Femme Fatale: Misogyny or Masterpiece?
Last Friday, our class followed our deep reading of Mike Davis’s City of Quartz with the staple Noir masterpiece, Double Indemnity. I remember studying Noir during my freshman year in the Film History and Application class, and frankly, I just remember being disturbed and upset by the archetypal characterization of women in these films. The women were evil masters of manipulation who used sexual prowess and mind control in order to seduce and control the protagonist male in the film, often for a monetary or capital gain. This inherently negative representation of women is a huge part of every Noir film, but after watching Double Indemnity for the second time, I started to more deeply understand the roles of women in these Noir films; the women truly represent the essence of Noir as a complex metaphor for Los Angeles. Women in Noir films, specifically in Double Indemnity, turn out to be the brilliant, complex, artistic --and incredibly offensive-- metaphor for an idea Mike Davis wrote about years later.
Double Indemnity’s depiction of Phyllis communicated an incredibly complex and multidimensional Noir-style fusion of the perceived commodified necessity of Los Angeles as well as the antithetical nuanced devastation it often causes to its inhabitants. Through Phyllis’s seductive and devious manipulation, she leads Walter to believe that he needs her, so much so that he even commits murder in order to have her. Here, Phyllis can be seen as a metaphor for LA: Walter’s willingness to do anything in order to achieve his goal shows the objectification and commodification of Phyllis, of Los Angeles. Phyllis, on the other hand, lies to an unsuspecting Walter; she lures him in just to fall limp in his arms, leading him to believe that he is actually in control of their relationship the whole time (just as Los Angeles pulls many in with its clear skies and sunny beaches but ends up destroying them). However, Walter is never in control: Phyllis --or the applied concept of Los Angeles-- is secretly calling the shots the entire time, all so that she can benefit from the monetary gain of insurance from the death of her husband, similar to how Mike Davis says Los Angeles takes but never gives. The brighter side which Noir features is also represented in Phyllis. The blissful but broken lens through which Walter views Phyllis and metaphorical Los Angeles allows him to have a sexy and alluring adventure, which, in reality, is a part of the appeal of Los Angeles. Walter also enjoys driving on Los Angeles’s famous freeways and somehow magically appearing at the beach, Olvera street, and the Hollywood Bowl all in the same outing, obviously a booster view of Los Angeles’s fictional accessibility. Despite Phyllis’s malice, Walter enjoys her company and benefits from her presence while their relationship lasted.
Double Indemnity’s depiction of Phyllis communicated an incredibly complex and multidimensional Noir-style fusion of the perceived commodified necessity of Los Angeles as well as the antithetical nuanced devastation it often causes to its inhabitants. Through Phyllis’s seductive and devious manipulation, she leads Walter to believe that he needs her, so much so that he even commits murder in order to have her. Here, Phyllis can be seen as a metaphor for LA: Walter’s willingness to do anything in order to achieve his goal shows the objectification and commodification of Phyllis, of Los Angeles. Phyllis, on the other hand, lies to an unsuspecting Walter; she lures him in just to fall limp in his arms, leading him to believe that he is actually in control of their relationship the whole time (just as Los Angeles pulls many in with its clear skies and sunny beaches but ends up destroying them). However, Walter is never in control: Phyllis --or the applied concept of Los Angeles-- is secretly calling the shots the entire time, all so that she can benefit from the monetary gain of insurance from the death of her husband, similar to how Mike Davis says Los Angeles takes but never gives. The brighter side which Noir features is also represented in Phyllis. The blissful but broken lens through which Walter views Phyllis and metaphorical Los Angeles allows him to have a sexy and alluring adventure, which, in reality, is a part of the appeal of Los Angeles. Walter also enjoys driving on Los Angeles’s famous freeways and somehow magically appearing at the beach, Olvera street, and the Hollywood Bowl all in the same outing, obviously a booster view of Los Angeles’s fictional accessibility. Despite Phyllis’s malice, Walter enjoys her company and benefits from her presence while their relationship lasted.
Does this complex dissection of the archetypal femme fatale excuse the inherent misogyny of its
characters?
How does this complete characterization of a large city as a single woman fall short? How does
it accurately represent the challenges and benefits of Los Angeles?
How is the characterization of Walter as a ‘consumer’ of Los Angeles problematic? Does it
accurately represent an Angeleno journey with and in Los Angeles? Why or why not?
