And now ladies and gentlemen, before I tell you any more, I’m going to show you the greatest thing your eyes have ever beheld. He was a king and a God in the world he knew but now he comes to civilisation, merely a captive, a show to gratify your curiosity. Ladies and gentlemen, look at…
Kong and, although the gender pronouns in the quote don’t quite fit, Shosho. It was difficult not to draw parallels between the characterisation of Kong and Shosho and their experiences within their respective films. The above quote from King Kong contextualises the kind of power dynamic that inheres in the films King Kong and Piccadilly. Identity in both films is established through binary oppositions. London and New York are established as civilisation or the Occident while contrarily, China and an undesignated island somewhere in the Pacific represent the Orient. Thus, the films protagonists who hail from these places are constructed as ‘the Other’ whose subjugated place in society is central to Occidental imagination.
In Piccadilly, Shosho’s characterisation as ‘other’ is constructed via visual cues. While her Occidental counterpart Mabel is bathed in incandescent light, Shosho is predominantly cast in shadows. The faces of characters in Piccadilly become a screen upon which judgements about character are projected thereby structuring particular interpretations of these characters.
Similarly, costuming functions to acquaint the audience with the ‘otherness’ of characters in both Piccadilly and King Kong. In Piccadilly, Shosho is constructed as other through contrast to Mabel, the archetype of an Occidental woman. While most scenes contain Mabel resplendent in white, Shosho wears her drab scullery outfit, complete with holes in stockings, or black satin clothing recalling conceptions of the ‘Other’ as dangerous and/or lascivious. Shosho’s costuming in the dance scene is one example of the undifferentiated representations of the Orient by the Occident. The Thai costume sported by Shosho functions to signify the homogenized Orient at the expense of Chinese historical and cultural integrity. Similarly, in King Kong, the marital ceremony that takes place on Skull Island, an isolated island located in the Pacific, features the use of leopard skins as an element of set design. Leopards are scarcely found in places other than Africa, and definitely not found to exist naturally on desolate islands in the Pacific.* Maybe, however, I’m asking too much of a film which featured a human-eating-brontosaurus. (Brontosaurus’ are herbivores).
While Kong is transported from the Orient for the gratification of spectators paying top money to marvel at the ‘eighth wonder of the world’, Shosho is similarly brought out of the scullery for the viewing pleasure and entertainment of the Occident by exploiting the otherness of her own culture at the expense of its integrity. In this sense, the central plot features of King Kong and Piccadilly become an allegory for what is going on in mainstream cinema. In films of the era, the cultural integrity of the Orient is of minimal concern, for instance, white actors in ‘yellow face’ acted the parts of most Oriental characters. Concurrently, ‘oriental actors’ such as Anna May Wong experienced the kind of racism that plays out on screen, notably, through wage and billing discrimination. Humorously, also, Anna May Wong was killed off in most of her films. Both King Kong and Piccadilly remain interesting historical artefacts which depict the relationship between the Occident and the Orient in the early 20th century.
Kong and, although the gender pronouns in the quote don’t quite fit, Shosho. It was difficult not to draw parallels between the characterisation of Kong and Shosho and their experiences within their respective films. The above quote from King Kong contextualises the kind of power dynamic that inheres in the films King Kong and Piccadilly. Identity in both films is established through binary oppositions. London and New York are established as civilisation or the Occident while contrarily, China and an undesignated island somewhere in the Pacific represent the Orient. Thus, the films protagonists who hail from these places are constructed as ‘the Other’ whose subjugated place in society is central to Occidental imagination.
In Piccadilly, Shosho’s characterisation as ‘other’ is constructed via visual cues. While her Occidental counterpart Mabel is bathed in incandescent light, Shosho is predominantly cast in shadows. The faces of characters in Piccadilly become a screen upon which judgements about character are projected thereby structuring particular interpretations of these characters.
Similarly, costuming functions to acquaint the audience with the ‘otherness’ of characters in both Piccadilly and King Kong. In Piccadilly, Shosho is constructed as other through contrast to Mabel, the archetype of an Occidental woman. While most scenes contain Mabel resplendent in white, Shosho wears her drab scullery outfit, complete with holes in stockings, or black satin clothing recalling conceptions of the ‘Other’ as dangerous and/or lascivious. Shosho’s costuming in the dance scene is one example of the undifferentiated representations of the Orient by the Occident. The Thai costume sported by Shosho functions to signify the homogenized Orient at the expense of Chinese historical and cultural integrity. Similarly, in King Kong, the marital ceremony that takes place on Skull Island, an isolated island located in the Pacific, features the use of leopard skins as an element of set design. Leopards are scarcely found in places other than Africa, and definitely not found to exist naturally on desolate islands in the Pacific.* Maybe, however, I’m asking too much of a film which featured a human-eating-brontosaurus. (Brontosaurus’ are herbivores).
While Kong is transported from the Orient for the gratification of spectators paying top money to marvel at the ‘eighth wonder of the world’, Shosho is similarly brought out of the scullery for the viewing pleasure and entertainment of the Occident by exploiting the otherness of her own culture at the expense of its integrity. In this sense, the central plot features of King Kong and Piccadilly become an allegory for what is going on in mainstream cinema. In films of the era, the cultural integrity of the Orient is of minimal concern, for instance, white actors in ‘yellow face’ acted the parts of most Oriental characters. Concurrently, ‘oriental actors’ such as Anna May Wong experienced the kind of racism that plays out on screen, notably, through wage and billing discrimination. Humorously, also, Anna May Wong was killed off in most of her films. Both King Kong and Piccadilly remain interesting historical artefacts which depict the relationship between the Occident and the Orient in the early 20th century.
The dragon featured in the picture of Anna May Wong would undoubtedly have evoked the concepts inherent in The Bulletin cartoon of the late 19th cen
tury which signifies the dangerous Orient (in the form of the dragon) threatening the Occident (signified by the baby).*Imdb.
3 comments:
Its a bit tricky, but do you think we could see a comparison between the contrast of Mabel and Shosho, the satin dress vs. the scullery outfit, and the contrast bewteen Ann and Kong?
i like this idea of the 'occident'; it's the first time i've come across the term and find it rather catchy. haha.
The first thing that jumped to mind after reading even just the first paragraph was that Shosho and Kong both exist as "others" in their respective new 'habitats'.
Shosho as a Chinese immigrant in London, and Kong as a wild animal in Manhattan.
Post a Comment