Some may argue that the movie The General conforms to traditional patriarchal gender roles. Annabelle Lee, the heroine, is kidnapped (albeit inadvertently) by hostile soldiers and needs the heroic exploits of her lover to rescue her. She is portrayed as submissive to her father and brother, ineffectual in plotting her own escape (such as throwing a stick of wood into the train furnace or failing to stop the engine so her lover can board it), and often exhibiting domestic inclinations ( as when she sweeps the engine with a broom).
Do you agree with this picture of Annabelle Lee -- or is it more complicated? Is Annabelle a stereotypical damsel in distress or is she a more progressive figure? Is there something about her a feminist could admire? What is this film saying about gender roles?
There is no question that Annabelle Lee conforms to traditional patriarchal gender norms. The most striking example of this is probably her submission to her father and brother. She listens to them without question, most notably when it comes to only being able to be with a man in uniform. Not only does she break things off with Johnnie solely because he is not enlisted, but she also refuses to get back together with him, despite the fact that he rescued and saved her and the confederate army, until he is in uniform. While she might toe the line of gender norms when placed in extreme environments, Annabelle always reverts back to the traditional picture of a southern belle. However, this movie does portray Annabelle as more than just an incompetent doll. Just because her actions are confined within the lines drawn by the patriarchal society does not mean that those actions are insignificant. A very clear example of this is when she is able to make the train go backwards. This scene is particularly interesting because underneath the comedy of what happened, the message is rather progressive. Initially portrayed as a damsel in distress on a rogue train, Johnnie runs to save her. Yet, upon his arrival, Annabelle has realized how to operate this gigantic piece of machinery and actually goes backwards to save Johnnie. Yes, Annabelle does exhibit many domestic and submissive inclinations, but that is to be expected at the time. It is somewhat foolish to think that movie made in 1926 portraying the confederacy would have a strong and independent female character. Annabelle is by no means a typical damsel in distress, but that doesn’t necessarily mean she is “progressive.” While she does exhibit qualities outside of the realm of a typical damsel in distress, she always returns to her place within the confines of the traditional patriarchal gender roles.
ReplyDeleteThe portrayal of Annabelle in The General is more complicated than the traditional damsel in distress. Initially, she is helpless against her capture. She never tries to run away or foil the Union’s plans until Johnnie comes to save her. It is only then that she helps him stop the Union soldiers as they travel back South. There are many times where she messes up, making the situation worse. For example, when Johnnie sprays oil or gasoline onto the pile of wood he made on the bridge Annabelle accidently knocks over a piece of burning wood which lights the pile. Johnnie becomes trapped on the other side and must jump through the fire to get back to the train. She also does not always seem to know what to do with herself on the train. For instance, at one point she begins sweeping the train. Annabelle is portrayed for the majority of the movie as the classic damsel in distress.
ReplyDeleteHowever, she is also a progressive figure. There are many instances where Annabelle shows her intelligence and independence. She travels by herself to visit her father during a time period where the ideology is that women must be escorted by a man everywhere she goes. Annabelle also, while in the sack as they sneak onto the Union, tries to pull out the metal stake that connects the front of the train to the other train cars. This allows Annabelle and Johnnie to steal the train while leaving train cars in the way. She even recognizes that the Southerners thought Johnnie is a Union soldier before he did and needed to change so that they would not be shot. These instances show that Annabelle is intelligent and does not always need a man to tell her what to do. I believe The General shows through Annabelle that a woman can still be a damsel in distress but does not always need help from a man as much as believed.
