Supporting Work

Medusa I

After I had created my first film centred around Medusa named ‘Medusa WIP’, (‘Medusa WIP’ can be found on page 3 of ‘Supporting Work’) I decided that instead of hiding Medusa’s eyes within my video work, as I did with ‘Medusa WIP’, I would present them directly, to emphasise her power. I also wanted to include more of the narrative of the dramatic monologue I have written. ‘Medusa WIP’ has no depiction of Perseus and so for ‘Medusa I’ and ‘Medusa II’ I decided to create a representation of Perseus, to establish him as a character and as a symbol of patriarchal voyeurism. It was in the making process of ‘Medusa I’ that I decided I would have Perseus polish his sword whilst scrolling through pictures of Medusa on a phone frame as a simultaneously violent and sexual act that might be disrupted, in order to shatter a male voyeuristic gaze, before opposing it with Medusa’s female gaze. This idea was also influenced by Perseus’ strategy in the original myth of observing Medusa’s reflection in his shield to avoid meeting her eyes, something which Barbara Creed mentions in her own analysis of Freud: ’Freud noted that a display of the female genitals makes a woman “unapproachable and repels all sexual desires”… Perseus’ solution is to look at only a reflection, a mirror-image of her genitals… his shield reflects an “altered” representation, a vision robbed of its threatening aspects.’ (Creed, 1989, pp. 84)

This is contrasted with the ending of ‘Medusa I’, however. As Medusa looks directly into the camera, I feel this is a more effective portrayal of a re-directed female gaze, in which the viewer and Perseus are both confronted by Medusa’s power; something emphasised through the editing of this film, which acquaints her with powerful and bright natural imagery. As Medusa blinks her eyes in ‘Medusa I’, there is also a flashing effect, similar to a camera’s flash. I believe that the connection of Medusa’s eyes with the eye of a camera is an exciting area that may be explored further in my research as I investigate the subject of cyber feminism more deeply. I would like to explore the idea of combining a female body with a machine in more depth in Unit 2, in order to deconstruct the concept of Patriarchal control over both women and machine. Because I felt the ending of ‘Medusa I’ has been successful especially in its use of imagery; this has heavily influenced my presentation of Medusa’s character through editing in my later work for ‘Medusa II’.

The watercolour and drawing below was copied from a screenshot taken from ‘Medusa I’. The image provokes connotations of illustrative drawing to me, as the image captures a specific and dramatic moment in which Medusa spies Perseus, yet he has seemingly not yet seen her. From the image, and even from the stony appearance of Perseus, we can infer the events that might take place next when he meets Medusa’s eyes and she turns him to stone. Medusa is delicately painted here, with gentle, feminine features. Perseus is drawn more roughly, with the large, bloodied tip of his sword presented to the foreground. This subverts those images of Medusa where she is depicted as a monster and where Perseus might be interpreted as a hero. Instead, Medusa is lit by the sun behind her as she observes Perseus with an unimpressed expression. She appears almost like an artist observing a sculpture to me; something that is especially interesting as I have since integrated the myth of Pygmalion into ‘Medusa II’, in which a sculptor’s female statue is brought to life. This image therefore helped plant the seed of a later narrative in ‘Medusa II’ in which being revived from a statue and transformed into a statue has become a cyclical process of objectification becoming subject, only to be turned into an object again.

The roughened and naive appearance of Perseus in both the clay and the pen drawings, as well as the depiction of his sword and the images of Medusa lends an element of humour to ‘Medusa I’ and ‘Medusa II’. Perseus appears as a half-made toy or a doll might, which is absurd since he partakes in an adult, sexual act. The humour and absurdity surrounding the character of Perseus in this work is only heightened as this project has progressed, his sword making a squeaky ringing sound as he polishes it in ‘Medusa II’. His scream in ‘Medusa I’ is also comic; it is not a cry of agony, unlike in ‘Medusa II’, where it is made more monstrous, but rather it is simply a honking type of cry of alarm as his sword is transformed in his hand. While I feel this is effective in using humour to ridicule the character of Perseus’ and his ‘male gaze’, I later strived to make the scene of his metaphorical sexual act and castration more disturbing in ‘Medusa II’. I felt this has allowed the viewer to feel more uncomfortable as Perseus commits his act of voyeurism, therefore further justifying his mutilation and Medusa later turning him to stone.

Bibliography:

Creed, B. (1989) Horror and the Monstrous-Feminine: An Imaginary Abjection In: Donald, J. (ed.) Fantasy and the Cinema. London: British Film Institute. pp83, pp84.