. British Journal of Sociology of Education (20 nov 2006): p. 461.
7
In young adolescent books and films the heteronormative representation is often present where ‘males are under pressure to conform to expectations that they be powerful, handsome, muscular, capable, and unemotional while females are to be attractive, fragile, slim, caring, and emotional’.6 Parsons, a literature scholar with an expertise in children’s engagement with fiction, states that historical and cultural contexts constituted the heteronormative representation of gender in reality and in fiction narratives, and since the spectators itself are products of those hegemonic contexts, the spectator has the habit of accepting this gendered discourse as natural, essential and conclusive (Parsons 2004: p. 136). The embeddedness of standardized, appropriate gender acts disguises the fact that the stories represented in fiction films are created and reproduced through the dominant discourse and therefore conform to the heterosexual matrix (Parsons 2004: p. 136).
The continual portrayal of these power relations in the gender hierarchy are closely related to the term ‘iterability’ which is introduced by Judith Butler, an American philosopher with a large contribution to the field of gender theory. Iterability is a complex term that has been interpreted in multiple ways. It describes the regularized and constrained stylized repetition of norms which are not performed by a subject (Butler 1993: p. 95), but ‘this repetition is at once a reenactment and
reexperiencing of a set of meanings already socially established; it is the mundane and ritualized form of their legitimation’.7 In Butler’s book Gender Trouble it was mistakenly understood that the performativity of gender was a simple and willed form of cross-dressing (Campbell, Harbord: p. 231). As Butler wrote in her preface of her 1999 revised edition of Gender Trouble, the book may read ‘as if gender is simply a self-invention or that the psychic meaning of a gendered presentation might be read directly off its surface essential to the naturalized and denaturalized forms that gender takes’,8 but in her next book Bodies That Matter (1993) Butler made increasingly clear that performativity is not a singular ‘act’, ‘for it is always a reiteration of a norm or set of norms, and to the extent that it acquires an act-like status in the present, it conceals or dissimulates the conventions of which it
is a repetition’.9 Butler argues that there is no ‘doer behind the deed’, but that the ‘doer’ is variably
constructed in and through the deed (Butler 1999: p. 181). As she clarifies in an article that she wrote before Gender Trouble, entitled ‘Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in
Phenomenology and Feminist Theory’:
6
Taber, Nancy et al. ‘’She’s more like a guy’ and ‘he’s more like a teddy bear’: girl’s perception of violence and gender in The Hunger Games’. Journal of Youth Studies, vol. 16, no. 8 (Feb 2013): p. 1025.
7 Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 526.
8
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xxv.
9
8
The act that one does, the act that one performs, is, in a sense, an act that has been going on before one arrived on the scene. Hence, gender is an act which has been rehearsed, much as a script survives the particular actors who make use of it, but which requires individual actors in order to be actualized and reproduced as reality once again.10
Butler therefore believes that gender identities are fabrications manufactured and sustained through corporeal signs and that the gendered body is performative, since it has no ontological status apart from the various acts which constitute its reality (Butler 1999: p. 173). She states that ‘acts and gestures, articulated and enacted desires create the illusion of an interior and organizing gender core, an illusion discursively maintained for the purposes of the regulation of sexuality within the obligatory frame of reproductive heterosexuality’.11
As powerful cultural agents, fiction films influence the construction of, by cultural
hegemony determined, appropriate gendered behaviour and thereby enabling the production of such behaviours by creating positions to occupy (Parsons 2004: p. 136). In the past few years a handful of filmmakers produced films aimed towards children that tried to break with the traditional heteronormative representation of gender. The films did not directly ‘attack’ the representation of the established gender norms, they rather ‘challenged’ the boundaries separating masculinity and femininity. Films as The Hunger Games, its sequel The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the Dutch film Cool Kids Don’t Cry evolve around a female character that lively shifts between feminine traits and masculine traits, depending on the specific situation she experiences and, even more important, depending on the character’s own choices. In the above mentioned children’s films, the established heterosexual norm is challenged, not by an obvious exaggerated, radical flip of gender, but gradually, by internalizing a mix of feminine and masculine traits within the female character.
The term ‘children’s film’ has a broad definition. Ian Wojcik-Andrews dedicated a whole chapter in his book Children’s Film: History, Ideology, Pedagogy, Theory (2000) to describe the term ‘children’s film’ to conclude in the end that ‘there are in fact many ways of thinking about the “idea of cinema for children” including the way in which we might define a children’s film. It’s a
complicated issue and involves a range of personal, pedagogical, critical, textual, institutional, and cultural/imperial points of view. […] There are “children’s films”, but there is no such thing as a “children’s film”’.12 Wojcik-Andrews argues that defining the term ‘children’s film’ is an impossibility, but instead he mentions a list of textual characteristics that describe the idea of cinema for children (Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 7) of which I will name a few applicable ones for my thesis. One criteria
10
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 526.
11
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 173.
12 Wojcik-Andrew, Ian. Children’s film: History, ideology, pedagogy, theory. New York: Garland Publishing Inc.,
9
that is mentioned states that children’s films are adapted from children’s literature, which is the case for The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Wojcik-Andrews however argues that defining children’s literature brings forth the same problems as finding criteria for children’s fiction; does this include literature written by children, literature read by children, or literature written for children (Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 6)? The most important characteristics for my use of the term is that it evolves around young adolescent characters, and that in general the adults -like parents, teachers and coaches- only play minor roles in comparison to the young adolescent characters. My chosen films are, mainly for economic reasons, aimed towards a broader audience, for example by addressing to the young spectator’s parents too. The films however do not have mere entertainment value for young adolescents, the young adolescent are, on top of that, able to engage with the characters in such a way that they can learn and acquire from the characters. The last important aspect mentioned by Wojcik-Andrews that applies for my thesis is that ‘playfully or seriously, mainstream and/or countercinematic children’s films contain moments of self-awareness or self-discovery that lead to equally important moments of choice’,13 which creates a character which is a source of exploration, discovery, and transformation (Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 10) as is seen in The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and in Cool Kids Don’t Cry.
