Strange Loves: Or, How Mac Students Stopped Worrying about their Midterms and Learned to Love this Bomb Movie
Sex, love and politics get even stranger over the short break. Drop your questions here on Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove, George Kennan's "Long Telegram," and Yuly Daniel's "The Man from MINAP."
I have yet to watch Dr. Strangelove, but I wanted to talk about a couple things from "The Man from MINAP." Having just read it and not though too critically about it yet, a few symbolic/visual things stand out to me.
One was the fig tree - just in The Bell Jar, and now in this story, when Vera calls Anna a "barren fig-tree." Seeing a fig-tree twice made me wonder what it's common symbolic relevance is, so I Googled it. I'm not well-versed in the Bible like I know many are, so finding out it's a "Tree of Life" and the "Tree of knowledge of good and evil," was an eye-opener. I wanted to share just in case anyone else didn't know that.
Of course, the attitude expressed on pg. 141, "What the hell, there's the atom bomb!" brings us back to Lenny Bruce yelling "We're all gonna die!". That wry situating of a personal experience or decision in an international context (specifically one that may at any time end in a nuclear Holocaust) in order to justify it or trivialize said choice/decision/behavior seems to be a common theme. (Volodya even gets called a "beatnik" after being accused of having such an attitude).
Finally, I wanted to connect this reading to Phkentz. In this story too we get a desexualization of sex, an "alien ideology," to quote pg. 149. The story (specifically, Volodya) makes sex strange, turning it into a business interaction or a socialist duty. What is different about this story is that this alien form of sex, initially criticized by MINAP and the people associated with it due to it's damaging effect on the Soviet family, is eventually embraced by the dominant whole in an attempt to harness it and use Volodya's strangeness to the state's advantage. The story carries unnerving themes of (temporally relevant) social and genetic conditioning, and the policing of the individual (in an attempt to eradicate the individual, or anything "strange").
Oh - one more small thing that caught my attention was when Vera says, "I'll prepare the ground," and then later when the narrator says, "[m]y advice is to find some neutral ground" (139, 145). Both are referring to a place to have sex. It's difficult to derive meaning from a single word, especially in translations (because who knows what the original word was and/or what the connotations were to a native Russian speaker) but I do know that the earth is of massive importance in Russian history and culture. I wonder if it's no coincidence to refer to the place where something so natural and earthly occurs as "ground." The contrast between this perspective and the impersonal, almost clinical perspective given to us by Volodya in regards to sex could be worth noting, depending on the quality of the translation.
I hope every moment of this class brings us back to "Pkhentz," one of my all-time favorite works of literature ever. But to speak to the figure of the fig, it also has art-historical relevance as an emblem of Christian/Victorian prudery. Check out what they did to David in the 1800s. http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/d/davids-fig-leaf/ In Russian, fig has the added charge of a gentle expletive, the Russian equivalent of English's euphemistic "flip," as in "flipping idiot" or "flip off." According to one informal online glossary of Russian slang, "figa (noun) [is] a figure made by one's fingers... It looks like fist, but thumb instead of being at the top of fist should be pushed between pointing and f*cking fingers. Showing this figure to someone is equivalent to showing 'f*ck' but is not so strong. The word 'figa' is used in expressions (see "na fig", "ni figa", "ofiget'")." http://www.datapacrat.com/True/LANG/REAL/dictiona/RUSSIAN.HTM
The character of Zalessky, when first accused of the destruction of a Soviet family along with his sexual sins, is automatically outcast and considered unfit to be a member of both the Soviet society and the Young Communists. However, when it is proposed that Zalessky's gift (or whatever you may call it) could actually benefit the nation, the response is very different: "The first thing we have to establish is whether he can teach other people. If he can then we're in business. We can lay down the production figures for clothes, shoes, brassieres, and ladies' bicycles. Within twenty years or so we can level up the number of men and women," (page 157). And later, the perception of Zalessky as an unfit Soviet citizen disappears completely: "But if we had a few more children it would have an enormous political effect. It would be taken as evidence of our strength -- of our powers. As I was saying -- he's one of our own lads, a Soviet boy, a Young Communist. We must see that he's properly fed," (page 158). How does this sudden change in the perception of Zalessky display the Soviet obsession with gaining political power and advantage? How does the nation's original response and the backlash that resulted from Zalessky's sexual sin reflect the Soviet Union's strict societal expectations of its citizens, especially in matters of sex?
