The Films of David Lynch: Are they Feminist, Misogynist, or Neither?

Rather than spout off my opinions right off the bat, I would much rather leave this an open question for others to express their feelings about.

Just to remind you, some of Lynch's major films are:

Blue Velvet

Twin Peaks (the TV series)

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (motion picture)

Wild At Heart

Lost Highway

Mulholland Drive

Inland Empire

I know you probably have way more important subjects on your mind, but for those of you who can spare a moment or two to share your opinion, I am greatly indebted.

With appreciation,
Mike


I'm aware that he has made other films, particularly those prior to Blue Velvet, but they are not really pertinent to this point.

I would appreciate any opinions, no matter how brief or abstract, because I think this issue actually deserves attention, and maybe to be incorporated into an essay about Lynch and Tarantino.

If I didn't think his views of men were just as...odd...I'd say he's got some sexist stuff in there, but man he's got wierd folks in his movies. :D

And furthermore, his films are sort of retro, and the era he's hearkening back to was a sexist era. :P

so. Good post. Thanks.

but he is one strange, twisted dude at times.

I don't think he's so much a feminist or misogynist as he is simply fascinated by them.

Women are fascinating to me too, and I don't blame him for being fascinated by them.

When watching films like Mulholland Drive or Inland Empire, it is rather clear that he does fixate on his females. Tarantino seems fixated on female physicality, whereas Lynch seems to be looking deeper, or at least that is my perception

are pretty misogynist, in my experience. It's a nice sounding spin they put on their put-downs and mistreatment of women.

In my experience at least.

But there's a sincerity to Lynch and his work, and his films never really portray women as weak or anything like that. Even Isabella Rosselini's character Dorothy is not so much weak as simply a victim of some serious evil. She's like an unwitting femme fatale. Lynch has strong noir influences, so the femme fatale is an archetype that springs up, but she doesn't so much as lure Jeffrey into danger as he becomes obsessed with the danger himself. At the same time, Laura Dern's character Sandy is representative of what's good in the world I wuld argue.

Lynch seems to have never gotten over the fact that seemingly normal people engage in some rather abnormal things.
Bogdonavich's "The Last Picture Show" is a far more "grown up" and sophisticated take on this basic fact of life.

edit: typo

And by the way, Lynch is a Republican supporter.

You were a defender of Ronald Reagan in the '80s —
No, no, no. You know, we live in a time where everything that anyone has ever said, or that someone else has said that they said, goes on some site. It's kind of cool in some ways, but then you need to explain certain things.

Well, let's get this one correct for all time.
Reagan cleared brush. That's what I liked about him. My father grew up on a ranch in Montana, and I grew up in Western American thinking, sort of like cowboys in the past on my father's side. So I liked him for that, and I liked this one speech he read early on, at some convention. But at that time, I thought of myself as a libertarian. I believed in next to zero government. And I still would lean toward no government and not so many rules, except for traffic lights and things like this. I really believe in traffic regulations . Some stop signs are really absurd. Like at night, at two a.m., I come to a stop sign, obviously, no cars are coming. And when I stop at that stop sign, I feel like a fool. It's so ridiculous. And other times, when it's heavy traffic, and the light turns yellow, I really have a strong desire to stop, and to keep the car stopped until the light turns, and then to look both ways before going forward. A lot of situations are a matter of life and death. So I believe in traffic rules.

Uh-huh.
But now, I don't know if there even is a Libertarian party. They wouldn't have a prayer of getting anywhere. So I'm a Democrat now. And I've always been a Democrat, really. But I don't like the Democrats a lot, either, because I'm a smoker, and I think a lot of the Democrats have come up with these rules for non-smoking. And I don't think that that's necessarily so bad, but they have to give the smokers a place. You're just like an animal now. Not a clean animal, but a mangy, soiled, urine-soaked animal with remnants, and you're sent outdoors. Animals on my dad's ranch were always kept outdoors, because they weren't like house pets. Now, house pets are treated way better than smokers.

http://www.nervepop.com/filmlounge/interview/DavidLynch/printcopy.html

Okay.

