Term Paper on "English Sexism and Misogyny"

Quoted Instructions for "English Sexism and Misogyny" Assignment:

Here is the assignment:

Now that you have read bell hook's "Sexism and Misogyny: who takes the rap?" and watched The Piano, it's time to test hooks' claim. Write an essay in which you explain to what e4xtent you agree or disagree with hooks that The Piano excites audiences withs uncritical portrayal of sexism and misgyny" Keep in mind that you are explaining how much and why you agree with hooks' above statement in order to enact your essay's purpose: to persuade your readers to see that the sexism and misogyny in The Piano are or are not portrayed as exciting and acceptable. Your essay must indicate and be built around this purpose.

This essay is asking you to do two things. First, decide whether or not- and how much- you agree with bell hooks' assessment of The Piano. Second, carefully build a detailed and supported explanation of why you feel as you do. IN order to construct a argument that is convincing, you must refer to appropriate passages in bell hook' text as well as to specific scenes in the film. Remember, you are not arguing for or against gagsta' rap music in general; don't get off-topic defending or dismissing the genre of rap music. Instead, analyze hooks' comparison of the film to gangsta' rap to argue her point that both forms of entertainment wrongfully portray sexism and misgyny as exciting to listen to or watch, but that only rap music is condemned for this. When you watched the film, did you find yourself able to excuse and justify the sexism and misogyny for certain reason? If so, you're agreeing with hooks and you must discuss this. Or, when you watched the film, did you find yourself shocked and unable to excuse, for any reason, what you saw? If so, you're disagreeing with hooks, and you must discuss why. (Keep in mind that if you say there is no sexism and misogyny in the film whatsoever you have, first of all, not responded with any real engagement to the events in the film. Regardless of whether it can be justified, how can the finger-chopping scene be anything other than sexist or misogynist, for example? But worse, if you say that no sexism or misogyny exists in the film at all, you have inadvertently proven hook' claim about the film. She says audiences tend to miss these negative values because we're so accustomed to them and / somehow wish to justify them. If you claim that sexism and misogyny don't exist in the film at all, you are proving this point for her, so be very careful about the trap she's set for you. You will avoid this trap if you stick to the issue: discuss wheter or not the sexism and misogyny are portrayed as exciting and acceptable, just as they are in gangsta' rap music, not whether or not they exist in the first place. If you stick to this issue, you can see how a discussion of strengths or weakness of hooks' comparison of the film to rap music might become relevant). You should assume that your audience has read hooks' essay and seen the film , but their level of engagement has not been particulary critical. In other words, you should help your audience to see aspects of the film or of hooks' opinion of the film that they might have otherwise missed. This essay must be atleast 3 full pages.

Important Sources:

Here is the essay of Sexism and Misogyny : Who takes the rap? By Bell Hooks

For the past several months white mainstream media has been calling me to hear my views on gangsta rap. Whether major television networks, or small independent radio shows, they seek me out for the black and feminist "take" on the issue. After I have my say, I am never called back, never invited to do the television shows or the radio spots. I suspect they call, confident that when we talk they will hear the hardcore "feminist" trash of gangsta rap. When they encounter instead the hardcore feminist critique of white supremacist capitalist patriarchy, they lose interest.

To white dominated mass media, the controversy over gangsta rap makes great spectacle. Besides the exploitation of these issues to attract audiences, a central motivation for highlighting gangsta rap continues to be the sensationalist drama of demonizing black youth culture in general and the contributions of young black men in particular. It is a contemporary remake of "Birth of a Nation" only this time we are encouraged to believe it is not just vulnerable white womanhood that risks destruction by black hands but everyone. When I counter this demonization of black males by insisting that gangsta rap does not appear in a cultural vacuum, but, rather, is expressive of the cultural crossing, mixings, and engagement of black youth culture with the values, attitudes, and concerns of the white majority, some folks stop listening.