While Annabelle at times is able to use basic human common sense in times when Johnnie fails to do so (when she notices his Union disguise, for instance), her character is in no way progressive or a symbol of feminist influence. Her overarching aura of innocence and unintelligence, even though she is well-intentioned, deliberately distracts the viewer from the few moments in which she is actually helpful to Johnnie’s purpose. For example, when she (accidentally) turns the train backwards—an action that would ideally help the situation—Johnnie has already crossed over a hill to catch up with the train, rendering her attempt to help useless and even detrimental to the cause. When she knocks the burning log onto the bridge, effectively starting a fire, she has also trapped Johnnie and significantly held back the couple’s progress. Even more suggestive to the message of women’s weakness in The General is Johnnie’s treatment of his ‘lover’ throughout the film. Though he shows outward love for the woman, evident when he chooses to save her upon finding her in the Union camp or when he strives to become a soldier to win her affection, Annabelle ultimately is a mere burden in his journey. When she ties rope between two trees in a delicate and innocent attempt to help Johnnie, he looks at her in disbelief and near amusement. Similar “eye-rolling” reactions are showed by Johnnie when Annabelle throws out a piece of firewood because it has a hole in it, and when she begins sweeping the train (which also demonstrates her inclination to domestic actions—another misogynistic theme). In this way, Johnnie discredits any of the few ‘heroic’ qualities of Annabelle and reduces her to an airy, mindless trophy to mark the eventual success of his gallant adventure. The General may demonstrate a woman’s humanistic ability to have ideas, but Annabelle’s character is ultimately overshadowed by a sexist persona of submission and uselessness.
ReplyDeleteAnnabelle Lee fits entirely within traditional gender norms. First, she is portrayed as being completely incompetent. Whenever Annabelle’s actions actually influence the events of the film, the effect is almost always negative. Some people argue that Annabelle is a capable woman. Proponents of this view point to the scene in the film where Annabelle is able figure out how to brake and reverse the train. However, this is an incorrect reading of the scene. Annabelle is only able to figure out how to reverse the train after Johnny has already fixed the problem by sliding down the cliff. In other words, she only created another problem for Johnny to solve. Moreover, although she is able to technically figure out how to stop the train, she seems to forget this in a following scene. On the bridge, when Johnny is trying to get back onto the train, Annabelle ends up getting the train to move forward, away from Johnny, and then has to reverse it again. Annabelle may have learned how to brake the train, but she only uses this skill at the wrong time. Another good example is when Annabelle accidentally sets fire to the bridge which forces Johnny to jump into the water. All in all, Annabelle’s significant actions end up only creating problems that Johnny must solve. Annabelle is constructed as an incompetent women who only creates problems for Johnny (a man) to solve. Finally, Annabelle also conforms to gender norms herself. At the beginning of the film, she tells Johnny that she doesn’t want to talk to him until he’s in uniform. Annabelle, thus falls into the societal mold for women to only marry a military man who fits society’s masculine norms.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is obvious to see the "Damsel in Distress" role for Annabelle in this film, there are slight signs of progression in her character throughout the movie. This proves that she is not a complete damsel in distress despite the fairly obvious signs that she is. In the beginning of the movie the damsel in distress role is very true. She is an innocent, helpless woman who is very beautiful and is captured by the bad guys. She has no success of escaping alone and can only be saved by her “knight in shining armor.” Although Johnny isn’t exactly a big strong man, he is still a male hero who she relies on to rescue her. Even after Johnny saves her, she still is helpless when they are running away from the northern train. The only difference between Annabelle and stereotypical damsel in distress characters in that Annabelle tries to help and continually get smarter. At the start of the chase, she tries to help but fails. She throws a tiny wood chip into the fire which doesn’t help the train at all and also doesn’t know how to drive the train which makes Johnny have to sprint through the woods to catch her. Even though she doesn’t help with either of these acts, she still attempts helping which most helpless women don’t even do. For example; there might be a princess riding on the back of a horse, holding onto her prince and watching him fight for her. In this film, Annabelle tries to help despite being a woman. By the end of the train chase she actually does help Johnny a lot. She learns to drive the train in reverse and learns how to stop it. If she hadn’t learned this the train probably would’ve ended up in the river! Although Annabelle relies on Johnny to save her and bring her away from danger, she becomes very beneficial to the escape mission and that is why it is not fair to call her a “Damsel in Distress.”