And he supports the Democrats for the same reason a lot of people do: They're the least shitty option available.

But his politics are irrelevant to his art. Even if he was a Republican, that doesn't mean that his work is misogynist or any less artistically valid.

His politics appear to be rather mutable, was my point. He's probably not really interested in politics. That's fine. Many people aren't.

I did not say Lynch's work was misogynist. I said that in my experience men who call women mysterious, or some variation of that, have an uncomfortable way of relating to women. I know very little about Lynch's films. I fell asleep in Mulholland Drive, and don't believe I've seen any others.

I'm not arguing one way or the other about mitchum's point, but how can you agree to a point made about his films when you've never even seen his films?

are coming from a place of naivete or provincialism. I'm probably judging on what I've heard about Lynch's films, so point taken.

but I do feel that maybe "upping the ante on Blue Velvet" in Wild at Heart may indeed have been designed as gratuitous shock at times and is one of the reasons it is my least favorite movie of Lynch's.

And thanks for follow up below.
:toast:

"the bourgeois stroking the bourgeois"
No one else really gives a shit about their "daring"

found porn magazines in the woods. And will never get over it.

you say == Lynch seems to have never gotten over the fact that seemingly normal people engage in some rather abnormal things.


one of the reasons his films are so magnificent, he is not jaded, he stands amazed at this insanity we call human nature

:)
To me, the obvious model for that whole approach is "Winesburg, Ohio"
The difference? Anderson took a sober and "well, of course" view. Oh... and he was a genius.

,

and I'm not buying that one either

sorry if I touched a nerve

I really like films that capture this contrast between outward appearance and reality. A film that had great potential, I thought, was "The Good Girl", but I think everyone just saw Rachel from "Friends" in that role and it totally overshadowed the character. I loved what that film said and how it followed the decisions the female lead made and the consequences of some of her rather diabolical actions, while on the surface she began and ended as a mundane, normal 'good girl'. It could have been a great film with someone besides Aniston in the lead role and Jake Gyllenhall's weird accent it got totally derailed.

Your post reminds me of a quote from "Man in the Long Black Coat" by Dylan, where he says, "Preacher-man talkin'/There's a sermon he gave/said "Every man's conscience/ Is Vile and Depraved/ You cannot rely on it to be your guide/ 'Cause it's you that must keep it Satisfied."

Aniston didn't bother me, but I've only seen Friends 2 or 3 times :)
Gyllenhall's accent was indeed weird, but I assumed it was an affectation adopted by his character

I think that sometimes the actors do such a bad job with those accents (at least it grates on me being a native southerner) that they should just make them mid-western for the sake of the plot. I really couldn't get over Rachel in that film. I think Aniston is permanently type-cast. She needs to do like Farrah Fawcett did and play some serious roles like The Burning Bed/Extremeties/Small Sacrifices, etc to break out of that, otherwise she'll be stuck in romantic comedies forever. I wish that her portrayal had had more depth because that really could have been a thought-provoking film had it been handled better; as it was it made me wonder about alot of the really benign-looking, 'butter wouldn't melt in their mouths' young women I've known. One in particular it brought to mind was a girl I worked with about a decade ago who was cheating on her fiance' at work, with another co-worker (all three worked together) and wouldn't call off her wedding because in her words "it'll be cheaper to get a divorce then it will be to call off the wedding". And this was a very, very sweet, benevolent seeming 19 year old girl. Mayb the reason they made them southern is because that kind of thing is very common in the south where you have the overly sweet facade and the person doing pretty diabolical things underneath.

when there is such a more serious issue here in the lounge, and I just feel so bad for OPERATION and his sweet wife.

I apologize, maybe this could have waited a few days. But honestly, I truly am fascinated by this question.

:shrug:

"The Straight Story"

i don't know how those two films can be dismissed as juvenalia even if say, "dune" can

for most people such a work as one of those would be the peak of a career

Otherwise, I agree with you re: other folks' peaks....

