English

1/12/2018

FRAMING FOR THE FILM
Hitchcock made Frenzy late in his career (it was his penultimate film) after what many scholars and fans consider to be a period of "lesser" films: Marnie (1964), Torn Curtain (1966), Topaz (1969). Atypical of most of his Hollywood career, Hitchcock made the film in the UK, shooting (also atypically) on location in and around London. The film's gritty style may strike you as quite unlike the sleek Hollywood films Hitchcock made (even Psycho). In its lurid subject matter, you will find similarities to Psycho, Shadow of a Doubt, and Marnie, though Frenzy goes even further in its graphic depictions of depraved sexuality and violence. For example, the film has a disturbing scene of rape, the complexities of which we will discuss in class. Otherwise, the film's interrelations of sex, violence, marriage, and death will be familiar, as will its coupling of these factors with a tone that is, by turns deeply disturbing and darkly comical. Along these lines, and as we did with the Shirley Jackson story, "Jack the Ripper," please pay attention to the film's tone vs. its subject matter.

Frenzy is a complex film with a number of running motifs that place focus on food, sex, and the body more generally. It is also arguably a study in different versions of failed masculinity. We have discussed this topic in many of Hitchcock's films, though perhaps it was never more apparent in his work than it is in Frenzy. See what you think of this thematic interest when you consider the representations of women in the film. Ask yourself whether or not you find the women to have strength and power, and if they are victims whether you find their victim status to outweigh that strength and power (if any). It might also be helpful to come up with a list of character traits as you watch the film, tracing what kinds of conflicts arise.

Finally, it will be helpful to think through parallels between Frenzy and Psycho, as Julian and I decided to bookend the course with these two films because of their compelling shared concerns around masculinity and femininity and their complicated and shifting active and passive, sadistic and masochistic roles.

TOPICS
As I explained in class, this forum is a chance to air out initial ideas you might have for the final essay. Accordingly, I have listed the topics below, as-is. Try to produce a thesis paragraph of not more than 250 words as your response. If you responded to the prior post topics for Marnie, you need not respond to this one. Choose only one of the topics below. Please post your response by midnight, Wednesday, 5 December.

I. Representations of Women, 1
Compare and/or contrast the representation of women in Marnie and Frenzy. Despite their differences, is there a consistency between the two films as feminist texts? If you find the films’ treatment of women to be significantly different, take the time to discuss the complexities of that difference. Tease out these issues with some reference to either Charlotte Perkins-Gilman or Shirley Jackson. You may choose to use the story as a framing device, drawing your argument from its key themes and conflicts. You may also choose to treat the story slightly more peripherally, as long as a reference to it forms a significant part of your argument.

II. Representations of Women, 2
The stories by Charlotte Perkins-Gilman and Shirley Jackson are clearly interested in the struggles of women against larger forces — historical, political, familial, cultural – that oppress them. Choose one of these stories as a basis for a feminist reading of either Marnie or Frenzy. Both films feature characters whose roles arguably shift and blend between monster and victim. Take the time to explore the complexities of these roles, using the themes and concerns of the two feminist stories as your guide.

III. Urban Gothic
Write an essay that discusses the significance of the urban setting in Frenzy and “Jack the Ripper.” What key symbols, conflicts, and themes arise explicitly from the urban environment where these works take place? What power does the city hold over its subjects in these works? In the Gothic more broadly, architecture—particularly houses—is intertwined with character physicality and psychology. How are such links between character and setting also apparent in these works?

27 Comments

INSTRUCTIONS

Please respond in the Comments section. To see this section, just click the red "comments" line). To create a new response, use the "Leave a Reply" box.

Do not use the "reply" button under the previous user's comment. Add your comment as an entirely new one.

It is best to write your response in a document that you can save, and then paste it into the comments box.

Be sure to read all comments by your peers before writing your own, and to consider the ongoing discussion in your own comment.

Be original!

Isabeli Pizzani

3/12/2018 04:57:03 pm

Topic III: Urban Gothic

The part of Shirley Jackson’s story where the Jack brings Rose to her building and the landlord opens the door, letting the murderer take the girl to her apartment can be compared with the scene in FRENZY, where Robert brings Babs up to his apartment. The camera follows them until he shuts the door behind them and it stops moving. Afterwards, we hear Rupert say: “I don't know if you know it, Babs, but you're my type of woman” (FRENZY). The camera backs away and we go down stairs, then out of the building. Hitchcock films the movie in a way that we feel part of the scene as if we were a neighbour or a passer-by. In both works someone see murderer in his way to kill someone, but even if they notice something strange, the witnesses don’t interfere. Big cities such as New York and London are populated by millions of people who have no connection between them. Since they don’t have a small population, metropolises encourage their citizens to be a lot more self-centered than small towns, where you always meet the same people. People avoid at all costs to get involved in others’ business since there are so many people and most of them never met each other. The buildings and apartments represent the life in a big city. These massive buildings contain dozens of apartments that are private spaces. A metropolis has millions of inhabitants and they all have their own private lives. All these people that share the same building and rarely meet the same neighbour. When one of these neighbours enters his apartment, he enters his private domain. A person that lives in a big building can’t look after all his neighbours.