The sexist, misogynist, patriarchal ways of thinking and behaving that are glorified in gangsta rap are a reflection of the prevailing values in our society, values created and sustained by white supremacist capitalist patriarchy. As the crudest and most brutal expression of sexism, misogynistic attitudes tend to be portrayed by the dominant culture as an expression of male deviance. In reality they are part of a sexist continuum, necessary for the maintenance of patriarchal social order. While patriarchy and sexism continue to be the political and cultural norm in our society, feminist movement has created a climate where crude expressions of male domination are called into question, especially if they are made by men in power. It is useful to think of misogyny as a field that must be labored in and maintained both to sustain patriarchy but also to serve as an ideological anti-feminist backlash. And what better group to labor on this "plantation" than young black men.

To see gangsta rap as a reflection of dominant values in our culture rather than as an aberrant "pathological" standpoint does not mean that a rigorous feminist critique of the sexist and misogyny expressed in this music is not needed. Without a doubt black males, young and old, must be held politically accountable for their sexism. Yet this critique must always be contextualized or we risk making it appear that the behaviors this thinking supports and condones,--rape, male violence against women, etc.-- is a black male thing. And this is what is happening. Young black males are forced to take the "heat" for encouraging, via their music, the hatred of and violence against women that is a central core of patriarchy.

Witness the recent piece by Brent Staples in the "New York Times" titled "The Politics of Gangster Rap: A Music Celebrating Murder and Misogyny." Defining the turf Staples writes: "For those who haven't caught up, gangster rap is that wildly successful music in which all women are `bitches' and `whores' and young men kill each other for sport." No mention of white supremacist capitalist patriarchy in this piece, not a word about the cultural context that would need to exist for young males to be socialized to think differently about gender. Staples assumes that black males are writing their lyrics off in the "jungle," away from the impact of mainstream socialization and desire. At no point in his piece does he ask why huge audiences, especially young white male consumers, are so turned on by this music, by the misogyny and sexism, by the brutality? Where is the anger and rage at females expressed in this music coming from, the glorification of all acts of violence? These are the difficult questions that Staples feels no need to answer.

One cannot answer them honestly without placing accountability on larger structures of domination and the individuals (often white, usually male but not always) who are hierarchically placed to maintain and perpetuate the values that uphold these exploitative and oppressive systems. That means taking a critical looking at the politics of hedonistic consumerism, the values of the men and women who produce gangsta rap. It would mean considering the seduction of young black males who find that they can make more money producing lyrics that promote violence, sexism, and misogyny than with any other content. How many disenfranchised black males would not surrender to expressing virulent forms of sexism, if they knew the rewards would be unprecedented material power and fame?

More than anything gangsta rap celebrates the world of the "material, " the dog-eat-dog world where you do what you gotta do to make it. In this world view killing is necessary for survival. Significantly, the logic here is a crude expression of the logic of white supremacist capitalist patriarchy. In his new book "Sexy Dressing, Etc." privileged white male law professor Duncan Kennedy gives what he calls "a set of general characterizations of U. S. culture" explaining that, "It is individual (cowboys), material (gangsters) and philistine." Using this general description of mainstream culture would lead us to place "gangsta rap" not on the margins of what this nation is about, but at the center. Rather than being viewed as a subversion or disruption of the norm we would need to see it as an embodiment of the norm.

That viewpoint was graphically highlighted in the film "Menace To Society" which dramatized not only young black males killing for sport, but also mass audiences voyeuristically watching and, in many cases, "enjoying" the kill. Significantly, at one point in the movie we see that the young black males have learned their "gangsta" values from watching television and movies--shows where white male gangsters are center stage. This scene undermines any notion of "essentialist" blackness that would have viewers believe the gangsterism these young black males embraced emerged from some unique black cultural experience.

When I interviewed rap artist Ice Cube for "Spin" magazine last year, he talked about the importance of respecting black women and communication across gender. He spoke against male violence against women, even as he lapsed into a justification for anti- woman rap lyrics by insisting on the madonna/whore split where some females "carry" themselves in a manner that determines how they will be treated. When this interview was published, it was cut to nothing. It was a mass media set-up. Folks (mostly white and male) had thought if the hardcore feminist talked with the hardened black man, sparks would fly; there would be a knock-down drag out spectacle. When Brother Cube and I talked to each other with respect about the political, spiritual, and emotional self- determination of black people, it did not make good copy. Clearly folks at the magazine did not get the darky show they were looking for.

