Is it necessary to "be" a feminist to "make" feminist cinema? Icíar Bollaín and her cinematographic representation of gender.

Julia Cabrera Campoy

doi:10.5209/infe.54954

Abstract

Inequality between men and women in cinema has remained stable from its beginnings. Both behind the cameras and on-screen representation, women have been systematically invisible, underrepresented and objectified. Feminist efforts arose in the 1970s to visualize and subvert the existing power order, working through two axes: the critique on patriarchy and patriarchal cinema industry, and the development of feminist counter-cinema. Despite their efforts, women's situation has not been greatly improved. However, from the 90s a stream of female authors considered feminists by the critic disowning feminism has spread out. Their films are led by strong capable women, no longer representing women's struggles but assuming their victories and creating from them. New categories of analysis such as post-feminist cinema have been developed for those films. Nevertheless, I question whether these are essentially feminist representations since they are building alternative models of femininity. If they are, does this mean that a feminist consciousness is not necessary to make feminist films? In order to address this question I analyze gender representation in Bollaín’s filmography, and see whether their films fit in any feminist category despite her denial to the term, and the implication this could have.

Highlights

The so-called seventh art has arrived to its first century of history
In this sense, when Bollaín admits the current gender inequality of the cinema industry, framing it as the lack of “female presence among people who decide what is done and who does it” [translated from Spanish] (Bollaín, 2017), she does not acknowledge the vertical discrimination accounted for before. She understands gender inequality as “a matter of diversity” that can be solved by convincing women to lean in the ruling positions; something that should be done not for social justice but because “we need more thematic variety” [translated from Spanish] (Bollaín, 2017) in films. This claim for diversity in Bollaín’s and other female directors’ statements has been analysed as fitting in the cultural pattern of postmodernism, which is shaped by the ideas of “plurality and tolerance” [translated from Spanish] (Martínez-Carazo, 2002: 79), as opposed to fixed monolithic ideologies —including feminism
At the same time, feminist critics analyze the content of their films as feminists inasmuch as they fit into the counter-cinema mentioned above

Summary

Introduction

The so-called seventh art has arrived to its first century of history. The reality of the filmed image has radically changed since the first Cinematograph Lumière appeared. She understands gender inequality as “a matter of diversity” that can be solved by convincing women to lean in the ruling positions; something that should be done not for social justice but because “we need more thematic variety” [translated from Spanish] (Bollaín, 2017) in films This claim for diversity in Bollaín’s and other female directors’ statements has been analysed as fitting in the cultural pattern of postmodernism, which is shaped by the ideas of “plurality (racial, cultural, aesthetic, ideological) and tolerance (vital stances marked by its inclusive character that blur the lines of transgression)” [translated from Spanish] (Martínez-Carazo, 2002: 79), as opposed to fixed monolithic ideologies —including feminism. At the same time, feminist critics analyze the content of their films as feminists inasmuch as they fit into the counter-cinema mentioned above.

Analysis of gender representation in Bollaín’s films

Findings

Conclusions