Can non-Angelenos really understand Noir? Why or why not?
Do you think Noir and Double Indemnity specifically is more artistic or more of a tool to send a
message?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe confusion of American gender roles in the 1940s meant the post-war media was obsessed with reinstating traditional masculinity on the homefront. To address the fruitful independence of women in industrial jobs, noir’s male characters were amiable and passive, victims of the femme fatale. Walter Neff, successful insurance salesman, whose imposing stature is reemphasized, is the bastion of masculinity as his only weakness is lust (an anklet). Walter is well-regarded and financially independent, while Phyllis is, from the beginning, disloyal while dependent on her husband for an allowance. When Walter, after meeting Phyllis in her depths of moral murkiness, cannot light his own cigarette, he is officially emasculated. Much of noir is committed to the reestablishment of gender roles in metropolitan society: woman equals bad, manipulative, weak. Man equals good, victims of too much female empowerment.
ReplyDeleteThough the Phyllis-Los Angeles metaphor model works well, it’s important to recognize the city’s independent meaning in Double Indemnity. Without Los Angeles, there could be no Phyllis. Amidst the sunshine, beautiful offices, $30,000 homes, Hollywood Hills, and pink wine, Phyllis breeds deceptiveness and inauthenticity. Seduction and plotting happen in the suburban home, festishized Spanish colonial ones at that, while murder and clean-up are reserved for the industrial urbanity of the train yard. The visual imagery of sunny suburban life either clashes with or allows the violence inside neatly groomed homes and people. In this way, noir dismisses the booster narrative of Los Angeles as the anomaly metropolis with industry and suburbia (working and middle class, dirt and cleanliness) peacefully coexisting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere is something that is deeply problematic and upsetting about Phyllis's characterization in Double Indemnity. Phyllis is treated throughout the film as no more than a powerful desire for Walter. Immediately after meeting her, Walter falls into a state of servitude, left helpless under the seductive power of Phyllis. Phyllis leeches off of Walter's naive love for her, and Phyllis vacuums money from her husband. Walter is made into a puppet, no more than a ploy to finish the nasty work of an authoritative woman. Given the time period and the lack of women in positions of power, the film ultimately creates a biased and sexist model of what women do with authority and power. The film suggests that when a woman gains power, she uses it to bring chaos and havoc into the lives of others. Not only that, but the films implies that a woman will feed off of the sincere trust of men to selfishly better herself. In a film like Double Indemnity, is noir really noir? Is Los Angeles being shown in its most genuine and sincere form? No. While Noir can many times act as an artistic tool (as it is meant to be used), it can also be used to push agendas onto audiences. Double Indemnity does have a clear message. Double Indemnity propagates the idea that women are power hungry and manipulative and men are good and innocent. Those are definitely biased views of Los Angeles and gender qualities that lack any validity. Noir is complex. Can it be understood by all? Not completely. Noir can be digested and comprehended by urban people. People who live in big cities will tend to understand noir because noir is aimed at major cities.
ReplyDeleteWhile I will admit that the shift in the portrayal of women as innocent damsels in distress in melodramas to the femme fatale in noir films does, to me represent a shift in how society is able to view women, it is still deeply discouraging. However, it does prove that society has accepted women in positions of power even if that power is used for evil. To ask one female character to portray all of the nuanced complexities of a city that houses over 10 million residents is difficult. I think Phyllis is able to portray the noir version of LA (this is not the only version or perspective), but in doing so makes her responsibility to portray a city more important than her responsibility to portray a woman. I mean to say that when you assign one character such a challenging feat of symbolism, and metaphor, you prioritize the characterization of a city over the creation of an authentic female character. On the surface level, this creates issues, as the average consumer is likely not thinking deeply about her character, her role, or any metaphor as which she functions and instead is just consuming media. However, I think when we examine more deeply, and with the hindsight of history, we are able to more clearly see the compromises made to depict a city rather than a woman.
