Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Continuing Problem of the Universal to Questions of Justice: A Feminist Reading of Lars von Trier’s Dogville

  • Published:
Liverpool Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What are the terms of evaluation that seem relevant in deciding whether a film is feminist or anti-feminist? Which critical practices should be engaged in such an evaluation? In recent and contemporary critical feminist practices, feminist arguments are no longer based on a stable subject category of “woman” and there is no longer any particular methodology upon which feminist theorists rely. The category of “woman” has been revealed to be not an ahistorical, stable category but an effect of material and representational practices. Further, feminist methodologies have been concerned to contextualize the framing of the questions they ask, as well as their place in the methodologies they employ. In addition to the refusal of an essentialized female subject, feminists have called into question the idea that it is possible to produce a “feminist method” based on the standpoint of a female subjectivity, even where this subjectivity is admitted as a construct, arguing that this extrapolation to the general from a particular point of view produces political, and frequently racist, effects. In this essay, I consider Lars von Trier’s controversial film Dogville (2003) as a case study to explore the relation of practices of representation to questions of feminist justice. I argue that the film does a lot of good critical work in showing the ways in which certain practices of representation can be mobilized to produce a collectivity (or “sovereignty”) that is seen to emanate from “the people” and to thereby instantiate authority, while simultaneously disguising the material and political effects of its subjugation of “others.” However, in doing this work the film produces its own problematic construction of universality and particularity. Further, the film instrumentalises representations of sexual violence and subjection in order to prove its point, and as productive as these tactics are to illuminating questions of social justice, I argue that this representational practice produces effects that need to be read as anti-feminist.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Abella and Zilkha (2004), Brandt (2002) (16), and Figer (2003) (16).

  2. For a critique of rape narratives in the service of colonial projects in India, see Jenny Sharpe’s Allegories of Empire. A number of feminists have shown the ways in which rape narratives have been used in the US context—see Sabine Sielke (2002) and Tanya Horeck (2004) for readings of American culture, film and literature, and Saidiya Hartman (1997) for a deconstruction of the category of “rape” as it applied in representations of plantation slavery.

  3. As Abella and Zilkha explain, the mise-en-scene ‘lures the spectators into believing they occupy an almost transcendental position in relation to the events’ (2004, p. 159).

References

  • Abella, Adela, and Nathalie Zilkha. 2004. Dogville: A parable on perversion. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis 85: 1519–1526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, Walter. 1968. Critique of violence. In Illuminations, ed. Arendt, H., (trans: Zohn, H.). New York: Schocken Books.

  • Best, Stephen. 2004. The fugitive’s properties: Law and the poetics of possession. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, Per Aage. 2002. The political philosophy of Dogville: On Dogville by Lars von Trier. P.O.V. Film and Politics.

  • Derrida, Jacques. 1980. The law of genre. Critical Inquiry 7: 55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agee, James, and Walker Evans. 1939. Let us now praise famous men. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figer, Bo. 2003. A dog not yet buried—Or Dogville as a political manifesto. P.O.V. Film and Politics.

  • Hartman, Saidiya. 1997. Scenes of subjection : Terror, slavery, and self-making in nineteenth-century America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horeck, Tanya. 2004. Public rape: Representing violation in fiction and film. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, Jeanne Follansbee. 2001. The work of art: Irony and identification in ‘Let Us Now Praise Famous Men’. Novel 34 (3): 338–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sielke, Sabine. 2002. Reading rape: The rhetoric of sexual violence in American literature and culture, 1790–1990. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, Thornton. 1938. Our town: A play in three acts. New York: Coward McCann Inc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Honni van Rijswijk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van Rijswijk, H. The Continuing Problem of the Universal to Questions of Justice: A Feminist Reading of Lars von Trier’s Dogville . Liverpool Law Rev 38, 33–46 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-017-9197-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-017-9197-3

Keywords

Navigation