After Phil and I saw Juno in a small and stifling cinema in the centre of Budapest, I asked him what he thought. He said: "it was written by a woman." Not being very perceptive myself, I was shocked that he could discern this instantly. He turned out to be right, of course -- the film was written by Diablo Cody.
Apparently, though, Juno has received some criticism for its portrayal of gender and "womens' issues". My knowledge of this criticism is limited to having read the film's Wikipedia page, but that was enough to convince me of the general sillyness of this kind of criticism. The two main complaints seem to be as follows (warning, spoilers follow):
- Since Juno backs out of having an abortion after having checked into the clinic, the film has been criticised for being pro-life. The Guardian said that Juno "completes a hat-trick of American comedies in the past 12 months that present abortion as unreasonable, or even unthinkable -- a telling social sign."
- Since the female characters in the film are generally 'stronger' than the male characters, the film has been criticised for portraying men as irrelevant and for having a general feminist subtext. Phyllis Schlafly is quoted as saying that the theme of Juno "isn't love, romance, or respect for life, but the triumph of feminist ideology, i.e., the irrelevancy of men, especially fathers."*
The same is true of the feminism/strong women criticism. Telling a story about a situation where the men don't have strong characters doesn't necessarily mean that you're advocating that situation or making any grand pronouncements about the respective roles of men and women. The gender situation in Juno is perfectly possible, and probably actual in some corner of the world. Breaking news: there are plenty of weak men around. Telling a story about them shouldn't mean you get accused of wholesale feminism.
Of course, when applied generally, these points can be overturned -- for example, if a writer or director comes on-record as saying that his or her film is intended to make an ideological statement. My point is simply that, as a general rule, we shouldn't assume that the representation of a certain situation or choice in a film is tantamount to support of that kind of situation or choice. Until someone says otherwise, it's a story. Perhaps this is too strong -- I guess that comes because it's the narrative aspects of films and novels (and many songs) that really interest me, rather than speculation about ideological doctrines behind the tales.
I'd be interested to hear what others thought of Juno in these respects.
* I should point out that the article also lists quotes from more sensible people who haven't made these kind of criticisms.
5 comments:
This debate make me think of something similar about Wall-E. Fat people feel attacked, so do conservatives.
People–mostly Americans I suppose–just want to be offended by anything, they are paranoid, thinking that movies are done only with an ideology, i.e. as propaganda. As you say about Juno, the narrative aspects of a movie are usually more important (and interessant).
Steve
PS For a full account of the debate see this. It's in French but most of the links are in English.
It really hadn't occurred to me that Juno could even possibly have carried with it some kind of intentional pro-life moral. There was the scene with a stereotypically young and naive Christian protester outside of the clinic she visited, but that struck me as being more satirical than anything. I largely agree with your general feeling, that this was a film ultimately about a teenage girl faced with the daunting reality of having a child. In fact, in all honesty, I wouldn't say that the female characters were actually that strong in this movie... Juno herself is presented not as an intellectual young woman or even one who is (at the beginning of the film at least) emotionally mature. She and her best friend are, as far as I was able to tell, the epitome of 15-ish school girls who are unable to grasp the magnitude of the serious situation facing Juno. I'd say more than anything, that I would expect someone like Juno, as she was initially presented, to nonchalantly choose abortion without much thought, and the fact that she decided against this seemed testament more to her growing awareness and character development than any underlying moral message.
Also, neither one of the married couple who were planning to adopt Juno's baby came across as being particularly "strong." The husband was presented as being fairly immature and selfish, but in fairness, Jennifer Garner's character seemed very emotionally insecure to the point of being desperate. If I'm being unfair, then I hope it could at least be agreed upon that their marriage seemed to be a very troubled one even from the point of introduction to these characters. I can't really say that any one character in this film came across as being very strong, and maybe that was one of the film's points: That Juno, young, naive, and emotionally unsure of herself, would be forced by her own situation to grow and develop as a person, rather than through any positive interaction from others. The various emotional situations she encounters throughout the film (such as when she learns the couple is going to divorce) seem to add to her growing awareness.
So yes, in short, I don't think either of those two main criticisms you mention hold much water. But whatever, I thought this film was overrated anyway.
Adam,
I would have to disagree with you when you say that Juno is not presented "as an intellectual young woman or even one who is emotionally mature."
Juno is intelligent to the point of extreme hyperbole, with her use of vocabulary, her witty come backs, here deep understanding of her situation -- after I watched the movie I said to myself 'no 15-year-old girl is actually that smart or mature in reality.'
I believe, that as most often happens, the people analyzing these films for 'womens issues' or instances of 'pro-life propaganda' are completely missing the point -- and are on a complete disconnect with the audience.
The audience, the moviegoers, are enthralled by her story, by this wise crack young woman, and not focused on the murky details such as the strength of the male, or the anti-abortion stance. I don't even think it happens on an unconscious level -- almost like all the hoopla surrounding 'The Golden Compass' which was seen by many as an 'anti-Christian film/book' because the author is an atheist.
I spoke with several adults who read the book as children, and that point had absolutely no relevance to the way they had ever viewed the book.
On it being pro-life. Ha! It actually portrays the pro-life movement in a lighter light, in that the girl who convinces her is made out to be a bit of a crackpot. She makes the decision based off of a mixture of fear and guilt. I found that they steered well clear of the quagmire that is moral right and wrong, much to the film's credit.
As to the feminism question. a) I don't think it was a boys-are-elastic-girls-are-fantastic thing, but rather a question of (admittedly sometimes 2-dimensional) characterisation. and b) would that be so bad? I mean, how rare do you see a mainstream film which popularises the idea of an actual strong female lead?
Actual criticism should probably focus on the quirky-for-quirky-sake nature of the film. I mean, there were loads of bits that were put in there simply to make people go, "OHMYGOSHILOVETHEMOLDYPEACHESPSDIDYOUSEENAPOLEONDYNAMITE?!?!?!??".
It's not a perfect film, but it was a breath of fresh air to see it not take the easy way out.
I agree with LeCrapaud when he says : "People–mostly Americans I suppose–just want to be offended by anything, they are paranoid, thinking that movies are done only with an ideology, i.e. as propaganda". I watched Juno 5 days ago, and it seems to be more a movie about a very peculiar (or cuold we better say "non-popular") 15 girl facing a very serious situation as it is pregnancy. BTW, the movie is nice, and I loved the music.
Mountainguy
Post a Comment