ReplyDeleteI certainly think non-Angelenos can understand noir, I just think that we have the distinct privilege of being able to site and experience the presence of noir in our city. In that way, noir as an aesthetic mode and artistic tool is easily consumed, widely utilized, and translatable. However, when the noir aesthetic is used to depict the cultural and urban reality of noir (the middle ground of boosters and debunkers), it takes on more than just an artistic style and becomes about sending messages that reflect the nature of the city from which it arose.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI see the point the metaphor is trying to make, but frankly, misogyny is inexcusable. By having misogyny present, it only makes people think that it is O.K. to use in any form. Repeatedly generalizing all women as a femme fetal hurts the progress women have been making in society over the last few years. The city of Los Angeles is extremely diverse and no street corner of the city is the same. Characterizing a city that is very diverse as one very specific woman does not do justice to neither the city nor to women. People in Los Angeles only consume and they rarely give. I do not think the characterization of Walter as a ‘consumer’ of Los Angeles fully represents an Angeleno journey with and in Los Angeles. There is a large number of people who come to Los Angeles purely to consume and purely to take. A large number of people come to Los Angeles to get rich and famous, to escape something, to try something new, or a host of other reasons. But there is also a large number of people who were born in Los Angeles, who have grown up in Los Angeles, and who have decided to continue to live in Los Angeles and their story is not dictated by a goal of “I want to be rich and famous.” These people have a different experience than those like Walter. There is the danger of a single story in generalizing everyone’s Angeleno journey as one like Walter’s. Part of me thinks of Noir as an inside joke that only Angelenos can understand, but part of me also thinks that Noir is a universal joke that everyone can understand. Maybe the “true/original Noir” that was meant to be a combination of the booster and debunker viewpoints is harder to comprehend for non-Angelenos, but modern Noir is something that is much more widespread. Double Indemnity is, in my opinion, an artistic tool used to reach the surface-level audience who just want to enjoy a nice film, but also used to reach the in-depth viewers who are able to pick up on the (sometimes) not-so-subtleties of its Noir theme.
ReplyDeleteThroughout Double Indemnity, Phyllis is consistently portrayed as deceptive, greedy, and manipulative. These negative characteristics embolden false stereotypes about women and frame the narrative so that Walter is pitied as a poor man who was taken advantage of. The complex dissection of the archetypal femme fetal does not excuse the inherent misognyny of the characters. I think the characterization of Los Angeles as a single woman, Phyllis, falls short in that it doesn't take into account that not all Angelenos end up being destroyed by the city. There are Angelenos that end up thriving in LA. However, I do think the characterization of LA as Phyllis does shed light on many of the challenges and benefits of the city. Walter embarks on a crazy, thrilling journey throughout his relationship with Phyllis. This could represent a benefit of LA: its enticing and electrifying energy. However, Walter murdering someone to be with Phyllis represents a challenge of the city: it can entrance people to the point of insanity.
ReplyDeleteThe characterization of Walter as a ‘consumer’ of Los Angeles is problematic because the product he is portrayed to be “consuming” is not an item, but Phyllis. This misogynistic characterization correlates women to items, further propeling the notion that women are just useful for pleasuring men. However, Walter also “consumes” LA by experiencing thrilling energy, yet being ultimately destroyed by it. This can accurately represent an Angeleno experience with and in LA because of the fact that many people come to LA seeking wealth and thrills, yet sooner or later become consumed by the many hardships LA presents.
I think non-Angelenos can understand Noir because LA is not the only city in the world that appears enticing, but presents many challenges underneath its facade. I think noir and Double Indemnity are tools to send a message about the perils cities like LA can hold for thrill, wealth seeking individuals.