Julia Prud'Homme

4/12/2018 11:45:01 am

Topic 1
Despite the main male characters’ evident misogynistic and rapist qualities, both Marnie and Frenzy are feminist films, because of how these male characters are portrayed and because of the female resistance. Both these films follow a similar plot line to Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper”, where we fully believe that the man has good intentions at the beginning, that he wants to save the girl instead of murder her, but where Marnie and Frenzy take a more feminist approach is in the way that the portrayal of aggression in these men creates a hatred in the audience towards them, a disbelief of any good intentions, even if the men aren’t the villains, because of their chaotic toxic masculinity. In Marnie, Mark is aggressive, and we hate him for trapping Marnie. He sexually assaults her, he forces the confrontation between her and her mother, and we want Marnie to escape him. In Frenzy, the villain is Rusk, the rapist murderer, and it’s true that Richard is supposed to be in the hero position, but the scene where Richard yells at his ex-wife creates a cold distance between the audience and him, that makes us hate him. The women in these films also continuously resist, Marnie does resist more verbally and physically, standing up to Mark and refusing his sexual advances, and she survives. In Frenzy, the women tend to be murdered, but they do resist, such as Ms. Blaney’s physical fight, and those who survive, such as the secretary, are extremely useful to the discovery of the murderer. The portrayal of the men as aggressive and cruel, even in their good actions, and the resistance of the women, make these films feminist in their critique of toxic masculinity.

Vanessa Amar

4/12/2018 02:08:18 pm

Topic II
Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” and FRENZY share remarking similarities in the treatment of women involved and the identification of the audience. They display incredibly passive women who unaware of what they are a victim to. The ending of Jackson’s story evokes the similarities between simply being a wife and being a victim to a gruesome murder at the hand of a man. Similarly, the true criminal in FRENZY is a display that the danger to women does not come from a stranger in a dark alley, but it comes from a neighbour, a friend, or even a husband. This pushes the audience in both cases side to identify with the women of the story; they prey that Jack’s victim wakes up, that his wife becomes suspicious, and that Babs doesn’t go in Rusk’s room. The audience gets a front row seat in the annihilation of women at the hands of men they otherwise trusted. These women are not capable of resistance because they are not capable of being aware of what is happening or who they are supposed to be resisting against. This is evoked in the ease with which Babs marches to her murder in life, but the incredible resistance she shows in death once the danger has been identified.

Victoria Caputo

4/12/2018 09:51:15 pm

“Jack the Ripper” by Shirley Jackson and FRENZY by Alfred Hitchcock are similar in their portrayal of the patriarchal society we live in. Toxic masculinity is covered in both works as the men make degrading, crude comments about women. For example, in “Jack the Ripper”, the men in the bar do not have any sympathy for the unconscious girl, and one of them even responds by suggesting to call the mayor when asked to help her out. Although these uncaring men don’t end up killing the girl, they might as well have. Their complete disregard for her life is indicative of how society treats women. In FRENZY, Robert Blaney, the main protagonist of the film, is falsely accused of murder, and despite his innocence, he still falls victim to his own toxic masculinity. His insecurities regarding his ex wife being way more successful than him made him bitter, and he is very hostile in his interactions with her. There is also the conversation between the two men at the beginning of the film discussing the murders that is a key example of crude misogynistic comments. One man says being raped before being murdered is a “silver lining” for the victims. Similarly to “Jack the Ripper”, none of these men are driven to kill women, however they are all part of what is wrong with society’s treatment of women. These works are telling us that there isn’t simply one “big bad monster” lurking the shadows, there is a plethora of them.