Watching Dr. Strangelove, one of the most striking things to me was the extremely gendered nature of the film. With the exception of a general's wife, there are no women in the movie at all. Not only are all of the characters men, but some like General Turgidson demonstrate a particular type of masculinity. Dr. Strangelove is contrasted with this throughout the film. His high pitched, German accented voice stands out as much as his eccentric appearance and jerky robotic movements. I think that the name "Strangelove" is of particular importance, referring perhaps to a strange love for the bomb or perhaps the name has a relationship with queerness that we can explore more deeply. Finally, his idea at the end of the film to "preserve human specimens" in which a ratio of 10 women for every man will be spared in a mine shaft appeals to the men in the war room, but disrupts the traditional American ideal of monogamy.
I was similarly interested in the gendered representations depicted in the film. In particular, I wanted to think about the sexual narratives that span the film (i.e. constant references to life force or libido, Dr. Strangelove's plan at the end of the film, the sexualized female body). How do these sexual narratives speak to larger Cold War plot of the film? How/why might we understand power to be gendered/ erotic? How does this relate to the film Circus, which similarly documents the competition between the USSR & USA in developing the most state of the art technologies?
I second that second! We *have* to talk about the many phallic technologies that facilitate this quasi-romantic rivalry or "political intimacy," as X (AKA Kenna) calls it in his "Long Telegram"...
The "Dr. Strangelove" scenario, as it turns out, was not only possible but was almost (accidentally) replicated many times. Seriously: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2013/09/30/130930crbo_books_menand?currentPage=all
Off topic, and not really a life-changing or class-changing discussion, but I'm curious to know why Kubric et al. chose to name the movie after the character Dr. Strangelove, considering the relatively small role he plays. The pilot, the president, both generals, the Soviet ambassador, and the British captain all have much larger roles. In the scheme of things, Dr. Strangelove only really speaks at two points (at lease from what I remember): when he confirms that the doomsday weapon could feasibly exist and at the end when he proposes a rather eugenic and fascist solution (and loses control of his body). The title of the movie inherently magnifies him as a main character or at least the one on which the story hinges. So, what could the chosen title tell us about the overall themes and of the movie? How does seeing Dr. Strangelove as the pivotal character change how one interprets the film (how would we view the film if it had been named after a different character like General Ripper)? How can the title of the movie and the significance, then, of the doctor help us better understand the Cold War "culture" of fear and paranoia and the ends to which they lead?
I like the wonky text - I think it made it seem very dramatic. It is pretty terrifying that it was almost replicated many times.
Also, apparently "[t}he plan to regenerate the human race from the people sheltered in mineshafts is a parody of Nelson Rockefeller's, Edward Teller's, Herman Kahn's, and Chet Holifield's 1961 plan to spend billions of dollars on a nationwide network of concrete-lined underground fallout shelters capable of holding millions of people." (I just got this from the Dr. Strangelove Wikipedia article). I think Dr. Strangelove is the main character because the main critique(s) - in the form of satire of course - about the Cold War comes from his character.
I'm also interested in the way he was portrayed - including his body movements at particular times, as you mentioned. His portrayal was a little problematic but also relevant. Being in a wheelchair, wearing those strange glasses, unable to control his body movements, ect.
Me too, wonky text is very Bell Jar. While we're on the subject of Strangelove's satirical sources in actual cold war politics, the John Birch Society was terrified that the precious bodily fluids of healthy American families was being sapped by the communist flouridation of the water supply. On this subject, keep water in mind when reading "The Long Telegram," which has flowing, liquid language all over the place.
