雏菊1966

这个世界上的一切都堕落了

你说的一切是什么

就是一切

我们堕落了不是吗

而且我有工作，做个傻瓜哈哈哈哈哈哈哈

有五秒转的时光列车太酷炫太惊喜了！

鬼马的太有趣了（两个人一黑一白，一个墨绿一个薄荷绿，一个格纹一个波点，一个短发花环一个双马尾，一起烧房子，泡牛奶浴，在草地上打滚儿，剪衣服，互相丢蛋糕）把蝴蝶标本与女性身体的私密敏感部位相结合

你不属于这个世纪

我一定是爱上你了

导演维拉·希蒂洛娃（Věra Chytilová）是捷克斯洛伐克新浪潮电影时期的代表人物之一，有“东欧最前卫女导演”、“捷克电影第一夫人”之称。我个人并不喜欢大家在女性导演的身份前加上“女”字，因为你不会在男性导演前面加上“男”字。所以，我单纯地认为，她是一位非常前卫，非常风格化的导演，我非常喜欢她的作品。

《雏菊》，这部1966年的作品，时隔55年，放在今天来看，依然是我心中前卫的作品。

这部作品的前卫之处，首先很直观的体现在它给你的视听冲击。开片用了近2分钟的时间，运用重复蒙太奇，在紧张的像战鼓一样的音乐中，交叉展现战争中炮弹对世界的摧毁画面。你会想这是一部战争电影吗？然后画面突然转到两个女孩的对话，她们认为这世界没有人理解她们，世界的一切已经堕落，于是她们也决定开始堕落。故事就这样开始了，她们或跟不同的老男人约会、或去歌舞厅捣蛋、或者去偷吃破坏丰盛的食物。

我是一个很喜欢通过不同的色调去展现影片氛围的人。在这部作品中，你能看到几乎所有的色彩被呈现在影片中，一会是黑白、一会是红色、一会是琥珀色，有时在一个场景中，每个画面切换不同的颜色，有时在一个镜头里转换不同的颜色，我想说，这也太厉害了，我爱死了。每次我在我的作品中想要这么去展现的时候，我都觉得自己真是个天才，然后再看到这些表现手法，其实在很久以前就有人这么做了的时候，我都自惭形秽。

这部作品的人物表演是刻意的，做作的，但是这个刻意和做作是恰到好处的。她们有时穿着漂亮的裙子，有时穿着像太空人的报纸做的衣服，有时穿着比基尼，她们有时会吵架，有时会沉思，有时欢笑，有时做一些很怪异的行为，用剪刀剪鸡蛋，在家里放火烧东西，看着她们，仿佛离开了地球，去到另一个星球。

影片在两个女孩看似「堕落」的故事内核下，将战争元素的画面插入其中。除了开片的两分钟，结尾也以一个俯拍的长镜头下战争带来的破败景象结束，甚至在黑屏之后，炮声依然震耳欲聋，敲击着心脏。战争一前一尾， 将这两个女孩的故事包裹，就像战争包裹着人们的生活。影片的结尾出现一条字幕「谨以此片献给精神生活一片混乱的人」。在经历战争与战后重建的时代背景下，「一片混乱」就是人们的生活写照吧。而这也许就是导演想表达的。在纪录片《捷克斯洛伐克60年代新浪潮电影二十五面体》采访中，导演说「我们知道电影应该表达其他语言无法表达的东西」。对这句话，我想各人都有各人的理解。

重复旋转的涡轮，漫无目的的飞机，一团迷糊的炮火，尖锐而规律的号角。横亘欧洲的铁幕在前，一切工业符号都有了足够的理由出现，炮弹在号角声中飞驰，燃烧，坠落，流弹入海。

画面一转，我们看见两位少女正坐在海边的沙滩上。

她们没有色彩，没有动作，每一个姿势都伴随着微妙的吱呀声，让人联想到捷克的木偶传统。她们就麻木而天真地坐在那里。玛丽二号吹响了一声号角，说，ani na mi to jde（我才不在乎）,玛丽一号接话，tak co nám jde（我们能做些什么），玛丽二号放下号角，nic nám nejde（我们什么也做不了）。

一闪而过的高楼崩塌，玛丽一号戴上花环，玛丽二号遗忘了号角。在彼此商量“要成为坏女人”之后，以玛丽二号给玛丽一号的一巴掌为转场，她们来到了有果子、有色彩的伊甸园，随之无姿态地如孩童一般起舞，玛丽二号咬了一口果子，第三个场景出现在她们的公寓里。