Julia Bifulco

4/12/2018 09:59:41 pm

Topic III: Urban Gothic

Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” and Hitchcock’s FRENZY both take place in very populated cities with lots of sidewalk traffic. There are quite literally eyes everywhere—it’s difficult to sneak around and not be noticed, right? Then why is it that both murderers in these works are able to commit crimes without being stopped during the process? In Jackson’s story, for example, the murderer makes it very clear that he is not the only person to walk past and acknowledge the unconscious girl on the sidewalk. He is, however, the only one of those pedestrians who seems to care at all about her (granted, he only does because he views her as the perfect murder victim, but I digress). The list of witnesses to his crime does not stop there: from the men in the bar to the cab driver to the victim’s landlord, many people see Jack with his future victim, but not a single one intervenes. One might argue that they didn’t know what was going to happen—and that they might have acted if they did—but that is irrelevant; how would they have known the circumstances? It is just morally wrong to ignore the situation entirely, but that doesn’t seem to stop them. A similar case takes place in FRENZY: once Monica discovers her boss’s strangled corpse, she screams in horror, and two women passing by on the sidewalk hear her, pause for a moment, and continue about their day without another thought. Maybe these women hear bloodcurdling screams every day, maybe this is nothing new for them, but either way, it’s ridiculous for them to do absolutely nothing and not give the situation more than a moment’s notice. They are just as guilty as the other bystanders in “Jack the Ripper”; by not doing anything to help, they are enabling the criminal and making it easier for them to continue murdering. Arguably, the most frightening part about both the short story and the film is that we as a society would likely not notice what was going on right in front of our eyes. Even if we did, there’s no certainty that we would care. These are only two cases from the works where society is presented with a horrifying situation and does nothing about it. The reality and gravity of this exposure and realization is what should truly horrify the audience and the readers.

Sophie-Leprohon Watters

4/12/2018 10:58:34 pm

Topic II
Alfred Hitchcock's MARNIE and Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” are both feminist works in which the audience is a part of deciding whether the motives behind the main characters, Mark (MARNIE) and the narrator (“Jack the Ripper”), are those of an antagonist or a protagonist. In “Jack the Ripper”, while questioning the men at the bar as to know what they are going to do about the defenseless teenage girl, the narrator seems baffled at their attitude towards her. He becomes her protector when he understands the men at the bar are dismissing the danger she is under (Jackson, 268). He is in a position of authority as well a protagonist since he controls the future of her safety, but only becomes an antagonist by the end when it is revealed that he kills the young girl. However, in MARNIE, Mark stays an antagonist throughout the entirety of the movie. He too is in a position of authority, “I've tracked you and caught you and by God I'm going to keep you.” When he “saves” Marnie by the end of the movie, the audience knows this is done to manipulate her in staying by his side, and it works. Even though both endings show the domination of men over women, a shift of authority from the narrator and Mark is transferred to the viewer. The audience becomes the ultimate protagonist as they decide what the final verdict of these men should have been to ensure the security of the young girl and Marnie.

Isabella Martino

4/12/2018 11:53:57 pm

Topic #2
Both Charlotte Perkins-Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” and Hitchcock’s MARNIE aim to illustrate society’s misinterpretation of women in society. The notion that women cannot be independent and strive is overstated in both works in order to showcase women’s cries for help and demand for change. In “The Yellow Wallpaper”, the protagonist is originally seen as the victim, as she suffers from a terrible illness. Her husband – also known as her doctor – delivers strict guidelines for her to follow in order to have a successful recovery. Automatically, the assumption that a man is needed to help cure a woman is made. However, when the protagonist rejects her husband’s instructions, she is instantly painted as a monster that everyone fears; crawling on all fours with a wild look in her eyes. Similarly in MARNIE, Marnie is at first viewed as a dominating figure. Her fierce confidence while impersonating others as well as her resistance towards Mark causes the audience to view her as the predator. This being said, the roles switch entirely when Mark begins uncovering her troubling past, and as a result Marnie is perceived as the victim. She is seen as weak, hysterical, and completely dependent on Mark to help rid her of her traumas. Although the roles are reversed between both works, the message that independent women are viewed as ‘monsters’ remains the same. The ways in which women are perceived to be reliant on men in order to be happy and healthy, are not only exaggerated but dramatized to portray the absurdity of society’s conception of women, thus provoking the demand for change.

Angele Wen

5/12/2018 01:09:03 am

TOPIC I
Similarly, but very differently, female characters in both MARNIE and FRENZIE are feminists trying to escape from men. They fight for their freedom. Marnie constantly wants to escape from Mark, her fiancé. He tries to always keep her in his eyesight by forcing her to live with him. He even tries to imprison her in a room on a cruise, where she cannot escape. The audience only feels happy for her when she is seen riding freely on a horse. It seems like she is finally escaping, like a wild animal released back to the nature. Similarly, Brenda tried to escape from Rusk before she got raped and murdered. She was also imprisoned, but in her case, it is in her own property and not at the man’s house. The murder makes the audience hate Rusk and it makes him the antagonist of the film, while Mark is seen as an antihero. He doesn’t seem perfect, but one can give him credits for having good intentions. Just as the narrator in “The Yellow Wall Paper” by Charlotte Perkins-Gilman, all these women are locked and not allowed to go where they want. They are under a man’s control. All these works show how men mistreat women. They are locked by force and not allowed to have total freedom. They are under control and have all tried escaping, but did not succeed.

