FOCUS FEATURES

Bewildered, not ‘Beguiled’

This
summer
saw
more

of
the
academic-discourse-

permeates-pop-culture
phenomenon
that’s
been

snowballing for the past few
years,
especially
on
social

media; one of the most obvious
examples of how polarizing
it can get was the discourse
surrounding Sofia Coppola’s
reboot of “The Beguiled.” And
yes, I’m still thinking about it
several months after the fact —
now that the dust has settled
(and I’ve wasted even more
of my time reading frenetic
think pieces) I have a more
synthesized idea of why I had
such a hard time articulating
my irritation with both the
film’s critics and champions.

“Beguiled” made Coppola

the second woman ever to
win
best
director
at
the

Cannes
Film
Festival,
and

several people praised it as the
feminist reboot we’ve all been
waiting for. Others completely
panned it. Always a sucker
for a period piece stirring up
contention, I walked into the
theatre intrigued.

I
walked
out
utterly

bemused.
Maybe
my

experience was ruined because
my roommate could not stop
giggling for the last 45 minutes
straight. Or maybe she was
right, and I need to look at it
purely as if it were played for
camp — but based on how many
people thought it was either
the feminist film of the year or
the worst decision Cannes ever
made, I don’t think so.

Coppola’s “Beguiled” takes

us into the small world of a
group of young women at an
all-girls boarding school in the
South during the Civil War.
Within the first few moments
of the film, one of the youngest
of the girls stumbles upon an
injured Union deserter, Cpl.
John McBurney (Colin Farrell,
“The Lobster”) and brings
him home with her to tend to
his wounded leg. Most of the
girls and young women are
fascinated with him, a couple
of the younger ones nursing
crushes while the oldest girl,
Edwina (Kristen Dunst, “The
Virgin Suicides”) appears to
fall in love, and Alicia (Elle
Fanning) appears to be in the
throes of a sexual awakening.
Both of their efforts are shut
down
by
Martha
(Nicole

Kidman) who is also more
interested in the soldier than
she lets on.

There
are
two
reasons,

as far as I could tell, why
people hailed it as one of the
feminist films of the year.
For one, Coppola turns the
ending of the original slightly
on its head, infusing it with
a little more confusion and a
little more castration revenge
fantasy; the women might have
the power, the film whispers
at you to believe. For another
thing, it portrays these young
women to have a little more
sexual
agency
than
the

original. More so-called sexual
empowerment.

Many of the loudest critics

of the film came at it from
a social perspective, rather
than a cinematic or aesthetic
one. Many scorned the idea
that this film chose to omit
the one character of color that
was in the original, arguing
that it made no sense for
a film about this period to
have no characters of color,
particularly
slaves
—
this

particular criticism has been
responded to by those who
argue that including a person
of color only as a tokenized
bearer of trauma would have
signified
more
harm
than

good.

There is absolutely valid

criticism
of
the
Southern

Gothic genre, as well as any
Civil War period piece that
could miss the mark. But “The
Beguiled” is not “Gone with the
Wind”; that is, it is not using
the Civil War as an aesthetic
backdrop to tell a different,
romanticized story. Rather, it is
— or shall I say, could have been
— a microcosmic portrayal of a
very particular group of people
during this era. It actually
wouldn’t be that unlikely for
slaves to have run off from a
property close to the end of
the Civil War, especially if it
was an estate without a white
man in charge, such as this
one. I have read about cases
where white women in charge
of plantations had freed slaves
for no other reason than they
were scared of rebellion. So the

overall premise that these six
young white women in this all-
women’s school would be alone
and doing their own work isn’t
far off the mark.

Now don’t get me wrong,

I
love
the
fulfillment
of

castration fantasies as much
as the next girl, and I get
the burning desire (no pun
intended) to show beyond all
measure that women, even
young women, also feel sexual
desire and had the agency in
some ways to act on that, even
in the era of the eyelash batting
Southern belles. I understand
the appeal of the character of
Alicia. But that in itself, even
if it were believable, wouldn’t
be nearly enough to give
validation to the idea that this
film is feminist. Because at the
end of the day, two, if not three,
of the main women in the film
are ready to throw each other
under the bus, desperate and
competitive to the point of
comicality for his approval and
attention.

This
film
isn’t
feminist

because it lacks completely
the grounding that a true
examination of these women’s
relationships with each other
would’ve looked like. Being
alone for months, if not years,
terrified every time Union
or
Confederate
men
came

by, would likely have bonded
them so closely together it
would be nearly impossible
for anyone to come between
any two of them, let alone all.
These women completely lose
their heads over a man; some
small sliver of so-called sexual
agency is not nearly enough to
gloss over that.

There
is
plenty
to

enjoy
about
“Beguiled”:

Aesthetically,
it’s
gorgeous.

But a reboot of a film isn’t
feminist just because it’s less
misogynistic than its original
source material, or because
it includes a weak attempt
at sexual empowerment that
honestly only caters to the
men — both the man in the
film and the male reviewers
who think themselves open-
minded for praising it as some
kind of feminist empower-trip.
And there’s plenty to criticize
too; but criticism of the film
itself as a story based on the
historical aspects of it only
really works if it is predicated
upon
accuracy,
not
value

judgements.

SOPHIA

KAUFMAN

GENDER & MEDIA COLUMN

SINGLE REVIEW

Annie Clark is now bicoast-
aly melancholic. Earlier this
week, the singer, who pre-
forms under the name “St.
Vincent,” released the sec-
ond single off Masseducation
— which now has an Oct. 13
release day.

“Los Ageless” is, in many
ways, a companion track
to the album’s first single,
“New York.” The title is, of
course, a riff on Los Ange-
les. Both are love songs and
lamentations, but while the
former deals with a love lost,
the latter contents with a
love never fully formed. “I
try to tell you I love and it
comes out all sick,” she sings
at the end of the song.

Her relationship with the
city is as vivid as it is compli-

cated. The city is drawn like
an abusive lover, but she’s
trapped there, lured in by
the sparkle and the sunsets
and the superstars. The sec-
ond verse paints images like
“Girls in cages playing their
guitars” and “In Los Ageless,
the waves they never break
/ They build and build until
you don’t have no escape.”

Off the heals of Melodrama,
producer Jack Antonoff and
his signature sound are hav-
ing a moment in pop music.
After “Look What You Made
Me Do” earlier this month, I
thought his punchy bassline

and hand clap prechoruses
were six feet under. But, it
turns out Taylor Swift is
dead and Jack Antonoff isn’t
going anywhere. The sticky
synth and twacking bassline
pull the best of ’80s pop,
while St. Vincent’s deep,
smoky vocals feel acutely
current.

The chorus is haunting —
“How could anybody have
you and lose you?” — she
begs again and again. It is,
in true St. Vincent fashion,
everything that good pop
music aspires to be. I can’t
get it out of my head. It’s
simple and infectious and,
yet, I haven’t completely fig-
ured it out yet.

- MADELEINE GAUDIN

LOMA VISTA

“Los Agleless”

St. Vincent

Loma Vista

INTERESTED IN JOINING ARTS?

E-mail arts@michigandaily.com for a copy of our application

INTERESTED
IN JOINING

DAILY
ARTS?

E-mail

arts@michigandaily.com

for a copy of our application

and information on applying.

6A — Friday, September 8, 2017
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com