I thought this deserves an independent thread - sorry if I've missed loads of interesting thoughts and opinions that might have appeared off-topic in other threads... please chip in here and feel free to repeat things you may have said elsewhere...
LeoF threw up some interesting links - thanks! I'll reproduce them below for anyone that missed them.
I still haven't read Zizek's "The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime" but am currently wading through Todd McGowan's extremely Lacanian "The Impossible David Lynch", which so far is a good response to many of Nochimson's weaker conclusions (in "The Passion of David Lynch : Wild at Heart in Hollywood") - however, IMHO it also suffers from a similar problem, that is, in its attempt to sustain a critique from a (relatively) fixed theoretical standpoint and present interpretations of Lynch's films in such a definitive way.
To LeoF - the "thread" about IE containing reams and reams of analysis is the official discussion board on the main IE site, which - if you still haven't seen the film - you'd do well to stay away from for now, just as you did with Nochimson's take on IE! When you do watch it, and if you feel you want to delve in there (before watching it a 2nd time, which I would recommend before going into any real depth on the boards...) you will easily find that eloquent poster I mentioned previously.
Does anyone have any other recommendations or opinions about critical responses to Lynch?
Here are the links LeoF provided before :
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol9-2005/n34sinnerbrink
http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol3-1999/n42bleasdale
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/show ... did=186035
Critical responses to Lynch
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
I really need to verbalize something right now and thought this thread might be a good place. An acquaintance at a forum board I am a founding member of just referred to David Lynch as a misogynist ... Don't know if I'll respond yet but I'm sort of just, um, stymied, almost like a deer caught in the headlights. Not in any critical literature I've read over the years or forum board comments about DL's films, can I remember ever reading that particular comment.
I've seen the gamut of other thoughts of course, like people loathing his work because they don't understand it, it's too out there, nonsensical, tries too hard for a visceral reaction from the audience, but never that his material is hateful towards women. Just having finished Twin Peaks after not having seen it since the series went off the air, I'm hit even harder by that comment since, for the Laura Palmer character in particular, I was struck again by the degree of affection I could feel David and Mark Frost had for her. She was universally everyone's daughter and friend (except to the villains of the piece of course). I know Fire Walk With Me is a tough film to sit through because it explores even further the depths of human darkness, and the Isabella Rossellini nude scene is often pointed at in Blue Velvet, but I still can't dredge up one memory from his films that suggests a trend in that direction.
I am very sensitive to this subject being a supporter of human rights agencies like Equality Now and others, while at the same time understanding that the artistic mind is not always culpable when the intent in a film, ugly or unpleasant as it may seem, is a legitimate part of an artist's vision, not an extension of their own demented psyches.
When I think of a director's body of work, there are directors I do think of as having misogynistic overtones (though I hesitate to label them as women haters), like Oliver Stone, Verhoeven, Von Trier, Woody Allen to a certain extent (take a good look at Husbands and Wives), anyone who has the balls to put torture porn up on the screen and dares to call it art, but David Lynch? He's produced a fair amount of disturbing images over the years (FWWM gave me nightmares) but I never equated those images with misogyny.
Before I go off the deep end here, I'll stop and ask if anyone would like to give their opinion on the subject.
I've seen the gamut of other thoughts of course, like people loathing his work because they don't understand it, it's too out there, nonsensical, tries too hard for a visceral reaction from the audience, but never that his material is hateful towards women. Just having finished Twin Peaks after not having seen it since the series went off the air, I'm hit even harder by that comment since, for the Laura Palmer character in particular, I was struck again by the degree of affection I could feel David and Mark Frost had for her. She was universally everyone's daughter and friend (except to the villains of the piece of course). I know Fire Walk With Me is a tough film to sit through because it explores even further the depths of human darkness, and the Isabella Rossellini nude scene is often pointed at in Blue Velvet, but I still can't dredge up one memory from his films that suggests a trend in that direction.
I am very sensitive to this subject being a supporter of human rights agencies like Equality Now and others, while at the same time understanding that the artistic mind is not always culpable when the intent in a film, ugly or unpleasant as it may seem, is a legitimate part of an artist's vision, not an extension of their own demented psyches.