Emily Trankarov

5/12/2018 01:23:42 pm

Topic #2

Charlotte Perkins-Gilman’s “Yellow Wallpaper” outs the tyrannical effects of social misogynist abuse on women. The female narrator is kept under lock and infantilized by her husband. She’s patronized and forbidden from with writing and expressing any thought. That element of the story can be interpreted as the husband’s fear towards his wife’s independent thinking and intellectual abilities, expressed through prohibiting any actions which might encourage it. On a larger scale, he’s (as were most men during that time due to the social contexts of the period) afraid of strong, thinking women. Similarly, although succumbing to fatal fates, the women in Alfred Hitchcock’s Frenzy speak the voice feminism. It is undeniable that aggression and harassment on women is omnipresent in the film’s plot. Yet, I’d argue that the way it does so ultimately shines a negative light on and condemns such actions. The predator’s (neck-tie murderer a.k.a. Bob Rusk) victims are all independent, strong and successful in their own way. They are women he feels pleasure in making vulnerable and annihilating. Perhaps the pleasure he gets from committing those crimes is the satisfaction of reasserting his “manliness” he feels jeopardized in their presence. The importance in the weapon of choice being a neck-tie is not to be overlooked. A tie, which is a quintessential symbol for ‘masculinity’ and male, happens to be what chokes the women to death. It’s a possible allegory of sorts for the oppressive patriarchal society which figuratively suffocates women. As a result, the women in both the story and the film continuously shift from monsters to victims. Creature creating a sense of terror within potentially emasculated men and victims to their male oppressors.

David Boghen

5/12/2018 03:00:05 pm

Topic 2

Women’s resistance to patriarchy is evident yet subtle in FRENZY, and each female character has their own way of resisting. Because of the societal construct that is in place, women are not able to openly express the oppression that they feel. They are sometimes incapable of realizing the oppression they are living themselves, because it is so ingrained in society. This is the main argument that Perkins-Gilman makes, and while the narrator of “The Yellow Wall Paper” internalizes her oppression, women in FRENZY have other ways of fighting back. Brenda’s initial reaction to Rusk’s advancements is to reject him, but once she sees that the only way that she can get away is to accept to go to lunch with him, she does so. Accepting to do a man’s bidding is a form of passive resistance, which can be related to the narrator of Perkins-Gilman’s text, who lets her husband lock her in a room and prevent her from seeing her children. Being passive in these scenarios is more of a resistance than being active because if the women are actively resistant, they would still be unable to overcome the oppression that they face from men. Therefore, being active would only reinforce the dominance that men have. The men are more comfortable when the women resist, as is shown when Rusk says, “I like you to struggle. A lot of women like to struggle.”

Idia Boncheva

5/12/2018 05:45:44 pm

Topic 3:
The fact that both Hitchcock’s FRENZY and Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” use the city of London to frame their narratives provides insight on how people, or in this case characters, can be influenced by their environment. Everything about big cities such as London—from their gloomy weather to the vast population or the constant rumble of ‘progress’—create claustrophobic conditions where Gothic drama thrives. Here, the confinement can be a metaphor for oppressive normalization. Indeed, in FRENZY, “the neck-tie murder”, who became famous for sexually assaulting women prior to strangling them, is not taken seriously by the public. Because of the newspapers who like to give nick-names to serial killers and some characters who think mass murderers are “so good for the tourist trade”, even the viewer is given the impression that crimes are a business opportunity, rather than a real threat (FRENZY). Consequently, the murderer isn’t only a symbolic figure associated with the oppression of industrialization, it is also normalized by the population. Parallelly, Jackson creates a version of ‘Jack the Ripper’ “that is now simply part of an aggregate ripper”. Although there is only one true criminal in her short-story (Jack the Ripper), the bystanders who refuse to help a girl passed out in the street contribute to the decay of human morals to an equivalent degree. Therefore, Jackson and Hitchcock provide us with an interpretation of these characters as magnifying glasses for the oppressive climate of the urban.