After this conversation, and talking with rappers and folks who listen to rap, it became clear that while black male sexism is a serious problem in our communities and in black music, some of the more misogynist lyrics were there to stir up controversy and appeal to audiences. Nowhere is this more evident that in Snoop Doggy Dogg's record "Doggystyle". A black male music and cultural critic called me to ask if I had checked this image out; to share that for one of the first times in his music buying life he felt he was seeing an image so offensive in its sexism and misogyny that he did not want to take that image home. That image (complete with doghouse, beware the dog sign, with a naked black female head in a doghouse, naked butt sticking out) was reproduced, "uncritically," in the November 29, 1993 issue of "Time" magazine. The positive music review of this album, written by Christopher John Farley, is titled "Gangsta Rap, Doggystyle" makes no mention of sexism and misogyny, makes no reference to the cover. I wonder if a naked white female body had been inside the doghouse, presumably waiting to be fucked from behind, if "Time" would have reproduced an image of the cover along with their review. When I see the pornographic cartoon that graces the cover of "Doggystyle," I do not think simply about the sexism and misogyny of young black men, I think about the sexist and misogynist politics of the powerful white adult men and women (and folks of color) who helped produce and market this album.

In her book "Misogynies" Joan Smith shares her sense that while most folks are willing to acknowledge unfair treatment of women, discrimination on the basis of gender, they are usually reluctant to admit that hatred of women is encouraged because it helps maintain the structure of male dominance. Smith suggests: "Misogyny wears many guises, reveals itself in different forms which are dictated by class, wealth, education, race, religion and other factors, but its chief characteristic is its pervasiveness." This point reverberated in my mind when I saw ***** Campion's widely acclaimed film "The Piano" which I saw in the midst of mass media focus on sexism and misogyny in "gangsta rap." I had been told by many friends in the art world that this was "an incredible film, a truly compelling love story etc." Their responses were echoed by numerous positive reviews. No one speaking about this film mentions misogyny and sexism or white supremacist capitalist patriarchy.

The 19th century world of the white invasion of New Zealand is utterly romanticized in this film (complete with docile happy darkies--Maori natives--who appear to have not a care in the world). And when the film suggests they care about white colonizers digging up the graves of their dead ancestors, it is the sympathetic poor white male who comes to the rescue. Just as the conquest of natives and lands is glamorized in this film, so is the conquest of femininity, personified by white womanhood, by the pale speechless corpse-like Scotswoman, Ada, who journeys into this dark wilderness because her father has arranged for her to marry the white colonizer Stewart. Although mute, Ada expresses her artistic ability, the intensity of her vision and feelings through piano playing. This passion attracts Baines, the illiterate white settler who wears the facial tattoos of the Maori--an act of appropriation that makes him (like the traditional figure of Tarzan) appear both dangerous and romantic. He is Norman Mailer's "white negro," seducing Ada by promising to return the piano that Steward has exchanged with him for land. The film leads us to believe that Ada's passionate piano playing has been a substitution for repressed eroticism. When she learns to let herself go sexually, she ceases to need the piano. We watch the passionate climax of Baines seduction as she willingly seeks him sexually. And we watch her husband Stewart in the role of voyeur, standing with dog outside the cabin where they fuck, voyeuristically consuming their pleasure. Rather than being turned off by her love for Baines, it appears to excite Stewart's passion; he longs to possess her all the more. Unable to win her back from Baines, he expresses his rage, rooted in misogyny and sexism, by physically attacking her and chopping off her finger with an ax. This act of male violence takes place with Ada's daughter, Flora, as a witness. Though traumatized by the violence she witnesses, she is still about to follow the white male patriarch's orders and take the bloody finger to Baines, along with the message that each time he sees Ada she will suffer physical mutilation.