I am of the belief that misogyny can never be excused, regardless of the validity of the philosophy that evokes it. While I understand and appreciate the important point being made through femme fetal, I can't help but feel uncomfortable at the depiction of the female character as an evil and manipulative one. Having a little sister who I love more than anything or anyone, I would actually argue that I feel a little offended when I see female characters depicted unfairly or dishonestly. I believe the major reason why the characterization of an entire city by a single woman falls short is because it fails to regard the countless lives that have been improved by Los Angeles. Like any and every experience, there are at least two sides to the Angeleno story. LA is an extremely complex ecosystem with more variables influencing "success" than most other cities. Therefore, there is a longer list of outcomes possible for LA residents, resulting in experiences as diverse as the city itself. Some people can't stand hearing the word LA, while some people couldn't imagine their lives any place else, and everything in between. The characterization of Walter as a consumer of Los Angeles is flawed in that it portrays an unrealistic LA lifestyle, one that if you're from around here you understand is highly improbable. In a single evening, for example, he ventures from the beach to Olvera Street to the Hollywood Hills with ease and speed. However, Walter does seem to navigate the cities streets and freeways quite well, demonstrating efficiency gained through experience. I am confident that non-Angelenos are able to comprehend noir, although depending on where they live, they might have a more difficult time attempting to find noir in the context of their own life experiences. That being said, other cities demonstrate noir "qualities", so again, I do not believe noir is specific to Los Angeles in any way, shape, or form. I actually believe that the intention of noir is exactly 50% artistic and 50% message vessel. If there were too heavy an emphasis on the artistic aspects of the film, the message would be diluted and possible lost entirely to the viewer. On the other hand, if the emphasis were too strong on the message, people might loose interest or respect for the message itself, therefore rendering the entire artwork useless.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a deep meaning can be found within Phyllis's seemingly shallow character, offensive stereotypes of women are still perpetuated because this meaning is so easily lost on most people. Without a deep-dive into Double Indemnity or preexisting knowledge of Mike Davis's opinion on Los Angeles and noir, Phyllis appears to be another representation of misogyny in our society-- submissive and manipulative in hope of monetary gain. Especially considering noir was such a popular genre at the time, the predictably constant personality of each woman would certainly generate more misogynistic views in society.
ReplyDeletePeople not from Los Angeles are definitely able to understand noir; however, they are not able to experience it firsthand in the way that we can. There will always be benefits and flaws of a certain city, but, as we have discussed previously, one can recognize Los Angeles's pros and cons with much more ease than other cities. The fact that Los Angeles was advertised so strongly sets such a high bar for itself. Because of this, once in the city, flaws can easily be spotted, creating a view of both sides.
I was not able to watch Double Indemnity so I can’t comment on the depiction of women in that film in regards to noir. However, I would argue that noir is not specific to Los Angeles and because of this, people other than Angelinos can and do understand noir. Noir is directly translated to “black and white film” and originated in France post World War II. Ignorant individuals only identify noir with Los Angeles due to the popularization of noir in Hollywood films and movies but it is not even the original location of noir. Along with this, I think that noir has become more of an artistic tool than an actual instrument to send a message. A side effect of its popularization in the movie industry and especially Hollywood is that nowadays it seems unrealistic where originally, the purpose of noir was to show the hidden truths of society. Because of this, the use of noir has changed dramatically along with the messages behind it.
ReplyDeleteNo singular entity is able to capture the essence of an entire city and Phyllis is no exception. By characterizing Phyllis as Los Angeles, we are only able to get only a glimpse at the city. Phyllis characterizes LA as beautiful and enticing, but also evil and manipulative. Although she provides a noir outlook on the city, the characterization lacks depth. We have to keep in mind that Phyllis, as a character, was created by one person (the author), manipulated by a few others (Hollywood writers and executives), and interpreted by another (Barbara Stanwyck), so we are only able to learn a few varying perspectives of Los Angeles. As someone who grew up in LA, I think that my understanding of noir may be more comprehensive than that of a non-Angeleno, but that doesn’t prevent them from being able to understand the concept of noir. As long as one understands the idea of perception vs. reality and good vs. bad, I think they have the ability to understand noir. I think noir is so successful because it is able to act as both a new method of artistic expression while also sending a message about society (in the case of Double Indemnity that message specifically was about Los Angeles).
ReplyDeleteI think the role women played in these noir films were empowering at the time. Yes, they were objectified and treated differently than men, but in these movies, they ran the show. The role these women played during the noir movement is comparable to Cardi B’s role in pop culture. I have often thought that Cardi B was not empowering to women until someone explained to me how she’s knowingly playing the system. It’s difficult to characterize a city in general, making it even more difficult to do it with a single character. There was a multitude of people and cultures that make up Los Angeles, all of which have different beliefs and Los Angeles experiences. However, she was able to characterize some broader aspects of Los Angeles. Walter falls vulnerable to the temptation of crime in Los Angeles, but I wouldn’t regard him as a consumer of Los Angeles. Moreover, I don't think his experience would be that of the typical Angeleno. Movies such as Double Indemnity glorified rare events in Los Angeles to appeal to the consumers of its time. In other cities, I think they would be able to understand Noir but their perception of how life is in Los Angeles was would be dramatically skewed.