公寓

电影伊始再不能让人想得更多了。彼时世界被划分为两大阵营，冷战及不信任带来的军备竞赛，工业大社会生产之下异化的个人，斯大林主义背后操纵的集体思想。然而作者并未偏颇任何主义，而是站在人的境况当中谛观一切，且不予以意见。

置身在微尘与宏大的反复之间（具体表现为毫无预备的转场画面），纵然Věra Chytilová有意运用feminism的目光，但更多的依旧是普世情感。Věra本人也在采访中反复表示，她觉得自己不像女权主义者，在她的电影中寻找女权主义信息是最浅薄的解读方式。

回到最初，汲汲营营的涡轮像一盘吸尘机，毫不留情地抽离我们所谓的一切自我，使我们成为每一颗无足轻重的螺丝钉，甚至生活也要伴随着号角进行。可总有一天我们会想，如此这般的工作是为了什么呢？在高楼坠毁之前，我们显然不能够知道答案，因为一切对玛丽而言都是虚无的，直到大厦倾覆，危机才有迹可循。

终于，脱节的人变成了具体的人（要变得越来越坏），玛丽们忽然有了大胆放纵的力量（因欲念，从我们什么也做不了到偷吃果子觉得是再正常不过的事情），却更加自然快乐了，这时世界方有色彩，即便从伊甸园坠落到公寓（人间）。这是玛丽（女人们）欲念的具象化。不变的是依旧没有人理解她们，如同没有任何人能够理解彼此一样。

如此这般的工作是为了什么呢？

但是玛丽一号和玛丽二号不工作，所以她们想方设法获取食物。

玛丽二号频频和年长的男人约会，她戴着玛丽一号为她挑的丝巾，掩饰活泼的天性，装作恬静温柔的样子与男人谈话，而后玛丽一号现身，称她是玛丽二号的姐姐，肆无忌惮地点单，借此机会不顾形象地大吃大喝，而后再一齐送男人去火车站，扬长而去，进行下一个轮回。

她们服装一黑一白，长相成熟的玛丽一号戴着花环，一席白裙，长相幼态的玛丽二号环绕丝巾，一身黑裙，在此后的故事当中，她们频繁变换服饰，但只有花环和丝巾贯穿始终。就服装、长相而言，玛丽一号和玛丽二号显然是男人印象的一体两面，制作者将其进行了错位倒置，加剧了电影的荒诞感。

由于男女关系的故事浮现，人们往往倾向于联系父权社会下的女性处境，不过这似乎也是一种刻板印象，并恰恰也是Věra所嘲弄的符号标签，是她电影最表层的部分。她以此为武器，嘲弄了观看她电影并试图从刻板印象出发的所有解释。尽管暗示着女性的自主思想，电影提出女性应该离开家庭和社会角色的约制，寻找自身在父权社会被弱化的独立意志，但玛丽们作为想象中的女性角色，她们的伊甸园中并无亚当，因此不存在作为男人肋骨而被创建出来的前提，故而也不依附于任何一个男人。尽管用着男人的钱财贪飨不已，但这只是出于世俗的交易——男人欲念的具象化。比起划分阵营，Věra把男女双方的印象都极致标签化，那些故事是如此真实又是如此不真实，仿佛流动的话语和口号，她要针对的只有那个掌握话语权的人选。

玛丽一号也进行了约会。这次是在一个收集蝴蝶标本的男人公寓。他一再向她表白，她以蝴蝶标本为挟，反复脱离掌控，只问身边有没有食物。蝴蝶标本、报纸上漂亮女性的图片拼贴皆暗含男性对女性的情欲，女性应符合男性所渴望的模样，即纯洁的样貌、处女、服从男性、漂亮的身材等。嗓音高亢，举止幼稚，是男人们生活中“期待的”，因为他们没有意识到两个女人的故意行为。

而伊甸园的禁果、花等除了具象化为贪食之外，亦隐喻着女性对自我情欲的追求。同样的，玛丽二号在与老男人约会之时，老男人虽克制，但也在进食，男女的欲望本质上是一致的，饮食男女，贪食色相。玛丽一号用蝴蝶标本遮掩三点，男人低声求她取走，正暗合这一点。而这一幕的精彩之处则在于模糊结局的后续，玛丽一号与玛丽二号继续玩乐，听着打来电话男人所说的情话，把挂在墙上的纸带和香肠烧掉，一一剪掉烤好的香肠、鸡蛋（男人的情欲象征）——她们都对男人没有欲望。也许她们是爱着对方的。

