Feminist interpretation of music videos – 2012/3

Mainstream music videos typically depict women in a sexualized and unrealistic way, playing into the male fantasy. British film critic Laura Mulvey discovered a theory that she terms 'the male gaze' which focuses, among other things, on how men view women on the silver screen. Although written for film, the theory can be applied to music videos: see below.

I also wrote about Mulvey and the film SuckerPunch. See a previous post.



Lily Allen's video and lyrics are a near parody of today's music industry, parodying various artists in her 'Hard Out Here' video including Robin Thicke, Nicki Minaj and Jessie J. Lily told people that the song was meant as a dig at the industry's expectations of women to be sexually desirable objects. She said: "[It was] Meant to be a light-hearted satirical video that deals with the objectification of women within modern pop culture. The message is clear."

The video represents women as what they are 'meant' to be, what they usually are in conventional music videos: dancing, smoking, sexualized actions, working in a kitchen, having money thrown at them. The operation/liposuction scene at the beginning corroborates this- various men and the industry tells her that she needs to look a certain way in order to be successful. At one point, Lily assumes the male role. Wearing a fur coat and standing in front of Rolls Royce she throws money at the women dancing/twerking around her and mimes having 'doggy style' sex with one of the dancers, beating her butt. It is so conventional and exaggerated that it becomes the opposite. Naturally, all conventions are adhered to in order to provide proper context in order to mock. Within the lyrics, women presented in as opposites: "Don't need to shake my arse for you because I've got a brain"juxtaposed with "If you're not a size six, then you're not good-looking"

The representation of women in this music video, after analysis, is atypical. The lyrics of the song focus on women working to get what they want, a positive message: 'You wanna a Maseratti? You better work bitch.'  Yet the 'characters' sexualized attire (lingerie and BDSM inspired clothing) juxtaposes this, conforming to the conventional music video, detracting from the message of the song. BDSM is typically associated with dominant/submissive practices and Britney follows this, presenting herself as a dominant over others. The video also uses the typical 'male' conventions such as fast cars, explosions and skimpily dressed women. Another obvious convention that is adhered to is the use of product placement- Beats speakers by Dr. Dre are seen 'harnessed' into the mouth of a woman, S&M style. A Bulgari perfume bottle is also seen at the very beginning. Britney also addresses women as 'bitches', a word some feminists argue is an example of causal misogyny. One could however argue that the very definition of feminism is to allow the freedom of choice for women, including language and clothing. Sadly, this message is again not usually brought to light, especially in mainstream music videos where women are typically told what to wear, as seen with the controversial 2011 Slut Walk. Much like Allen's music video, there are virtually no men- all dancers are female.   Britney is represented dominant, fearless (standing in a pool infested with sharks), in control woman- she challenges her sexuality by engaging in various practices with other women.  Britney sports her typical blonde hair, an obvious contrast to the dancers black hair. This concept of singling out a person, making them appear 'special' dates back to Ancient Greece-unique warriors such as Achilles and Alexander the Great were also believed to be blonde, setting them apart from the masses. Camera angles tend to be long/wide, mid or close-ups, none are visibly canted to emphasize power or sexuality. Long shots are used to show the choreography and the clothing that the 'empowered' women wear.
In terms of Laura Mulvey, I feel that parts of the theory fall down, but some aspects remain. Mulvey writes that a male viewer identifies himself with the male protagonist of the film and thus, through his eyes, objectifies the woman. Fortunately, there are no men to identify with, allowing the women to empower themselves thusly. In this case, women are the 'rulers' objectifying other women, which can be seen as 'controversial'. 


*U N F I N I S H E D*