Katniss Everdeen and Akkie van Vliet as characters blur, transcend and challenge the
established representation of the dominant heterosexual matrix. For these characters the margins of the categories as ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ are not fixed and the characters show the malleability of those by cultural hegemony determined boundaries. Although Katniss mainly does conform to the considered feminine bodily appearance and does have definite protective, maternal feelings, her remaining gendered traits seem explicitly not feminine. She is a hunter, not emotional or expressive of her feelings and is decidedly uncomfortable with romance or physical intimacy. Also Akkie considers herself feminine, but the tough, blond girl does not conform to the traditional portrayal of a female. She loves to play soccer, she keeps her feelings to herself, she wants to act independently and actively seeks to compete with boys in considered masculine behaviour. Katniss and Akkie do not want to occupy the position of the passive object for the male gaze, neither for the male characters within the screen story or for the male spectator within the auditorium, as British feminist theorist Laura Mulvey describes in her article ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’ is seen frequently within traditional Hollywood films. This to-be-looked-at-ness, as it is termed by Mulvey, creates a sexual imbalance in Hollywood narratives, with a split between the active/male and passive/female (Mulvey 1975: p. 11).
13 Wojcik-Andrew, Ian. Children’s film: History, ideology, pedagogy, theory. New York: Garland Publishing Inc.,
10
The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don't Cry are not the first films that try to defy the heteronormative representation of gender identities and gendered acts, but they do show a new approach to do so. By creating believable female characters which inhabit internalized feminine and masculine traits, the filmmakers produced a much more subtle and effective manner to undermine this dominant hegemonic masculinity. In the past two to three decades a few exceptional heroines were created, who had the almost impossible task to attack the dominant masculine film industry by representing the tough, independent woman. The heroines tried to function as role models for women by embodying considered masculine traits, traits that in reality also for the term ‘masculine’ felt a little overdone. The question arose if over muscular, fighting, even murdering women, waving around with guns and swords, were the appropriate characters for women (or men) to relate to. The simplistic role reversal, as Parsons argues, usually presents ‘a comedic rather than an empowering, realistic view of possibility and lack the subtlety that is most effective in challenging stereotypes’.14 Film critics righteously remarked that male film heroes which embody the complete package of masculine appropriate behaviour and therefore fit most neatly in the box of the illusionary categorical ‘Strong Male Character’ are usually most boring and for that reason the critics wondered why filmmakers and its spectators expected the heroines to live out their lives in this claustrophobic little box (McDougall 2013). Was it even possible for women to identify with the established stereotypical ‘Strong Female Character’ and could the representation of women in the end, cause a change in the production and perception of the heterosexual gender norms?
The filmmakers of Cool Kids Don't Cry, The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire got rid of the idea to break with the stylized repetition of hegemonic masculine acts by
completely replacing feminine by masculine behaviour by female characters. Katniss and Akkie portray a new ideology of female heroism, by internalizing feminine and masculine traits within the female character to create a believable, compelling and strong character which challenges the heteronormative representation in Hollywood film, and which ultimately could more effectively function as role models for women. The female heroines challenge not only the normative
representation of female characters in Hollywood films, but also within the film’s narrative they use their challenging internalized characteristics to rebel against hegemonic powers. Katniss’ protests are mainly addressed towards President Snow, the Capitol’s dominant ruler, while Akkie tries to
undermine Joep’s dominance in class. Both authorities try to exercise their powers to force both lead characters to fit in the hegemonic heterosexual framework. This new ideology concerning the
14
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate behavior’.
11
portrayal of female heroism tries to achieve the same effect as drag, since, according to Butler, ‘drag is subversive to the extent that it reflects on the imitative structure by which hegemonic gender is itself produced and disputes heterosexuality’s claim on naturalness and originality’,15 but the
challenges at the boundaries of masculinity and femininity by the new female hero is far more subtle than drag. The internalizing of oppositional gender behaviour is an implicit form to challenge the heteronormative idealizations frequently shown in films and therefore is more easily perceived as natural and even original at itself. It is true that this new ideology does not open fields in film for homosexuality, transsexuality and other expressions that for a large part attack the obligatory heterosexual matrix, but this new ideology of female heroism does open a field of possibilities within the female gender category itself. Akkie and Katniss show that it is possible to deviate from the traditional image of the female film character as submissive and beautiful, and still have a successful film character with which the spectator is able and attracted to engage with.
As already mentioned shortly, Judith Butler emphasizes that acts, gestures and desires create the illusion of an interior and organizing gender core, an illusion that regulates sexuality within the obligatory frame of heterosexuality (Butler 1999: p. 173), but nonetheless an illusion. She argues that ‘there is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively
constituted by the very “expressions” that are said to be its results’,16 and these expressions are nothing more than the reiteration of previous ‘expressions’ that become intelligible as gender norms (Nayak 2006: p. 467). Since this gender core does not exist outside of its doings and is therefore illusionary, I am aware that it is risky, not to say a misperception of Butler’s readings, to write about ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculinity’, ‘femininity’ and their separating boundaries as if these were somehow fixed or real. However, I will refer with these terms to the heteronormative gender norms that are constituted through cultural hegemony. Like Butler, I use the term ‘normative’ as pertaining to the norms that govern gender, as well as it ‘also pertains to ethical justification, how it is established, and what concrete consequences proceed therefrom’.17 Gender is a fantasy, but this does not mean that there are no perceptions as the ‘reality’ of gender. The spectator thinks that he knows what reality is, and takes a secondary appearance of gender that does not conform to the hegemonic representation to be mere artifice, play, falsehood, and illusion (Butler 1999: p. xxii). When Katniss and Akkie
question these categories of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ through their performances, it is shown that what we take to be ‘real’ is the naturalized knowledge of gender, and that this is in fact a changeable and revisable reality (Butler 1999: p. xxiii). Butler states in Gender Trouble that ‘if the truth of gender is a fabrication and if a true gender is a fantasy instituted and inscribed on the
15
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 125.