Violence against land, natives, and women in this film, unlike that of gangsta rap, is portrayed uncritically, as though it is "natural," the inevitable climax of conflicting passions. The outcome of this violence is positive. Ultimately, the film suggests Stewart's rage was only an expression of irrational sexual jealousy, that he comes to his senses and is able to see "reason." In keeping with male exchange of women, he gives Ada and Flora to Baines. They leave the wilderness. On the voyage home Ada demands that her piano be thrown overboard because it is "soiled," tainted with horrible memories. Surrendering it she lets go of her longing to display passion through artistic expression. A nuclear family now, Baines, Ada, and Flora resettle and live happily-ever-after. Suddenly, patriarchal order is restored. Ada becomes a modest wife, wearing a veil over her mouth so that no one will see her lips struggling to speak words. Flora has no memory of trauma and is a happy child turning somersaults. Baines is in charge, even making Ada a new finger.

"The Piano "seduces and excites audiences with its uncritical portrayal of sexism and misogyny. Reviewers and audiences alike seem to assume that Campion's gender, as well as her breaking of traditional boundaries that inhibit the advancement of women in film, indicate that her work expresses a feminist standpoint. And, indeed, she does employ feminist "tropes," even as her work betrays feminist visions of female actualization, celebrates and eroticizes male domination. In Smith's discussion of misogyny she emphasizes that woman-hating is not solely the province of men: "We are all exposed to the prevailing ideology of our culture, and some women learn early on that they can prosper by aping the misogyny of men; these are the women who win provisional favor by denigrating other women, by playing on male prejudices, and by acting the `man's woman'." Since this is not a documentary film that needs to remain faithful to the ethos of its historical setting, why is it that Campion does not resolve Ada's conflicts by providing us with an imaginary landscape where a woman can express passionate artistic commitment and find fulfillment in a passionate relationship? This would be no more far-fetched than her cinematic portrayal of Ada's miraculous transformation from muteness into speech. Ultimately, Campion's "The Piano" advances the sexist assumption that heterosexual women will give up artistic practice to find "true love." That "positive" surrender is encouraged by the "romantic" portrayal of sexism and misogyny.

While I do not think that young black male rappers have been rushing in droves to see "The Piano", there is a bond between those folks involved with high culture who celebrate and condone the sexist ideas and values upheld in this film and those who celebrate and condone "gangsta rap." Certainly Kennedy's description of the United States as a "cowboy, gangster, philistine" culture would also accurately describe the culture evoked in "The Piano". Popular movies that are seen by young black males, for example "Indecent Proposal, MadDog and Glory, True Romance", and "One False Move", all eroticize male domination expressed via the exchange of women, as well as the subjugation of other men, through brutal violence.

Contrary to a racist white imagination which assumes that most young black males, especially those who are poor, live in a self- created cultural vacuum, uninfluenced by mainstream, cultural values, it is the application of those values, largely learned through passive uncritical consumption of mass media, that is revealed in "gangsta rap." Brent Staples is willing to challenge the notion that "urban primitivism is romantic" when it suggests that black males become "real men" by displaying the will to do violence, yet he remains resolutely silent about that world of privileged white culture that has historically romanticized primitivism, and eroticized male violence. Contemporary films like "Reservoir Dogs" and "The Bad Lieutenant" celebrate urban primitivism and many less well done films ("Trespass, Rising Sun") create and/or exploit the cultural demand for depictions of hardcore blacks who are willing to kill for sport.

To take "gangsta rap" to task for its sexism and misogyny while critically accepting and perpetuating those expressions of that ideology which reflect bourgeois standards (no rawness, no vulgarity) is not to call for a transformation of the culture of patriarchy. Ironically, many black male ministers, themselves sexist and misogynist, are leading the attacks against gangsta rap. Like the mainstream world that supports white supremacist capitalist patriarchy, they are most concerned with calling attention to the vulgar obscene portrayals of women to advance the cause of censorship. For them, rethinking and challenging sexism, both in the dominant culture and in black life, is not the issue.

