Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T23:17:09.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rape versus Mans/laughter: Hitchcock's Blackmail and Feminist Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Tania Modleski
Tania Modleski*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In film studies the work of Alfred Hitchcock has often been considered misogynist, and feminist critics have assumed that the female spectator can enjoy the films only by adopting the position of a masochist or the perspective of a man. An analysis of Blackmail, however, reveals that women's relation to the text is much more complicated than has generally been supposed. The film is constructed as an elaborate joke on the heroine, who, as in the Freudian paradigm, is ultimately transformed into an object between two male subjects; nevertheless, because much of the film stresses her subjectivity, a reading that insists on woman's point of view and experience becomes possible. This reading, which activates the word rape—a term seldom used in analytical discussions of the film's central episode—has serious implications for feminist critics in their struggle for interpretive truth.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 102 , Issue 3 , May 1987 , pp. 304 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Allen, Jeanne Thomas. “The Representation of Violence to Women: Hitchcock's Frenzy.” Film Quarterly 38 (1985): 30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Lindsay. “Alfred Hitchcock.” Focus on Hitchcock. Ed. LaValley, Albert J. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1972. 48–59.Google Scholar
Barr, Charles. “Blackmail: Silent and Sound.” Sight and Sound 5 (1983): 189–93.Google Scholar
Bergstrom, Janet. “Alternation, Segmentation, Hypnosis: Interview with Raymond Bellour.” Camera Obscura 3–4 (1979): 71–104.Google Scholar
Castle, Terry. Clarissa's Ciphers: Meaning and Disruption in Richardson's Clarissa. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1982.Google Scholar
Cixous, Hélène. “Castration or Decapitation?” Trans. Annette Kuhn. Signs 7 (1981): 41–55.Google Scholar
Cixous, Hélène. “The Laugh of the Medusa.” New French Feminisms. Ed. Marks, Elaine and de Courtrivron, Isabelle. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 1981. 245–64.Google Scholar
Cottom, Daniel. “The Enchantment of Interpretation.” Critical Inquiry 11 (1985): 573–94.Google Scholar
de Lauretis, Teresa. Alice Doesn't: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1984.10.1007/978-1-349-17495-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doane, Mary Ann. “Film and the Masquerade: Theorising the Female Spectator.” Screen 23 (1982): 74–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durgnat, Raymond. The Strange Case of Alfred Hitchcock: Or, The Plain Man's Hitchcock. Cambridge: MIT P, 1974.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. “Law as Interpretation.” The Politics of Interpretation. Ed. Mitchell, W. J. T. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1983. 249–70.Google Scholar
Felman, Shoshana. “Rereading Femininity.” Yale French Studies 62 (1981): 19–44.Google Scholar
Fetterley, Judith. The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1978.Google Scholar
Flynn, Elizabeth A., and Schweickart, Patrocinio, eds. Gender and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts, and Contexts. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. Trans. Strachey, James. New York: Norton, 1960.Google Scholar
Haskell, Molly. From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in the Movies. New York: Penguin, 1974.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, Alfred, dir. Blackmail. British International Pictures, 1929.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, Alfred, dir. “Direction.” Focus on Hitchcock. Ed. LaValley, Albert J. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1972. 32–39.Google Scholar
Houston, Beverie, and Kinder, Marsha. Close Up. New York: Harcourt, 1972.Google Scholar
Jacobus, Mary. “Is There a Woman in This Text?” New Literary History 14 (1982): 117–42.10.2307/468961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1981.Google Scholar
Lesage, Julia. “Women's Rage.” Jump Cut 31 (1986): 67–69.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. The Savage Mind. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1966.Google Scholar
Linderman, Deborah. “The Screen in Hitchcock's Blackmail.” Wide Angle 4 (1980): 20–29.Google Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, Sally, Borker, Ruth, and Furman, Nelly. Women and Language in Literature and Society. New York: Praeger, 1980.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine. “Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: Toward Feminist Jurisprudence.” Signs 8 (1983): 635–58.Google Scholar
Marcus, Jane. “Art and Anger.” Feminist Studies 4 (1978): 69–98.10.2307/3177626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayne, Judith. “The Limits of Spectacle.” Wide Angle 6 (1984): 4–15.Google Scholar
Metz, Christian. The Imaginary Signifier: Psychoanalysis and the Cinema. Trans. Britton, Celia, Williams, Annwyl, Brewster, Ben, and Guzzetti, Alfred. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1982.10.1007/978-1-349-05103-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvey, Laura. “Afterthoughts on ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,‘ Inspired by Duel in the Sun.” Framework 15–17 (1981): 12–15.Google Scholar
Mulvey, Laura. “Changes.” Discourse 7 (1985): 11–30.Google Scholar
Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” Screen 16 (1975): 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poague, Leland. “Criticism and/as History: Rereading Blackmail.” A Hitchcock Reader. Ed. Deutelbaum, Marshall and Poague, Leland. Ames: Iowa State UP, 1986. 78–89.Google Scholar
Rich, Adrienne. “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-vision.” On Lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose 1966–1978. New York: Norton, 1979. 35–49.Google Scholar
Rohmer, Eric, and Chabrol, Claude. Hitchcock: The First Forty-Four Films. New York: Ungar, 1979.Google Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia UP, 1985.10.7312/sedg90478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, Kaja. “Histoire d'O: The Construction of a Female Subject.” Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality. Ed. Vance, Carole S. London: Routledge, 1984. 320–49.Google Scholar
Spoto, Donald. The Art of Alfred Hitchcock. New York: Doubleday, 1976.Google Scholar
Spoto, Donald. The Dark Side of Genius: The Life of Alfred Hitchcock. New York: Ballantine, 1983.Google Scholar
Taylor, John Russell. Hitch. London: Faber, 1978.Google Scholar
Truffaut, François. Hitchcock. Rev. ed. New York: Simon, 1983.Google Scholar
Weber, Samuel. The Legend of Freud. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1982.Google Scholar
Weis, Elizabeth. The Silent Scream: Alfred Hitchcock's Soundtrack. East Brunswick: Fairleigh Dickinson UP, 1982.Google Scholar
Welsh, Alexander. George Eliot and Blackmail. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1985.Google Scholar
Williams, Linda. “When the Woman Looks.” Re-vision: Essays in Feminist Film Criticism. Ed. Ann Doane, Mary, Williams, Linda, and Mellencamp, Patricia. American Film Institute Monograph Series 3. Frederick: University Publications of America, 1984. 83–99.Google Scholar
Woolf, Virginia. A Room of One's Own. New York: Harcourt, 1957.Google Scholar
Yacowar, Maurice. Hitchcock's British Films. Hamden: Archon-Shoe String, 1977.Google Scholar