The gaze is a term you hear thrown around quite a bit in critical media studies. It is, at once, both simple and complex.
"Gaze." It's as easy as looking, right? And at its most basic level, that's exactly what the phenomenon describes: who is looking, what is being looked at, and why? All visual arts have, in one way or another, a built-in gaze that can be examined and analyzed.
In the 1970s, film theorist Laura Mulvey brought the term "male gaze" permanently into the lexicon of film criticism. Her essay "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" [PDF] relies heavily on Freudian theories (even while in a film studies graduate program, Your Critic found this essay a particularly thorny read) but also basically defined feminist film theory. It's a difficult piece from which to pull a key quote or single definition, but I'll run with this one:
"In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active / male and passive / female. The determining male gaze projects its fantasy onto the female figure, which is styled accordingly. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness."
In its most basic, shortest form, the idea is this: on screen, the primary purpose of a woman is as a sexualized (deliberately or not) object, and the viewer for which film is designed is a straight male.
The essay that defines this idea is now closing in on 40 years old, and came out of a different era. I don't think that, here in 2011, I'd ever be inclined to apply straight-up Freudian theory to media analysis. (If I ever do display the urge to do so, please take away my computer.) But the idea of the gaze does indeed hold up, as does the idea of the default viewer.
Here's the thing: it works at a mostly subconscious level. With very few exceptions, a film director or a game designer doesn't set out actively thinking, "I am going to make this to appeal directly to straight white men and everyone else can get bent." Rather, the likelihood is high that the creator himself is a straight white male, and so comes to production with unconscious biases in place, that then are reflected through things like the framing of shots or the motion of the camera. And even if the creator in question is not all three (straight, white, male), the media landscape has been dominated by those elements for such a long time that this perspective is the default, and its point of view may not be challenged.
Thus: the male gaze.
So as we talk about the gaze and the male gaze in gaming, what do we really mean? What are we talking about?
Wikipedia has a nice little run-down of the areas of gaze -- the "who" in "who's looking." The three that are most important to us are:
- Characters' gaze at other characters
- The camera's gaze
- The spectator's gaze
The spectator, in our case, is the person playing the game. Whoever is holding the controller, or gesticulating at the Kinect, or sitting at the keyboard: that person is the spectator. The spectator's gaze is unbelievably crucial to both first-person and third-person narrative games. So important, in fact, that it will be standing alone as a Part 2 to this discussion.
The camera's gaze is the easiest to talk about, and the way characters gaze at other characters is tied into it. We the viewers see how characters see each other by how the camera behaves. This is every bit as true in gaming as it is in cinema, although in modern 3D narrative gaming, character placement and framing also play a large role. (Non-interactive cut-scenes essentially are film, and can be analyzed in the same ways.)
As a general, broad rule of thumb, the way the camera moves around or is positioned on a character tells us something about how we are meant to view that character, both literally and figuratively. Media saturation is now so high in our culture that we're very nearly all born speaking this language of visual cues and ideas.
We know what heroes pose like, and how they're framed. You can actually tell a lot about each character from how he's standing. Ezio's design conveys his positioning in the grey areas of life (he's a good guy by being an Assassin), Supes is, well, Supes, and Snake over there looks straight at you. But note how they all stand: strong, confident.
We know what villains pose like, and how they're framed. They are men of action, in motion, presenting their challenge. And their weapons. And their black costumes and / or hidden eyes.
For us, the issues arise with women, and how they're framed. And so it comes to pass that a super-spy, a world-renowned adventurer, and the galaxy's best thief mainly display their... assets. When they have weapons, they're held pointed toward the floor. They don't stand straight; rather, they pose their hips.
Of course, gaze is constantly in motion (think of the classic head-to-toe scoping out of the hottie across the room), not static. These are all just promotional images, right? So let's go to the video.
There's always Miranda offering her loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2 (00:01 - 01:08):
With Madison, the issues of what we see and how we see it are both in play. The camera is... not shy. (The censored bits between 03:00 and 05:00 are to make it YouTube-safe; nothing's covered up in the game.) For extra credit, watch Ethan Mars's morning shower from the same game. The camera is much less fond of his curvature than it is of hers.