Mainstream white culture is not concerned about black male sexism and misogyny, particularly when it is unleashed against black women and children. It is concerned when young white consumers utilize black popular culture to disrupt bourgeois values. Whether it be the young white boy who expresses his rage at his mother by aping black male vernacular speech (a true story) or the masses of young white males (and middle class men of color) seeking to throw off the constraints of bourgeois bondage who actively assert in their domestic households via acts of aggression their rejection of the call to be "civilized. " These are the audiences who feel such a desperate need for gangsta rap. It is much easier to attack gangsta rap than to confront the culture that produces that need.

Gangsta rap is part of the anti-feminist backlash that is the rage right now. When young black males labor in the plantations of misogyny and sexism to produce gangsta rap, their right to speak this violence and be materially rewarded is extended to them by white supremacist capitalist patriarchy. Far from being an expression of their "manhood," it is an expression of their own subjugation and humiliation by more powerful, less visible forces of patriarchal gangsterism. They give voice to the brutal raw anger and rage against women that it is taboo for "civilized" adult men to speak. No wonder then that they have the task of tutoring the young, teaching them to eroticize and enjoy the brutal expressions of that rage (teaching them language and acts) before they learn to cloak it in middle-class decorum or Robert Bly style reclaimings of lost manhood. The tragedy for young black males is that they are so easily dunned by a vision of manhood that can only lead to their destruction.

Feminist critiques of the sexism and misogyny in gangsta rap, and in all aspects of popular culture, must continue to be bold and fierce. Black females must not be duped into supporting shit that hurts us under the guise of standing beside our men. If black men are betraying us through acts of male violence, we save ourselves and the race by resisting. Yet, our feminist critiques of black male sexism fail as meaningful political intervention if they seek to demonize black males, and do not recognize that our revolutionary work is to transform white supremacist capitalist patriarchy in the multiple areas of our lives where it is made manifest, whether in gangsta rap, the black church, or the ***** administration.

Here is the analysis of The Piano:

Analysis of "The Piano," the movie

The Piano examines the construction of sexuality in nineteenth century colonial New Zealand within the discourses of power that shaped this era. Different discourses of gender and race and their interactions are presented in order to support a narrative critique of the European patriarchal ideology as dominant social structure.

In the opening sequence of the film, the viewer is immediately presented with an image of marriage as entirely contractual: "Today he married me to a man I've not yet met." The protagonist, although she has already been established as strong-willed and non-conforming, is accepting but not altogether optimistic about the arrangement. The viewer also learns that she already has a daughter, but the question of the child's legitimacy are left unanswered. These factors suggest potential conflict with the patriarchal authority of the husband over his spouse's sexuality and introduce the primary power discourse of the plot: that of the female protagonist's commodity status through the negation female autonomy by the patriarchal system.

European patriarchal values are embodied by Stuart's character, he symbolises repression, the narrowing of sexuality into an unemotional discourse of female passivity and male dominance. The film exposes the property mentality which resulted in the devastation of the natural landscape but also in the corruption of personal relationships - above all else, Stuart believes in his ownership of Ada. He demonstrates this by negating her own claim to property in the beginning of the film. Stuart does not hesitate in the trade of Ada's piano to Baines for a piece of land, and refuses to acknowledge her right to it, or understand her anger over this action. His sense of property also extends to her sexuality, he attempts to rape her twice to exert his ownership, to force her into submission, when his sense of control over her is threatened. Stuart is unable to appreciate a sexuality where he is not in the dominant role. After he learns of Ada's adultery and forbids her to continue the relationship, Ada attempts to initiate intimacy with him on her own terms: with her taking an active but gentle role, she does not wish for him to touch her. Stuart cannot handle a situation, especially a sexual one, that requires his passivity, he is disturbed by the idea and it makes him uncomfortable, although he was the one who initially expressed concern that she had not yet "become affectionate". His patriarchal view of sexuality is so limited that he cannot understand Ada's need to establish a level of intimacy she is comfortable with, before they can express mutual affection.