When I think of a director's body of work, there are directors I do think of as having misogynistic overtones (though I hesitate to label them as women haters), like Oliver Stone, Verhoeven, Von Trier, Woody Allen to a certain extent (take a good look at Husbands and Wives), anyone who has the balls to put torture porn up on the screen and dares to call it art, but David Lynch? He's produced a fair amount of disturbing images over the years (FWWM gave me nightmares) but I never equated those images with misogyny.
Before I go off the deep end here, I'll stop and ask if anyone would like to give their opinion on the subject.
Leland's daughter was murdered and the Norwegians left.
Actually, I have heard that comment before. Once or twice, directly by a journalist/critic and at other times, quoted by critics who then dissprove the point.
I find it a completely ridiculous comment. It is a shallow and thoughtless description of Lynch's stories. Yes, women are often victims in his films and are frequently brutally treated (think Twin Peaks, FWWM, parts of Wild at Heart, INLAND EMPIRE), and on the surface you would therefore say...yes, misogynistic. But any intelligent human being who can look further than a single scene and see the entire story and treatment of a character can see it in almost the reverse.
-I agree that Frost and Lynch create a Laura Palmer that we fall in love with..that we feel for...an almost magical and out-of-reach girl.
-Laura Dern in IE is on a journey which eventually leads to empowerment and beauty. (Think of the scene where she finds the Lost Girl!)
-MD is such a powerfully female film which shows sides of love, jealously and complexity that women have.
There are 2 common themes here. Firstly, Lynch loves conflict and conflict makes a GREAT film. Secondly...women play a massive role in his films and are not pushed to the edges as after-thoughts or supporting characters like in so many other films. He doesn't freeze them in comfortable roles of mother, daughter, lover, gentle, sweet...they are true players who go through hell and back, who manipulate, who love, who care and who are often stronger and more interesting than the men!
I find it a completely ridiculous comment. It is a shallow and thoughtless description of Lynch's stories. Yes, women are often victims in his films and are frequently brutally treated (think Twin Peaks, FWWM, parts of Wild at Heart, INLAND EMPIRE), and on the surface you would therefore say...yes, misogynistic. But any intelligent human being who can look further than a single scene and see the entire story and treatment of a character can see it in almost the reverse.
-I agree that Frost and Lynch create a Laura Palmer that we fall in love with..that we feel for...an almost magical and out-of-reach girl.
-Laura Dern in IE is on a journey which eventually leads to empowerment and beauty. (Think of the scene where she finds the Lost Girl!)
-MD is such a powerfully female film which shows sides of love, jealously and complexity that women have.
There are 2 common themes here. Firstly, Lynch loves conflict and conflict makes a GREAT film. Secondly...women play a massive role in his films and are not pushed to the edges as after-thoughts or supporting characters like in so many other films. He doesn't freeze them in comfortable roles of mother, daughter, lover, gentle, sweet...they are true players who go through hell and back, who manipulate, who love, who care and who are often stronger and more interesting than the men!
-
brokentiny
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:09 pm
- Location: Hobart, Australia
I've heard a few times of that accusation. I think it's incredibly offensive to accuse someone of being a misogynist. And as a huge fan (sometimes objective critic) I find it offensive personally.
I can understand why people may see that on a very superficial level. The moments mentioned in the earlier posts (Blue Velvet and FWWM), but these are just moments in a much larger whole.
I believe Lynch is aware of these accusations as he makes a reference to the danger of generalisations, (paraquote: "this female character does not represent all women") in "Catching the Big Fish".
I believe Lynch finds the female characters in his films fascinating, alluring and beguiling, he does not hate them (well, maybe Lula's mother!). Perhaps this may reflect his own feelings. I think like most men (going out on a limb here, I'm a guy, be kind!) he is fascinated by someone different to him and another gender is pretty different. Males and females can never really know how the other thinks or is, all we can really do is try and understand each other and get along. That may seem simple and maybe naive, but I think that's how Lynch sees it IMO.
