@Phil Perspectives: Cone Chapter Plan
Original Plan:
Title- Women as inferior in Hollywood- and how Ripley was revolutionary
Chapter 1
- define gender
- define Hollywood
- define inferior
- stereotypical differences between men and women
- inferior women- spinster vs bachelor
- women in science fiction = inferior to men
- define feminism
- Laura Mulvey- Male gaze
- Bechdel Test
- Sandra Bem- Gender Schema Theory = how individuals become gendered
- Judith Butler- gender theory = gender is a social construct
- Gender 'doesn't matter' = one should not be superior over the other
Chapter 3
- Ripley in the Alien series
- how the female protagonist changes in her role throughout the films
- first female to not be viewed as inferior
Other possible things outside of the cone that might be useful:
- Aristotle
- Darwin- theory of evolution = women seen as inferior
- How science got women wrong - Angela Salini
Plan after discussion:
Basic Outline
Chapter 1- the issue with women in science fiction
Chapter 2- gender theory proving that gender 'doesn't matter'
Chapter 3- Ripley case study
Title- Women in science fiction in Hollywood- and how Ripley was revolutionary
Chapter 1
- women in science fiction
- victim
- evil
- glamorised assistant
- if powerful= sexualised
- costume
- science fiction up until 1979
- Pulp sci fi
- b-movies
Chapter 2
- Laura Mulvey- Male gaze
- Bechdel Test
- Sandra Bem- Gender Schema Theory = how individuals become gendered
- Judith Butler- gender theory = gender is a social construct
- Gender 'doesn't matter' = one should not be superior over the other
Chapter 3
- Ripley in the Alien series
- how the female protagonist changes in her role throughout the films
- first female to not be viewed as inferior
Other possible things outside of the cone that might be useful:
- Aristotle
- Darwin- theory of evolution = women seen as inferior
- How science got women wrong - Angela Salini
Hi Em,
ReplyDeleteYes - 'Plan B' is looking more resolved; so just to restate; my feeling is that the 'job' of chapter 1 is to 'reveal' the assumptions/normativity at work behind the various representations of female characters in science-fiction. The 'reveal' should seek to demonstrate the structures/binaries/ideologies playing out 'over and over' in science-fiction, so the feel of this chapter should be wide-ranging, research-intensive and example rich. By the end of the chapter you should be able to summarise - with confidence - the various tropes characterising female characters; those tropes, I suspect, will be problematic in terms of what they tell us about the ways in which we unknowingly perpetuate gender stereotypes. I suggest you think about organising your 'types of representation' into categories - so 'the glamorous assistant or side-kick', the 'love interest', the sex monster and so on. The REALLY important thing about this chapter, Emily, is that your research is real, authentic and experiential - i.e. you know what you're talking about and can talk about it with relish, confidence and with authority.
Just a word of advice: it can be tempting for students to seek to prove in a black and white way that a is superior to b - for example, you argue that Ripley represents the 'solution' to the problems you identify; this makes it difficult then when you need to consider that maybe the characterisation doesn't always fit the solution you want it to: for example, it's possible for Ripley to be a sex object AND an independent woman AND a lonely woman AND a mother figure AND... I think you need to think about 'complexity' and nuance as being aspects of progressive representation of female characters, as opposed to expecting Ripley to fulfil the role of a saint-like representation, if that makes sense? You're seeking to prove perhaps that Ripley is 'more complicated' as opposed to 'superior'.
Saw this - think it would really useful in general in terms of representation and visual culture:
ReplyDeletehttps://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Representation.html?id=dAqycFD4PBsC&redir_esc=y