Another way in which power discourses of sexuality are challenged in the film is through the contrast of colonial with Maori cultural value systems. Nineteenth century European culture allowed for only heterosexuality between adults, within the institution of marriage. This is evident in Stuart's reaction to the sex play of Flora and the Maori children; they are embracing trees in a sexual manner while the Maori women watch on, unconcerned. Stuart, upon seeing Flora's behaviour, is shocked and offended. "I'm greatly shamed! You've shamed these trunks." He chastises her, and in the following scene he is shown supervising her as she whitewashes the trees. This shows how sexuality that is not controlled by the accepted power discourse of a marital relationship must be labeled as immoral and obscene. The film also makes the comparison of European female colonialist sexuality with that of the Maori women. The scene in which Baines is doing his washing in the river with a Maori family most powerfully illustrates the distinction: "You need a wife. Its no good having it sulk between you legs for the rest of its life." So Baines is informed by the Maori woman. Here, her wisdom is privileged - her culture accepts human sexuality and desires to be undeniable, rather than shameful. She speaks frankly with Baines about his sexuality, because it is not a taboo topic within the Maori culture. Baines also has sexual relations with Maori women he is not married to, which is not scandalous within their culture. The film appears to be presenting an alternative view of sexuality, one within which power discourses are not an accepted necessity, as they are within the parallel sexuality of the European colonialists. Clothing also plays an interesting role in the juxtapositions of the two cultures - the Maoris are not ashamed of nudity, their dress is practical for the environment, and the women dress comfortably. This contrasts with the dress of the colonialists; both sexes wear many layers of restraining clothing, but it is the European females whose dress is especially confining, with a tight corset and large, awkward hoop skirt, symbolising the cultural restrictions of femininity.

Baines' sexuality and his concept of it is much less culturally constructed than that of Stuart, since he himself has less of a patriarchal colonialist identity. He has the Maori facial tattoo, and speaks the language, he also maintains less of a power position over them than does Stuart. Baines has respect for equality, both across race and gender; the Maori women in his house are not subservient as they are in the other colonial households. Baines values female sexuality, he also recognises that women have a right to it - he does not use violence against Ada because he is not interested in enforcing his will over hers. He recognises the value that the piano has for Ada, which Stuart fails to do. Through Baines The Piano challenges the traditional power discourse of sexuality within marriage. The concept of sexual ownership is shown to be false, even though the nineteenth century patriarchy treated women themselves as property. Ada rejects sexual relations with her husband - her sexuality still belongs to her, and she enters into the sexual contract with Baines by choice. Ada is aware of her sexual power over Baines: she realises it when Baines leaves the church hall out of frustration and humiliation when she will not let him sit next to her. Also, the film does not portray her adultery as an act of immorality; it is sex without love that is critiqued in the film, explicitly by Baines. Implicitly, Baines' sexuality negates male domination. He talks to Ada like an adult equal, while Stuart treats her like a child.

Both Ada and Baines deviate from the traditional institution of European culture: they require love to have a sexual relationship, and love equates freedom from power discourses. This is strikingly juxtaposed with Stuart's concept of sexual relationships. Stuart seems completely ignorant that affection must be earned through trust, respect and love - none of which he shows towards Ada. Baines and Ada both undergo a turning point in their feelings towards each other. For Baines it is when he gives the piano back to her, because he cannot continue with their contract. "I want you to care for me." For Ada, it is after this act of kindness that she realises her attachment to him, their sexual involvement has become emotional also. Here a reversal of conventional emotional stereotypes is explored. Male emotional vulnerability as a result of sexual relations, rather than female, is privileged, and represented by Baines character: "...Does this mean something to you, Ada?... Do you love me?" In many ways this is a film which privileges respect and appreciation of female sexuality and is strongly opposed to its exploitation. This can be seen through the presentation of nudity in the film - male nudity is revealed more than female, and the portrayal of Ada's naked body is more discreet than the portrayal of Baines'. The film uses this technique to express the necessary privacy that should surround intimacy; the concept that sexuality must involve emotional interaction as well as physical is also conveyed.