一同泡澡

后来，玛丽一号和玛丽二号准备泡澡，“这就是我不明白的，为什么会有人说我爱你，你明白吗？”“为什么你会这么说而不是用鸡蛋来替代呢？”，她们将鸡蛋打碎，在浴缸里倒满牛奶，把报纸上剪下的男人纸像压入牛奶当中，玛丽一号看着沉下去的男人纸像，“就像是，有人不在了。”“你的意思是死了吗？”，她们一边泡澡一边进食，同时对生与死、存在与不存在进行哲学思考。“是的，拿你举例。”“我？他更喜欢你。”“现在我们坐在这里，想象一下，这不是我们。这太愚蠢了。”“谁告诉你这是我们？谁告诉你，你真的存在呢？”“你。”“是的，这是真的。”

再后来她们去了乡下，农民没有注意到玛丽一号和玛丽二号，一群骑自行车的工人从她们身边同样不在意地经过，玛丽一号和玛丽二号开始怀疑自己是否已经消失了。不过她们去偷玉米并且捣乱至一地鸡毛时，她们又确信了自己的存在。回到公寓，她们用被子卷起对方，用剪刀把彼此剪开，同时窃窃私语，“真高兴我们回家了。”“去死，去死，去死。”“你在燃烧，我在燃烧，我们在燃烧。”“你觉得过得如何？”“不要这样对待我，你知道我爱你。”“我们会发生什么事，我们会发生什么事，我们会发生什么事。”“我们缺乏任何证据。”“我们不要走更多的路了，好吗？”，从而成就电影的另一幕波普平面主义高潮。

似有若无的话语逻辑，分解的肢体与纸片，极具视觉与话语的冲击。作为讨论的命题，欲念和虚无都被明显地提了出来。“爱（欲）”与“鸡蛋”的价值观冲突，“存在”与“虚无”的证明方法，最后，用棉被包裹自己，用剪刀撕碎彼此。为什么要说我爱你而不是用鸡蛋来替代呢？他们只想消费她们罢了。

虚虚实实，真真假假，无一不愚嘲着表面之下虚伪，被滥用的自由话语，以及这个撒谎的世界。用天真的破坏欲来击穿现实的逻辑话语，她们此刻犹如化身战争，坦克碾碎引以为豪的人文主义，原子弹炸沉那些公共道德，不计其数的尸体走路，说话，只有玫瑰会唱歌，但艳丽的玫瑰本真也是刺。她们打碎鸡蛋进行沐浴，喝浴缸里的牛奶，超出美味享受的范围亦或者说是生理需求的界限（尤在下一幕体现最甚），食物成为堕落本源的象征，是七宗罪之一，是对权力与话语的渴望，是人心虚无的体现。

在世俗的伊甸园故事当中，禁果是情欲的体现，爱是存在的证明，她们就深情而严肃地说，“你知道我爱你”，与前文“谁告诉你这是我们？谁告诉你，你真的存在呢？”“你。”“是的，这是真的。”相印证，很难不去猜测，这是为了对抗虚无而说出的借口，因前方农民与工人的漠视，她们除了撒落一地玉米穗，用客观世界反证自身之外，只能与同一维度的玛丽相爱（没有人关心她们，爱她们，证明其存在），又或许这是一对不为世俗所容的同性恋，在父权异性恋的世界里挣扎，无论如何，“我们不要走更多的路了，好吗？”，已然预示了一个终点，随后她们把彼此剪碎，在存在与虚无中来回翻覆，Věra使用了大量彩色滤镜、波普手法、蒙太奇手段，不乏让吕克戈达尔的痕迹，但她在某种程度上的确在与她们共舞。被撕碎的不仅是自我，也是一切，国家，社会，被重新缝补的也是这些，极尽绚烂当中我们看见的却只有虚无，两个少女仿佛伊甸园之果喂养而出的恶之花，在思想和行动上，恶劣地破坏一切看得见的规则游戏，既包括她们自己和故事逻辑，也包括观影者的思维。

