Hey Vincent, okay, so you've got to be super-focused and concise as you're dealing with two theoretical frameworks, which will need to be defined and explained effectively. That said, I think the combination of these two ideas demonstrates some nice joined-up thinking, so go for it.
Stylistically, I think you need to begin by talking about the film and not the theorists; so a story synopsis that emphasises the elements of the story that are going to help you get to the point of your assignment. For example, if you summarise the story as a) being based on an established fairy story and b) about a beautiful woman who sacrifices herself for her father and c) ends up as the object of the beast's courtship, then you're synopsis is achieving a number of useful things that prime your analysis, as you 1) show that fairy stories have elemental structures according to Propp and 2) then show those elemental structures position women in particular ways (i.e. as valuable only in their relation to men).
Short version is that I'd advise that 'paragraph 1' should be the plot synopsis that sets up the terrain of the theorists, who you then introduce - otherwise, you're introducing us to ideas before we know why we need them.
Looking at your structure, I think you're going to need more than '4 paragraphs' - this tells me you're probably trying to make too many points per paragraph and need to sub-divide your content a little more.
The one thing I'd say too is that Belle does represent a challenge to the idea of the completely passive object in the story: she's actually a bit more complex, because she isn't just 'the prize' - she's also in control of quite a lot of what happens in the castle. Perhaps you need to consider this complexity - not as a problem in terms of your essay - but rather as a means of suggesting that Cocteau's film represents a more complex iteration of the archetypes and so resists the 'male gaze' somehow - or, you make the point that despite Belle's behaviour, she STILL fits the archetype, and is still an object of male power. I guess what I'm saying is that Belle is interesting in terms of fairy tale characters because she's both prize and 'policewoman', so does her 'lack of passivity' present a challenge to your ideas?
So it might be that your essay question might re-calibrate in this sense - that you establish Propp's archetypes specific to fairytales and then use Mulvey to 'critique' those structures and then use those ideas to assess how Cocteau's Belle character conforms/challenges that critique? (She can be both things and your analysis can except that!).
For this reason, I wonder if you've got the time and space to consider the Disney version too? Does that represent a dilution of your analysis in the space of 1000 words? My instincts are... with two theorists and the 'complexity of Belle', I think you've got enough on your plate...
Hey Vincent, okay, so you've got to be super-focused and concise as you're dealing with two theoretical frameworks, which will need to be defined and explained effectively. That said, I think the combination of these two ideas demonstrates some nice joined-up thinking, so go for it.
ReplyDeleteStylistically, I think you need to begin by talking about the film and not the theorists; so a story synopsis that emphasises the elements of the story that are going to help you get to the point of your assignment. For example, if you summarise the story as a) being based on an established fairy story and b) about a beautiful woman who sacrifices herself for her father and c) ends up as the object of the beast's courtship, then you're synopsis is achieving a number of useful things that prime your analysis, as you 1) show that fairy stories have elemental structures according to Propp and 2) then show those elemental structures position women in particular ways (i.e. as valuable only in their relation to men).
Short version is that I'd advise that 'paragraph 1' should be the plot synopsis that sets up the terrain of the theorists, who you then introduce - otherwise, you're introducing us to ideas before we know why we need them.
Looking at your structure, I think you're going to need more than '4 paragraphs' - this tells me you're probably trying to make too many points per paragraph and need to sub-divide your content a little more.
The one thing I'd say too is that Belle does represent a challenge to the idea of the completely passive object in the story: she's actually a bit more complex, because she isn't just 'the prize' - she's also in control of quite a lot of what happens in the castle. Perhaps you need to consider this complexity - not as a problem in terms of your essay - but rather as a means of suggesting that Cocteau's film represents a more complex iteration of the archetypes and so resists the 'male gaze' somehow - or, you make the point that despite Belle's behaviour, she STILL fits the archetype, and is still an object of male power. I guess what I'm saying is that Belle is interesting in terms of fairy tale characters because she's both prize and 'policewoman', so does her 'lack of passivity' present a challenge to your ideas?
So it might be that your essay question might re-calibrate in this sense - that you establish Propp's archetypes specific to fairytales and then use Mulvey to 'critique' those structures and then use those ideas to assess how Cocteau's Belle character conforms/challenges that critique? (She can be both things and your analysis can except that!).
For this reason, I wonder if you've got the time and space to consider the Disney version too? Does that represent a dilution of your analysis in the space of 1000 words? My instincts are... with two theorists and the 'complexity of Belle', I think you've got enough on your plate...