16 Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 33. 17
12
surface of bodies, then it seems that genders can be neither true nor false, but are only produced as the truth effects of a discourse or primary and stable identity’.18
A paradox arises in which gender is a fantasy, an illusion, but nonetheless cannot be
understood as a mere illusion since the observer’s perception of gender is in fact real. Gender is not a fact and the various acts of gender creates the idea of gender, but it cannot be denied that ‘genders are part of what ‘humanizes’ individuals within contemporary culture; indeed, those who fail to do their gender right are regularly punished’.19 What is right is defined by cultural hegemony and what Butler calls ‘Realness’, which is the ‘standard that is used to judge any given performance within the established categories’.20 These perceptions of gender reality on basis of hegemonic gender norms has real consequences, including the creation of our sense of subjectivity (Butler 1988: p. 522). It makes our subjectivity constructed, but that does not make it any less real. To say that gender is only a fantasy, indicates that it is in fact a role we play and that it can be stopped at any time, but this is, as already argued, absolutely not the case for gender. So to subvert the current hegemonic thoughts it is necessary to change the traditional representation of females within Hollywood films, but for a real revolution it is even more important, as Butler states, to radically shift one’s notion of the possible and the real (Butler 1999: p. xxiii).
Although the rules, or laws, of the dominant hegemonic masculinity may be a fantasy, unreal, still it cannot be denied that these rules are in fact tangible within our cognitions. These are not fixed artefacts, but as by iteration and performativity established laws that can be inhabited and
reappropriated, but still tangible, to say so. The notions of possibility, the real and the spectator’s attitudes towards gender are captured within the spectator’s brain and have real consequences in real life. By bringing in the cognitive paradigm this research will study how characters as Katniss and Akkie, who I will call ‘Challenging Gender Identities’, can be of influence on the cognitions of young adolescent spectators. In order to make a change against the ‘reality’ of gender, it is the brain with its hegemonic views on considered appropriate behaviour and appropriate gender acts, filmmakers need to address. I am aware that it is a risky turn within the previous writings about gender, especially within Butler’s theories, since she states that there is no ‘doer behind the deed’ and that gender is an imitation without an original, but I want to argue that bringing in the cognitive paradigm can open a field of possibilities to change our original view on gender, but especially on thoughts on how films can make a change against the current hegemonic gender norms.
As Butler already emphasizes in her preface to Gender Trouble, as a writer it is almost impossible ‘to oppose the “normative” forms of gender without at the same time subscribing to a
18
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 174.
19
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 522.
20
13
certain normative view of how the gendered world ought to be’.21 Still it is not my intention to give a feministic view on both films, although it is hard not to approach this field since both films can be considered feministic texts. I, however, want to research young adolescent’s perception of these children’s films that do not conform to the heteronormative representation of gender seen in traditional films. Daniel Kahneman’s theory about the fictious cognitive System 1 and System 2 elaborated in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011), together with the Elaboration Likelihood Model developed by Petty and Cacioppo will form the basis of my cognitive approach to examine the conscious and unconscious perception of gendered behaviour performed by the film characters and the ultimate influence on attitudes towards gender within the young adolescent spectator. The Elaboration Likelihood Model states that the probability of attitude change and the eventual
durability of this attitude change is mainly determined by the nature of elaboration and the intensity of the spectator’s engagement with the observed information and observed gendered behaviour that is presented to the spectator through a mediated message (O’Keefe 2002: p. 137). Kahneman’s cognitive System 1 and System 2 mainly describes through which fictious system, consisting of an automatic/effortless system and a conscious/effortful system, certain information is perceived by the spectator’s brain and in what way the spectator is engaged with specific observed attitudes, beliefs and behaviour.
In the first chapter of this thesis the portrayal of the characters in The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, and in special Katniss Everdeen’s portrayal of a Challenging Gender Identity will be researched, followed by the second chapter in which the portrayal of Akkie van Vliet in Cool Kids Don't Cry as Challenging Gender Identity will be studied. In what way are the characters challenging towards the conformity of the hegemonic heterosexual matrix? How do the films portray these characters as challenging? As will be argued Cool Kids Don't Cry also shows a separation between femininity and masculinity through the mise-en-scene, while The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire mainly deviate from the traditional representation through the
narrative and shown behaviour. How is it possible that the three films were received as exceptionally successful, while young adolescents primarily appreciate representations that are known to them through the cultural discourse? This research will take a look at how the characters are perceived in general and on which level the characters invite the spectators to engage with them. With help of Gramsci’s theory about cultural hegemony and Butler’s ideas about iterativity and performativity will be explored how Akkie and Katniss in fact are part of the iteration of gender norms, since they reappropriate and re-enact the set of meanings associated with gender, but that they deviate from
21
14
the traditional stylized repetition of gender behaviour in such a manner that they do not conform and maybe even oppose previous hegemonic gender representations.
In the final chapter the cognitive paradigm will be discussed, and the manner in which the spectator’s cognition perceives the challenging gendered behaviour presented in the films, and how this perception influences the spectator’s attitude towards gender will be researched. Kahneman’s cognitive System 1 and System 2 and Petty and Cacioppo’s Elaboration Likelihood Model will give new insights in how mediated messages and the contained gendered behaviour will be perceived by young adolescents and in what ways these Challenging Gender Identities may cause a possible attitude change within the spectator’s cognition. With these cognitive theories as basis it will be researched to what extent the films, and in special Katniss and Akkie, are capable of starting a revolution that shifts the notion of the possible and the real, and to what extent it is possible to expose the illusionary characteristic of gender and show that even hegemonic gender norms are an imitation without an original.
15
THE HUNGER GAMES: A GAME OF GENDERED ACTS
Critics have critiqued that in Butler’s work ‘reiteration becomes a static rather than temporal act where the reproduction of the sex-gender system involves a ceaseless reinscription of the same’.22 It is this ceaseless reinscription of the same that is often seen by female characters within Hollywood films. As Mulvey states, females in these film narratives mainly represent the passive object for the male gaze as the physically desirable, sexually submissive female (Laughey 2007: p. 103). Katniss, as lead character of the two successful Hollywood films The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, deviates from this static iterable practice where females are expected to be attractive, fragile, slim, caring, and emotional (Taber et al. 2013: p. 1025). As will be argued, this does not mean that she does have any of these characteristics, but Katniss is able to shift between behaviour that is considered appropriate feminine and masculine behaviour. The hegemonic power of the Capitol however tries to force Katniss to conform to the obligatory heterosexual matrix.