她们没有走更多的路了，玛丽一号和玛丽二号乘坐机器来到一个奢华的大厅，当中有一大桌丰盛的食物，或许是某场共产主义领导高层行将举行的聚会。她们用手尝着不同的食物，不停更换座位以便得到美食，贪食在这一部分当中得到淋漓尽致的体现，不仅如此，她们脱光衣服，无意识地肆意挥霍食物，用高跟鞋踩踏佳肴，踢飞盘子，将蛋糕当做雪球扔来扔去，镜面视觉效果一度呈现出万花筒的形态。

当她们爬上吊灯荡秋千之时，两人掉入河中，接着电影出现了恍如审判者的字幕：这是她们唯一的结束方式，有任何方式可以拯救这些恶毒的行为吗，玛丽们回答我们快淹死了，我们在呼救，因为我们完全堕落了，我们再也不想堕落了，于是审判者说，我们会给她们第二次机会，接下来会发生什么事情。

玛丽们穿着用废弃报纸做成的衣服将餐桌收拾干净。她们回到餐厅。把打破的碎片放在桌子上，把食物倒回盘子里，说着我们要善良，我们要勤奋，那么，一切都会干净而美丽。清理完成之后，她们躺在桌子中央，说着我们很高兴。玛丽二号让玛丽一号重复这句话，玛丽一号问我们是否在伪装。玛丽二号说我们不是，随即吊灯落在了她们身上，电影切换到战争镜头，上面出现电影声明：“献给那些精神生活一片混乱的人”。

这是无聊的、不被世界理解、和世界一起变坏的玛丽们所做的最后一件事情。她们果然没有克制自己的欲念，尽情享用着大厅里的一切，秉持着谁发现谁掌握谁进食的原则，与那些滥用霸权的人们不同的是，她们不加以遮掩，甚至破坏到底，娱乐到底。贪食症在现代社会被看作精神病征之一，在玛丽们疯狂不加节制进食的背后，反映的恰恰是精神世界的崩溃，她们的行径看似没有什么意义，甚至滑稽可笑，但各种过火行为映射出内心的虚无；面对现实世界的混沌，这些荒诞大概是她们消除不安的镇静剂。自电影起始，她们几次回归伊甸园，再下沉到人间，而在这一幕过后落进水里。

伊甸园和水域总是交叉出现，从Věra的天主教家庭背景出发，我们不妨把这几次伊甸园看作地狱抑或天堂的层级，把水域理解为灭世纪的洪水，经历一次次欲念“罪责”之后，被“上帝”问罪，因此玛丽们不断坠落，直至虚无主义的水域（内心的道德底层），她们才开始求饶和反思。这也暗合甚至反讽了捷克民族形象，“Pábitelé”式的言行举止，这种天真的、甚至是愚蠢的幻想似乎又是一种高超的生存技巧。正是这样一种生存姿态使得捷克民族得以在血雨腥风的历史变迁中生存下来。

因此，似乎很难去判定哪一种是好的，哪一种是坏的，没有永恒的真理，只有无所不在的悖论。

她们穿着废弃报纸拼接包裹的衣服回来打扫，正如玛丽们曾遇见的清洁工一样，与此前不同的是，如今她们沾满了标签，口号和他人的话语，不再是发誓所成为的自由的坏女人了，她们的愿望（欲念）只有好好工作，然后幸福。我们可以看到，大厅里狼藉的场景渐渐干净而整洁起来，但破碎的盘子仍然无法复原，掉在地上的食物再也没办法进食，脏污的窗帘依旧脏污，被战争破坏的家园亦复如是，Věra用物质构建的客观世界映射人们战后创伤的心灵还是那么空虚无措，像是用生命做出的一场达达主义实验，尽管玛丽们没有溺毙在道德的彼岸，吊灯还是击中了彼时凌驾于社会体制之上的她们，被世俗规范驯化的，最终也将为世俗规范所摧毁。玛丽们仅仅只代表女性吗？仅仅只代表个人吗？我看不尽然。

