  |
||
|
||
|
Title: Twist Barbie: Lynn Sigel dreams of plastic feminism Rating: 2.5 out of 4 Reference: Director, Amy Shuba; producer, Dee Dee Halleck. Library of Congress subjects: Barbie dolls Toys--Social aspects--United States Sociology subjects: Feminisms & feminist analyses Kids & youth Popular culture in North America Reviews and Numerical Ratings 4 I love this one – it’s very excellent! & thought-provoking! The narrator looks at how Barbie can be used as a vehicle for feminism, can be empowering to girls & young women, & how she is a metaphor for “plastic feminism”: i.e., how feminism can be just as flexible as Barbie. Overall, the narrator’s trying to demonstrate that young girls aren’t just passive pawns to the image of Barbie as a subjugated female, but rather, they’re actively involved in resisting, redefining & interpreting their reality (e.g., there’s a sleepover shown in which two girls have their Barbies kiss, there’s a sense that Ken is pretty much a non-entity). Barbie can also be used to teach young girls about feminism - e.g., there’s a Dr. Barbie, Barbies of colour - and this is possible because she’s made by a forward-thinking company where most of the executives are women. The narrator creatively shows how the media have pitted feminists against Barbie and how society buys into the media’s depiction that feminists hate femininity & those who find pleasure in it. Not only women, but also gay men, are using Barbie as a vehicle for empowerment. The narrator shows how the aesthetics & politics of gay men’s culture are coverty expressed in Barbie magazine, with a “hotbed of metaphors for coming out of the closet”. Also, Barbie allows gender-bending. This is a really difficult video, she goes really fast and I had to rewind it and ask, what is she saying? The sociological expressions the narrator uses are quite advanced, and if you haven’t been exposed to a lot of feminist theory you wouldn’t understand it. For students in 3rd & 4th year in Women’s Studies and Sociology. Kisrene McKenzie (undergraduate) 1 This video caused quite a stir. Funnily, the title seemed to irk the Graduate Workshop’s attendees even before a clip was ever shown. Most workshop participants liked Kisrene McKenzie’s written review/analysis but disagreed with it after watching the video. The majority of participants felt that the woman narrating the video should definitely not be given the last word; it was reiterated, by many, that the message in this video needed to be taken up very critically. Viewers felt that the narrator bandied around “masculinity” and “femininity” without effectively evaluating them. Treating “Earring Ken” as a representative of the gay community was considered inappropriate and damaging. Many viewers felt this video should never be shown simply because of the language used. Others found it incredibly boring and said that the scope was too limited. Some graduate students mocked the characterization of “career” Barbies as progressive, since none of these Barbies could be more than a size one. Students were maddened by the fact that there was no critique of size in this video. Body image received no analysis and this was a bone of contention for most. The cinematic form was criticized too: the narrator could not conceal that she was reading an essay, and her pauses and formal speech annoyed many viewers. Graduate Workshop 2.5 Possibly too advanced for new undergrads? Also, quite difficult to hear narrator. Still, I found the topic very interesting & the narrator’s comments intriguing. Sarah Rogers 1 If you want to turn your class off of feminism this will do it! This oh-so clever-intellectual humour views like a badly edited paper (which I might add she is clearly reading-painfully- in the Barbie fun-house) and I admit I had to turn it off. (How many of our students even know what the Phil Donahue show is?) There is much better written and visual material about Barbie which incorporates young feminists in the Canadian context. Patti Phillips 3 The information in this video lacks clarity, and its content is not straightforward. Topic-wise, it would be a great choice for our sociology and/or feminist-related courses and would best suit students from the 3rd & 4th years. I must advise that when you watch this video, it will feel never-ending. Although a lot of facts are presented, the narrator is not focusing on her main job: to educate her audience on the topic of culture and feminism. If the narrator is rambling on and confusing her audience, leaving the audience in an exhausted state, students will tune her out and not be educated by her. We should give her credit for her great research, but she should find another interesting way of tackling the job. Also, although there were many different viewpoints presented, the video does show a sense of bias. Minh Hoang (undergraduate) 3 Intellectually rigorous arguments in what’s basically a conference paper, delivered amidst life-size Barbie scenes. Funny, colourful, held our attention. Would be better with headings for the main sections - instructor could provide a summary. Lecture topics: high/low culture, analysis of cultural artefacts, feminisms. Kathy Bischoping & Rebecca Raby 3 Poor video quality - poor colour & sound. Excellent
sociological narrative but the presentation is dull & visually uninteresting,
e.g., narrator lying on pink chiffon bed, talking at audience. Riley
Olstead
About the project | Book a video for class | Enter the Library Catalogue | Send us feedback | Back to main |