ReplyDeleteThere are some aspects where Annabelle perfectly portrays the typical damsel in distress, but there are also situation where she doesn't fit the picture. There are several occasions where she even outsmarts the men. An example of this is where she ties the rope to the two trees in an attempt to stop or slow down the northerners train from chasing her and Johnnie. Though this didn't work the way she intended it to, it eventually slowed them down and did pan out in her favor. All it took was limited energy of her simply tying a rope to trees, all this while Johnnie was putting so much effort into tossing large pieces of wood onto the train which wasn't working well at all. Though Annabelle has her moments outsmarting the men, she also had her moments where she perfectly fit the typical damsel in distress. An example of this is when both her and Johnnie tried to escape and she accidentally knocked the log onto the bridge which started a fire. This created a delay for them and even renders their process from escaping the Northerners. Also throughout the film the audience sees how Annabelle demonstrates this domestic inclination by sweeping when she's bored to keep herself entertained or feel useful. In conclusion, the film The General tries to portray Annabelle as a typical damsel in distress, but the closer the viewer pays attention to the movie, they'll see that Annabelle is smarter than appears. An argument could also be made that there is a bit of feminism in the film because in the examples for Annabelle, she is able to do things just as if not better than Johnnie her counterpart is. This could be the spark/beginning of a movement that will continue all the way up to modern times, all because of an innocent "damsel in distress" who knows how to take care of herself and outwit her opponent and even her crush Johnnie.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are certainly moments when it appears that Annabelle Lee is transcending past the typical role of females in society during the silent film era, these few moments are far outweighed by the overwhelming amount of moments in which Annabelle conforms to her traditional patriarchal gender roles as a weak, naïve woman. Admittedly, there are smaller scenes in the film that may suggest to a more complex representation of Anabelle’s role (such as the fact that she went to see her father on her own without the need for a male escort), but these minor events are nothing compared to the larger storylines that suggest Annabelle is a weak naïve woman. Annabelle is incredibly submissive to all the men in her family throughout the entirety of the film, doing whatever they say without question. Annabelle’s naivety is demonstrated when she attempts to escape from the clutches of the Union by throwing a stick of wood into the trains furnace. This scene in particular makes Annabelle seem incompetent to the audience, and sets the tone for Annabelle throughout the whole film as weak and gullible. Not only does Keaton make Annabelle conform to traditional patriarchal gender roles through huge themes and scenes in the movie, but also in more subtle ways. Even while captured, Annabelle has an inherit instinct it seems to act domestically whenever possible, as she sweeps the engine of the train with a broom. Between the large and obvious and even the smaller and more subtle scenes, Keaton makes it clear that Annabelle is your typical domestic, weak, and naïve woman of the silent film era.
ReplyDeleteThe character of Annabelle Lee absolutely fulfills the ‘Damsel in Distress’ stereotype, offering very little that a modern day feminist would find appealing. As posited by the question, Annabelle is submissive and incompetent at many points throughout the film. Firstly, The General reinforces gender roles towards the beginning when Annabelle refuses to see Johnny until he enlists in the Confederate Army – that a woman must be with a masculine man; one who defends his state. She is later kidnapped by Northern soldiers and can’t escape herself, so she requires some ‘hero’ to rescue her. However, her role becomes more complicated as the movie goes on. She learns how to drive the train forwards and backwards as Johnny runs alongside trying to get back on board. This is not actually helpful because each time she reverses the train’s direction, Johnny would have been able to get back on if not for her doing so. It is possible to see somewhat of a progressive female character here because she is able to accomplish the job of a train engineer, but the film still depicts her as ineffectual even in this situation, which undoes any merits of Annabelle’s success. Another segment of the movie where Annabelle may appear to be a progressive character is when she sets a trap for the Northern army’s train by typing a rope around two trees so that when they drove through, the trees would be uprooted and become entwined with the train. Even though this plan works, it still shows how she is subordinate to Johnny. Annabelle is only given time to do this because Johnny stops the train to collect wood for the engine. Therefore, Annabelle’s only true success comes in the film when Johnny ‘allows’ it, and she still portrays the ‘Damsel in Distress’ despite some signals that there might be more to her character.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the depiction of Annabelle Lee, in this movie, is more complex than just a simple damsel in distress. White, there are several scenes which depict her as weak and unintelligent there are also a few key scenes which contradict this initial assessment of her character. The portrayal of women during this time period was inferior and incapable of being an independent person. This is reflected in the movie with scenes such as when she is seen sweeping the train and only throwing small twigs into the train fire where Buster Keaton’s character was tossing large logs. Another, more subtle, depiction of her as an inferior female is her need for a strong male character to save her from her captors. While there may also be debate surrounding whether Buster Keaton is the perfect depiction of a strong male figure, he is her heroic savior in the end. Scenes like this reinforce the idea that Annabelle Lee is meant to be portrayed as a damsel in distress; however I think there are a few scenes which contradict that assumption. For example, Annabelle Lee is able to operate the train, moving it both forward and backwards. The intellectual requirements which allow a person to operate a train are far beyond that of what Annabelle Lee was believed to possess, and yet she is able to easily operate the train when Buster Keaton is not available. These contradicting opinions on Annabelle Lee’s capabilities lead the viewer to question whether this film reinforces typical gender roles or is shining a new light on how women should be viewed.