始終覺得一部大師級的電影少不了各種看不懂，於是你就做功課，直到你恍然大悟。當然有人要個人主義，愛誰誰去，我都不懂了還看看看且不是自虐！但是不同的是，一部沒B裝B的電影和有B可裝的電影是不一樣的，所謂大師，就是有B了。既然有了B，咱就謙虛一點好了^_^ 今天看的是捷克的新浪潮幹將齊蒂諾娃之《雛菊》，講述的是兩個空虛放縱的年輕女子和她們怪異舉止的片段式的、令人眼花繚亂的的超現實主義描寫。73分鐘的先鋒實驗片，開啟了捷克新浪潮的大門，但是影片完成后據說因為“浪費食物”的緣由被社會主義當局禁映直到第二年解禁并在世界範圍內獲得好評。 電影是沒有常識思維的，一堆亂七八糟的炫麗圖片，沒有劇情，穿著除了領口哪兒都一樣衣服的兩個吃貨，各種驚世駭俗。哪怕是拿到四十多年后的今天來看，依舊不失其先鋒性。 我看到了波普。色彩，底片被染上多種顏色，隨意的剪切拼圖。藍裙子倚著綠大門或者綠裙子倚上藍大門。蝴蝶三點比基尼，自創抹胸，廢棄的鋼絲卷放到頭上就是一頂帽子，鏽跡斑斑的鐵絲網穿到了身上，還有舊報紙做成的衣服。那時候andy·warhol的《瑪麗蓮·夢露》還沒出世呢。 還有女權。男人在電話里傾訴衷腸，門外敲門說愛，兩個女傻丫卻在房間里剪香腸、雞蛋、香蕉吃。車站餐廳里各種各樣瞄準她們下半身的中年男子，卻只落得一個為兩個吃貨買單換來車站一惜別待遇。 蒙太奇。新浪潮也不是只有長盡頭。恰到好處的蒙太奇（當然是你所意想不到的）依然是叫人折服的。神作的火車軌道，伴隨始終的機械動作，各種畫外音，滴滴答滴的時鐘聲。 當然，整個片子，其實是達達。兩隻性感的怪仔妹發表宣言“既然世界已經如此糟糕，我們何不讓它變得更壞”！於是搞破壞、戲弄別人、糟蹋食物、肆無忌憚，笑的卻跟邪惡的小綿羊似地。適時的插入炮彈爆裂，飛機轟炸的場景，一切規矩都打破，所有的存在都要顛覆去？毀滅，被毀滅，荒誕和虛無。怪不得布拉格之春被老大哥鎮壓后，導演被禁拍好幾年電影。 影片結尾，導演說“這部電影先給精神生活完全混亂的人。” 哈，精神上的快樂才是永久快樂的唯一保障。 笑死了。然後，好餓~~

Destruction and Reflection in Objectification: Feminist Allegory in Daisies/ Sedmirkrásky [1] and The Girls/ Flickorna [2]In the male-dominated film industry, it is rare to see films made from the perspective of women. Thornburg complains that traditionally most media have provided limited role models for women and that most films objectify women and define them in terms of their relationship to men.[3] With the onset of second-wave feminism in the early 1960s in the west, more women got involved in the film industry as filmmakers and more films were produced from a feminist point of view. Examples of such films include Daisies and The Girls, which are both directed by and use women as protagonists. These films successfully broke down stereotypical portrayals of women in film and have presented women’s reflection on their condition under patriarchal society. Daisies is directed by Věra Chytilová, a preeminent member of the Czech New Wave film movement. This film can be interpreted in a number of ways and can also be considered as a feminist allegory which reconstructs the doll metaphor as the celebration of the female recalcitrance rather than the apparent condemnation of its heroines.[4] The Girls, which is more recognisable of its director - Mai Zetterling’s political commitment, inserts an ancient Greek comedy - Lysistrata as a feminist allegory to reveal the heroines’ reflection on their own lives. Focusing on the central notion in feminism - objectification, this study will explore the feminist values presented to the viewer in Daisies and The Girls. This will be achieved by carefully comparing and analysing filmic elements and techniques used in both of these films. Before we begin to analyse their respective film works, it is valuable to look at these female filmmakers’ authorship approaches first. Although Chytilová and Zetterling are both from Europe, they came from opposing parts of Europe divided by the so called “Iron Curtain” for much of the 20th century, leading to distinct cultural differences in their work. As one of the most innovative filmmakers in 1960s, Chytilová’s work is characterised by surrealism, grotesque satire and absurdism. She is very creative in her methods through which she utilises avant-garde and experimental techniques to establish her own unique film style. For a brief period the work she produced was critical of communism, due to the de-Stalinization policy of the Czech government in the early 1960s, a short-lived period of artistic freedom in the country. Her early career as a fashion model may also have influenced Daisies. Zetterling is perhaps better known in the west for her acting than for her directing, yet she has created a new image of women in film which has embodied the potential of filmmaking by women[5]. Her filmmaking style is deeply influenced by the Swedish Ingmar Bergman, who has achieved worldwide notoriety as a director. He has directed several films and TV series that focus on women and marriage such as Persona[6] and Scenes from a Marriage/Scener ur ett äktenskap [7] which are in the same vein as The Girls. Some of the actors from The Girls also star in some Bergman’s other films. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the influence of Bergman when analysing The Girls by Zetterling.Differences in film elements and techniques set apart the contrasting styles of Daisies and The Girls. When analysing the respective films’ cinematography, it is apparent that the change of colour in Daisies and The Girls sets essential differences in their film’s tone. The differences are not just confined to the fact that Daisies is cine-colour and The Girls is in black and white. Daisies has manifest colour change from filters change and colour effect. The heavy use of colour effect in this film does not follow any specific rules, setting a tone that resembles a disordered game. Hames remarks that Daisies does not take itself seriously as most experimental films do.[8] This is contrast to The Girls, which follows a clear rule of the change of colour contrast. To some extent, The Girls is a combination of acting, reality, imagination and reminiscence. However, it is notable that only the reality and acting on the timeline are presented in a normal contrast, whereas imagination and flashback are both in high black and white contrast. This indicates a strong tendency of gender opposition. A clear and firm tone has been stated from the manifest colour change.

