The Stamford/Stanford Wives
I knew it would be only a matter of time before I'd have to cough up some more personal perspective. This archetypal, modern classic was recently remade and just came out on DVD. Given that the housewife scene is something I'm very familiar with.. got to comment. Without even having finished watching the DVD, there are several flavors that taste familiar.
First off, I definitely identify with that feeling of the protagonist, like, "is this whole fuckin town nuts... or is it ...ME??" Hmm, I guess I'll have watch the rest to find out. Fortunately, I do still remember the older, darker version. In those days, we took our Feminism more seriously, not to mention proudly. Back then, I thought to myself, as we all did, "That will never happen to me!" So, seeing this new version, having just come out the other side of that scene, very interesting.
Anyway, the other thing that felt mucho familiar was this feeling of boys team/girl's team, each having it's own agenda. Though the movie really only addressed the male agenda. What a send up on the classic stereotype of what men want out of life and in their women, the insecure geek aspect... believe me, if there's anything I can relate to (or failed to). They want things that are mutually exclusive. For example, great sex and the whole Martha Stewart thing. Based on my experience, once the woman buys into the whole female encampment thing, that's the focus, the guy is, as my nine year old so tactfully put it, "the money man". Most women buy into it because they drift in and forget it's not the only game in town, they also become trapped economically. The saddest part is that their world gets so small. If anyone has an agenda, it's the women, because most of these women are above this level of banality and do feel some inner frustration... I hope. Maybe that is the question, and a very important one, the story seeks to address. Is this work divided model working?
In some ways, yes. You should see these kids. Many don't see the Dads much, the classic complaint of my own generation, and they may soon look on the housewife moms very unfavorably, all my friends and I did. But, they've got it damn good, maybe spoiled, but still good. The Dads also seem to have it pretty good. They mostly love their work, the structure generally works for them. They resent feeling second to the kids, resent the lack of love & sex. And many of them can't see straight for the pressures on them. But, they're men. Gifted by God with denseness and obliviousness. It's mild. I think it's the women who mostly take it on the chin, unless they very proactively address it when the kids get older and more independent. Cause, that's the rub. It changes. The kids do grow up and want independence. Can you really make your whole life just about doing service to everyone around you? What then is your own identity as a person? The guys, at least, have careers. No one really thinks mothering is a lifetime career. It's not. Check out Desperate Housewives, now #1 show. The term will now be an entrenched part of the lingo & the "problem" will hopefully get some attention. Who knows, maybe some day the focus will turn to the real problem. What's the real problem? Cowboy capitalism.
A better model, in terms of the health of the relationships themselves, and the culture (as in Europe) is two parents both working a human schedule AND having a good standard of living, not having huge pay differentials. I would imagine those couples are much better off, because the two are still equals who relate to each other not two people living in largely different worlds. That works for most people, but not for companies, who would rather pay for one worker, one training, one set of benefits, one set of individual needs - which are ever so pesky. My own scenario highlights the whole thing perfectly; high pressure job - two choices - job or kid - not both - not here.
As you will see again and again, if you look, in this country, it's the corporate interests that call the tune (remind me to discuss one of my favorite films - Network). The gov't. is really all we have to look to for mollification, and that's why it pains me so much to see those interests buy silver spoon sons and enough propaganda to convince every churchgoer in every little podunk, backwoods town from here to hicksville... successfully....that if you just wave your flag, and thump your bible long enough, everything's gonna be alright. It's the U.S. Blues, right here in Stepford, your own hometown.
What I think every person should consider is... is this working for me? Cause, if it's not, change it. We may not be able to make all the global, political changes we might like, but we can each live our own lives as fully as possible, whatever the larger context, and in so doing, bring awareness to those around us. Remember, the communities of hollow people we see in Stepford are lacking. It's structure and form, all the trimmings, but it's empty, as shown in the movie. We want a society of fulfilled, aware people... so we don't keep killing folks in wars all over the place or work our lives away, feeling empty and vaguely dissatisfied.
First off, I definitely identify with that feeling of the protagonist, like, "is this whole fuckin town nuts... or is it ...ME??" Hmm, I guess I'll have watch the rest to find out. Fortunately, I do still remember the older, darker version. In those days, we took our Feminism more seriously, not to mention proudly. Back then, I thought to myself, as we all did, "That will never happen to me!" So, seeing this new version, having just come out the other side of that scene, very interesting.
Anyway, the other thing that felt mucho familiar was this feeling of boys team/girl's team, each having it's own agenda. Though the movie really only addressed the male agenda. What a send up on the classic stereotype of what men want out of life and in their women, the insecure geek aspect... believe me, if there's anything I can relate to (or failed to). They want things that are mutually exclusive. For example, great sex and the whole Martha Stewart thing. Based on my experience, once the woman buys into the whole female encampment thing, that's the focus, the guy is, as my nine year old so tactfully put it, "the money man". Most women buy into it because they drift in and forget it's not the only game in town, they also become trapped economically. The saddest part is that their world gets so small. If anyone has an agenda, it's the women, because most of these women are above this level of banality and do feel some inner frustration... I hope. Maybe that is the question, and a very important one, the story seeks to address. Is this work divided model working?
In some ways, yes. You should see these kids. Many don't see the Dads much, the classic complaint of my own generation, and they may soon look on the housewife moms very unfavorably, all my friends and I did. But, they've got it damn good, maybe spoiled, but still good. The Dads also seem to have it pretty good. They mostly love their work, the structure generally works for them. They resent feeling second to the kids, resent the lack of love & sex. And many of them can't see straight for the pressures on them. But, they're men. Gifted by God with denseness and obliviousness. It's mild. I think it's the women who mostly take it on the chin, unless they very proactively address it when the kids get older and more independent. Cause, that's the rub. It changes. The kids do grow up and want independence. Can you really make your whole life just about doing service to everyone around you? What then is your own identity as a person? The guys, at least, have careers. No one really thinks mothering is a lifetime career. It's not. Check out Desperate Housewives, now #1 show. The term will now be an entrenched part of the lingo & the "problem" will hopefully get some attention. Who knows, maybe some day the focus will turn to the real problem. What's the real problem? Cowboy capitalism.
A better model, in terms of the health of the relationships themselves, and the culture (as in Europe) is two parents both working a human schedule AND having a good standard of living, not having huge pay differentials. I would imagine those couples are much better off, because the two are still equals who relate to each other not two people living in largely different worlds. That works for most people, but not for companies, who would rather pay for one worker, one training, one set of benefits, one set of individual needs - which are ever so pesky. My own scenario highlights the whole thing perfectly; high pressure job - two choices - job or kid - not both - not here.
As you will see again and again, if you look, in this country, it's the corporate interests that call the tune (remind me to discuss one of my favorite films - Network). The gov't. is really all we have to look to for mollification, and that's why it pains me so much to see those interests buy silver spoon sons and enough propaganda to convince every churchgoer in every little podunk, backwoods town from here to hicksville... successfully....that if you just wave your flag, and thump your bible long enough, everything's gonna be alright. It's the U.S. Blues, right here in Stepford, your own hometown.
What I think every person should consider is... is this working for me? Cause, if it's not, change it. We may not be able to make all the global, political changes we might like, but we can each live our own lives as fully as possible, whatever the larger context, and in so doing, bring awareness to those around us. Remember, the communities of hollow people we see in Stepford are lacking. It's structure and form, all the trimmings, but it's empty, as shown in the movie. We want a society of fulfilled, aware people... so we don't keep killing folks in wars all over the place or work our lives away, feeling empty and vaguely dissatisfied.
posted by Intervision at 11:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home