IS 2017 Webreport

2.1 Hero’s Journey

The notion of the Hero’s Journey was first introduced by Joseph Campbell in his book “The Hero with a Thousand Faces”, published in 1949, and elaborated upon by Vogler in his 1998 book “The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure For Writers”. This concept can alternatively be called the “Monomyth”. Structurally, it consists of 17 original stages which the typical hero-quest will progress through, which was later summarized and condensed into 12 stages by Vogler.

Vogler argues that the concept of the Hero’s Journey is that “the myth of the hero”, which he characterizes as “the most persistent theme in all of oral traditions and recorded literature”, is ultimately, when distilled to its basics, “the same story – retold endlessly in infinite variations”. It transcends the boundaries of culture and time and still has the potential to excite and retains its relevance in today’s world. (Campbell, 1949) As such, it can be best summarized as the archetypal pattern or structure of narrative that appears in literary works throughout time. (Vogler, 1985)

It is argued that the Hero’s Journey draws heavily upon ideas from Carl Jung’s archetypes, (Peterson, 2017) which are common ideas that “permeate the collective unconscious and emerge as themes and characters in our dreams and surface in our culture”. Jung noticed a correlation between a person’s dreams and the common stereotypes of mythological figures, and he suggested that both were coming from a deeper source, in the “collective unconscious” of the human race. He thus theorized that such archetypes are a “reflection of aspects of the human mind”.

In her dissertation on the analysis of the Hero’s Journey in films, Mackey-Kallis directly acknowledges that for Mythic Criticism, “any interpretation is always grounded in the particular socio-historical moment out of which it arises and to which it speaks”. (Mackey-Kallis, 2001) She specifically calls upon ANH in particular and the Star Wars Original Trilogy as a whole as a prime example of a monomyth, and George Lucas also explicitly acknowledged borrowing elements from the Hero’s Journey. As such, the concept of the Hero’s Journey provides a conceptual framework to serve as a basis of comparison between the thematic story/plot arcs and the development and progression of the main hero in the Original Trilogy and that of TFA.

 

2.2 Male Gaze Theory

First put forth by Laura Mulvey in the article “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”, which was first published in 1975. It represents a significant influence on modern Feminist Film Theory, by directing film theory towards a psychoanalytic framework and allowing the intersectionality of film theory, feminism, and psychoanalysis. At heart, it postulates that mainstream film perpetuates a culture of patriarchy and male dominance

Male Gaze Theory is based upon the assumption that films “reflect” and “reveal” the “socially established interpretations of sexual difference” and hence “controls images and erotic ways of looking” (p.422). It further puts forth the concept of a asymmetry of power between the two genders and a society “ordered by sexual imbalance” where “pleasure in looking” is dichotomized between the “active/male” and “passive/female” gazes (p.425). Mulvey utilizes psychoanalysis and Freudian theory to support her arguments, argueing that within the “patriarchal unconscious[ness]”, due the lack of the phallus by women, the male sexual organ, it thus induces fear in men, due to the potential instability to the phallocentric order of society that allows for the position and privilege of men. Women thus symbolize “castration threats”, which thus results in the formation of scopophilia as a natural counter-reaction by men (p.427). Mulvey utilizes the Freudian definition of scopophilia which states that “looking” at “erotic objects” provides a “source of [sexual] pleasure” and argues that mainstream cinema continuously and insidiously perpetuates this idea (p.423).

In her opinion, the “heterosexual division of labor” in films “[controls] its narrative structures” in order that “the man controls the film fantasy” and is shown as the motif of power (p.426). Men are seen to be ones who are actually essential to the plot, rather than just mere accessories. However, au contraire, women are "bearing the burden of sexual objectification", being portrayed as “erotic objects for the characters on screen” as well as the “spectator” (p.426). Women are portrayed in an erotic and sexual manner, and are not given a role that drastically affects the outcome of the plot, instead being sexually objectified in place of men. Mulvey then concludes that the male gaze is achieved by "playing on the tension in films” and “controlling the dimension of time” and “space" via “editing”, “cinematic codes” and “changes in distance (p.430). This is then “broken down” and “cut to the measure of desire” to satiate and satisfy the male ego.

This theory is therefore important as it provides a theoretical framework by which films can be logically analyzed and allows for the distinct identification and evaluation of techniques and methods by which women are portrayed in film. It also provides the potential opportunity of examining other methods in film by which the male gaze can be created and women can be objectified.

 

2.3 Feminist Film Theory

In 1970, Kate Millett espoused in her book, “Sexual Politics”, the argument that sex is a “status category” with “political implications” (p.122). She argues that there is a “relationship of dominance and subordinance” between men and women, which are direct consequence of the “patriarch[al]” nature of society, (p.123) whereby “every avenue of power within the society” is “entirely in male hands” (p. 123). This unequal relationship results in the creation of stereotypical demarcations of gender roles stemming from the “needs and values” of the “dominant and the dictated” (p.124). Millett puts forth the proposition that the key split is focused on the notion of “aggression is male” and “passivity is female” (p.128), with a corresponding partition of the “polar qualities” of each category (p.129). In particular, she assigns “aggression, intelligence, force and efficacy” to the “masculine” and “passivity, ignorance, docility, virtue and ineffectuality” to the “feminine” (p.124), causing an abject difference in societal expectations. Females are tasked with “domestic service and attendance upon infants” while males are given “the rest of human achievement, interest and ambition” (p.124). This allows us to clearly demarcate the general stereotypes of each gender and explore the means and effects of the films portrayal of characters of each gender.