The two Hunger Games films that have been produced so far are adopted from the first two books from the Hunger Games trilogy written by Suzanne Collins. The narrative is set in a dystopian future located in North America, which has been renamed to Panem. Panem is divided into thirteen districts governed by the wealthy Capitol. All districts are obliged to participate in the annual Hunger Games, where a boy and girl from each district are randomly selected during a reaping. The selected tributes are sent into a televised arena to fight to the death, leaving only one survivor as the victor. The female lead character of the film, named Katniss Everdeen, becomes a tribute after she volunteers to replace her younger sister Prim. Katniss is joined by the male tribute Peeta and is mentored by Haymitch, a previous Hunger Games’ winner for district 12. Haymitch encourages Katniss to pretend she and Peeta are ‘star-crossed lovers’ and therefore gaining the audience’s approval and additional sponsors, increasing her probability of survival. At the end Katniss and Peeta are the only two survivors left and they decide to simultaneously end their lives, leaving no winner for its audience. However before they can continue with their plan, they are stopped by the Game Makers and therefore both are ultimately declared as winners of this year’s annual Hunger Games.
In the second film, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, it becomes clear that Katniss and Peeta’s performance within the arena and the cleverly escape from death had an impact on the districts, and signs of uproars are shown through Panem. This year President Snow is allowed to make a change to the annual games, since it is Quarter Quell, an event happening every 25 years, enabling him to give an edition where previous winners need to compete again in an arena. Katniss
22
Mills, Catherine. ‘Efficacy and vulnerability: Judith Butler on reiteration and resistance’. Australian Feminist
16
and Peeta are again selected and are forced to fight their way through the Games. This time an unusual collaboration arises and the Games seem to be more a rebellion against the established order outside the arena rather than an individual struggle for survival within the arena. When Katniss forces her way out of the arena at the end of the film, it becomes evident that the events within the arena had once again a large effect on the situation outside of the arena.
Besides the attractive and innovative narrative of the Hunger Games, the books and films are interesting and have been praised mainly because of the themes Suzanne Collins incorporated in her work. It sketches a futuristic world named Panem that at the same time does not seem to have any similarities with our present world, but when inspected closer Panem precisely looks like our present world. The idea of a televised arena where children have to fight to their deaths, the literal
subdivision of the nation in districts on basis of people’s professions, the enormous power of the Capitol over those districts, but also smaller aspects like appearances of buildings, vehicles and people, are not similar to the spectator’s idea of reality. Although the futuristic dystopian world of Panem seems to be unknown to its spectator, it is believable since the films certainly do give a representation of our world. The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire 23 explicitly reveal through an attractive Hollywood narrative the present division in class, wealth, gender and power. The present hegemonic powers gravest achievement is that it submerges the oppressed human beings’ consciousness about the oppressive reality (Freire 2000: p. 51). Collins however seems to allow the oppressed characters, as well as the spectators, to see the truths about the hegemonic authorities and their oppressive powers. Think about the districts portraying the social divisions in class; think about the arena showing media’s dominance and the constant surveillance; think about the Capitol representing the one percent of financial wealthy owning and repressing the remaining percentages. Suzanne Collins exposes underlying forms of crisis and presents them through a fiction narrative to young adolescents. It is fair to wonder if it is responsible or necessary to face young adolescents with problems of such kind, which are generally still too complicated for them and which they cannot control yet. Although this is more than an interesting question, the main focus of this thesis will be on Katniss’ portrayal of a gender identity and her challenge against the hegemonic representation of gender in films.
Panem’s dystopian future is hardly a gender utopia. Still The Hunger Games addresses challenges towards the established gender norms, and playful shifts between gender roles are evident within the narrative. Although the Capitol does function as the hegemonic power which tries to exercise their power over the district’s residents to control their conformity to the heterosexual matrix, in which the categories of sex, gender and desire are supposed to conform to the social
23 In the remaining part of my thesis, I will use The Hunger Games as referent to the Hunger Games book trilogy
17
construction of compulsory heterosexual norms (Butler 1999: p. 42-43), the Capitol’s residents themselves are the first mark of an attack against this same matrix. As already mentioned the Capitol residents’ drag presence, including colourful clothing, golden tattoo’s and make-up for women as well for men, blurs the distinction between femininity and masculinity. When it comes to the sense of altered self-presentation, men and women in the Capitol -in the films mainly represented by Effie Trinket, Caesar Flickerman, President Snow and, Cinna, Octavia and Flavius- seem to live according to the exact same rules and use the same gendered markers (Mitchell 2012: p. 12). Butler argues that the body is a social construction on which cultural meanings are inscribed and that ‘the body is figured as a mere instrument or medium for which a set of cultural meanings are only externally related’.24 The Capitol’s residents portray this malleability of the body, literally by applying
exaggerative make-up and undergoing plastic surgery (to keep a young looking appearance), but also by severing the typical gendered connotations between body and gender (Mitchell: p. 12-13). The uncoupling of the sex and gender categories within the Capitol, without having consequences or being punished for the non-conformance with the heterosexual matrix, shows that gender norms of the dominant cultural discourse are closely related to hegemonic powers. As Lears, an American cultural and intellectual historian, remarks about Gramsci’s term cultural hegemony, the ruling group maintains their hegemony ‘by giving their domination an aura of moral authority through the
creation and perpetuation of legitimating symbols’.25 Symbols that define the social order of values, norms, perceptions, beliefs, sentiments, and prejudice (Lears, 1985: p. 569). In The Hunger Games is shown that the Capitol as hegemonic power can determine and naturalize their own gender norms. It deviates from the gendered norms that are known to the spectators and therefore has the effect of creating alienation between the Capitol’s residents and the spectators. This effect is deliberately emphasized by the filmmakers, since the spectator is supposed to empathize with Katniss and the remaining people from the districts, who are oppressed by this hegemonic authority. It must be noted that the Capitol’s breakage with the heterosexual matrix only exists within the Capitol itself, they however force the subordinate groups to conform to the heterosexual matrix.