:hi:

One thing I'd been saying for a while--well prior to MD and IE, even--was that Lynch was a parodist of TV and Hollywood conventions. His use of music, in particular was one of the first clues, i.e. way over the top romantic, string swells and cues during Jeffrey and Dorothy's twisted love scenes, etc.

Wild at Heart with its Oz motifs and Twin Peaks, again with the acting and music and their timing amped just beyond (or way beyond, but always beyond) convention. Mourning dad? Sexy school girl? Ditzy secretary? Barney Fife like deputy? One armed man?

Then of course two movies in a row about actresses in Hollywood, i.e two levels of reflection on H-wood's depiction of women.

These are just some fairly basic observations (I'm sure someone has written about Hoolwood/parody by now), but the upshot of it is that it adds a layer one needs to be aware of, I think. That is, what aspects are Lynch's "vision," what are his parody of H-wood, and, maybe even, what are his critiques of H-wood re: how women are treated?

Sorry about the ramble....

Compares mainly Blue Velvet to post-punk's use of irony in the same era. It's from the book "The Cinema of David Lynch : American Dreams, Nightmare Visions." Interesting read, even if you don't agree with it.

The thesis was that Blue Velvet was not parody or to be read as ironic?

I tend to see things as parodies, I think. Touch of Evil, for instance. Noir for sure. But such an exaggeration of all the convention, from lighting to angles?

But friends don't usually agree. I think The Tenant has to be viewed as a comedy, too, so what do I know?

And I don't have the book here. But yeah, the thesis was basically that it wasn't ironic in any way.

i've met them

another person who captures that well, but in another medium, is joyce carol oates

apparently lynch is a conservative guy IRL but in film he just stands back and is a photorealist/surrealist

either that or i've had a very strange life because the one thing i get from lynch is how realistic and accurate he is in describing people

i'm told he's asperger's and i'm a high functioning autistic so perhaps it is just a matter of how accurately he conveys a viewpoint that doesn't usually get any play in the media

his women are human beings, which is fairly radical in the movie industry -- but i don't think he is doing it on purpose

i am a female and i remember the first film of his i saw, eraserhead, was so stunning to me because of some things that could have been filmed from my own life and my own father's life that caused me to walk out and not view the rest of the film for about 25 years, i'm serious

Where'd you hear about him having Asperger's? I've never heard that before.

don't remember, i'll try to find out

his odd approach to characters and human nature.

I think David Lynch is a great director--however, to your question, I answer neither. I think Lynch exposes us to a surreal world where we are left to come to our own conclusions about his characters. I do not think his work passes judgement on its characters and any conclusions we draw are solely our own.

I hope the above makes sense. I'm tired. It makes sense in my head

i don't think lynch is trying be prescriptive and put forth an ideology

i think he's trying to be descriptive and we see the world afresh and make up our own minds

And I do agree that his fresh eyed wonderment is his greatest gift/principle aesthetic.

But...I do think that Lynch is fascinated with Hollywood and its conventions. And what they say about us, especially the responses evoked if these conventions are tweaked, amped, etc.

I said it up thread, but in case you missed it. I think the often slightly--or at times, very--inappropriate music in Lynch's films is important in "reading" them. In fact, I think it can be argued his sound design is almost as essential as the visual to both the experience and what understanding may be had. And perhaps some of the best use sound in the movies.

,

that deep down he has this idea of how they should be. They should be kind of pure and innocent and sweet, but much of his work deals with how corrupted many women have become. When Laura Palmer is first introduced in Fire Walk With Me, we see all these sweet images of the perfect American high school girl. But then she disappears into the bathroom and snorts a little coke, showing us that this image of innocence is not what it seems. At the end, when Bob is about to kill her and her prostitute friend, her friend is saying things about how she's "so dirty" and thus not ready to die.

I don't know if I would go so far as to call his work misogynist. Because I think he ultimately he paints his females in a very sympathetic light. After all, they're usually the way they are because the men in their lives made them that way through abuse. But I agree with what the other poster said about Lynch's work. They're like a young boy that found porn out in the woods, and never got over it.