Friday, October 9, 2009

REAR WINDOW: Voyeurism and the Object of the Male Gaze




Alfred Hitchcock’s 1954 film, Rear Window, gives us an inside look at the life of injured photojournalist, LB Jeffries, who as a result of his injury is bound to a wheelchair. Because our protagonist is unable to leave his apartment, he passes the time by observing, or spying on, his neighbors out of the rear window of his apartment. The entire plot is centered around Jeffries’ discoveries as a “Peeping Tom” and therefore, the film has a strong underlying theme of voyeurism.

In her piece, “From the Woman Who Knew Too Much: Hitchcock and Feminist Theory”, Tania Modleski analyzes the relationship between Jeffries and his girlfriend. She discusses the exhibitionist behavior of Lisa and the voyeuristic actions of Jeffries. Modleski makes the point that although Lisa is an exhibitionist, she is also portrayed in a confident and superior manner to Jeffries. She notes most significantly Lisa’s physical presence in each shot as compared to that of Jeffrey’s. On page 727, she makes the observation that, “in Rear Window, however, the woman is continually shown to be physically superior to the hero, not only in her physical movements but also in her dominance within the frame…” While these are notable characteristics of our two protagonists, I do not think that this is the voyeuristic relationship that must be analyzed.

I would like to discuss voyeurism in terms of the object of the male gaze as it relates to Rear Window. When considering the male gaze in relation to Hitchcock’s film, I found the most interesting voyeuristic relationship to be that of our protagonist, Jeffries, as a “Peeping Tom” looking into the windows of his neighbors while they are unaware. At first, we see him observing all of the neighbors and taking equal interest in each of their actions. Two neighbors are females who live alone, one being particularly attractive and desirable, the stereotypical object of the male gaze, and there are couples in the other apartments. At no point is he focused specifically on the attractive female neighbor, as would be expected. As the plot progresses and as Jeffries continues to “peep”, he becomes fixated on the actions of Mr. Thorwald. In film, the vast majority of the time, the object of the male gaze is a woman who is desirable to the man and therefore becomes desirable to us as the audience. Modleski briefly discusses Laura Mulveys views on voyeurism in relation to Hitchcock films and she states that they are “tailored to the fears and fantasies of the male spectator, who…needs to see her fetishized and controlled in the course of the narrative…The film spectator apparently has no choice but to identify with the male protagonist, who exerts an active controlling gaze over a passive female object.” As Modleski stated, Lisa is most certainly not a “passive female object” and in my opinion, she is also not the primary object of Jeffries’ gaze. So, in the case of Rear Window, the object of the male gaze is not a woman, rather, from Jeffries’ perspective as a voyeur, or “Peeping Tom”, it is Thorwald. This interest in Thorwald comes about due to Jeffries’ suspicion that Thorwald has murdered his wife. Although Jeffries is not “peeping” on Thorwald in a sexual context, he still chooses to focus on and become obsessed with the actions of this male individual over the actions of his other neighbors, which is worth noting. His interest in Lisa as a visual subject becomes clearly secondary to his desire to view Thorwald in an effort to find evidence of murder.

9 comments:

  1. I am really impressed with your ability to take a scholarly article and dissect it. You could comb through Modleski and figure out what agrees with the film and what doesn't. I followed your argument very clearly and I agree that Thorwald become the prime object of Jeffries gaze in Rear Window. But that does not outrule Modleski's ideas of the passive female. I think both are simultaneously calling for Jeffries' attention, and in turn the attention of the viewer. We should also keep in mind that the voyeurism that Modleski defines is underlying that of the casual observer. Great post! I really enjoyed it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Ashleigh,
    You picked up on a lot of irregularities in this film that I hadn't even thought of before. First, I thought it was really good how you analyzed Modleski's opinion that Lisa was portrayed in a much more superior manner than Jeffries. After reading your blog I realized so many more ways that Lisa was shown as the fitter of the couple. Lisa is clearly from money, in the city's elite upper-class, well-respected and very much independent. In most shots, she is shown regally and she acts as an antithesis to Jeffries' fragile state. Lisa is also the one that carries out much of the action in the film. She breaks into Thorwald's and does all of Jeffries' dirty work as he just sits by his window. Second, it's strange that in Rear Window the object of the voyeurism isn't a female (Lisa), it's a male (Thorwald)! Of course attention is given to Lisa, but it is Thorwald that intrigues Jeffries the most. He definitely becomes an object of obsession while Lisa is put on the back burner.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In your blog you pointed out that Jeffries' primary focus is not on the attractive female neighbor, as would be expected. I must admit I found it strange at first that he was not particulary interested in her only because we have been accustomed to the "male gaze" of the cinema (it was also strange how Grace Kelly's character did not seem to mind that he was watching the dancer). However, I liked how you explained though how that strange feeling goes away as Jeffries becomes interested in Mr. Thorwald because he is the primary focus.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really liked your post, and you definitely picked up on a lot of things that I didn't. I also really liked how you were able to take Modeleski's article and apply it to film's we've viewed in class.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hope this doesn't come accross badly, but Shilpi, you said this:

    But that does not outrule Modleski's ideas of the passive female.

    You may want to re-read Modeleski... Mulvey argues for a active male gaze/ passive female object relationship, but Modeleski takes issue with Mulvey, arguing that the situation is much more complex than that and there is also a female gaze, especially in Rear Window, in which Lisa takes a very active role.

    Ashleigh-- it's not my week to comment but since I'm here, good job! It's definitely true that Lisa only becomes a significant object of Jeffries' gaze when she is helping him unravel the mystery of Thorwald-- when she is in Thorwald's apartment, for example. When they are actually in the room together he hardly ever looks at her.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nice, thorough engagement with the notion of voyeurism. Helps to remind us that really it works on so many levels in cinema.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I enjoyed reading your take on voyeurism in conjunction with Rear Window. Reading your post (especially the Modleski quote you highlighted)reminded me of a movie I once watched - Krótki film o miłości (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_Film_About_Love) that dealt with similiar themes of voyeurism in a more straightforward way than Hitchcock

    ReplyDelete
  8. Though the primary object of voyeurism is Thorwald (male), he is not sexualised by the camer. BUt lisa being secondary in terms of object of voyeurism, she is sexualised. So, still female is always sexualised by the camera and this leads to power relationship(subject-object) It is not male objectification but rather male identification.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Though the primary object of voyeurism is Thorwald (male), he is not sexualised by the camer. BUt lisa being secondary in terms of object of voyeurism, she is sexualised. So, still female is always sexualised by the camera and this leads to power relationship(subject-object) It is not male objectification but rather male identification.

    ReplyDelete