#p. 35

[everyillumi]

[returntomytilene]

Sonnet sans titre

Dans un chemin bordé de sanglante amertume Où ce qui fut aimé deviendra boue et prose, Je marche, me tournant vers des regrets posthumes, Gardant au fond de moi l’incurable névrose.

Âme de mon passé meurtrie à peine éclose, Tu sors de ton cercueil, ton regard mort s’allume A mes bonheurs enfuis, et le parfum des roses Se mêle au gris linceul drapant le tout de brume.

Ma jeunesse est la pâle aurore sans soleil, Fuyant les vifs plaisirs au baiser trop vermeil, Pâle aurore d’hiver se levant sans envie.

Le futur est un mal, ceux qui l’aiment des fou ; Je veux ployer mes jours en linge de momie Autour du souvenir des morts qui me sont doux.

Natalie Clifford Barney, Quelques Portraits-Sonnets de Femmes, 1900, inspiré par Renée Vivien, dans Album secret

[everyillumi]

[returntomytilene]

‘I was struggling, my breath against her breath, my body against her body, when she changed her mind: she seized me and, from such depths of her femininity, forced a possession on me that was, unfortunately, perfect!’

— Natalie Clifford Barney, Women Lovers, or the Third Woman, originally written in 1926, translated by Chelsea Ray

[livrolatra]

“Eu farei o que fiz  Não por dinheiro ou prazer,  Mas por dívidas a serem pagas  E correções a fazer.  Por sangue que é tão vermelho  Quanto uma rosa pintada.  De modo que cada um saiba  Que colhe a semente plantada”.

- Eu Sei O Que Você Está Pensando

[firstreadbooks]

(This is an old argument in the field of Thinking About Suffering and its stupidity and lack of sophistication could be plumbed for centuries, but suffice it to say that the existence of broccoli does not in any way affect the taste of chocolate.)

Chapter 2, p.35 (TFiOS)

I know it is your duty as a writer to portray worlds and experiences other than your own, lest you become stale (which you tend to suck at, hence why you are so bland) but I really doubt you know anything about suffering or loss, nor really exists a reason why we should take you at your word that anything you say could pass as an authority on suffering.

[firstreadbooks]

Why Hazel Is Wrong In Her Summation About ‘Boy Movies’ And ‘Girl Movies’

“I don’t know why boys expect us to like boy movies. We don’t expect them to like girl movies.”

--Chapter 2, p.35 (TFiOS)

There is a reason this is wrong, and a very big one that Jawn seems to have not picked up on. I’m going to take this moment to explain it, because not a lot of people seem to really realise it either.

While films shouldn’t be gendered, there is no doubt that they actually are by the people who produce these films and market them. If we were to categorise films as either ‘boy movie’ or ‘girl movie’ this is how I believe we would:

‘Boy Movie’:

Male Lead

Male-centric storyline (focus on male character)

Typical Genre: ‘Action’/‘Thriller’/‘Horror’

‘Girl Movie’:

Female Lead

Female-centric storyline (focus on female character)

Typical Genre: ‘Romance’/’Chick flick’/‘Melodrama’

As with the gender binary in real life, there are plenty of exceptions, and plenty of ways in which this is incomplete/inadequate, but I can be certain that these are the requirements most cinema-going people would look to.

Now, ‘Boy Movie’, going by the first requirement, is actually something of a misnomer: considering that, out of the 172 films released in 2011, 74.4% of them had a male lead, the fact is that this category should be called ‘Neutral Movie’; men (particularly white men) are cast in a majority of lead roles because male characters are considered to be characters that target ‘everyone’ and that ‘everyone’ can relate to; ‘male’ is considered ‘neutral’. Everyone is expected to like ‘boy movies’.

Meanwhile, only 25.6% of those 172 films had a female lead. While female cinema-goers make up just more than 50% of the audience, they’re still viewed as a demographic whose economic power in the film industry is only recognised when they want to particularly appeal to them. With only 4.1% of those films headed by female directors, you can bet the female leads aren’t especially representative of real, breathing women, and that at least half of those films aren’t female-centric (scant enough films even pass the Bechdel test, let alone the Mako Mori test). See, ‘Girl Movies’ are only expected to appeal to women: while everyone is expected to enjoy male-lead films, men are not expected to enjoy female-lead films; only women. 

As men aren’t expected to enjoy ‘Girl Movies’, those female-lead films are rarely seen as equal in quality or acclaim.

Meanwhile, few of the female-lead films are female-centric; considering that Romance is a genre with the most female leads, the story is less about the female lead and more about her getting a man (that sort of heteronormative crap). Often, the case is that, even if she’s the lead, she is not driving the story in any way, simply being pulled through it.

A prime example, in fact, would likely be The Fault in Our Stars and its film adaptation, which just goes to show that Jawn rarely practices what he preaches.

Shit to check out:

2014 Hollywood Diversity Report - the source of the stats for this rant (this report also accounts for the roles of people of colour in the media, so do check this out for those stats).

The Bechdel and Mako Mori tests

Shit People Say To Women Directors (a blog dedicated to the real experiences of women in the film industry)

Every Single Word (a blog dedicated to showing every single word spoken in films by People of Colour, illustrating exactly how small their roles and voices are in US media (run by Dylan Marron))

[alibellule]