post 7

Susan Felleman analyzes the lack of acknowledgment concerning the capabilities of female artists in recent cinema. Artemisia and Camille Claudel, while both well done and directed for another interpretation, do not aim the area of focus toward what female artists are capable of. Rather the two films just mentioned direct the attention of the audience in a direction of lust and erotic relationships. Both films seem to portray Artemisia and Camille as women who are forms of inspiration to their "mentor". Truthfully, this article is onto something as both times we watched these films I assumed prior to the screening that each film would demonstrate why these women are such talented artists. Rather, the films focus on the loving relationships and fictional historical inaccuracies that in a way ruin the concept of the film. To contradict myself, these were well made films and clearly delivered messages that these films were directed to grasp the intimate relationships rather than the truth about art.
Before diving into each of the films individually and pointing out why the author was entirely correct about the portrayal of women in these films, there are aspects of these films that imply the director chose not to focus on the artistic capabilities, but rather the intimacy of the main characters. In personal opinions, most likely the directors felt that depicting the artistic capabilities would lean toward a documentary vibe. Can documentaries turn a profit in the box office? The answer can not be mine because I simply do not direct films. However, the general assumption could be that the directors of these films felt the Hollywood tone could be easier to portray of the films focused more on love, rather than historical accuracies with the artists. "But in all three films, the passionate commitment to art is seen not only as inherently and originally sexual in its underlying energies, but also as explicitly bound up in sexual forces" (39). There is something about these films that seem to be more among the lines of a love story and most likely the directors wanted nothing else. This was a big mistake on their part as the critics who matter in this subject tend to only focus on the historical inaccuracies.
While unfortunately, the film has been ruined for me through reading the article, it can be assumed that the directors focus on the love based story, rather than the artistic beauty of Camille's sculptures. She was truly a gifted sculptor and the film seems to neglect from demonstrating her abilities. Instead, the film focuses on Camille as Vidal's inspiration. Something about her brings a glowing light bulb in his artistic brain and through her he is inspired to work to perfection. He even says to himself in a particular scene that he can't figure out what it is about her, but something in her image makes him work harder and better than his later years. "Claudel descended after her relationship came to an end in 1893" (33). There is more depth in this sentence. In fact, this brings me back to the concept of inspiration. The author of this article is making a note that the film focuses on not only the love life, but Camille's relationship as an inspiration. He never says he loves her, but treats her great and uses her as his inspiration. The film's message is sent by implying that Vidal was an animal and simply used her, focusing on his own empowerment. This is most likely the director's intentions. We, the audience, are supposed to acknowledge that the film is dedicate to the mistreatment of Camille. She was a gifted sculptor who is led to her own destruction through her fake relationship with Vidal. The article, like previously stated above, is onto something more than just the loving relationships depicted in these stories, but the mistreatment of women in these films.
While the previous paragraph rants about the mistreatment of women and how this film does not focus enough on her capabilities, there is one aspect of the film that demonstrates respect toward who Camille was as a person. Camille has what could be considered in the words of Dr. Libby as a "dysnfunctional family in modern times", but the father is always supporting Camille. He makes her look him in the eye and assures that she acknowledges her own confidence. The father reminds her that she never backs down and doesn't take orders. She simply can reach her destination on her own. The film is allowing us to understand she is headstrong and capable of almost anything artistic. However, the film also creates an understanding that Vidal ruins who she is and uses her as his inspiration.
The reading further demonstrates the perverted aspects of Artemisia. There is no denying that this is a sexual film. This could ranger from Artemisia loving the concept of painting herself or male friend naked to watching Tassi in a gigantic orgy. Aside from the historical inaccuracies of the film consisting of paintings and the trial as previously discusses in last week's blog, Felleman is also concentrating on the creative ideas of the relationship between Artemisia and Tassi. While this blog could be extended forever if only concentrated on the fact that the director was more interested in a false relationship, there is some genius to this film that leans the audience to focus on the creativity of Tassi and how he affects Artemisia as an artist. "One of Artemisia's key images of artistic vision is a paradox" (32). Felleman is noting the creativity to depict Tassi as a mentor who helps Artemisia see the world through her artistic abilities. Unfortunately, this is one of the only scenes in which the film focuses on how gifted she was. A lot of this short film aims the concentration on the love life of Tassi and Artemisia, followed by the opinions of her father. Another scene in the film in which we can understand she is truly gifted is when Artemisia first shows Tassi her art. The camera zooms in on his face, creating an easy interpretation for the audience to understand that he is overwhelmed by her capabilities. Generally, Felleman is correct that this film is not only historically inaccurate for the most part, but art is sexually induced in the films and that the directors spent too much time focusing on the relationships as opposed to what these female artists were capable of. However, I feel that the directors were too concentrated on making a successful, profiting film and tended to move away from what should have been the area of focus. Felleman has some great ideas.