Fig. 1 The dynamic colour effect of rail in Daisies.

As evidenced by the soundtrack differences in Daisies and The Girls, the feminist allegory is told in a subtle way and a direct way respectively in each film. Much like its visual style, Daisies’ soundtrack is an experimental mixture of dialogue, sound effects and music. The soundtrack is more independent in Daisies, it includes pop music and mechanical sounds such as the tik tok of a clock and creaking sounds. The creative use of contrapuntal sound effectively defines the attributes of the two heroines from the opening scene of Daisies: the movement of the two Maries’ bodies makes a mechanical sound. From the beginning of the film Chytilová has made it clear that two heroines are puppet-like, as evidenced from their stiff and unnatural movements. In contrast, the sound source used in The Girls is diegetic for the most part. The movie uses dialogue directly copied from the play Lysistrata for dramatic effect. The memories and imagination aroused by the theatre that three heroines perform in are juxtaposed with lines from Lysistrata, to show their understanding of the drama and reflection of their real lives. The psychological description of an old couple who Liz has treated like friends is shown as monologues which reveal the status quo of women under the male gaze. Compared to Daisies, the dialogue in The Girls is more revealing in terms of its political overtones. This is in contrast to the dialogue of Daisies, which is far more banal and mundane, therefore its subtext as a feminist allegory is presented in a far more subtle way. Another element that differentiates the style of Daisies and The Girls is the performance style. The performance in Daisies is mostly acted out by the two women, and they are both amateur actors. Their performance style is unique and unnatural, and is in keeping with the style of the film. Their body language and speech are also stilted, and these traits combined with their negative and selfish behaviour are superficially attractive. [9] This performance style helps to establish the image of the girls as being doll like, Hames argues that they ‘act out a puppet-like spectacle.’[10] In The Girls, the acting performances are more natural and professional. The characters’ behaviour noticeably diverges under different conditions. In the real world and in memory sequences, the heroines are obedient and weak. However in the scenes from the theatre and from their imagination, they are radical and strong. These inconsistencies in their behaviour show their strong desire to have these traits in the real world. For instance, Liz gives three speeches which are after the show, in the real world in front of the journalists and in her imagination. Her confidence level varies in each of her speeches, at the start of her after-show speech she is reasonably self-assured, but in her real world speech she is irresolute, lastly in her imagination she is fearless and intrepid, reflecting her ‘desire for power’.[11]

Fig.2 Liz’s three speeches in The Girls: after the play, in front of the journalists and in her fantasy.