Much of the portrayal of the U.S./Soviet relationship seems to imply that the U.S. is being emasculated (or thinks that it is) by the Soviet Union. For example, the conversation between the U.S. President and Premier Kissoff resembles that of a domestic dispute between husband and wife, with the husband making excuses and seeking forgiveness from the wife. The hyper-masculine characters of Jack D. Ripper (similar to Jack the Ripper, who targeted women) and the stereotypical Western pilot are an attempt to compensate for this emasculation. General Ripper's cigar and the bomb that the pilot straddles at the end seem to be phallic symbols that assert the manhood of the United States.
This is kind of a trivial question, but I'm wondering how to position the chewing gum into this image of hyper-masculinity. I believe it's General Turgidson who is constantly chewing gum, and I'm not sure what this says about him. Any thoughts?
I think, if I am remembering the right character, it might imply that he's immature. It trivializes his status as a hyper-masculine military ..uh, guy? Chewing gum is usually associated (particularly when this movie was made) with teenagers or "valley girls." It adds to the satire. Also, again if I remember the character correctly, he seemed like a fairly intense guy. That repetitive, almost aggressive gnashing adds to his character in that way too.
I agree with you Mackenzie, and I also want add that there is something a little sexual about chewing gum.. especially when the chewer is the valley girl that you mentioned. I think that puts an interesting spin on Taylor's idea of emasculation in the film.. Could the gum chewing be de-masculating him or sexualizing him?
Yeah I would definitely agree that it's a form of emasculation with the whole "valley girl" connotation. I'm not sure that I see it as sexualizing him just because the action seemed more obnoxious than seductive, but perhaps it's doing both.
The names in Dr. Strangelove were what caught my attention, starting with Generals Turgidson and Ripper. Both are ridiculously masculine names. Turgid means swollen or distended, which could relate to his masculinity or ego; and Gen. Jack Ripper seems a bit too close to Jack the Ripper for me to disregard the connection. Then there are the names of the more feminine characters, Mandrake (which is a plant that, historically, has been credited as a cure for infertility) and the president Merkin Muffley. And then, of course, there's our queer Dr. Strangelove. How do the names of characters reflect on their masculinity/femininity? What meaning can we glean from the historical context of certain names?
I totally agree with the masculine/feminine tendencies of these names, but I took them less as historically relevant and more as a little satirical, like the rest of the film. I feel like the writers thought it would be funny to give all of the characters these weird names. Another example is the officer who found Mandrake and Ripper... his name was Bat Guano. Take that as you will!
The plotline revolves largely around miscommunication, the most obvious being the inability for the president to communicate with the general and intervene with the bomber planes. Turgidson’s personality revolved around fear and distrust of the “Commies”, a hysteria brought about no doubt by misinformation. As the countdown nears and Mandrake tries to give the president the three letter code, he struggles with the telephone and the money. Perhaps it is purely for comedic relief, but I am inclined to think that maybe it is more of a commentary on the misinformation in the American system, since even the highest generals seem to be afflicted with it, and those in a lower chain of command were left completely in the dark.
In Dr. Strangelove, women seem to be objectified and almost seen as the enemy. This was especially true for General Ripper. One part in particular that I noted was a conversation between General Ripper and Mandrake where General Ripper is talking about his water fluoridation paranoia. He tells Mandrake that he first thought about this while in a sexual act. He then extends his argument to say that "Women sense my power" and "I do deny them my essence." I think in this scene, he is saying women are not to be trusted and he consistently asserts his dominance over them. Besides this scene, there is also a scene in which a pilot is seen taking the time to look at a Playboy magazine. Also, General Turgidson's secretary/sex toy is seen only once and in that scene, she can be seen wearing virtually nothing, suggesting she has been used as a sexual object. To further take away her own identity, General Turgidson jokes with her that he's going to marry her, giving her his namesake. Women objectification/dehumanization also becomes evident when there is talk of being able to preserve the human race toward the end of the movie. There is suggestion of an overwhelmingly feminine ratio of females to males - 10 females for every 1 male. Not only that, but they must be highly attractive as well. All of the men in the room nod in agreement.
