When the Woman Looks She Gets Vertigo

Vertigo, produced in 1958 and starring James Stewart and Kim Novak, is one of Alfred Hitchcock’s most well-known films. Not only is the story one of intrigue and mystery, but the cinematography was groundbreaking at the time. Budding filmmakers are still taught the “vertigo shot” (dolly out while zooming in) and it’s commonly used in all genres of film today. Aside from the stunning directing, acting, and other technical/cinematic elements of the film, the plot is a pristine product of the Golden Age of Hollywood, especially where gender inequality is in debate. The role of the woman in all of Hitchcock’s films can be scrutinized (hello, mommy issues), but in Vertigo specifically is seen a wonderful example of Linda William’s gender theory of when the woman looks.

Although a significant portion of Williams’ writing was in relation to classic horror films, many of her arguments can be observed in Hitchcock’s thriller. The most obvious of which is that women are punished for acting on their desires. Judy Barton, as it turns out, was acting like Madeleine Elster, the wife of one of Scottie’s old college mates. We won’t pretend that her actions were in any way moral. Judy admits to being paid to impersonate a possessed Madeleine in order to cover up a real murder. She was under the direction of a man, Gavin Elster. Although she herself was not a conspirator in the murder, she was, at one point or another, aware of what was happening. She isn't punished for this, however. As Williams points out in her analysis of Dressed to Kill, the “good girl” no longer extends to just the sexually pure, but to women who will submit their will to that of a man, specifically the male protragonist, even if in so doing her actions are no longer "good" or "pure." There are implications that Judy, in the past, has performed immoral deeds in order to make ends meet, and this latest entanglement is no different. But instead of being punished for aiding in the murder of someone, she is rewarded for obeying a man. She meets Scottie and falls in love. Sure, it’s hard for her because she knows she has to leave him eventually, but while she’s doing what she’s supposed to do, things go really well for her.

She begins to desire Scottie, though; to “look.” Once her intentions are clear to not only the audience, but to herself, the time comes for her to “kill herself.” Although it’s faked, the Madeleine that Scottie grew to know has killed herself as a result of getting too wrapped up in her own wants. The most on-the-nose example is when Scottie finds Judy after the apparent suicide. The letter-writing sequence, in which Judy confesses to everything she’s done in a letter and then rips it up, was almost left out of the film in order to create a greater tension for the audience. Hitchcock felt that the film was better without it but studio executives disagreed and forced him to put it back in. This scene validates Williams’ notion of the woman being punished for having her own desires. Had she admitted to her crimes and been up front with Scottie (and removed herself from his life as the letter suggested), she would have survived and gone on to lead a happy life. She may have even ended up with Scottie in a beautiful, white-picket fence type of situation. But instead, she puts her own desires above those of our male protagonist (her desires being to stay out of trouble and in Scottie’s life-- His desires being to have Madeleine back and know the truth). This series of lies and deceits leads to Judy’s death and, as patriarchal societal law would say, her comeuppance.

In contrast, the male protagonist, Scottie, and the murdering husband, Gavin, do not share in the same fate as the selfish female. Observing, first, the more nefarious of the two, Gavin is never punished for his crimes. Audiences may choose to believe that he was after the fact, but the film never suggests the possibility. He uses Judy, he kills his wife, and he exploits Scottie’s phobia for his own personal gain. All around, not a great guy. But he never gets his. In fact, the film seems to suggest that he gets away with it and makes no further comment on his guilt. The story revolves around Scottie and Judy/Madeleine, but it all set into motion by Gavin’s immoral actions. Were he a woman, by Williams’ argument, he would be severely punished for his actions. As it stands, he’s neither judged nor punished.

Even Scottie gains the sympathy of the audience despite his impropriety. Asked to tail Madeleine, Scottie’s voyeurism is not hidden from the audience. Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze is out in full force while Scottie spends days observing, studying, and obsessing over the subject of his gaze. Even Madeleine/Judy accepts the role of being observed by observing herself in the form of a portrait. Without even delving into the cinema-specific points of her argument, the male dominated gaze controls the story. Scottie falls in love with her; conveniently after seeing her naked while she is unconscious. Not only is this incredibly creepy, but he’s also a home-wrecker seeing as he believes this woman is happily married to a man who loves her (sure, it all turns out to be a lie but he doesn't know that at the time). Instead of condemning his actions, the audience sympathizes with him and wants it to work out for him. We’re angry and let down when he doesn't get the object of his desire, but aren't too concerned with the fate of Judy/Madeleine as an individual person, only as Scottie’s desire.

Mulvey opens the door to a deep analysis of film, specifically during this time, in regards to gender and the objectification of women.  Williams, however, takes it a step further and observes the typical results when a woman looks. As exemplified by the classic, Vertigo, Hollywood has a long way to go before the patriarchal ideology of oppressed women is brought to light and, consequently, remedied.