To some extent, Daisies is about the consequences of poor decision making whereas The Girls is a reflection on the feminist allegory. Daisies and The Girls both criticise consumerism with food but in differing ways. In The Girls, Gunila has an unpleasant flashback where she goes shopping and buys a cake. She is treated disrespectfully by a male clerk in shop and then children start to chase her, leaving her feeling helpless. She drops the cake she bought and runs away. Gunila does not push back against the clerk’s behaviour and fears the kids even as a mother of four children herself. In Daisies, the two girls eat, cut and spoil food, and burn things with joy. There behaviours show the girls’ liberation from consumerism using hyperbolic imagery. Lim describes them as being ‘awaken to revolt’[12]against the worn out cliche that women are powerless and flimsy.The relationship between the heroines and men in these two films are portrayed using different techniques. In Daisies, the two Maries belong to no-one, and they enjoy the game of manipulating men because of their inability to love. In other words, they also belong to everyone. They are portrayed as both consumers and destroyers of food, but in reality they represent the typical woman who has been objectified to the point where they are no different to a product that is consumed in the patriarchal society. Chytilová further highlights this from other details in the film such as when the two Maries soak themselves in the milk bath and when they get into the food elevator. In Daisies, the two Maries use destruction to justify their existence. Nobody cares them so they decide to destroy. The Girls is for the most part about the struggle of three heroines against the men in their lives. They are deeply bothered by the reality that people are indifferent towards them even though they are successful actresses. The girls in Daisies parallel the mistresses of Liz’s husband in her fantasy scene in The Girls. Liz’s husband takes his mistresses out from his case and undresses them on the bed as though they are dolls, whilst persuading Liz to sacrifice her career to support him. Thornburg points out that Liz’s husband wants to objectify Liz in the same manner as his mistresses: to achieve an ‘expansion of his own ego’.[13]Clouzot states that the dominant trait of Daisies is its objective vision[14], which explains why Chytilová and Zetterling present the two Maries and the mistresses of Liz’s husband in a similar manner.

Fig. 3 Analogous characters in The Girls and Daisies: The mistresses of Liz’s husband and the two Maries are all like dolls.

The difference can also be seen from different character settings. In The Girls, the heroines’ conflict with the men in their lives is partly due to their successful jobs. However, in Daisies, the two girls never work but exist under an ‘economical parasitism’ [15]. The three heroines in The Girls are middle-class white women who can be related to by the audience from their different conditions: Mariamne is a mistress, Liz has a cheating husband and Gunila is a mother who has a boring and irresponsible husband. In Daisies, the young and beautiful Maries are an extreme representation of every woman who has been objectified in their life. Daisies and The Girls both operate within a double world structure but it presented to the viewer in different ways. The two worlds in Daisies, which are the realistic orderly world and the world of the two Maries’ abnormal behaviours, exist independently. The majority of Daisies is dominated by the second world. There are several parts of the film in which the two Maries encounter the real world. For example, in the nightclub scene, a female dancer becomes frozen with surprise upon viewing the two Maries’ farcical behaviour. One can assume that her reaction shows how she has become enlightened by the two Maries’ defiance against docility. In the countryside scene, the two Maries are passed by a group of workers who totally ignore them, which sparks Maries’ self-criticism about their decision to engage in this behaviour. Moreover, the dual protagonists are symbolic of the double world. The repeated use of symmetrical composition from the beginning correlates with the concept of double world. Daisies starts with the dual protagonists sitting on the ground and ends with them lying on the table after their punishment. Their rebellion is destined to fail because they are still stuck in the cage of patriarchal society. At the end of the film, their behaviour reverts to that of the stereotypical female, happy to be subservient in society. Their destruction can be interpreted as Chytilová’s criticism on objectifying women.

Fig. 4 The double world in Daisies: the female dancer is closely awakened by the two Maries’ unruly behaviour which shows an intrusion of th

In The Girls, the double world becomes mixed up together as the three heroines’ theatre acting, real life and fantasy combine. The nightclub scene in The Girls is a fantasy in which Liz leads the women to use their initiative to put themselves under the male gaze by taking off their clothes in front of male onlookers. Only in the imaginary scenes do the women rebel bravely, which is similar to the behaviour of the girls in Daisies. Apart from this, the heroines are passive and oppressed in the real world. Their fantasies are more like daydreams, compared to the practical revolt that occurs in Daisies. The Girls ends in an ambiguous manner. Liz’s decision to get divorced is not shown explicitly but is replaced by the imagery of distorted figures dancing in the mirror, which may indicate an acknowledgement by Zitterling that the challenges faced by women in the real world are still difficult to conquer. As Zitterling admits that ‘a woman is emotionally formed by men and never quite breaks free from them, even if she would like to.’[16]

Fig. 5 The colour contrast change in the last scene of The Girls when Liz declares she is getting a divorce, which calls into question wheth

