At the last post I discussed about my gaze as a photographer. I am a “hunter” and a “farmer”, I enjoy photographing ad interacting with other people. I have interest in their history and I enjoy the relationship of me as s photographer, and them as a subject. I am also exploring on myself and experimenting taking sel-portraits and combining two images.
Futhermore, I was very interested on the talk about landscape photography and its relation to the male gaze. I never thought of the landscape as a methaphor of femininity.
Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze suggests that it denies woman of their identity, transforming them as objects to be admired by their physical appearance. For a long time most film director were men, therefore the male gaze is present immany films and ads, implying that we are viewing story or advert through the eyes of an heterosexual.
During this process, women is objetified and make inferior or less important than the male. The relation is of dominance, the male gaze dominates the scene and implies power. The landscape, if compared to the woman, is dominated by the photographer and “bears the imprint of the cultural pedigree”. (Bright, p. 2)
Just recently that woman started to gain more visibility in the movie industry as directors, therefore the majority is still dominated by the male gaze. The music industry is another example where sex is used as a product that sells, so the male gaze is strongly present.
Bright, Deborah. Of mother nature and Malboro men. An inquiry into the culture meanings of Landscape photography.