I wanted to mention a couple things again since I've now watched Dr. Strangelove.
First of all, as others have pointed out, women were almost nonexistent in the film. Where they did exist, they were objects: the woman at Turgidson's place who was clearly a sex object for him and whoever was on the phone, the PlayBoy magazine, and particularly as breeders in the hypothetical bunker situation posed at the end by Dr. Strangelove. In fact, even supposed "enemies" come together over their mutual heterosexual maleness.
The other thing that really creeped me out in regards to gender was Jack Ripper's explanation of his obsession with maintaining his bodily fluids. He explains to Mandrake that he first became paranoid when he had sex, feeling depleted and "empty" afterwards, and concludes by saying he now denies women his "essence." Women become the enemy in this sense.
One last thing I wanted to mention was all the sexual imagery in the film. Perhaps I'm just being a perv, but even the opening scene where one plane was refueling another and there was romantic music playing seemed blatantly sexual. Not to mention the pilot on the B-52 riding the nuke. War is hyper-sexualized in this movie. What effect does that have? What is it saying about the Cold War?
Personally, I really enjoyed Doctor Strangelove, particularly how satirical it seemed to me. I liked how in the end one solution to surviving the doomsday device is to live underground, and the general wonders what happens if the Soviets keep weapons for the 100 years and the United States doesn't, and he says something along the lines of legal if there's a mine gap". This related to the bomb/missile/weapon gap that was such a concern during the Cold War and I just wonder what this is really saying about the nature of the war? I also enjoyed the group each character seemed to represent.
A few times during the film, including the last line, Dr. Strangelove refers to the President as "Mein Führer." Given this obvious signpost which parallels Cold War politics with the Third Reich, what is the significance of this connection in terms of commentary on the era and our understanding of the film in context?
I have yet to watch Dr. Strangelove, but I wanted to talk about a couple things from "The Man from MINAP." Having just read it and not though too critically about it yet, a few symbolic/visual things stand out to me.
ReplyDeleteOne was the fig tree - just in The Bell Jar, and now in this story, when Vera calls Anna a "barren fig-tree." Seeing a fig-tree twice made me wonder what it's common symbolic relevance is, so I Googled it. I'm not well-versed in the Bible like I know many are, so finding out it's a "Tree of Life" and the "Tree of knowledge of good and evil," was an eye-opener. I wanted to share just in case anyone else didn't know that.
Of course, the attitude expressed on pg. 141, "What the hell, there's the atom bomb!" brings us back to Lenny Bruce yelling "We're all gonna die!". That wry situating of a personal experience or decision in an international context (specifically one that may at any time end in a nuclear Holocaust) in order to justify it or trivialize said choice/decision/behavior seems to be a common theme. (Volodya even gets called a "beatnik" after being accused of having such an attitude).
Finally, I wanted to connect this reading to Phkentz. In this story too we get a desexualization of sex, an "alien ideology," to quote pg. 149. The story (specifically, Volodya) makes sex strange, turning it into a business interaction or a socialist duty. What is different about this story is that this alien form of sex, initially criticized by MINAP and the people associated with it due to it's damaging effect on the Soviet family, is eventually embraced by the dominant whole in an attempt to harness it and use Volodya's strangeness to the state's advantage. The story carries unnerving themes of (temporally relevant) social and genetic conditioning, and the policing of the individual (in an attempt to eradicate the individual, or anything "strange").
Oh - one more small thing that caught my attention was when Vera says, "I'll prepare the ground," and then later when the narrator says, "[m]y advice is to find some neutral ground" (139, 145). Both are referring to a place to have sex. It's difficult to derive meaning from a single word, especially in translations (because who knows what the original word was and/or what the connotations were to a native Russian speaker) but I do know that the earth is of massive importance in Russian history and culture. I wonder if it's no coincidence to refer to the place where something so natural and earthly occurs as "ground." The contrast between this perspective and the impersonal, almost clinical perspective given to us by Volodya in regards to sex could be worth noting, depending on the quality of the translation.
