So postmodernism is a topic that seems to be coming up in a few of my classes this semester, all at about the same time. While postmodernism interests me, I'm still having a hard time grasping exactly what it is or how to define it. If I'm slightly off-base with anything I say within this blog post, feel free to point it out to me and correct me! I appreciate it!
This was my second time seeing Heathers and I think I enjoyed it even more this time. I was glad to hear other people in the class seemed to disagree with Nick Burns' 'Scent of Dominance' essay and it wasn't just me. One of the things I did think was interesting that Burns brought up but didn't focus on was the feminist reading of the movie. He says that Veronica is oppressed by JD and that her father is 'clearly useless'; while I agree with both of these things, I want to point out that Veronica is also oppressed by the Heathers-- Veronica lets other people control her and doesn't stand up for herself in general-- and not just her father, but every adult in the movie, is 'clearly useless'.
We talked about JD a LOT in class, and I just want to bring him up again very briefly. Throughout the whole movie I found myself really wanting to like him, and searching for reasons to be able to although he just kept getting crazier and skeezier. Then in class we talked about how we are so used to having a charming, heroic male character that the female protagonist falls in love with, but we fall in love with too. And in a way, I felt JD had just a tiny bit of charm in some way. It's very much like Jack Nicholson's charm, or Heath Ledger's charm as joker-- we don't like them, they're very creepy, yet we're drawn to them and glad when they're on screen. When I think about it, there was only one truly sweet moment (to me) between JD and Veronica in the film-- when he saves her from her cow-tipping double date, and she's covered in cow poo and trying to avoid being pretty much raped by a jock. Maybe just that one moment where he took her away from all of that kind of softened me to him just the littlest bit.
One thing that really bothered me about Burns' article was that I felt like he was pretty much saying Heathers had no point, offered nothing to the audience, other than form and style. Like Dr. Strangelove, I thought Heathers was a satirical and dark social commentary, making us look critically at ourselves, our youth, our society. At the same time, it satirized the very idealized teen movies of the time that seemed to be offering teens answers to their problems, but these answers didn't work in real life. In a way I agree that the film gives no answers to teenage problems-- but I think the fact that it makes us look at society differently and see the ridiculousness of social hierarchy even within high schools, the extent of 'peer pressure' and how far kids will go to 'fit in', and the disconnection between older generations and youth is enough of a 'point' or 'answer'. Maybe there isn't a concrete answer to these problems, but by beginning to recognize them and see ourselves in a truer light is just a beginning for change. It seems like Heathers was one of the first films of its kind, and it was a preface to movies like Mean Girls-- which is a very similar story but more contemporary.
I suppose ending my blog by talking about the end of the film would be appropriate. I myself wasn't sure how to take the ending. Has nothing changed within the high school or has it changed slightly because Veronica is now in charge and people will be nicer and happier but overall the hierarchy remains? I'm not sure-- we can't really know what will happen the next day or the next year within the school. We talked about the red scrunchy being an 'empty signifier'; we know it represents power to these girls, but the object itself really doesn't stand for anything. I thought that maybe Veronica knew this herself. I read her putting the scrunchy on as a kind of, "Things are going to be the way I want them to be now, not the Heather way." Does this mean she's going to wear it to school every day now and everyone will fear but also worship her? I doubt it. But does it mean that the hierarchy and stereotyped groups within the school will now disappear? I doubt that too. Maybe just little things like Martha Dunnstock now having a friend should be comfort enough to viewers. That's how I took it.
I like how u associated the movie to dr. strangelove and also got at some of the things the story was trying to do, which I agree, the reading totally misses. I think that the color red really symbolizes dominance in this movie as the only characters we see wear this color are the two heathers and the two jocks. I think that Victoria realizes that she can make things better by leading by example. The attention that she will get from wearing the scrunchy will allow here to do that.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Veronica seemed like the Heathers' and JD's puppet. She was aware the Heathers were using her but JD was a little more manipulative about it and tricked her a few times. I really wanted to like JD at first too but quickly lost this desire. I thought the film was extremely dark and I liked your comparison to Dr. Strangelove and saw the connections a little better.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your whole talk about how every single adult in this film was utterly useless. for throughout most of the movie i really just wanted to punch all of them square in the face, for being so numb to the whole situation. I mean common that hippieish teacher saying " the most important decision as a teen is whether or not your going to kill yourself"...who says that? even the parents question there own daughter over some guy they themselves call a "dark horse". sorry to go off in a rant but man those adults sucked.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really nice blog and you touch on a lot of interesting things. I liked your discussion about the parent’s role in the film as well. They really are oblivious to everything that’s going on, almost as if they are unable to remember being teenagers themselves. I always hate when adults are portrayed this way because I feel like, “man there’s no way they could be that dumb”. But I think whenever films like Heathers or Rebel Without A Cause do this, it cleverly addresses the issues of generational gaps and how parents and their kids can never be on the same page.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you say about the ending also. I think that this is how we’re meant to look at the film, having just enough closure to make us feel as good as we possibly and realistically could after all of this has taken place. The ending of Heathers is in many ways like the ending of The Breakfast Club. In the grand scheme of things, nothing changed and what happens throughout both films affects no one else. However, although it might be incredibly small, something changes. It seems like a more realistic way to look at life. Awesome job, this was a great blog to read.
I know exactly what you mean about JD being exactly the sort of character one would get a crush on, even though he's seriously psycho. I didn't entirely agree with the Burns article either--he seemed to miss both the satirical depth _and_ the fun of postmodernism.
ReplyDeleteIt _is_ a slippery concept to define. But basically, the postmodern aesthetic often has to do with images that refer to other images, rather than anything real beneath it. There are a lot of ways that Heathers refers not so much to actual teen problems (though it does), as to other teen _movies_. And the characters themselves make references to pop culture things (Gilligan's Island) or high culture things (Moby Dick) in ways that have no significance whatsover--like the word 'Eskimo' being treated, hilariously, as some kind of clue to why Heather would kill herself.