In gaming, the camera's gaze and the characters' get tangled together, because we aren't just viewers, but players. We take on the role of someone in the story, and the camera serves as our eyes. Male characters tend to be the point-of-view characters, even in a third-person game. We watch what interests them. Miranda's deliberately putting herself on display for Shepard. This makes the moment of male gaze particularly jump out if you're playing a female Shepard, as then the on-screen dynamics feel misplaced, rather than feeling like a default.
So when characters gaze at other characters, the camera follows their lead. Hundreds of games do it. The running comment I had while playing through the Metal Gear Solid series (spouse held the controller 90% of the time; I provided the running MST3K-style commentary 100% of the time) was that clearly, working buttons and zippers for women were too expensive for these high-tech organizations.
The other issue of gaze in gaming, however, is made more complex by the interactivity and choice factors in the medium. Heavy Rain is a deliberately cinematic game and so the camera, framing, and direction behave in a deliberately cinematic way. Madison may not have an awareness of the viewer but she will behave for his eyes all the same. But what about another genre of game? How does the gaze behave in an action platformer, an adventure game, a first-person shooter, or an RPG? How does the male gaze function when the lead character is a woman, or when the player has full control of the camera?
As a general, broad rule of thumb, the way the camera moves around or is positioned on a character tells us something about how we are meant to view that character, both literally and figuratively. Media saturation is now so high in our culture that we're very nearly all born speaking this language of visual cues and ideas.
We know what heroes pose like, and how they're framed. You can actually tell a lot about each character from how he's standing. Ezio's design conveys his positioning in the grey areas of life (he's a good guy by being an Assassin), Supes is, well, Supes, and Snake over there looks straight at you. But note how they all stand: strong, confident.
 |
| You work those shoulders, gentlemen! |
 |
| No comment on Sephiroth's sword vs. how happy he is to see you. Such as. *ahem* |
For us, the issues arise with women, and how they're framed. And so it comes to pass that a super-spy, a world-renowned adventurer, and the galaxy's best thief mainly display their... assets. When they have weapons, they're held pointed toward the floor. They don't stand straight; rather, they pose their hips.
 |
| And then of course there's wardrobe design. Lookin' at you, Eva. |
Of course, gaze is constantly in motion (think of the classic head-to-toe scoping out of the hottie across the room), not static. These are all just promotional images, right? So let's go to the video.
There's always Miranda offering her loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2 (00:01 - 01:08):
Or of course there's our introduction to Madison in Heavy Rain (probably NSFW):
With Madison, the issues of what we see and how we see it are both in play. The camera is... not shy. (The censored bits between 03:00 and 05:00 are to make it YouTube-safe; nothing's covered up in the game.) For extra credit, watch Ethan Mars's morning shower from the same game. The camera is much less fond of his curvature than it is of hers.
In gaming, the camera's gaze and the characters' get tangled together, because we aren't just viewers, but players. We take on the role of someone in the story, and the camera serves as our eyes. Male characters tend to be the point-of-view characters, even in a third-person game. We watch what interests them. Miranda's deliberately putting herself on display for Shepard. This makes the moment of male gaze particularly jump out if you're playing a female Shepard, as then the on-screen dynamics feel misplaced, rather than feeling like a default.
So when characters gaze at other characters, the camera follows their lead. Hundreds of games do it. The running comment I had while playing through the Metal Gear Solid series (spouse held the controller 90% of the time; I provided the running MST3K-style commentary 100% of the time) was that clearly, working buttons and zippers for women were too expensive for these high-tech organizations.
 |
| Seriously, Naomi? You're going to leave your boobs hanging out with a kid like that flinging hot food around? |
The other issue of gaze in gaming, however, is made more complex by the interactivity and choice factors in the medium. Heavy Rain is a deliberately cinematic game and so the camera, framing, and direction behave in a deliberately cinematic way. Madison may not have an awareness of the viewer but she will behave for his eyes all the same. But what about another genre of game? How does the gaze behave in an action platformer, an adventure game, a first-person shooter, or an RPG? How does the male gaze function when the lead character is a woman, or when the player has full control of the camera?
In the interest of not presenting a 10-page paper for your Monday morning, the player's gaze is Part 2, coming in the next post.
[Edit: Part 2 is here.]
[Edit: Part 2 is here.]