The residents of Panem’s districts show therefore far more sexual conformity with what the spectator believes to be appropriate gendered behaviour. Although their clothing obviously
represents the poor conditions in which most districts live, there is clearly a large distinction between men and women’s appearances. Women wear dresses, shoes with little heels and have long, often braided, hair, while men wear trousers, shirts or blouses and have in general short hair. The districts,
24
Butler, Judith. Gender Troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 12-13.
25
Lears, T.J. Jackson. ‘The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities’. The American Historical
18
at least as far as the spectator is shown, also conform the established social gender construction when it comes to the professions the people occupy. The professions are exclusively separated on basis of their sex and corresponding masculine or feminine traits; men do the heavy work, like coal mining in district twelve, while women take care of the home or sell goods on the market. Nothing within the districts seem to challenge the heterosexual matrix as the Capitol does, which is a result of continual power over the districts, of which the Games itself are the best example. Effie Trinket, the Capitol’s escort for district 12, announces before the reaping a ‘very special film brought to you all the way from the Capitol’.26 The propaganda film shows that there has been an uprising in the past, in which the thirteen districts rebelled against ‘the country that fed them, loved them, protected them’,27 and that they do not tolerate another form of treason. Therefore the Capitol decided that annually every district must offer a male and female tribute, and as the voice-over claims, ‘that serves as a reminder of our generosity and our forgiveness. This is how we remember our past, and this is how we safeguard our future’.28 The short trailer is a way for the Capitol to repeatedly show their dominance, since the Capitol ‘is produced by power and must continually reiterate that power in order to maintain its own social existence’.29 The repetitive nature of this propaganda film is demonstrated through Gale, who imitates the words of the voice-over before the words are heard over the speakers. The film not only demonstrates the Capitol’s power, but simultaneously wants to create a deeply belief within the oppressed that the rulers are indeed legitimate, which is according to Gramsci one of the most important factors for the established order to keep their cultural hegemonic position (Lears 1985: p. 569).
Although a large part of district 12’s people are submissive towards the hegemony of heteronormative standards, Katniss and Peeta both represent an interesting and challenging way of embodying gender roles. They do not only rebel against the scripted hegemonic social conventions and ideologies forced on them by the Capitol, but they therefore also challenge conventions that are perceived as natural in traditional Hollywood narratives. Katniss as character blurs, erases,
transcends and challenges established representations of the dominant heterosexual matrix (Mitchell 2014: p. 2). One of her powers as the heroic female seems the ability to perform,
consciously and unconsciously, various forms of gender. Categories as ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ are explicit parts that she plays and performs while in her district or during the Games
26
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Effie Trinket presents a special film to district 12 (00:12:59)
27 Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Voice-over special propaganda film (00:13:27) 28
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Voice-over special propaganda film (00:14:00)
29
Mills, Catherine. ‘Efficacy and vulnerability: Judith Butler on reiteration and resistance’. Australian Feminist
19
(Mitchell 2014: p. 3). The structure of the Games itself, but especially Katniss, portrays the malleability of a gender identity.
In the film Katniss’ feminine bodily appearance does conform to the hegemonic
representation of females within traditional Hollywood films. The fact that Jennifer Lawrence, the actress that plays Katniss, was chosen as the most sexy women by the British men’s magazine in 2014 (Waller 2014) already indicates that the actress does conform completely to the ideal beauty, which can be seen as a form of hegemonic oppression since it is based on a time-related norm that determines if a female suits the term ‘beautiful’. Despite Katniss’ feminine bodily appearance, with her long, dark braid and her feminine characteristics, Katniss’ other gendered traits are explicitly not feminine in The Hunger Games. Katniss is a hunter, killing animals in the woods with her phallic bow and arrow, wearing a manly leather jacket and hunting boots. She is not emotional or expressive of her feelings and is decidedly uncomfortable with romance or physical intimacy (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 11). These characteristics are in general accepted as masculine within Hollywood narratives. As Mulvey states about the traditional representation of the female in film, ‘in their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness’.30
Katniss however explicitly tries to deviate with this dominant representation, which becomes evident in the way she acts when Peeta declares in front of the camera’s during a television show that he has had a crush on Katniss since the first time he saw her. Katniss watches the whole interview from behind the stage, but when Peeta finally shows up backstage, she aggressively pushes him against the wall, asking him in disbelieve why he would say something like that. Katniss did not react in anger solemnly because she thought it was a lie and because of her disappointment in Peeta since he tried to perform according to the Capitol’s norms and values; it however irritated her that Peeta’s
declaration made her look desirable and she was definitely not content with this desirability or to use Mulvey’s terms, to-be-looked-at-ness. At the end she reluctantly agrees with Haymitch, her mentor, to go along with the plan to be ‘star-crossed lovers’ during the Games, in order to gain support from sponsors, simply because of the fact that this would increase her chance of survival. Again a way of securing the Capitol’s dominance, since the tributes can increase their probability of surviving by conforming to the desired heterosexual matrix.
In contrast, Katniss has certain traits that can be categorized as feminine. Especially her relationship with her little sister Prim can be characterized as maternal. In fact, the first scene in The Hunger Games in which Katniss is presented, shows her comforting her sister, who has had a nightmare. She is rocking her gently, rubbing her hair and assuring that everything will be fine
30
20
(Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 11). Although the cognitive paradigm will be saved for the last
chapter, I would like to refer shortly to Edward Thorndike’s theory, called the Halo-effect. In general, the Halo-effect describes the tendency to judge everything about a person or situation, including things you have not observed yet (Kahneman 2011: p. 82). This results in the fact that the first traits of film character that are shown, will change the very meaning of the traits that appear later on.31 So to start the film with this maternal imagery is a clever way for the filmmakers to keep Katniss yet to be introduced masculine traits in context with her motherly characteristic. When Katniss volunteers to take Prim’s place in the Hunger Games, it not only shows a masculine form of heroism, but in context with what the spectator has seen earlier, it is an act of maternity. The same applies for killing another tribute when protecting Rue and taking care of Peeta when he is hurt. Those are not only actions to increase her probability of survival, but it shows her natural feminine, maternal side.