In the end, his characters are just that..."characters"
People who accuse Lynch of misogyny based on a couple of superficial examples in "Blue Velvet" or "FWWM" forget about some of the strong, non-victim, female characters in other films. Examples;
Sissy Spacek's character Rose in "Straight Story", Dr Treves' wife in "The Elephant Man" (a minor but very supportive character) and even though Lula goes through some rough times in "Wild at Heart" she is strong and pretty much equal in the relationship with Sailor.
I can understand why people may see that on a very superficial level. The moments mentioned in the earlier posts (Blue Velvet and FWWM), but these are just moments in a much larger whole.
I believe Lynch is aware of these accusations as he makes a reference to the danger of generalisations, (paraquote: "this female character does not represent all women") in "Catching the Big Fish".
I believe Lynch finds the female characters in his films fascinating, alluring and beguiling, he does not hate them (well, maybe Lula's mother!). Perhaps this may reflect his own feelings. I think like most men (going out on a limb here, I'm a guy, be kind!) he is fascinated by someone different to him and another gender is pretty different. Males and females can never really know how the other thinks or is, all we can really do is try and understand each other and get along. That may seem simple and maybe naive, but I think that's how Lynch sees it IMO.
In the end, his characters are just that..."characters"
People who accuse Lynch of misogyny based on a couple of superficial examples in "Blue Velvet" or "FWWM" forget about some of the strong, non-victim, female characters in other films. Examples;
Sissy Spacek's character Rose in "Straight Story", Dr Treves' wife in "The Elephant Man" (a minor but very supportive character) and even though Lula goes through some rough times in "Wild at Heart" she is strong and pretty much equal in the relationship with Sailor.
There is something important to be said
Michel Chion's book is both critique and biography and could thus fit in this thread too. Then there are all sorts of academic essays around in journals and anthologies. I read a lot a few years ago, but I can't recall any titles right now.
Also, Greil Marcus' most recent book - The Shape of Things to Come - contains long sections on Lost Highway and Fire Walk with Me.
Also, Greil Marcus' most recent book - The Shape of Things to Come - contains long sections on Lost Highway and Fire Walk with Me.
"Who's the towhead? Those drugs are LEGAL!"
Yes, this. Generalizations based on spotty observations are specious at best. So I went back to where the comment was made and said, look "______", I respect your opinion but this is why it doesn't work for me, and also quoted iar's last paragraph above because he/she said it so well.brokentiny wrote: I believe Lynch is aware of these accusations as he makes a reference to the danger of generalisations, (paraquote: "this female character does not represent all women") in "Catching the Big Fish".
Then the friend comes back and says (paraphrased) that they were reconsidering their opinion and that they had based theirs on what seemed to be 50s small town worship, but that they also stood by their point about misogyny within DL's fanbase!! God.
Leland's daughter was murdered and the Norwegians left.
Within DL's fanbase?!? But that's even more ridiculous than the first comment! I'm a woman and I love Lynch's films. What's more...I love women! Not meaning to be offensive to any men around here, but I actually find women more fascinating, on the whole. I actually think the strong female presence in Lynch's films are part of the reason I'm drawn to them. To see women in such active and interesting roles, rather than a simple love-interest to the leading man, which they are in sooo many Hollywood films.
Hm. This person is a little loony!
Hm. This person is a little loony!
I don't know if they're loony but I'm not even sure where the second comment came from b/c they didn't initially say that. It started off with my commenting on the blog of some little 20-year-old twerp in Austin, Texas whose views regarding women are grossly antiquated (men only like women who are meek, humble, able to procreate, wear dresses - you get the drift). I said, after looking at this person's MySpace briefly, "how can anyone who loves the films of David Lynch and Stanley Kubrick think that way?" That's when they responded that it made sense because both of them are misogynists.
Ah well. It's good to get some back up and perspective on this anyway - I appreciate it.
Ah well. It's good to get some back up and perspective on this anyway - I appreciate it.
Leland's daughter was murdered and the Norwegians left.