Bridget Griffin

5/12/2018 08:16:50 pm

Topic II:
Even with the presence of a murderer, it is difficult to pinpoint a specific villain in Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper”: the failure of multiple men to help an unconscious girl on the sidewalk when implored to do so, despite being revealed as a plot to determine the value of the murderer’s potential victim, is very indicative of the story’s patriarchal social climate. Similarly, in Alfred Hitchcock’s FRENZY, Rusk, a serial killer known for strangling women with his necktie (literally suffocating them with a patriarchal symbol), is encouraged to do so by his environment. There is much more emphasis put on the interest that people have in this murderer than there is on the loss of his victims: the stand reads “another necktie strangling” rather than “another woman strangled”. This emphasis put upon the masculine act of murder rather than the feminine loss of a life is continued in the movie’s focus upon the man falsely accused for these murders rather than the women murdered.The supposed ‘happy ending’ of this movie consists of Rusk being found to be the real killer, allowing for Blaney to be freed: another man’s victory. Meanwhile, the corpse of Rusk’s latest victim lies in his bed, just as the women in “Jack the Ripper” lie, unconscious. This portrayal of women aims to illuminate the severity of their oppression: in FRENZY, the killer is caught; in “Jack the Ripper”, he isn’t. The problem is solved in neither: there is still a dead woman lying in bed, forced into passivity.

Hannah Di Francesco

5/12/2018 08:47:24 pm

Topic II
At the first glance it may seem that the women in FRENZY and the girl in “Jack the Ripper” are just the victims of a psychopath. One could be led to thinking the only issue is the killer, but these issues go a lot deeper. These works show women who could seem weak, but who are actually very strong characters. Brenda started her own business and became successful with it. Babs also works, and she does not tolerate any comments from her boss. The reader does not know much about the girl from “Jack the Ripper”, but she still survives completely on her own. All of these women are victims of the patriarchal and capitalist society that is still present to this day. This can be shown very clearly in FRENZY, where the tool that is used to kill is a necktie. This necktie represents the white businessman, who is usually also pretty well-off. The disregard of the public towards the murders is also a sign of this corrupt society. Nobody, in both stories, cares for the victims and just lets them go with a strange man even though they do not know the true intentions of this man. Since, women are the targets, they do not take the murders as seriously. For example, when rape is considered a silver lining to the murders in FRENZY and everybody lets Jack take the unconscious girl without batting an eye at all of his questions. So, these women show the issues that are present within society and they did not die because of weakness. They died because nobody wants to change the society that is focused on men and money. Nobody is ready to denounce the flaws of society and this is why these murders could happen.

Lyna Ikram Bayou

5/12/2018 09:10:41 pm

III. Urban Gothic

Hitchcock’s FRENZY and Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” share similarities regarding the way their use of urban setting. In the film, the “neck-tie killer” kills women by strangling them with his tie after raping them. In the film, one striking scene is the shot after Rusk kills Babs in his apartment. The audience follows the action, witnessing the murder inside the room, and is then transported outside of the building, into the busy streets of London. The citizens appear to be minding their own business. People living in urban cities tend to act this way: everyone is too busy with work and their own problems, buried in the industrial pollution and capitalism, to pay attention to others around them. This also takes place in Jackson’s story, when the killer asks the men inside of the bar about the girl laying on the street, unconscious. They act as total bystanders, unwilling to help the man, who appears to want to help the young girl. Such behavior, in both works, can be attributed to the isolation and lack of human connections caused by industrialization and urbanization. Another scene worth mentioning is the opening shot of FRENZY. In this scene, the audience first watches a beautiful portrait of London: big, glorious, perfect. As the camera gets closer to the city, it shows insights of the reality of city-life: there is pollution, noise, dirt and this time, even a dead body. This completely changes the image of beautiful London. Similarly, in “Jack the Ripper”, everything seems perfect at first: a good man wants to help an unconscious girl, to save her from harm. He brings her home, puts her into bed and everything seems perfect… Until he kills her. Shirley Jackson, like Hitchcock, is reminding the audience of the reality of big cities: decades of pollution, isolation and crime. The reality of something we try to deny and hide.

