More on Movies

I’ve often complained to John (who else?) about movies that give short shrift to women characters: buddy movies or comedies or action films where the women are merely decorative, warmly supportive of their men, and/or sexually available at convenient times. They get no funny lines and have no particular personalities. Talented actresses are always complaining about this — so few meaningful roles. 

I argue that creating weak minor characters should go in the debit column when we’re evaluating a film. It’s the screenwriter’s and the director’s responsibility to make all the characters as interesting and individual as possible. Vapid, cardboard cutouts in the place of living breathing women weaken a film, but too often critics and viewers don’t seem to notice.

Two recent movies demonstrate what I mean by developing  secondary characters effectively. It can be done! George Clooney is the centerpiece of Up in the Air, but the two female supporting characters, played by Anna Kendrick and Vera Farmiga, get lots of screen time, and they’re funny and individualized and complicated. They help make the movie as entertaining and effective as it is.

Julie and Julia has, of course, two women characters at its center. Here the men take the supporting role. I would argue that in a typical popular film, where the men take center stage, their wives would be either treacly-submissive or witchy and unsympathetic. Nora Ephron’s screenplay (and, I assume Julie Powell’s book, though I haven’t read it) offers supportive spouses with amusing lines; they’re sympathetic, and they also have their own issues. This isn’t an art film with lots of complications, but these minor characters are beyond one-dimensional. They help make the movie partly about marriage. They’re not cliches, and male screenwriters could take a lesson from Ephron’s example.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Ten “Bests”

The writer Kris Ohlson has been passing around this essay from The Washington Post, via email and her Facebook page, by Julianna Baggott, called “The Key to Literary Success? Be a Man — or Write Like One.”    Baggott points out that Publishers Weekly‘s list of the ten best books of 2009 contained no women writers. On the entire list of 100? Only 29 women. Baggott continues with something of a mea culpa: she herself, educated to favor male writers and male themes, disguised her gender under a pseudonym when she wrote a trilogy for young people.

The whole issue is just depressing. It’s irritating that Publishers Weekly responded to criticism of the list by saying that they weren’t striving for political correctness, as though (as Baggott says) that’s the only reason you’d consider women writers. I think it requires a conscious effort to be fair and inclusive, in a manner analogous to affirmative action. That is, if we’re aware that our default position is to “favor” (that is, notice) male themes and male writers (usually white ones), then we have to doublecheck our lists and our preferences to see that we’ve given women and minorities a fair shake.

I used to do this when, years ago, I chose all the books that our book group read. Like all the rest of Western culture, I’d unconsciously gravitate toward white male writers, and I’d check myself every now and then, seeking out a book by a woman or African-American writer. However misguided and cliche-ridden Black History Month may sometimes seem, it serves this good purpose — it makes us think about inclusivity. I’d say to myself,  “Okay, let’s read a good African-American novel this month,” when I may not have done so without the reminder.

On the film side, The Hurt Locker, directed by Kathryn Bigelow, is being included on many 2009 top-ten movie lists. It fits, in a way, the male-themed model, in that it’s an action movie about soldiers who disable explosive devices. But it also is a passionate anti-war film. Like many women, I’m avoiding this movie because I’m queasy about the violence, but I admire it from afar. My stereotypically female behavior — steering clear of violent movies — is another aspect of this whole problem. On most mainstream lists, Bigelow is the only woman listed, but when international films are considered, many women are popping up. For example, The Beaches of Agnes, a lovely film by Agnes Varda, shows up, as does The Headless Woman by Lucrecia Martel. (Both of which appeared at the Cleveland Institute of Art Cinematheque.)

Anyway, I had to compile a list of my favorite books of 2009 for the Plain Dealer. I didn’t pretend that they were the “best,” but they were the best I read last year. My list of ten included three women writers. It’s at least a better percentage than the Publishers Weekly top ten, but, sadly, about the same as their top 100. Here they are, along with my little blurbs. (None of these appeared in the final PD list.) Lynne Sharon Schwartz’s witty memoir, in my opinion, should have been on everyone’s 10 Best list.

  • Inside of a Dog: What Dogs See, Smell, and Know by Alexandra Horowitz

 A scientist and dog lover interprets the canine umwelt, that is, how the dog experiences the world, with affection but no sentimentality. (This would make a great book-group choice along with The Story of Edgar Sawtelle. If your group likes dogs.)

  • Not Now, Voyager: A Memoir by Lynne Sharon Schwartz

 The under-read novelist writes a wittily charming and elegant travel memoir, having admitted at the outset that she doesn’t really like to travel.  

  • Lies Will Take You Somewhere by Sheila Schwartz

Schwartz’s daring, suspenseful, and funny novel is made poignant by her untimely death just before its publication.

Posted in Books | Leave a comment

About Borderline Personality Disorder

Until recently, experts estimated that two to three percent of Americans suffer from borderline personality disorder—over seven-million people. A recent study has upped the estimate to an astounding six percent. That would total around eighteen-million Americans, over three times the number of Alzheimer’s patients. (Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder occur in about one percent of the population.) When you factor in family members affected by the disease, the numbers are as high as thirty-million people or more.

So, it’s surprising that so few books about BPD are available. A shelf devoted to BPD would contain only a few dozen books, mostly targeted at professionals. Few are geared toward a popular audience, and even fewer are memoirs. Only two concern borderline parents. Books about depression, autism, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia, in contrast, fill the shelves of bookstores and libraries. When I began to connect my mother’s enigmatic, frustrating behavior with BPD, I read everything I could find hoping to understand her. Only two books—Surviving a Borderline Parent by Kimberlee Roth and Freda Friedman and Understanding the Borderline Mother: Helping Her Children Transcend the Intense, Unpredictable, and Volatile Relationship by Christine Ann Lawson—directly concerned the mother with BPD.

BPD is a frustratingly variable phenomenon. Certain symptoms, though, are hallmarks of the disorder. A person with BPD forms intense relationships and tries frantically to prevent the other person from abandoning her. (Three times as many women are diagnosed with BPD as men.) When that other idealized person inevitably falls short, the person with BPD suddenly reverses her high opinion—the other person is no longer loved, but despised. The person on whom they’re focusing all of their energies becomes either a devil or angel.

These extreme shifts show up in other borderline reactions. “Black-and-white thinking” causes sufferers to feel that they’re in more pain than anyone else in the world and that they’ll trust therapy only if it cures them completely—at which time they’ll be completely happy, like the people they imagine surround them. The emotions of people with BPD are erratic, and rage is common; it’s possible that many borderline men, diagnosed far less frequently than women, are incarcerated for violent crimes.

The term “borderline,” coined in 1938 by psychoanalyst Adolph Stern, describes a middle ground between neurosis and psychosis. Most experts trace borderline symptoms to a sense of emptiness and a lack of a strong sense of self—sometimes traceable to a childhood trauma such as abuse. (Some mental-health professionals consider BPD a manifestation of post-traumatic stress disorder.) Lacking a sense of self, the patient may also resort to impulsive activities, like spending irresponsibly or sexual acting out, to fill the void. She has difficulty feeling empathy.

Much of the literature presents BPD’s prognosis as dire. There’s hope in new therapies, however. Dr. Marsha Linehan, director of the Behavioral Research & Therapy Clinics at the University of Washington, has developed a promising treatment for BPD called Dialectical Behavior Therapy. She focuses on the inability to regulate emotion properly. The therapist must directly confront, in a caring and accepting manner, the patients’ emotions and dysfunctional behavior. Linehan’s compassionate approach involves reassuring patients that the therapist won’t abandon them and trying whenever possible to validate their feelings instead of contradicting them. Her approach also requires therapists to work together to share the stresses of their work and honestly to face their own frustrations and emotions.

Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, along with other innovative cognitive therapies and pharmaceutical research, is giving hope to those suffering with this painfully misunderstood and stigmatized disorder.

Posted in BPD-Related | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments