2. Laura Mulvey’s Theory
Laura Mulvey’s theory is stating that women are objectified and viewed through the eyes of a
heterosexual male. This male would then be seen as active, which would be looking and the woman
would be passive, meaning she is being looked at.
This theory can be applied to our production because she is in the male gaze for Jack, the male
character of interest, although she doesn’t actually know she is in the male gaze of Jack. However,
when she changes her image, this theory can no longer be applied to our film, as she is no longer in
the male gaze but sexualising herself in hope that she is in the male gaze.
3. Janice Winship’s Theory
This theory states that the female is complicit in creating the ideal version of herself for a male audience, because
of the gratification she will receive.
This applies to our production because she does indeed create what she thinks is the ideal version of herself, in
the hope of receiving the gratification she wants. However, this method of Arabella’s fails, as the gratification she
receives isn't what she was hoping for.
David Gauntlett’s theory does not apply to our production, this is because this theory states that women are in
control of their sexuality, however their sexuality isn’t for men, it’s for themselves. This doesn’t apply to Arabella
because she is controlling her sexuality for Jack, her love interest, not necessarily because she wants to.
4. Judith Butler’s Theory
Butler argues we are born a certain sex, but gender is performance. A man is not inherently masculine or a
female inherently feminine. We perform aspects of different genders. Gender does not exist outside of these
performances. For example, the act of wearing make up defines a person’s gender, rather than their gender
defining the act.
This applies to our production as Arabella, our main protagonist, is quite masculine, in a sense that she is a
very clumsy, tom-boy like character who isn’t interested in stereotypical female activities.