Jade Karakaly

5/12/2018 09:22:31 pm

Topic II

Similarities and differences may be established between Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” and Alfred Hitchcock’s FRENZY on the way women are represented in both works. A strong difference is how women’s success and power are portrayed differently in Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” compared to Hitchcock’s FRENZY. Indeed, Jackson’s short story, there are two women characters, and both seem to not have any power or influence over what is happening around them or in the society. One character is the victim of the protagonist’s murder. The first time the latter sees her, she is described as “so drunk that when he shook her and tried to sit her up she sagged backward” (Jackson, 266). It is clear that she is in the victim position and doesn’t have control over anything that is happening around her. In Alfred Hitchcock’s FRENZY, the main woman character, Brenda, is an independent woman that doesn’t need a male presence in her life as she runs a matchmaking business. She even invites her ex-boyfriend, Richard Blaney, out for dinner who ends up spending the night at a Salvation Army shelter. This is not common in a stereotypical patriarchal society. What’s similar in both works is how the male character always end up having the last word. In Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” the male character has power over the young girl who has the role of the victim. He is the one who seems to be doing the good thing by trying to save her from the city’s dangerous streets, but he ends up killing her at the end of the story. The fact the before killing her, he puts her picture in his pocket maybe shows how that she is now his victim, he owns her, and he may do whatever he wants with her body. Similarly, in FRENZY, Bob Rusk, Blaney’s best friend, is portrayed as a serial killer, and his victims are more often than not women. In both works, whether the women take the powerful or successful role which is the case in FRENZY or the women take the powerless and weak character role which is the case in “Jack the Ripper”, they always seem to succumb under the patriarchal society in which they live.

Doha Ani

5/12/2018 09:54:40 pm

Topic 1
The female characters in Frenzy, Marnie and “The Yellow Wallpaper” are always put in a passive position, due to the patriarchal society they live in, where all of their decisions are made by powerful man. In both Hitchcock’s movies when the female characters are successful and independent there is always a man that will come and put an end to it, almost putting them back on the “right road” as being a passive being who meets all the standards established by men’s. For example, Marnie was successful in the sense that she was never caught stealing and she was managing her own life without the interference of any man, but everything collapsed when Mark forced her to be his, putting an end to her freedom by marrying her. In Frenzy Branda was the personification of the strong, successful, independent businesswomen but she was killed by Rusk, more than Rusk she was killed by the patriarchal society she was evolving in, stopping her from being a successful autonomous woman. The main character of the “The Yellow Wallpaper” was also kept away, by her husband, from anything that involved any cultural or intellectual activity as they were labeled as “man field of specialties”. In these three stories, we can see how the men’s played a major role in stripping women from their freedom on all levels. The men’s actions can be read as an embodiment of the patriarchal society that will always be in the way of women’s freedom.

Wendy Lopez Ponce

5/12/2018 10:02:11 pm

The change of scenery from a house to a city, London, in Alfred Hitchcock’s film FRENZY, supports the portrayal of a patriarchal and capitalistic society, just like Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper”. The use of an urban city allows an expansion of the concepts wider impact on society and not just in one’s home. It is noticeable that the presence of the “neck tie murderer”, in FRENZY, is taken as a banal event just like demonstrated by the two men at the bar. When they say “so good for the tourist trade” it is a clear depiction of the importance society puts on profits over the individual. Followed by the importance of status represented by using the tie as a symbol of success and men’s superiority to women, it amplifies the movie’s back and forth quest for high social position. During the movie we notice that Rusk puts out this overly “bourgeois” image even though he is a part of the middle class, but he does so for people, such as Blaney, to see him as respectful and wealthy. As for Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper”, again with the need of a high social status, she represents this patriarchal society through all the men aware of the girl’s presence that neglect her need for help because in their eyes she doesn’t deserve it since she is just another drunk satisfying the sailors. The use of an urban gothic setting is what allows a wider understanding that conflicts of superiority and inferiority between man and woman, rich and poor go beyond the four walls of a house, that they are all around a city portrayed as vibrant such as London, for FRENZY, and New York, for “Jack the Ripper”, allowing the reveal of it’s not so good and vibrant image.

5/12/2018 10:03:58 pm

III. Urban Gothic

Ameera Kabir

5/12/2018 10:14:17 pm

The representation of the films’ women can be analyzed in parallel with the representation of the men. The image of Mark Rutland’s looming shadow as he confronts MARNIE while she’s horse-riding evokes the narrator’s husband in “The Yellow Wallpaper” in his overbearing grasp on how she spends her time “There comes John, and I must put this away,--he hates to have me write a word.” Whereas Charlotte Perkins-Gilman narrator does not have the language to protest her husband’s domination, the final scene evokes the image of a wild, and unrestrained resistance against him. She manages to express her emotions without vocalizing them, however her fate seems dark and/or undetermined. The open ending suggests either liberation from her oppressive marriage or forced rehabilitation; whether or not her voice is truly being heard is unknown. MARNIE ends on a different, but equally tragic note: she seemingly concedes to Mark and agrees to be with him, since she would rather “be with [him] than go to prison”. Arguably, she is not surrendering to him, but biding her time. No part of the film insinuates that she loves him, since her passionate encounter with her mother momentarily caused her to revert to a childlike state, and therefore she has not given up, but is in the process of recovery. When compared to each other, Marnie’s timid manner could be seen as a continuation of the narrator’s episode: after a fight, there must be time to heal. The ending of both works implies both tragedy and hope in their depiction of a woman’s resistance to a patriarchal force.