ReplyDeleteI remember watching Double Indemnity as a freshman in film class and not picking up on the LA metaphor until two days later when Ms. Cocumelli explained it in depth. I do not think Phyllis representing Los Angeles is noticeable without either studying the film in depth or having a deep knowledge of historical papers about Los Angeles. In reality, the film comes off as a typical mysosignistic film from an era when women were usually represented as “damsels in distress.” I am not sure what James M. Cain had in mind when creating the character of Phyllis, but due to the time period I think he was simply trying to represent the submissive and manipulative stereotypes of women through the character. That being said, I think the metaphor of Phyllis representing LA actually works very well in a noir sense. Obviously a character cannot literally represent LA, but a character can represent the manipulative and seductiveness of Los Angeles. In a noir sense, Los Angeles lures in people with the film industry, sunny skies, nice beaches, and the big homes, just like Phyllis seduces Walter. I think people that do not live in Los Angeles are able to comprehend noir (especially if they are from a large city), but some people might not be able to relate with it (especially if they are from a small town). I think noir is usually used to send a message about society on a deep analytical level, but I also think most people view noir as just artistic.
ReplyDeleteWalter being a consumer of LA isn't problematic in the fact that that tends to be how it is - people work hard to consume or achieve the product, LA, that they're producing. I think the problem comes when you identify Phyllis as representing LA, because that ties back into misogyny and objectification of women that was extremely prevalent at the time. Painting Phyllis as a product that a man can just achieve and own is extremely detrimental to the general idea of "femininity" - in this case, that women must be chased after and thus fall limply into the arms of the strong man who won them over. While I think Double Indemnity does Phyllis as a metaphor for the city and didn't solely characterize her to paint all women in a negative light, it is very possible that not all consumers of the film realized that. It takes going into the film with a certain mindset to pick up on the nuances of noir and what is really being said. I'm sure for many of the people watching movies at the time, this was simply a form of entertainment, so they weren't actively seeking out or open to the possibility of there being a deeper, darker underbelly to Double Indemnity. However, I think that the right audience, who knows what to look for and is aware of the workings of noir in culture, would easily be able to see what is being shown to them. This isn't just limited to people living in Los Angeles. I don't think noir just applies to LA - you can live anywhere in the world and understand that there is good and bad to it, and while it may have been more prevalent in LA and perpetrated by Hollywood, the concept of noir in reality is not unique to LA or Angelinos.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt’s interesting that the idea of noir is undoubtedly a multi-faceted, multi-dimensional, complex thing, vacant of any sort of “singularity.” Noir claims to be an accurate lens to view Los Angeles under, while, at the same time, the idea of LA being a “single woman” — one entity — is also a widely-accepted representation for LA. So what is LA? Is it many entities? One singular entity? Maybe a singular composite of many different entities? Is there any way to reconcile these two near-opposite LA metaphors — LA as noir and LA as a woman? I’m not sure. I think this struggle to simply define LA (LA is ____) is incredibly indicative of this city’s culture: no one knows what LA really is, and LA isn’t sure either.
ReplyDeleteI think that “consuming” LA is not inherently problematic if you think of the bits and pieces of the city that can literally be consumed: groceries, automobiles, clothing, shoes, etc. But, to me, this question also conjures up a visceral image of a woman, Los Angeles, being “consumed.” Who are the consumers? Mainly men like Walter in Double Indemnity. When thinking about consumption in this sense, I definitely think it is problematic. What I’m thinking about is this idea of consuming LA, but, in the world of Mike Davis’s metaphors and arguments, LA does not produce anything, so how can you consume it? I’m not sure how to answer this question, but I think you need to look at the history of LA and Southern California as a whole to get a good sense of the beast you’re looking at. LA is not only being currently consumed; it was founded by consumption, perpetuated by consumption, and will be devoured by consumption.
The idea that noir shows both sides of LA but fails to do the same with women through the use of the femme fatal isn't that surprising. The 1940s were not exactly the best place to be represented in the media if you were anything but a white man. The idea that all of the romantic aspects of LA as well as the negatives can be represented in one woman are not realistic. I think non angelenos can understand noir properly considering all of us as a class have been able to learn about and understand noir despite not understanding the complex philosophy of noir before we began talking about it in class. With enough research and appreciation anyone can understand noir. The focus of noir although heavily tied to noir was contributed to by many authors, film makers, and actors who were not from LA but substantially added to the genre.
ReplyDelete