I hope every moment of this class brings us back to "Pkhentz," one of my all-time favorite works of literature ever. But to speak to the figure of the fig, it also has art-historical relevance as an emblem of Christian/Victorian prudery. Check out what they did to David in the 1800s. http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/d/davids-fig-leaf/ In Russian, fig has the added charge of a gentle expletive, the Russian equivalent of English's euphemistic "flip," as in "flipping idiot" or "flip off." According to one informal online glossary of Russian slang, "figa (noun) [is] a figure made by one's fingers... It looks like fist, but thumb instead of being at the top of fist should be pushed between pointing and f*cking fingers. Showing this figure to someone is equivalent to showing 'f*ck' but is not so strong. The word 'figa' is used in expressions (see "na fig", "ni figa", "ofiget'")." http://www.datapacrat.com/True/LANG/REAL/dictiona/RUSSIAN.HTM
DeleteThe character of Zalessky, when first accused of the destruction of a Soviet family along with his sexual sins, is automatically outcast and considered unfit to be a member of both the Soviet society and the Young Communists. However, when it is proposed that Zalessky's gift (or whatever you may call it) could actually benefit the nation, the response is very different: "The first thing we have to establish is whether he can teach other people. If he can then we're in business. We can lay down the production figures for clothes, shoes, brassieres, and ladies' bicycles. Within twenty years or so we can level up the number of men and women," (page 157). And later, the perception of Zalessky as an unfit Soviet citizen disappears completely: "But if we had a few more children it would have an enormous political effect. It would be taken as evidence of our strength -- of our powers. As I was saying -- he's one of our own lads, a Soviet boy, a Young Communist. We must see that he's properly fed," (page 158). How does this sudden change in the perception of Zalessky display the Soviet obsession with gaining political power and advantage? How does the nation's original response and the backlash that resulted from Zalessky's sexual sin reflect the Soviet Union's strict societal expectations of its citizens, especially in matters of sex?
ReplyDeleteWatching Dr. Strangelove, one of the most striking things to me was the extremely gendered nature of the film. With the exception of a general's wife, there are no women in the movie at all. Not only are all of the characters men, but some like General Turgidson demonstrate a particular type of masculinity. Dr. Strangelove is contrasted with this throughout the film. His high pitched, German accented voice stands out as much as his eccentric appearance and jerky robotic movements. I think that the name "Strangelove" is of particular importance, referring perhaps to a strange love for the bomb or perhaps the name has a relationship with queerness that we can explore more deeply. Finally, his idea at the end of the film to "preserve human specimens" in which a ratio of 10 women for every man will be spared in a mine shaft appeals to the men in the war room, but disrupts the traditional American ideal of monogamy.
ReplyDeleteI was similarly interested in the gendered representations depicted in the film. In particular, I wanted to think about the sexual narratives that span the film (i.e. constant references to life force or libido, Dr. Strangelove's plan at the end of the film, the sexualized female body). How do these sexual narratives speak to larger Cold War plot of the film? How/why might we understand power to be gendered/ erotic? How does this relate to the film Circus, which similarly documents the competition between the USSR & USA in developing the most state of the art technologies?
DeleteI second that second! We *have* to talk about the many phallic technologies that facilitate this quasi-romantic rivalry or "political intimacy," as X (AKA Kenna) calls it in his "Long Telegram"...
DeleteThe "Dr. Strangelove" scenario, as it turns out, was not only possible but was almost (accidentally) replicated many times. Seriously: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2013/09/30/130930crbo_books_menand?currentPage=all
ReplyDeleteOff topic, and not really a life-changing or class-changing discussion, but I'm curious to know why Kubric et al. chose to name the movie after the character Dr. Strangelove, considering the relatively small role he plays. The pilot, the president, both generals, the Soviet ambassador, and the British captain all have much larger roles. In the scheme of things, Dr. Strangelove only really speaks at two points (at lease from what I remember): when he confirms that the doomsday weapon could feasibly exist and at the end when he proposes a rather eugenic and fascist solution (and loses control of his body). The title of the movie inherently magnifies him as a main character or at least the one on which the story hinges. So, what could the chosen title tell us about the overall themes and of the movie? How does seeing Dr. Strangelove as the pivotal character change how one interprets the film (how would we view the film if it had been named after a different character like General Ripper)? How can the title of the movie and the significance, then, of the doctor help us better understand the Cold War "culture" of fear and paranoia and the ends to which they lead?
Woah. the text at the top is a little wonky. Don't know how that happened.
DeleteAutomatically justified margins?
DeleteI like the wonky text - I think it made it seem very dramatic. It is pretty terrifying that it was almost replicated many times.
DeleteAlso, apparently "[t}he plan to regenerate the human race from the people sheltered in mineshafts is a parody of Nelson Rockefeller's, Edward Teller's, Herman Kahn's, and Chet Holifield's 1961 plan to spend billions of dollars on a nationwide network of concrete-lined underground fallout shelters capable of holding millions of people." (I just got this from the Dr. Strangelove Wikipedia article). I think Dr. Strangelove is the main character because the main critique(s) - in the form of satire of course - about the Cold War comes from his character.
I'm also interested in the way he was portrayed - including his body movements at particular times, as you mentioned. His portrayal was a little problematic but also relevant. Being in a wheelchair, wearing those strange glasses, unable to control his body movements, ect.
Me too, wonky text is very Bell Jar. While we're on the subject of Strangelove's satirical sources in actual cold war politics, the John Birch Society was terrified that the precious bodily fluids of healthy American families was being sapped by the communist flouridation of the water supply. On this subject, keep water in mind when reading "The Long Telegram," which has flowing, liquid language all over the place.
DeleteMuch of the portrayal of the U.S./Soviet relationship seems to imply that the U.S. is being emasculated (or thinks that it is) by the Soviet Union. For example, the conversation between the U.S. President and Premier Kissoff resembles that of a domestic dispute between husband and wife, with the husband making excuses and seeking forgiveness from the wife. The hyper-masculine characters of Jack D. Ripper (similar to Jack the Ripper, who targeted women) and the stereotypical Western pilot are an attempt to compensate for this emasculation. General Ripper's cigar and the bomb that the pilot straddles at the end seem to be phallic symbols that assert the manhood of the United States.
ReplyDeleteThis is kind of a trivial question, but I'm wondering how to position the chewing gum into this image of hyper-masculinity. I believe it's General Turgidson who is constantly chewing gum, and I'm not sure what this says about him. Any thoughts?
I think, if I am remembering the right character, it might imply that he's immature. It trivializes his status as a hyper-masculine military ..uh, guy? Chewing gum is usually associated (particularly when this movie was made) with teenagers or "valley girls." It adds to the satire. Also, again if I remember the character correctly, he seemed like a fairly intense guy. That repetitive, almost aggressive gnashing adds to his character in that way too.
DeleteI agree with you Mackenzie, and I also want add that there is something a little sexual about chewing gum.. especially when the chewer is the valley girl that you mentioned. I think that puts an interesting spin on Taylor's idea of emasculation in the film.. Could the gum chewing be de-masculating him or sexualizing him?
DeleteYeah I would definitely agree that it's a form of emasculation with the whole "valley girl" connotation. I'm not sure that I see it as sexualizing him just because the action seemed more obnoxious than seductive, but perhaps it's doing both.
DeleteAnd beyond this, chewing gum so ferociously is a sign of his (sexual) frustration, of being constantly turgid (son) with no means of release...
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe names in Dr. Strangelove were what caught my attention, starting with Generals Turgidson and Ripper. Both are ridiculously masculine names. Turgid means swollen or distended, which could relate to his masculinity or ego; and Gen. Jack Ripper seems a bit too close to Jack the Ripper for me to disregard the connection. Then there are the names of the more feminine characters, Mandrake (which is a plant that, historically, has been credited as a cure for infertility) and the president Merkin Muffley. And then, of course, there's our queer Dr. Strangelove.