5/12/2018 10:17:34 pm

FIRST SENTENCE CHANGE: The representation of the titular character in MARNIE and the narrator in “The Yellow Wallpaper” can be analyzed in parallel with the representation of the men that oppress them.
TOPIC: Representations of Women, 2

Kathleen Fabella

5/12/2018 10:33:16 pm

Topic #3
The Urban Gothic in both stories reflects the attitude of the people in the city towards murder and the victims. In FRENZY and “Jack the Ripper”, both stories take place in the city of London, but at different times of the day. In FRENZY, Rusk, the necktie murderer, kills his victims in broad daylight in any place he finds to be the “perfect spot” for his crime. On the other hand, the killer in “Jack the Ripper” murders the poor, drunken girl he encountered outside the bar during the night. Both of these stories come to show that murder does not have a schedule, that it could be done surrounded by big crowds walking around early in the morning or isolated in streets late at night, but they all lead to the same result, murder. Despite the different surroundings of both stories, they all make the victimized women feel the same, helpless and alone. That once the killers take a hold of them, despite living in a big, busy city such as London, the women are somehow found isolated from the people, from the empty and old apartment of the teenage girl to the shot of Bab’s murder where inside the apartment of Rusk is quiet to the loud, industrial sounds of London, showing how Bab’s scream couldn’t have been heard. Both places are described to be tiny or non important, like Rusk’s tiny home which seems extremely different from his performed bourgeoisie or the girl’s house described as ugly and not being taken care of. These places reflect unto how the killed women feel: forgotten and small in this big city full of people who couldn’t care less. That they are so blinded by that “London fog” that they don’t notice or even pay attention to what is truly going on in the city.

Ben Carson

5/12/2018 11:49:20 pm

Jackson’s story titled “Jack the Ripper” and Hitchcock’s film MARNIE are similar in many different ways. Both have very important female characters who are treated very poorly. As mentioned many times in class, it would be easy to label this film misogynistic because of how the women are treated. In both stories, the victims don’t know that they’re victims. In both films, a male character essentially has complete control over the main female character. In MARNIE, the male character genuinely thinks that he is helping her, whereas in “Jack the Ripper” he knows very well that he is going to kill her, but the audience is unaware. In Charlotte Perkins-Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper,” the main character is mentally quite ill. Her husband takes it upon himself to “heal her,” but ends up causing more damage, just like in MARNIE. Both “The Yellow Wallpaper” and MARNIE demonstrate the dangers of toxic masculinity and are critiques of a patriarchal society. In both stories, the woman starts off as a strong character, but the intervention of their husband causes them to become progressively weaker, and in the end causing a total mental breakdown.

Taina Dushime

5/12/2018 11:56:04 pm

Topic 3
In Alfred Hitchcock’s FRENZY, Blaney’s defense against his accusation of murder is as disregarded as the almost unconscious girl sitting on the sidewalk in Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper”. These representations of people being neglected when they call for help demonstrates how people have internalized the capitalist way of doing business as a way to rule their interactions and relationships with others. In FRENZY, London is shown as the capitalist city it is in which the dense population is put against one another in their pursuit of success. Therefore, everyone is seen choosing to mind their own business and avoiding meddling in others’ problems. This is seen as when Blaney’s friend, Johnny, brings him into his apartment for a little stay, the woman who lives with him tells him “You’re a bloody fool Johnny get yourself involved like this” and later says “I wash my hands of the matter”. This shows how this person closes the door on him instead of helping because doing so would mean risking her own safety and comfort. This refusal to help others in need brought by capitalism is also reflected in Jackson’s short story as no one cares for the young girl said to get drunk every day. According to the capitalist society, she is a failure, someone who, if helped, will only eat up money without providing any profits. For instance, even the girl’s neighbor who seems to know her very well does not want to have anything to do with her and does not care to help even when seeing how damaged she is. The indifferent reactions to people calling for help in these works suggest that capitalism has taught the citizens that there are some with who you do not do business because they will cause you more losses than gains and that regardless of how helpless they are.

