Materialities, Subjectivities and the Symbolic Spaces of Destruction and Hope in K. G. George’s Films

  • Archana VasudevEmail author


The theory of male gaze was first introduced by Laura Mulvey in her 1975 essay ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.’ According to Mulvey (Screen 16: 6–18, 1975), cinema reflects the oblivion of patriarchal society and reinforces the notion that women are the subject of heterosexual male control and desire (Superson in Hypatia 26: 410–418, 2011). The function of cinema, according to Laura Mulvey, is to serve as a voyeuristic medium that encourages the audience to take pleasure from looking upon. Many Hollywood movies, especially the films of Hitchcock and Sternberg, were widely studied on the basis of this version of psychoanalytic theory. Subsequently, new sources for revitalizing feminist film theory emerged through performance studies, new media studies, phenomenology and Deleuzian philosophy. These are theoretical frameworks that move beyond the semiotic preoccupation with meaning, representation and interpretation. Taking Mulvey’s analysis as its starting point, this chapter examines the specific techniques of the veteran Malayalam filmmaker, K. G. George’s representation of women in his film Adaminte Variyellu (Adam’s Rib) and men in Panchavadi Palam (Panchavadi Bridge) in order to suggest an alternative way of understanding the status of women and men in these works. In particular, this chapter aims to mobilize Gilles Deleuze’s work on cinema and other artistic media in order to argue the case that K. G. George’s films offer his characters a status that can be enjoyed by the spectator without any preconceived notions. The Deleuzian approach allows for a less negative outlook on desire, subjectivity and identity; opening up readings of film as embodying many forms of desire and creating experiences of affirmation for the spectator (Smelik in Wiley Blackwell Encycl Gend Sex Stud: 1–5, 2016).


Male gaze Laura Mulvey Adaminte Variyellu Panchavadi Palam Deleuze and Guattari Immediacy and materiality Rhizome 


  1. Appadurai, A. (1988). The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, S. (1973). Folk devils and moral panics: The creation of the Mods and Rokers. London: Paladin.Google Scholar
  4. Deleuze, G. (1995). What is philosophy? British Journal of Educational Studies, 43 (3), 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fleissner, J. L., & Felski, R. (2002). Doing time: Feminist theory and postmodern culture. Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, 21, 396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoffmann, S., & Ignatieff, M. (1994). Blood and belonging: Journeys into the new nationalism. Foreign Affairs, 73, 148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Loudon M, Deleuze G, Guattari F et al. (1995) What Is Philosophy? British Journal of Educational Studies 43:342.
  8. Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Screen, 16, 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Osborne, B. S. (2001). Landscapes, memory, monuments, and commemoration: Putting identity in its place. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 33 (3), 39–77.Google Scholar
  10. Smelik, A. (2016). Feminist film theory. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies, 1–5. First edition (6 May 2016).Google Scholar
  11. Stivale, C., & Bogue, R. (1991). Deleuze and Guattari. SubStance, 20, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Superson, A. (2011). Strategies for making feminist. Philosophy mainstream philosophy. Hypatia, 26, 410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Taussig, M. (1984). Culture of terror—Space of death. Roger Casement’s Putumayo Report and the Explanation of Torture. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 26(3), 467.Google Scholar
  14. Vasudev, A. (2018). ‘Male gaze’ in Malayalam cinema: A reading of K.G. George’s Adaminte Variyellu. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 9, 114.Google Scholar
  15. Vegari, A. (2006). Calling the shots: Women as Deleuzian material in the cinema of Godard. Michigan Feminist Studies, 19 (Fall 2005). Accessed 20 March 2019.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Journalism and CommunicationUniversity of MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations