scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 0036-9543

Screen 

Oxford University Press
About: Screen is an academic journal published by Oxford University Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Movie theater & Hollywood. It has an ISSN identifier of 0036-9543. Over the lifetime, 1497 publications have been published receiving 26240 citations.
Topics: Movie theater, Hollywood, Art, Queer, Film theory


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 1975-Screen
TL;DR: This paper used psychoanalysis to discover where and how the fascination of film is reinforced by pre-existing patterns of fascination already at work within the individual subject and the social formations that have moulded him.
Abstract: This paper intends to use psychoanalysis to discover where and how the fascination of film is reinforced by pre-existing patterns of fascination already at work within the individual subject and the social formations that have moulded him. It takes as its starting-point the way film reflects, reveals and even plays on the straight, socially established interpretation of sexual difference which controls images, erotic ways of looking and spectacle. It is helpful to understand what the cinema has been, how its magic has worked in the past, while attempting a theory and a practice which will challenge this cinema of the past. Psychoanalytic theory is thus appropriated here as a political weapon, demonstrating the way the unconscious of patriarchal society has structured film form.

5,533 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 1983-Screen

665 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jun 2018-Screen
TL;DR: Haneke and Aronofsky as mentioned in this paper argue that women artists can do feminism unconventionally by exposing the nexus of women's complicity with omnipresent societal power structures that shield gender norms.
Abstract: Michael Haneke’s The Piano Teacher (2001) and Darren Aronofsky’s Black Swan (2010) are films about women directed by men. Both films unorthodoxly chart women artists’ struggle with the discipline imposed on them by the arts and by their live-in mothers. By portraying mothers as their daughters’ oppressors, both films disturb the naïve “women = victims and men = perpetrators” binary. Simultaneously, they deploy audiovisual violence to exhibit the violence of society’s gender and sexuality policy norms and use gender-coded romance narratives to subvert the same gender codes from within this gender discourse. Using Judith Butler’s and Michael Foucault’s theories, we argue that Haneke and Aronofsky “do” feminism unconventionally by exposing the nexus of women’s complicity with omnipresent societal power structures that safeguard gender norms. These films showcase women concurrently as victim-products and complicit partisans of socially constructed gender ideology to emphasize that this ideology can be destabilized only when women “do” their gender and sexuality differently through acts of subversion.

504 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 1989-Screen

330 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202323
202248
20217
202019
201918
201815