A Life of Blonde Fragility

Week 7: Theology, Philosophy, and Film

Dear friends,

I apologize that this newsletter is a day late! I have been traveling and am in the middle of a move. Whew! But I am now HERE to talk about this week’s film, BARBIE! This newsletter is a long one and includes a lecture video!

This week’s live discussion will be on 3 pm ET on Saturday, April 20th (please note the starting time is an hour later than usual because of another commitment) and FREE to all.

HERE is the ZOOM LINK. This week’s discussion is FREE to any and all who wish to join. We have had some FANTASTIC discussions, so I would love even more to join us this week. And if you are interested in supporting my work and joining future discussions, you can always upgrade to a paid subscription ($5 a month). THANK YOU to all who have already done this!

When I was a little girl, I had a large collection of Barbies, one (blue leisure suit wearing) Ken doll, the Barbie Pool and Cabana, and many accessories. When I visited a favorite couson, I smuggled in a Barbie or two because she was not allowed to play with them. From what I can remember, my aunt was a feminist who believed that Barbie was sending the wrong messages to young girls about unrealistic, artificial physical standards of manmade perfection. Because of this, I used to sneak in a Barbie or two when I went to visit. On the more “neutral” ground of my grandmother’s house, I could bring my entire Barbie case so we could play dressup, wedding, and a Ken and Barbie Honeymoon in the Poconos.

Here I am (on the right) with my cousin playing with Barbies at my grandmother’s house. I am guessing that this is around 1977.

Of course, my aunt was right about Barbie’s idealized, laughably idealistic measurements. According to a classic article titled “Our Barbies, Ourselves” by Emily Prager:

“There are millions of women who are subliminally sure that a thirty-nine-inch bust and a twenty-three-inch waist are the epitome of lovability. Could this account for the popularity of breast implant surgery?”

Prager explains that the designer of Barbie was one Jack Ryan who also, interestingly enough, was a designer of Sparrow and Hawk missiles. She notes that the unrealistic Barbie proportions are more of a male fantasy than a female reality, finally asking: “Did Mr. Ryan design Barbie as a weapon?”.

The first Barbie debuted on March 9, 1959.

But Prager does not take the time to explain that Ruth Handler is also credited as the creator of Barbie (and she plays a very important role in the Barbie film). In fact, if you google the question of Barbie’s creation, Jack Ryan is not typically mentioned. Is this because agency has been given to the female creator, erasing a male co-creator from his place in history (a feminist triumph!?)? Or is it because it is a shameful secret that Barbie was (at least partially) created by a man? Even worse–a man who designed objects of war. Has Barbie’s history become woke or whitewashed? Who even knows…

---

BARBIE, directed and co-written (with Noah Baumbach) by Greta Gerwig, begins with Barbie looming large, her appearance on the scene a Copernican revolution of sorts. And Gerwig brilliantly does this with a hilarious opening allusion to Stanley Kubrick’s seminal 1968 film, 2001: A Space Odyssey. If you have never seen it (or want to revisit t), here is the famous opening sequence titled “The Dawn of Man.” If you do not want to watch all 9 minutes, you can start about 3 minutes in.

Unfortunately, this portion stopped short of showing an important (and very short) transition. You can watch that HERE.

Gerwig’s version of Kubrick’s opening sequence might be named “The Dawn of Liberated Woman.” In the film’s opening, we see little girls playing with baby dolls. They are, of course, analogous to the pre-evolved “human” monkeys of Kubrick’s sequence. The prehistoric “humans” have their incivility interrupted by the presence of a mysterious monolith from an unknown source. After the appearance of the monolith, the creatures begin to learn to use bones as tools, smashing them and throwing one into the air. As we jump into the future, this bone becomes a space satellite.

In Gerwig’s opening sequence, the interrupting presence of Barbie (who made her and placed her there?!) is as powerful and transformative as the presence of the monolith. She is also a monolith–solid, hard (plastic!), non-changing. When she appears, the little girls follow the lead of the apes by smashing their baby dolls. Note the use of Richard Strauss’s tonal poem “Also Sprach Zarathrustra,” a piece inspired by Nietzsche’s writing. Be sure to listen for its emergence again later in the film.

As the triumphant music climaxes, one of the little girls angrily throws her Barbie, and it transforms into a very familiar pinkBarbie logo.

Barbie is the future for all little girls!

“Thanks to Barbie, all problems of feminism and human rights have been solved….At least, that’s what Barbies think.”

Gerwig’s tongue-in-Barbie cheek satire has many, many layers, and I attempt to help us unpack some of them in the following 45 minute video. I raise more questions than I provide answers, and I hope to give you lots of thought as we consider ideas from Virginia Woolf, Julia Kristeva, Jean Baudrillard, and Laura Mulvey in relation to the film.

Here are some of the texts discussed in the video in case you want to read further:

Laura Mulvey: Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema

Virginia Woolf: A Room of One’s Own (the section I reference is part 5)

Jean Baudrillard: a portion of Simulacra and Simulations

My article on Baudrillard and The Matrix

Here are some insightful takes on biblical/theological parallels in the film:

Katelyn Beaty: “Barbie Affirms the Goodness of Female Embodiment”

Houston Coley: “Let’s Talk about Barbie and the Bible” (Video)

Alissa Wilkinson: “In the Beginning, There was Barbie.”

Some questions/topics to ponder:

1. Being in love with Ken is not Barbie’s ending/ narrative arc? What is her ending?

2. Think about the distinction between Reality/ Fantasy in the film, considering Baudrillard’s assertions. Are Barbie Land and Reality both constructs? Which is better?

3. Are matriarchy and patriarchy both constructs? How are each defined?

4. What Edenic scenes and themes do you see in the film?

5. Why does Gerwig use the same music for Barbie’s “monolith” scene and Ken’s “awakening to patriarchy scene”?

6. Is this successful as a satire?

7. What is the film’s commentary on consumerism and media (role of intertextuality).

8. Why were people offended by this film?

9. Is the ending truly satisfying? Does Gerwig just flip gender roles and stereotypes or is there more nuance in the film?

Thanks for reading and watching! Don’t forget to subscribe if you haven’t already!

I hope to see you for an invigorating discussion this Saturday!

Mary