Katniss’ strength, for pushing at the boundaries of the heterosexual norm, is the way in which she naturally performs her feminine and masculine gender identity. As Butler argues, ‘performativity is not a singular act, but a repetition and a ritual, which achieves its effects through its naturalization in the context of a body’.32 As Dubrofsky and Ryalls state, Katniss’ performance is not-performing and thereby she authenticates her challenging gender identity. Her naturalization, or authenticity, occurs through a refusal to perform gender rituals, causing the non-performance to be the feminine gender ritual (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 10). This might read as if gender is a radical choice or a merely individual choice as Butler argues is not the case, but gender is also neither imposed or inscribed upon the individual (Butler 1988: p. 526). As Butler states ‘surely, there are nuanced and individual ways of doing one’s gender, but that one does it, and that one does it in accord with certain sanctions and proscriptions, is clearly not a fully individual matter’.33 In The Hunger Games however is shown that Katniss is not able to forcibly perform a typical feminine or typical masculine gender, she rather embodies a naturalized identity, with feminine and masculine traits, depending on the situation she is in. Katniss’ iterated gendered acts deviate from the
31
A classic example to demonstrate this effect is shown in Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow (p. 82):
What do you think of Alan and Ben?
Alan: intelligent-industrious-impulsive-critical-stubborn-envious Ben: envious-stubborn-critical-impulsive-industrious-intelligent
Most people favour Alan more than Ben, although both have the exact same characteristics. It is simply because the order of traits can change the interpretation of later introduced traits. The stubbornness of an intelligent person is justified and may actually evoke respect, but intelligence in a stubborn person makes him more dangerous.
32
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xv.
33
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
21
traditional representation of females, within the narrative but also towards the spectator. She is however able to approximate and shift the spectator’s notion of ‘Realness’, which is ‘a standard that is used to judge any given performance within the established categories. And yet what determines the effect of realness is the ability to compel belief, to produce the naturalized effect’.34 This effect is itself the result of an embodiment of norms, a reiteration of norms (Butler 1993: p. 129), which is in Katniss’ case the effect that is accomplished by the repeated performance of not-performing.
Dubrofsky and Ryals, two scholars in cultural studies of communication and feminist media studies, argue in their article about the not-performance and authenticity of Katniss, that this
appears to be most explicit when she is supposed to perform before the Capitol’s residents. Katniss is very uncomfortable when she needs to undergo a complete makeover when she is about to be presented to the Capitol and she is confused when she is complimented multiple times with her remarkable beauty. Later on, in the scene when Katniss is interviewed by the Hunger Games’ presenter Caesar Flickerman for a television show, it is explicitly highlighted that Katniss’ actions are unplanned and that she behaves instinctively and authentically (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 10). Before the show she points out to Cinna, her dresser, that she doesn’t know how to make people like her. Cinna responds: ‘You made me like you’. Katniss confesses: ‘I wasn’t trying’.35 Katniss is
uncomfortable in situations when she is required to perform and conform to the Capitol’s desire, where women need to act feminine, highlighted by the shaky camera-use when Katniss walks on stage. Her shaky point-of-view, a perspective from behind her towards the audience and several quick inserts of audience members give the impression of Katniss’ unease. The audience’s cheers and Flickerman’s voice mutes at first, suggesting her blood to rush to her head. Katniss slowly adjust, indicated by the return of sound and the steadied camera, but her body betrays her nervousness, showing that she in incapable of performing in front of an audience. Her answers to Flickerman’s question continue to show Katniss’ instinctive responses. When Flickerman asks about her entrance in the Capitol a few days earlier, where Katniss showed up in a dress that made it look like she was on fire, she instinctively answers: ‘Well, I was just hoping that I wouldn’t burn to death’.36 The audience bursts into laughter, but Katniss does not join and seems startled by the response,
indicating her answer to be genuine and without forethought. At the end of the interview she offers Flickerman to show him her flames once again. She stands up, by spinning and twirling her dress ignites and bursts into flames. This performance is not something Katniss thought to do on her own, it was Cinna, her dresser, who came up with the idea to help her make people like her in order to gain sponsors (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 5). Her uncomfortableness and her inability to perform
34
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 129.
35
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Katniss and Cinna before interview with Caesar Flickerman (00:54:02-00:54:15)
36
22
this desired gender act is a push against the boundaries of the heterosexual norm, because it shows the malleability of gender and the inability to forcibly embody a gender. Although Katniss expresses the desire to perform, trying to make people like her and therefore gaining her sponsors, she is not capable to do so. This makes Katniss ‘an authentic self […] one that does not intentionally perform, or performs without premeditation’.37 This authenticity in Katniss is one of the main strengths of The Hunger Games for challenging the heteronormative representation of females, since it makes it possible for Katniss to perform a certain considered masculine act, as for example rescuing a man, without denaturalizing it, causing the audience to accept the situation, not feeling alienated at all from the character or the narrative.
Another definite challenge against the established heterosexual norms in The Hunger Games, is Katniss’ male opponent, Peeta. Katniss’ position as Challenging Gender Identity is strengthened by Peeta’s presence by defying the established gender roles in traditional Hollywood films. Peeta has the muscles, the square jaw line and his total physical appearance is masculine, but as with Katniss the bodily appearance does not match the considered expected gendered traits. Peeta is the one who tries to encourage Katniss to talk about her feelings, share herself with others. He falsely promises that her indifference does not hurt him, that she owes him nothing and he will be waiting when she comes to her senses. Peeta is ‘better than she is, but softer. He’s less knowing than she is. He’s less cynical than she is. He’s just as tough and as brave as he can possibly be with the skill set he has, and she’s responsible for mopping up when that’s not enough’.38 Peeta, as well as Katniss, is an attempt to break through the circle of repetitive heteronormative gendered acts predominantly represented in Hollywood films, by embodying characteristics that are considered feminine. It works for two reasons. The first is that Peeta also breaks with the hegemonic male-masculine-heterosexual matrix and secondly, it helps to create a contrast with the real lead character, Katniss, which
therefore stands out even more. The cohesion between this contrast and Katniss’ ability to naturalize multiple forms of gender, makes her undefinable as neither the typical Weak Female Character or the typical Strong Female Character. This contrasts helps to make Katniss the complicated, flawed and compelling character. If Peeta would have embodied considered ‘masculinity’, he would have been Katniss’ masculine opponent to which Katniss was obligated to level with in order to inhabit an internal mix of masculine and feminine traits, as will be argued in the next chapter is the case for Akkie in Cool Kids Don't Cry.