ReplyDeleteHow do the names of characters reflect on their masculinity/femininity? What meaning can we glean from the historical context of certain names?
I totally agree with the masculine/feminine tendencies of these names, but I took them less as historically relevant and more as a little satirical, like the rest of the film. I feel like the writers thought it would be funny to give all of the characters these weird names. Another example is the officer who found Mandrake and Ripper... his name was Bat Guano. Take that as you will!
DeleteThe plotline revolves largely around miscommunication, the most obvious being the inability for the president to communicate with the general and intervene with the bomber planes. Turgidson’s personality revolved around fear and distrust of the “Commies”, a hysteria brought about no doubt by misinformation. As the countdown nears and Mandrake tries to give the president the three letter code, he struggles with the telephone and the money. Perhaps it is purely for comedic relief, but I am inclined to think that maybe it is more of a commentary on the misinformation in the American system, since even the highest generals seem to be afflicted with it, and those in a lower chain of command were left completely in the dark.
ReplyDeleteIn Dr. Strangelove, women seem to be objectified and almost seen as the enemy. This was especially true for General Ripper. One part in particular that I noted was a conversation between General Ripper and Mandrake where General Ripper is talking about his water fluoridation paranoia. He tells Mandrake that he first thought about this while in a sexual act. He then extends his argument to say that "Women sense my power" and "I do deny them my essence." I think in this scene, he is saying women are not to be trusted and he consistently asserts his dominance over them. Besides this scene, there is also a scene in which a pilot is seen taking the time to look at a Playboy magazine. Also, General Turgidson's secretary/sex toy is seen only once and in that scene, she can be seen wearing virtually nothing, suggesting she has been used as a sexual object. To further take away her own identity, General Turgidson jokes with her that he's going to marry her, giving her his namesake. Women objectification/dehumanization also becomes evident when there is talk of being able to preserve the human race toward the end of the movie. There is suggestion of an overwhelmingly feminine ratio of females to males - 10 females for every 1 male. Not only that, but they must be highly attractive as well. All of the men in the room nod in agreement.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to mention a couple things again since I've now watched Dr. Strangelove.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, as others have pointed out, women were almost nonexistent in the film. Where they did exist, they were objects: the woman at Turgidson's place who was clearly a sex object for him and whoever was on the phone, the PlayBoy magazine, and particularly as breeders in the hypothetical bunker situation posed at the end by Dr. Strangelove. In fact, even supposed "enemies" come together over their mutual heterosexual maleness.
The other thing that really creeped me out in regards to gender was Jack Ripper's explanation of his obsession with maintaining his bodily fluids. He explains to Mandrake that he first became paranoid when he had sex, feeling depleted and "empty" afterwards, and concludes by saying he now denies women his "essence." Women become the enemy in this sense.
One last thing I wanted to mention was all the sexual imagery in the film. Perhaps I'm just being a perv, but even the opening scene where one plane was refueling another and there was romantic music playing seemed blatantly sexual. Not to mention the pilot on the B-52 riding the nuke. War is hyper-sexualized in this movie. What effect does that have? What is it saying about the Cold War?
Personally, I really enjoyed Doctor Strangelove, particularly how satirical it seemed to me. I liked how in the end one solution to surviving the doomsday device is to live underground, and the general wonders what happens if the Soviets keep weapons for the 100 years and the United States doesn't, and he says something along the lines of legal if there's a mine gap". This related to the bomb/missile/weapon gap that was such a concern during the Cold War and I just wonder what this is really saying about the nature of the war? I also enjoyed the group each character seemed to represent.
ReplyDeleteN.B. technical issues delayed publishing.
ReplyDeleteA few times during the film, including the last line, Dr. Strangelove refers to the President as "Mein Führer." Given this obvious signpost which parallels Cold War politics with the Third Reich, what is the significance of this connection in terms of commentary on the era and our understanding of the film in context?