Research Article

Women’s Role of Materiality: A Revaluation of the Subversive Power of Feminine Subjectivity in Hélène Cixous “L'écriture Feminine” and Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Stills

Kunyuan ZhangSchool of Arts and Sciences, Brandeis University, Waltham, USA*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Although Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Stills is not a practice of Hélène Cixous’s écriture feminine, both of the two are gravitated toward one shared phenomenon: the representation of women’s role of materiality by the feminine subject. The common consensus has held that women’s active subject positioning in the system of representation makes their body expression revolt against the othered, mute female body represented in the phallogocentric discourse. This paper—based on the inductive method of investigating écriture feminine and Sherman’s feminine iconography—questions the subversive power of the “speaking” female body. The conclusion is reached that the body expression, devoid of subversive power in both cases, would merely re-crystallize the myth of female inadequacy that fits into the patriarchal misconception. It is of great import that females stay vigilant against the role of materiality assumed by the feminine subject, which functions to disempower and misinform; it is indefatigability in pursuit of aspirations and the concrete agency in striving for victory over the intellectual discourse that empowers the female subject.

Keywords: feminine subjectivity; subversive power; women’s role of materiality
Published: February 28, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2/2022578
Volume: CHR Vol.2
pp. 490-498
Download PDF

References

  1. Vachhani, S.J. (2019). Rethinking the politics of writing differently through écriture féminine. Management Learning, 50, 11–23. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507618800718
  2. Xu, P. (1995). Irigaray’s Mimicry and the Problem of Essentialism. Hypatia, 10, 76–89. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3810206
  3. Schor, M. (1989). From Liberation to Lack. Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Arts & Politics, 24, 17-19. Retrieved from https://jstor.org/stable/community.28038322
  4. Mulvey, L. (1991). A Phantasmagoria of the Female Body: The Work of Cindy Sherman. New Left Review, 188, 136-150.OneSearch, https://newleftreview-org.eu1.proxy.openathens.net/issues/i188/articles/laura-mulvey-a-phantasmagoria-of-the-female-body-the-work-of-cindy-sherman.pdf
  5. Liu, J.C. (2010). Female Spectatorship and the Masquerade: Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Stills. History of photography, 34, 79–89. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/03087290903361399
  6. Cixous, H., Cohen, K., and Cohen, P. (1976). The Laugh of the Medusa. Signs, 1, 875–93. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/3173239
  7. Crowder, D.G. (1983). Amazons and Mothers? Monique Wittig, Helène Cixous and Theories of Women’s Writing. Contemporary Literature, 24, 117–144. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/1208100
  8. Berne, B. (2003). Studio: Cindy Sherman. Tate Research Publication. Retrieved from https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/cindy-sherman-1938/studio-cindy-sherman
  9. Brittain, D. (1999). Creative Camera: Thirty years of writing, 189, Manchester University Press.
  10. Kérchy, A. (2003). The Woman 69 Times: Cindy Sherman’s “Untitled Film Stills.” Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies (HJEAS), 9, 181189. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41274221
  11. Robinson, M. (1799). A Letter to the Women of England, on the Injustice of Mental Subordination. Printed for T.N. Longman, and O. Rees, 39, 84. Paternoster Row. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CB0127276681/ECCO?u=mlin_m_brandeis&sid=gale_marc&xid=439be1d6&pg=88
  12. Woolf, V. (2019). A Room of One’s Own, 104-106, The Commercial Press.
  13. Jameson, F. (1998). The Cultural Turn, 6, Verso.
  14. Collins, G. (1990). A Portraitist's Romp Through Art History. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/1990/02/01/arts/a-portraitist-s-romp-through-art-history.html
  15. Lemmon, N. (1993). The Sherman Phenomenon: A Foreclosure of Dialectical Reasoning. Discourse, 16, 100–117. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41389316.