In the film, the piano as an object takes on the symbolism of Ada's body, and her sexuality. It also is traded, and for both the trading of the piano by Stuart and Ada's arranged marriage by her father, the attachment of misplaced property value is privileged; the piano is no more Stuart's to trade than is Ada by the males who hold authority over her. Because the piano is her most powerful instrument of expression, the action by Stuart to trade is almost like his act of cutting off her finger - actions of cruelty, the castration of her autonomy. Stuart and Baines' handling of the piano both echo their concept of female sexuality. Baines is aware of the piano's value to Ada, his first act of compassion is to have it tuned. This demonstrates Baines' respect for it and for his respect of female sexuality in general. The piano gains conscious sexual significance for him as it comes to represent Ada's body. Early on, he is depicted polishing it in the nude, there is a ritual solemnity about this action that indicates he is serious about his attraction to Ada, that sexuality for him is not about power but about respect and adoration. The attempted rape scene of Ada byStuart in the forest is juxtaposed with images of the Maori men thumping and banging on the piano, conveying a message of physical disrespect and violence. Ada is saved only when Flora comes to find her in distress "They're touching your piano!" The film privileges the acts of violation occurring simultaneously as being connected, emphasising their symbolic similarity.

In the denoument, the piano ceases to symbolise Ada's sexuality - it represents more her misery, as the centre of her tragedy. Her new life in Nelson with Baines is portrayed as a rebirth of sexuality, the death of the piano and near death of Ada as the burial of sexual repression, the loveless power discourse between her and Stuart. Ada wears a black veil while learning to speak, and Baines kisses her through the veil and then lifts it to kiss her lips. The veil, being black rather than white, may symbolise the fact that Ada is not sexually 'pure' but as this is a traditional patriarchal value it is insignificant to both of them. The purity of their union is in their love for each other, the quality of sexual respect and equality that connects them. The scene conveys the concept that the sexuality Ada and Baines endorse is based love and acceptance over lust, but also on unrepressed emotion. The return in the final moments of the film to the image of Ada attached to the piano under the ocean and her contemplation of the silence that exists there serves to reinforce her independent identity - that her experiences are part of this and she will hold on to them, rather than transform herself to fit her new life. Although the film endorses the convention of the sought after union between lovers as bringing happiness, it does not present it as a mergingof identity - they have found a space within which they can express their sexuality freely, but it remains their own, for there is no triumphing of one discourse over another.

The Piano is a film which succeeds in its study of sexuality, and the destructive effect of institutionalised power discourses upon personal relationships. It emphasises the need for cultural acknowledgment of an individual autonomy, thus destroying the morality of the nineteenth century patriarchy which dictated sexual repression and ownership. Love as an integral element of sexual relations, with the definition of love conveying mutual respect as well as desire is presented as a major theme in the film, and sexual relations as a requirement of oppressive transactions such as arranged marriage are shown to be not only irrationally unjust but potentially tragic.

These are some of the ideas that I come up with, preferably if they seem reasonable, I would prefer them to be used in the essay:

They are exciting and uncritcally because rap serves the purpose of describing a world that many cannot relate to or want to confront. THe violent lyrics forces us to see what's going on in our country.

They aren't exciting and criticallly portrayed because people interpret the movie differently than what the director intends. The director might instend the audience to see the movie in a historical context but many audiences fail to grasp this idea. Rap sends a message for a change and glorifies life in a violent way.

The Piano and rap music oppress women

Director is trying to get a point across with the Sexism and Misogyny portrayed in the movie Piano.

Women are viewed as objects. The Piano symbolizes Ada's body.

Ada was treated like a child by Stewart but more like a women by Baines

When Ada demanded that the Piano be thrown overboard, one of her feet got stuck to the rope of the Piano. She manages to still escape. The shoe may symbolize Ada's finger.