Mulvey distinguishes between the two modes of viewing: voyeurism and worship, and she refers to Freud’s terminology in response to male “castration anxiety”. Voyeur type view contains a controlled stare, Laura mulvey argue that this is related to abusive: “pleasure is confirmed with the crime – by punishing or understanding so as to confirm the guilty person exert control and yield”. In contrast, the worship of objects includes “the substitution of the object of worship, or the reappearance of the character itself into a divine object for confirmation rather than. In this way, the beauty of the body of the object is constructed and transformed into something satisfactory to itself. This kind of erotic intent is focused only on appearance. She said that watching the worship led to an overestimation of female images and a cult of female movie stars. Mulvie argues that moviegoers are swayed by this form of viewing.Peep mode
Laura mulvey offers three male models of prying, which are actually the three main narrative modes of Hollywood movies:
The first is the recognition model. The hero of the audience and the screen, as a screen replacement, as a result, he put two kinds of combination of power: the power of control of the situation and watch the power of initiative so as to provide the audience with a complete, idealistic, self representation for the audience.
The second is voyeurism. The essence is a man’s peep at a woman.
The third kind is fetishism.Gender differences in visual pleasure.
“Visual pleasure” is male?
Laura mulvey’s entire discussion of “visual pleasure” does imply a basic assumption: the viewer is a man. So her “visual pleasure” is also male.
Mainstream Hollywood films offer theoretical weapons. According to Freud, people have a sexual instinct to peep. The scene of the movie provides an effective space for peep: the screen is displayed as an object in the light, and the audience is watching in the dark as the subject of the viewing. In this way, the relationship between the audience and the screen is formed between “see” and “be seen”, and the object that is shown to the audience in mainstream films is usually female. The viewer is either watching with the hero’s eyes, occupying the heroine, or viewing the woman directly through close-up shots of women’s faces and legs. In the viewing, the audience (male) is released to gain the “visual pleasure” of peep.
The “visual pleasure of peeping” and the “visual pleasure of self-identity” are all centered on men.
Laura Moore peacekeeping later many feminist film critics have found that the patriarchal culture as a kind of social subconsciousness, constantly emerge in the mainstream movie narrative, they constantly explore the surface “the tip of the iceberg”. The “visual pleasure” of the male center, which deconstructs mainstream films, began to shake up the patriarchal cultural system. At this point, the question is clear, not as a presupposition of the male audience, but the fact that he has discovered the male center of mainstream filmmaking.There is no subjectivity of female “visual pleasure”.
Laura mulvey did not discuss the visual pleasure of female audiences in her “visual pleasure and narrative film”.
Perhaps in Laura, Laura mulvey there such inferences is without foundation, because of the women in the patriarchal culture, first of all, there is no subjectivity, so she can’t get the unique and independent of men in the true sense of “pleasure” vision. The mainstream films give women only a re-education to strengthen the patriarchal system, which further strengthens the dominant position of the male, and the female is deeper in the unsubjectivity.
Therefore, the gender difference of “visual pleasure” is actually structural, which is the difference between subject and object. The establishment of female subjective “visual pleasure” is still a long and difficult journey, and the deconstruction of the “visual pleasure” of the male center is just the beginning.