-
brokentiny
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:09 pm
- Location: Hobart, Australia
You see this I why I said that I find the misogynist accusation offensive, because by loving his work you are somehow associated with misogyny.iar wrote:Within DL's fanbase?!? But that's even more ridiculous than the first comment! I'm a woman and I love Lynch's films. What's more...I love women! Not meaning to be offensive to any men around here, but I actually find women more fascinating, on the whole. :
And as a man, no I'm not offended by what you said, I agree. Although Lynch's film contain some incredible male villians (and female in "Wild At Heart"), the women always seem to be the central characters, willing to go out on a limb, extend themselves and experience a dark world. Even in something like "Straight Story" where Rose was not a main character, her support in the background of Alvin was always present.
I hope I didn't offend any women with my thoughts on Lynch's fascination with beguiling women.
An interesting Lynch-related thought to ponder, it's interesting to wonder if David himself made "Boxing Helena" exactly the same way Jennifer did. I suspect those accusations would be very easy to pin on him. Is it possible for a woman to be a misogynist? I don't think so and I'm not really trying to prove anything here, but just pondering.
I think David would be accused of hating woman and living through his film, whereas Jennifer is simply making a (fairly dodgy IMO) film or at worst making some kind of anti-male domination statement.
This is all kind of a 'what if' thought, but like I said, it's an unfair, unfounded accusation.
There is something important to be said
I'm not sure or not if it would be disrespectful to discuss Jennifer Lynch's work on this board, so until a moderator sees this and responds, I won't post my thoughts. I will say that I went over to IMDb last night and found a quote from Jennifer, saying that the film was "a metaphor, and a comedy." That's not how I remember it, but I'd definitely watch it again to discuss it here or in another thread. By the way, she has another movie coming out that's in postproduction I believe and it looks really, really, interesting.
Leland's daughter was murdered and the Norwegians left.
-
brokentiny
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:09 pm
- Location: Hobart, Australia
Yes, point taken, it was just a thought that came to mind, it probably has no specific place on this board other than it's Lynch related. A "metaphor and a comedy". A metaphor for what I wonder? Can't say I remember it being a particularly comedic film, but it's been a long time since I saw it. I remember it had a troubled production with actors dropping out and so-on.Tonya J wrote:I'm not sure or not if it would be disrespectful to discuss Jennifer Lynch's work on this board, so until a moderator sees this and responds, I won't post my thoughts. I will say that I went over to IMDb last night and found a quote from Jennifer, saying that the film was "a metaphor, and a comedy." That's not how I remember it, but I'd definitely watch it again to discuss it here or in another thread. By the way, she has another movie coming out that's in postproduction I believe and it looks really, really, interesting.
I guess my point was, in the end a film is a work of fiction and it may or may not relate specifically to the director's own point of view or outlook on life. Basing an accusation of misogyny or anything else purely on a couple of cinematic moments is superficial. All of which has been stated already.
There is something important to be said
Oh, not at all. That wasn't directed at you brokentiny, just in general. I think it would be interesting to discuss the film and what her intention was, if any, beyond a metaphor and a comedy.brokentiny wrote:Yes, point taken, it was just a thought that came to mind, it probably has no specific place on this board other than it's Lynch related.
Leland's daughter was murdered and the Norwegians left.
-
brokentiny
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:09 pm
- Location: Hobart, Australia
Tonya J wrote:Oh, not at all. That wasn't directed at you brokentiny, just in general. I think it would be interesting to discuss the film and what her intention was, if any, beyond a metaphor and a comedy.brokentiny wrote:Yes, point taken, it was just a thought that came to mind, it probably has no specific place on this board other than it's Lynch related.
That's what I thought and yes it would be interesting to discuss Jennifer's film and other activities. After you mentioned it, I went and looked up her new upcoming film, does indeed look interesting, Bill Pullman starring and David Lynch producing, interesting story, could be great. I've haven't seen "Boxing Helena" for a while so I must try and find a copy and give it another look. I think Jennifer is quite talented, the bits I heard of Oddio were quite funny and I thought she did a terrific job as writing in the role of Laura in the Laura Palmer diary for the Twin Peaks merch back in the day.
There is something important to be said