37
Dubrofsky, Rachel E., Emily D. Ryalls. ‘The Hunger Games: Performing notperforming to authenticate femininity and whiteness’. Critical Studies in Media Communication, (2014): p. 5.
38
Holmes, Linda. ‘What really makes Katniss stand out? Peeta, her movie girlfriend’. Npr.org. 25 nov 2013. 21-05-2014. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2013/11/25/247146164/what-really-makes-katniss-stand-out-peeta-her-movie-girlfriend?>
23
Katniss pretends not to conform at all to the heterosexual norm, but as Dubrofsy and Ryalls already warn in their article’s conclusion, this observation only makes sense on the surface. On the surface Katniss does not resemble the female characters from films with a traditional Hollywood narrative; as discussed above she is active, physically strong and indifferent to romance and
motherhood (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 12-13). She uses these characteristics to rebel against the Capitol’s hegemonic power, to protect the weak and to fight the good fight. However, a closer reading of Katniss’ behaviour and narrative shows that still some crucial social gendered behaviour is rusted in The Hunger Games.
Although it would be exaggerated to state that Katniss is a female glamorous sufferer or victim as is the case with most females in traditional fairy tales and Hollywood narratives (Parsons 2004: p. 137), it can be argued that much of Katniss’ behaviour and her challenging portrayal are dictated by external factors instead of that she is able to freely and consciously make her own decisions. To begin with, her protective and maternal instinct over her family can be said to originate from her father’s death and her mother’s inability to handle that truth, which eventually forced her into her independent role and her role as parent over her sister Prim. Instead of walking away, her maternal instinct made her look after Prim, but still this was a necessary, obligatory choice forced on her by external factors, pushing her into this role. As explained earlier on, the Halo-effect causes many, later introduced choices to feel related to her previous introduced character traits. When Katniss volunteers to take Prim’s place in the Games it does not give an impression of toughness, independence or heroism, it rather seems to be an act of her maternal, protective instinct. During the Games and the whole preparation before, Katniss is the victim of the Capitol’s dominance and its desire she is enforced to fulfil in order to survive. In the arena her direct killing of other tributes, so not the indirect killing through for example the engineered wasps called Tracker Jackers, comes also forth out of her motherly nature. When Rue, a definite similitude of her sister Prim, is attacked, Katniss sees no other choice than to protect her through killing. Although the similar black suits for every contestant do presume that no difference between male and female is initiated during the Games; there is however a clear distinction between the performed behaviour within the games. During the Games the female competitors mainly kill through indirect ways or for maternal reasons, while the male tributes are explicitly shown to kill others bluntly. As Dubrofsky and Ryalls formulate: ‘The implications are significant, suggesting good women are always already mothers, and their value, strength and heroism stem from their maternal instincts and conventional heterosexual femininity’.39
39 Dubrofsky, Rachel E., Emily D. Ryalls. ‘The Hunger Games: Performing notperforming to authenticate
24
Many external factors -varying from her forced substitution of her parents to take care of Prim to her obligatory participation in the Hunger Games, and from the compulsory fulfilment of the audience’s desires to increase her probability of survival to her acceptance of the fact that she needs to live up to President Snow’s wishes- all mould Katniss to who she is. Nevertheless, Katniss is able to shift between roles and naturalize these roles to act appropriate to different situations, which is, as is discussed earlier, one of her powers, but still she is submissive in the sense that she is obliged to act out a specific role in order to obey or satisfy an external factor. Although Katniss for this reason implicitly seems like the submissive pawn in a larger dominant whole, she tries to stretch or defy her boundaries whenever is possible to attain independence and definitely opens a field of doing gender differently. She is not constantly shooting aggressively with big guns, or waving around with large swords; The power of Katniss Everdeen is shifting between gender roles and naturalizing this performance, in order to increase her probability of survival and rebel against the established hegemonic authorities. As Challenging Gender Identity she rebels against the hegemonic powers within the narrative but also against the representation of females in films dictated by the
hegemonic Hollywood industry. Katniss became a model, and simultaneously a representative of the new ideology of female heroism for young adolescent girls and boys because of her attractive characteristics and The Hunger Games’ narrative, and therefore, although to many young adolescents probably unconsciously, showing a gender identity that breaks with the traditional iterative practice of heterosexual gender norms.
25
COOL KIDS DON’T CRY: A STRONG FEMALE AGAINST THE BOYS
Cool Kids Don’t Cry is a film based on the Dutch children’s book with the same title, written by Jacques Vriens, a successful and well known Dutch writer for children who won multiple awards for his children books.40 It is about Akkie, a twelve year old girl, who is in the final year of elementary school and who loves to play soccer. Joep, a tall and tough boy, claims that girls are not able to play soccer properly, but Akkie could not care less and she is convinced that she is as good as Joep. The main important events during the last year of elementary school are the final exam, school camp and the closing soccer tournament. Unexpectedly Akkie is informed that she suffers from leukemia and that she is supposed to be treated in the hospital. Every day she gets visits in the hospital from her friends and together they arrange the team line-up, until she is able to join class sporadically. After multiple pleas she is even allowed to go on school camp, but during a game of hide-and-seek she becomes unwell. At the hospital the test results show that the disease has entered Akkie’s brain and that the hope for healing has vanished. The class organizes a soccer match on a grass field near the hospital, which Akkie beholds from behind the hospital’s window. During the narrative Akkie and Joep become closer friends and even kiss at the end. When Akkie eventually dies, the cool kids from the last grade of elementary school cannot prevent from crying and dedicate the tournament’s soccer match to Akkie by means of banners, her name on their shirts and Elise’s winning goal.