ReplyDeleteThis movie has many old aspects to it and, from what I can tell so far, is a very traditional silent film. I think it definitely fit the time that it was made in, but as for right now, in present day, it sets a terrible disposition for the role that women play. It seems to me as though “The General” works against the progressive idea of all women because Anabelle is very dependent on her savior and also, there are no other female figures in the entire movie. As stated in the prompt, Anabelle must wait for Johnnie Gray to save her from her captors and also cannot complete what seem to be the simplest tasks. This dependence on the male figure in the movie automatically makes me hesitant to accept that Anabelle is portraying a progressive figure. Even though there are some scenes when Anabelle may be a successful, female role model, in no way do those scenes outweigh the overall sense of the devastating role of women in the movie. Since Anabelle is not a very dynamic character and is also the only female in the movie, the audience does not have a chance to see her personality or other characteristics and it is difficult to see the important role of women in movies at all. In “The General”, I unfortunately see Anabelle as a flat character that has no greater purpose in the movie than to move the plot along. As I’ve previously said, I think that this type of female character was to be expected in the time this movie was made, but, in this day and age, no one would be interested in a movie where the female character is not treated as an equal.
ReplyDeleteIn The General, most of Annabelle Lee’s actions show that she is a stereotypical damsel in distress. In the beginning, she tells Johnnie, her partner, to enlist in the army. This shows that she wants her partner to be manly and just like every other man. The most obvious stereotype is that she is easily tied up, captured, and taken away and then rescued by her heroic lover. The only person that helped her escape was Johnnie; if Johnnie weren’t there, she would not have escaped. On their journey back, there are many other sexist examples: she can’t figure out how to operate or stop the train, even after many attempts. Annabelle also makes many mistakes that make her seem brainless or ditzy, such as throwing a small, worthless stick of wood into the train furnace, or accidentally catching the bridge on fire too early before Johnnie is on the train. Another example is when Annabelle starts sweeping the engine with a broom at an unnecessary time. This portrays domestic inclinations, saying that women only work in the home as housewives. Not all of the actions she performs are portraying her as a “damsel in distress” though. In one scene while the train is stopped, Annabelle comes up with a plan to slow down the people that are coming after them. She ties a rope to two trees so the train would run into it and have to stop. This shows that Annabelle has thought more deeply about how to get them to slow down by coming up with a more complex plan than just simply throwing something on the tracks.
ReplyDeleteI think that the interactions between Annabelle and the male figures in her life and much more complicated than they seem. Annabelle can be seen as stereotypical damsel in distress in many scenes, specifically in the scene when she and Johnny are attempting to burn down the bridge to stop the opposing sides supply train arriving to their destination. In the scene Johnny has stopped the train and has begun to lay excess wood on the tracks and pouring oil over it, as Annabelle is handing more wood to Johnny she accidently knocks over the piece of wood that is on fire, causing Johnny to be stuck on the opposite side of the tracks and forced to jump. However, Annabelle can also be seen as a more progressive figure in many scenes, especially when the train begins to move when she accidentally moves the lever however she then figures out how to make the train go in reverse, which is extremely impressive due to her lack of engineering knowledge and skill. I think that Annabelle could definitely be admired by feminists as she surprises Johnny by all the different tasks that she is able to complete and because she is capable of making her own decisions. I think in the end the film is saying that gender roles aren’t really something to focus on, the film was made to be a comedy meaning that all the characters made mistakes not just the women.
ReplyDelete