| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Gustafsson, Tommy, 1969-
(författare)
-
En fiende till civilisationen : manlighet, genusrelationer, sexualitet och rasstereotyper i svensk filmkultur under 1920-talet
- 2007
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The setting for this study is Swedish film culture of the 1920s, which has been studied with a focus on representations of masculinity and gender relations according to four themes: 1) children and youth 2) fatherhood and love 3) sexuality and popularity 4) ethnicity and racial stereotyping. The rise of new consumer culture in the first decades of the 20th century created turmoil between traditional and modern values, not least when it came to conceptions of gender. Studies on masculinity have often directed its efforts towards writing a history of ideals, bound by the concept of hegemonic masculinity; a concept that exclude women as insignificant for the social construction of masculinity. One ambition with this thesis has been to counter the long-lasting concept of hegemonic masculinity, and in the process, try to build a bridge between men and women studies. One other ambition has been question the canonisation of the “Golden Age” of Swedish silent filmmaking by introducing the concept of “the pluralism of film”, and by using a vast material including: Swedish feature films, reviews, articles from fan magazines and trade paper, screen plays, censorship cards, official reports, etc; thereby circumventing the concept of film as “art” in order to focus on film as representation in a more reliably way. One conclusion is the revelation of the diversity that surrounds social constructions of masculinity and gender relations in both film culture and society. In addition, Swedish film of the 20s hardly contained any male characters that upheld the hegemonic ideal, giving way to a more prominent presence of strong female characters, often in the shape of the New Woman. Women did as well have a great influence on the formation of masculinity. However, a notion of a Swedish normative masculinity became visible when contrasted with numerous racial stereotypes, such as malicious representations of Black people and Travellers. The emphasis on gender relations, rather than on ideals, has also contributed to a wider understanding of gender, where criteria such as generation, class, ethnicity and sexuality ought to be included. When it comes to the canonisation of the “Golden Age”, a strong notion exists about the integrated use of nature in film narratives as being a Swedish national trait, when in fact this could be linked only to a few films. If one would point out a trait that permeates Swedish film of the 1920s, it would not be the use of nature, but instead the flagrant racism and xenophobia.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Gustafsson, Tommy, 1969-
(författare)
-
I sekulariseringens skugga : Manlighet och religiös tematik i svensk och amerikansk 1920-talsfilm
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Tidskrift för genusvetenskap. - Malmö : Malmö högskola, Studentcentrum. - 1654-5443 .- 2001-1377. ; :3-4, s. 91-113
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- There existed a great ambivalence concerning masculinity and its relationship to religion in the decades around the last turn of the century. The historical encoding process of religion, from gender neutral to feminine, have in general been interpreted as something solely negative for the constitution of masculinity during this period. Consequently, religious encoded masculinities have been deemed as deviations from the norm; as a negative feminisation. This assumption does not consider secularisation as an ongoing process, instead taking secularisation for granted when in fact Christianity and religiousness were still very much alive throughout Western societies. The focus for this article have been to examine images of Christ and Christ-like characters in Swedish and American films, and also how ordinary religious male characters were received, and what functions these images of religious manhood performed in these films, and society at large. The clear tendency was that a modern, more active masculinity was on its way to oust an older, more passive masculinity based on spiritual values – manifested, for example, in that films with clear religious themes were enacted in a distant past. However, the contemporary reception clearly shows that the images of these religious male characters were not feminised due to religion. Instead, spiritualised forms of masculinities functioned as a legitimate alternative alongside modern masculinity. This indicates that religion was not yet essentially encoded as ‘feminine’. Although some forms of masculine encoded emotions were controlled in the public, this did not at all include softer expressions of emotions that in earlier research have been explained as signs of femininity in relation to an ideal masculinity. Conversely, the predicament for spiritualised masculinities occurred when narratives included a woman (the love story), which unavoidably tilted the focus from the soul to the masculine body, thereby (hetero)sexualising the male character in a way that often worked as a feminisation.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Gustafsson, Tommy, 1969-
(författare)
-
Nationell ära och manlighet i Karl XII (1925) : - en historisk analys
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Scandia. - Lund : Historiska institutionen. - 0036-5483. ; 71:1, s. 46-76
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- During the 1920s, when the Swedish defence was under heavy debate, military and conservative forces on the right tried to turn the Swedish public opinion towards a climate more in favour of the defence by producing a big budget war film – Karl XII. In several senses the film became a great success. In Sweden the attendance figures were as high as one million (of a population of six) and the film was also exported to 19 countries. In addition to that the film was also hailed, by a an almost unanimous critical body, as a great Swedish artistic success. Karl XII was seen as a credit for the Swedish film production, and by that it also contributed to the Swedish national honour in the competition with foreign film production, especially American. With a gender perspective on this matter this artistic success was characterized as a specific male achievement by the Swedish reviewer’s. In some cases explicitly, but overall implicitly since this success was connected to the national honour with it’s male connotations. However, the propaganda piece that Karl XII was meant to be didn’t turn the Swedish opinion around. Both the right and the left wings in Swedish political life showed a clear awareness about the film’s underlying motive, and in spite of the success, Karl XII could only awaken patriotism among groups where it already existed. The same year as the film had it’s premier, 1925, the Swedish Parliament also took the decision to heavily cut the defence budget. With the notion that Karl XII was a propaganda piece meant to strengthen the Swedish defence, and the fact that this film is the only fully produced war film in the history of Swedish filmmaking, it becomes an interesting object for an examination of representations of masculinities in Sweden in the 1920s. A close reading of four of the film’s male characters, the effeminate dandy Hans Küsel, the boyish man Lasse Ulfclou, and the two rivals Charles XII and Peter the Great, showed that the film included a wide gallery of masculinities which didn’t always correspond with it’s articulated propaganda purpose to strengthen the Swedish defence, and in extension, to harden the Swedish masculinity in general. The reason for this lies not in the fact that the filmmakers and the initiators failed entirely with their purposes. In one important sense they did succeed. By avoiding to apply every male character in the film with traits of ideal hegemonic masculinity, they managed to produce a contemporary and complex representation of male gender and it’s mutual relations. And even though the film didn’t influence the complicated political struggle over the Swedish defence, they produced a film that worked just because it contained credible male characters with whom the contemporary audience could relate. Had all of the film’s characters been as unreal as Charles XII, with his strong hegemonic masculinity, the audience would most certainly have felt alienated and not bought a ticket for the film, but the audience didn’t fail Karl XII.
|
|