The synopsis implies a dramatic and tragic narrative, but director Dennis Bots choose not to emphasize Akkie’s journey to her deathbed but rather choose to tell a story of a dynamic group of classmates which deal with Akkie’s, but also their own, problems. The film begins with a scene that in a great way preludes this general atmosphere and gender relation that is seen through the largest part of the film, which mainly consist of a traditional separation between ‘female’, ‘male’, femininity’ and ‘masculinity’. The dynamics in classroom life in Cool Kids Don't Cry includes a form of hegemonic masculinity including patterns of resistance and bullying among boys, which is often seen in real life (Connell 2005: p. 833). Appearances and behaviour performed within the group are expected to conform to the norms cultural hegemony set and according to Butler’s obligatory heterosexual matrix, in which males behave and dress masculine and females behave and dress according to the feminine rules, and whoever tries to defy these gender norms are punished by insult or ridicule. In Cool Kids Don't Cry Joep represents the dominant hegemonic force exercising his power over females and subordinate males. Elise, in contrast, functions as the absolute representation of femaleness. Only Akkie and Laurens deviate as characters from the traditional representation in Hollywood films.
40
26
The first scene of Cool Kids Don't Cry preludes in a great way the general atmosphere and these gender relations within the film.
The openings shot of the film is shot through the net of soccer goal and shows the spectator the twelve year old, blond Akkie, who kicks the ball with a firm kick in the goal. Three tough boys from the opposing team, including Joep, the other lead character, grumble. Akkie is congratulated by her female team members and her only male team member Laurens, a blond boy who is not
considered particular masculine. A wide angle from a bird-eye perspective shows the spectator a park with an improvised soccer field, where a mix of female and male classmates are playing a soccer match. On the side of the imaginary playing field, three passive groups are observing the game, notable divided on basis of their sex -one group consisting of only boys, two groups of girls- which literally separates the category ‘male’ from the ‘female’. The evident division within the use of colour in clothes and attributes even further divides the categories. The boys of the opposing team wear mainly black, grey or blue clothes (representing masculinity), while Laurens wears a bright red vest and all the girls wear pink shirts (representing femininity); except for Akkie, who wears clothes that are suspiciously reminiscent of Joep’s clothes: a grey hoodie and dark training pants. Although the girls try their best to participate actively in the game by tackling and intercepting the ball, they succumb under the dominance of the masculine boys, literally shown by Joep’s pulling at Elise’s feminine long, brown hair. Only Akkie is not impressed by the boys’ dominance and is not afraid to oppose it. Without thinking she bashes into Joep, making him trip over, and dribbles across the field avoiding multiple tackles and once again scores a goal. Joep protests loudly. When Akkie accuses Joep of pulling Elise’s hair, Joep responds with an insult attacking the girls on their femininity and inability of playing soccer: ‘Whining chicks with long hair cannot play soccer, do they?’.41 Although Elise tells Akkie to leave it alone, Akkie cleverly replies to Joep, resulting in laughter from Akkie’s and Joep’s friends. Before the game continues Akkie convinces Elise that she certainly is good at soccer and after Joep demonstrates his dominance over a little boy who keeps count of the game, Akkie once again shows that she is not afraid of Joep and makes openly fun of the fact that Joep cannot stand losing. Those comments and insults aimed towards the other sex, the considered appropriate behaviour and the children’s urge to proof themselves, indicate the need to separate the
male/masculine from the female/femininity.
It is important for Joep as hegemonic power within the class’ gender hierarchy to keep masculinity defined as ‘non-femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 71). This exclusive contrast between masculinity and femininity, and the continually reiterating of his power will maintain Joep’s own social existence as hegemonic power (Mills 2000: p. 266). Joep performs the most heteronormative
41 Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Joep and Akkie playing soccer in the parc, translation from Dutch:
27
masculine part in the film. He is tall, loves to play soccer, looks tough and tries to exercise his power over his friends and especially the girls in his class. Repeatedly Joep tries to (verbally) harm his female classmates on basis of their femininity, or other classmates who do not conform to the heterosexual matrix. He grabs Elise by her ponytail causing her to fall on the ground, he teases Akkie because of her long hair and calls the girls ‘whining chicks’. When the girls do not conform to the heteronormative representation of girls and when they try to join in considered masculine
behaviour, Joep is the first to point out their inability and their incompetence to do so. In the film it becomes evident that Joep embodies the continual reiteration of hegemonic power, since he as individual ‘is both an effect of power and the element of its articulation’.42 He regularly punishes those who fail to do their gender right to maintain his hegemonic position, as Butler states, is frequently seen in contemporary culture (Butler 1999: p. 178).
In Cool Kids Don't Cry Joep seems to symbolize castration anxiety in the Oedipal scenario, a psychoanalytic theory developed by Freud and frequently cited in Butler’s works. Although it may read as quite a sidestep from this thesis, the Oedipal scenario will help to understand Joep as the power that reappropriates and re-enacts the hegemonic norms, and will therefore help to
understand Akkie’s subversive role within the film. Freud’s theory claims that the male child grows a sexual desire towards his mother, during one stage of his psychosexual development, resulting in emotional rivalry with the father, because he is the one who sleeps with the mother (Sarnoff and Corwin 1959: p. 374). The child has the urge to kill the father, but he is aware that the father is physically stronger and has the better chance to compete over the possession of the mother. According to Freud this eventually results in a fear of castration. By identifying and adopting the personality traits of the parent with the same sex, the child reduces his castration anxiety since he believes that the likeness to the father will protect him from his father’s fury. In Cool Kids Don't Cry this is shown through the relationship between Joep and his father. Joep’s father is definitely
dominant over Joep and Joep obeys, although reluctantly, his father’s orders. When things do not go as the father wants, he reacts in anger. This wish for dominance and the urge to control others is adopted by Joep and he repeatedly tries to project this power over his classmates. Joep therefore is an effect of his father’s masculine power and also the element of articulation since Joep repeatedly projects this hegemonic dominance over his classmates. As already mentioned, Joep especially desires to dominate the girls and Laurens as subordinate male, which is a phenomenon that is also explained by Freud’s theory. Since females do not have a masculine phallus, males consider the ‘feminine position […] as the figural enactment of that punishment, the very figuration of that threat
42
Nayak, Anoop, Mary Jane Kehily. ‘Gender Undone: Subversion, regulation and embodiment in the work of Judith Buter’. British Journal of Sociology of Education (20 nov 2006): p. 465.
