Hey folks! In my ongoing effort to get this old blog of mine back up and running, I thought I would tell you about my recent guest appearance on the fantastic new podcast, Oscarwatch. Hosts Steven Buja and Alex Riviello graciously asked me to come on and talk about one of my all-time favorite movies, Clint Eastwood’s elegiac Western Unforgiven. In this episode, we discuss how the film demythologizes everything from violence to masculinity to the American West itself. It gets kind of heavy at times, but still manages to be a lot of fun throughout.
On Friday, September 26, 2014, I successfully defended my thesis titled “Gangstas, Thugs, Vikings, and Drivers: Cinematic Masculine Archetypes and the Demythologization of Violence in the films of Nicolas Winding Refn.” Not only did I pass, but I passed with distinction, which is the best feeling in the world after struggling with a lot of self-doubt and uncertainty during the two years it took to research and write the damn thing. Anyway, I thought I should share the final version my thesis with the readers of this blog, because it might be of interest to some of the scholarly types out there. To visit DePaul’s online depository, you can just click the link above, or just click here. Both links will take you directly to the page housing my thesis. Thank you, and I hope you not only enjoy reading my ramblings, but also find the information contained within useful.
This is the final post in a series looking at how Nicolas Winding Refn engages with a recurring notion or approach to masculinity in his films. This series is based on the first draft of the second chapter of my Master’s thesis, titled Gangstas, Thugs, Vikings and Drivers: Global Hegemonic Masculinity and Cinematic Masculine Archetypes in the Films of Nicolas Winding Refn. This post serves as an examines how violence contributes to the construction of a recurring notion of masculinity in the films of Nicolas Winding Refn. As always, this is a work in progress, so if you are interested in quoting any of the information here, please contact me first for permission. Additionally, I welcome any and all feedback, so please feel free to let me know if you have any suggestions about how the work could be improved or altered. Thank you.
VIOLENCE AND MASCULINITY
In interviews, Nicolas Winding Refn has stated that he believes cinema does not make people violent, but it does show them how to be violent. In particular, he points to classic gangster films such as Mean Streets (1973) and The Public Enemy (1931) as primers in how to be a violent man, and considers this to be a case of “life imitating art imitating life” (Refn, 2006). More importantly, however, Refn has stated that his films are often a response to “how the media repackages and glamorizes violence and crime and all these terrible things” that he considers immoral (Westcott, 2006, online). This might explain why masculinity is often depicted within Refn’s films as being both violent and aggressive; Refn is reflecting and reacting to a recurring notion of masculinity that is informed by the hegemonic masculine ideal, which often positions masculinity as violent and aggressive (Horrocks, 1994; Jhally, Earp, & Katz, 1999;Robinson, 2000; DeRosia, 2003; Nayak & Kehily, 2008; Rehling, 2009).
This is the second post in a series looking at how Nicolas Winding Refn engages with a recurring notion or approach to violent masculinity in his films. This series is based on the first draft of the second chapter of my Master’s thesis, titled Gangstas, Thugs, Vikings and Drivers: Cinematic Masculine Archetypes and Violent Masculinity in the Films of Nicolas Winding Refn. In this post, I examine the concept of stoic masculinity, which is a vital component of the hegemonic masculine ideal. As always, this is a work in progress, so if you are interested in quoting any of the information here, please contact me first for permission. Additionally, I welcome any and all feedback, so please feel free to let me know if you have any suggestions about how the work could be improved or altered. Thank you.
STOICISM AND MASCULINITY
In addition to violence, aggression, and emotional constipation, one of the defining traits of dominant hegemonic masculinity is stoicism. Whereas men are often positioned as existing outside of language, and their silence is used as a way of emphasizing their lack of power, men who exist outside of language are often positioned as having an excess of power, and they are depicted as not needing language because they instead let their actions speak for them (Lehman, 1993). Indeed, the muscular tough guy characters that embody dominant hegemonic masculinity in Hollywood films (particularly action movies) are traditionally depicted as men of few words who are quick to act (Fig. 1).