Thanks to the efforts of generations of feminists, women have made great progress in the pursuit of gender equality in the west. However, today’s world is still dominated by men, and women in developing countries are still facing similar problems to what were experienced by women in the developed world in the 1960s. Winkler describes the three main actresses in The Girls as having a real ‘sense of frustration with balancing or combining work and family’ in 1995[17]. Women in the movie industry are still facing these same problems today. Chytilová has become renowned for her talent, skills and unique style. However, Zetterling cannot avoid being overshadowed by the more acclaimed Bergman as a director. Therefore, films like Daisies and The Girls are still hugely relevant as feminist allegories, not only because they show how women have awakened to reflect on their condition, but also to act as a benchmark when it comes to the representation of women in film today. Daisies and The Girls both have distinctive styles in presenting colours, sound and performance on screen. Chytilová tells the story of how women can be destroyed by objectification through an experimental comedy. Zetterling contrasts the reality and the political appeal of women who have become inspired by the play Lysistrata. They both reflect on the manner in which women have become objectified and go on to explore the real world demands of women. Although the five heroines in two films all fail in practicing, the double world in Daisies already interacts with each other and the three actresses in The Girls are awaken on the ideological level. These proclaimed feminist films will always inspire people to reflect and behave just as the female filmmakers had wished. Winkler highlights that Liz’s speech after her performance likely serves as Zetterling’s own views in regard to her film[18]. These films shot from the woman’s perspective in 1960s deserve more notoriety as they are invaluable in showing the potential of women as independent human beings. As Winkler argues that ‘in spite of Bergman’s influence, The Girls is Zetterling’s own.’[19]

Filmography

Bergman, Ingmar, Persona, 1966. Film. Swe: AB Svensk Filmindustri

Bergman, Ingmar, Scene from a Marriage/ Scener ur ett äktenskap, 1973. TV series. Swe: Sveriges Radio

Chytilová, Věra, Daisies/Sedmirkrásky. 1966. Film.

Zetterling, Mai. The Girls/Flickorna. 1968. Film. Swe: Sandrew Film & Teater

Bibliography

Anděl, Jaroslav, Alexandr Hackenschmied (Prague: Torst, 2000)Clouzot, Claire, ‘Daisies by Věra Chytilová’ Film Quartly, Vol.21, No.3, 1968, pp. 35-37.

Hames, Peter, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema) (Edinburgh University Press, 2010)

Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’ Camera Obscura, Vol.16, No.2, 2001, pp. 1-77.

Sloan, Jane, ‘Making the Scene Together: Mai Zetterling’s Flikorna/The Girls(1968) and Aristophanes’s Lysistrata’, Quarterly Review of Film and Video, Vol.25, No.2, 2008, pp. 97-106

Thornburg, Linda, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’ Journal of the University Film Association, Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1974, pp. 13-15.

Winkler, Martin M, Classical Literature on Screen: Affinities of Imagination (Cambridge Press, 2017)

[1] Chytilová, Věra, Daisies/Sedmirkrásky. 1966. Film. [2] Zetterling, Mai. The Girls/Flickorna. 1968. Film. Swe: Sandrew Film & Teater [3] Thornburg, Linda, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’ Journal of the University Film Association, Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1974, p. 13. [4] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’ Camera Obscura, Vol.16, No.2, 2001, p. 38. [5] Thornburg, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 13. [6] Bergman, Ingmar, Persona, 1966. Film. Swe: AB Svensk Filmindustri [7] Bergman, Ingmar, Scene from a Marriage/ Scener ur ett äktenskap, 1973. TV series. Swe: Sveriges Radio [8] Hames, Peter, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema) (Edinburgh University Press, 2010), p. 152. [9] Anděl, Jaroslav, Alexandr Hackenschmied (Prague: Torst, 2000), p. 8. [10] Hames, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema), p. 154. [11] Sloan, Jane, ‘Making the Scene Together: Mai Zetterling’s Flikorna/The Girls(1968) and Aristophanes’s Lysistrata’, Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 25:2, 2008, p. 102. [12] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’, p. 60. [13] Thornburg, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 15. [14] Clouzot, Claire, ‘Daisies by Věra Chytilová’ Film Quartly, Vol.21, No.3, 1968, p. 35. [15] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’, p. 57. [16] Thornburg, quoted in Rosen, Marjorie, ‘Women, Their films and Their Festival’ Saturday Review (ed) ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 15. [17] Winkler, Martin M, Classical Literature on Screen:Affinities of Imagination ( Cambridge Press, 2017), p.149. [18] Ibid. p.144. [19] Ibid. p.148.