Ruhullah Muhtat

6/12/2018 12:02:32 am

Topic III:

In Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” houses act as barriers to the outside world where the protagonist can show his true self to the reader. Indeed, the objective view from the story keeps the reader away from the protagonist mind in such a way that the reader hardly doubts of the main character’s intentions. Once the man brings the girl in her house, the his “kind man” fake identity falls off and he displays his murderous desires. Therefore, entering the girl’s house in “Jack the Ripper” is entering the protagonists mind. Hitchcock’s FRENZY showcases a similar use of the houses as a wall between superficial and real identity. For instance, when Rusk enters Mrs. Blaney’s office, she is stripped away from the outside world and experiences, along with the viewer, the masochistic identity of Rusk. In fact, Mrs. Blaney knows she must create contact back again with the outside world to escape from Rusk and she tries to do so many times, but she fails. In Babs murder, Rusk uses his house to freely metamorphose into his masochistic tie-murderer identity and although the viewer doesn’t get to see the Babs’ murder scene, having seen Mrs. Blaney’s, the movie lets the viewer imagine the scene. Interestingly, in the detective’s case this parallel seems contradictory. In his house, the detective is faking his love for his wife’s food while in his office, he gets to be himself and enjoys eating what he truly loves, however, the detective doesn’t seem to be happy in his current relationship, therefore, his most intimate place is not his house but his office.

Avraham Cymbalist

6/12/2018 09:01:55 am

In MARNIE and FRENZY, women are represented as objects to be conquered and controlled by men. These women still put up a fight even though all odds are against them, this is what makes these two movies feminist texts. Jack the Ripper relates to these movies in a different way. Since it is not a feminist text it contrasts with the movies. Through this comparison, what makes the two films feminist texts will be more apparent. In Shirley Jackson’s short story, the male character “pulled the girl out of the taxi by taking hold of her legs and dragging her until he could put her feet on the ground”. This passage makes it evident that the young girl was unconscious and unable to put up a fight. This is the difference between the story and the two movies. In MARNIE, the female protagonist is resisting against Mark. She confronts him and sarcastically ask him “you think you’re Freud? Nietzsche?”. The rape scene in FRENZY is very similar, when Rusk is in Babs office, she tells him to leave and tries to call the police. This resistance is the most important aspect of feminism or any cause worth fighting for. In MARNIE and FRENZY, this resistance doesn't help the women. The failure of resistance creates a comment on how sadistic men who harm women in many ways can be widely adored by the people around them

Marilena Mignacca

6/12/2018 04:27:27 pm

Topic 2
Both Frenzy and Shirley Jackson’s “Jack the Ripper” display a dominance society of men who look at women to be worthless and weak. In “Jack the Ripper” we can see that the men at the bar couldn’t care less about the intoxicated, unconscious woman who is laying on the sidewalk, they have no honour of helping her out. One man even suggest to “call the mayor” (Jackson, 267) instead of helping her out himself. It’s clear that they see this woman as someone who doesn’t have enough worth to be helped out. The man who kills her seems at first to be helping her home and caring for her until he takes out his knife and does the complete opposite. This can be compared to Frenzy of how Rusk is seen as a helping friend towards Blaney, he has sympathy for him when he hears that he’s lost his job and offers him food, the audience is completely blindsided as we come to find out that Rusk is the neck-tie killer. In Frenzy, everyone is focused on how the neck-tie killer is a ruthless and cruel person for doing such a thing to innocent women, but like in “Jack the Ripper”, the patriarchy in their societies deems them all to be just as horrible, such as the two men who are sitting in the bar who come to realize that the killer rapes is victims before murdering them, they say with smirks on their faces “it’s nice to know that every cloud has a silver lining”. In both the movie and story they not only focus on the killers themselves and the power they persist to have over their victims but also the power that persists in their society and that the killers are not the only monsters.

Kristopher Woofter

12/12/2018 04:44:03 pm

Hello, all, and welcome to the final post!

I want to say that you're all working well with some difficult texts this time around. MARNIE, FRENZY, and the stories by Jackson and Perkins-Gilman are, as some of you say, texts that frame a kind of oppression that can seem invisible to the victim, until it's too late.

Where I would caution you in the future is to be careful not to make claims that easily categorize the texts as "feminist," particularly since there are many kinds and camps of feminism, and to use the word without saying something about how you're using it to frame your thoughts sets things off in a critically unclear way. You also risk essentializing the text--imposing a reading on it that it might encourage, but that leaves out many other possible meanings, subtleties, and (perhaps most importantly) contradictions.

Beginning with Victoria's claim that there are in FRENZY multiple potential murderers here (as in the Jackson, where we have a kind of everyday, domestic "Ripper"), the most careful responses in this vein--the ones that looked at the texts as saying multiple things--were Emily's, Brigit's, David Boghen's, Hannah's, and Ameera's.

Cheers, all.

English

Leave a Reply.

INSTRUCTIONS

Archives

Categories