Jane Fonda: The Pin-up Revolutionary and the Profundities of her Image, 1960-1972
By Daniel Blumensev
The most accurate description of the image of Jane Fonda would be a performer. She is a performer of the screen as an actress, a performer of the body as a sex symbol, and a performer of radicalism as a feminist. Jane Fonda’s career up until and including 1972 had contained all of these elements, which caused contradictions towards her star’s image, with the media not knowing exactly which one of the things above she truly was. This essay will argue that Jane Fonda is not just a sex star like many critics at the time saw her as (Dyer 1998: 77), but a great actress as well as an advocate of feminism and sexual liberation, who acted through her all-Americanness, incredible acting skills and charisma in order to push these ideas forward, hence being called ‘The Pin-up Revolutionary’.
From the very beginning for her career since 1960 with the Tall Story (1960 Joshua Logan), Jane Fonda, solely marketed and critiqued in terms of being ‘Henry Fonda’s daughter’ (Dyer 1998: 68), was regularly playing attractive characters whose roles revolved around sex, either going to college only because of wanting to marry and make love with her crush Ray Blent in Tall Story, playing a prostitute in Walk on the Wild Side (1962 Edward Dmytryk) or being repulsed by the act of love-making at first but then learning to enjoy it in The Chapman Report (1962 George Cukor). Her sex comedies such as Barefoot in the Park (1967 Gene Saks) did not alter her strong standing sex star image either, which was emphasized even more by the deep-south melodramas she was in such as The Chase (1966 Arthur Penn) and Hurry Sundown (1967 Otto Preminger) in which she played nymphomaniacal and decadent women (Dyer 1998: 70). Not only did Jane Fonda keep playing all of these sex-related roles, but, even before her controversial cinematic association with husband Roger Vadim in 1965, Fonda’s appealing anatomy was being ultimately vulgarized and exploited in her early films. In her second feature Walk on the Wild Side her bottom was particularly focused on in the first few scenes of the film, and in Cat Ballou (1965 Elliot Silverstein) that same body part was given focus to once more, followed by a shot of Michael Callan eyeing it (Dyer 1998: 70). However, it was really after marrying French filmmaker Roger Vadim that Jane’s sex star image was truly born.
From the very beginning for her career since 1960 with the Tall Story (1960 Joshua Logan), Jane Fonda, solely marketed and critiqued in terms of being ‘Henry Fonda’s daughter’ (Dyer 1998: 68), was regularly playing attractive characters whose roles revolved around sex, either going to college only because of wanting to marry and make love with her crush Ray Blent in Tall Story, playing a prostitute in Walk on the Wild Side (1962 Edward Dmytryk) or being repulsed by the act of love-making at first but then learning to enjoy it in The Chapman Report (1962 George Cukor). Her sex comedies such as Barefoot in the Park (1967 Gene Saks) did not alter her strong standing sex star image either, which was emphasized even more by the deep-south melodramas she was in such as The Chase (1966 Arthur Penn) and Hurry Sundown (1967 Otto Preminger) in which she played nymphomaniacal and decadent women (Dyer 1998: 70). Not only did Jane Fonda keep playing all of these sex-related roles, but, even before her controversial cinematic association with husband Roger Vadim in 1965, Fonda’s appealing anatomy was being ultimately vulgarized and exploited in her early films. In her second feature Walk on the Wild Side her bottom was particularly focused on in the first few scenes of the film, and in Cat Ballou (1965 Elliot Silverstein) that same body part was given focus to once more, followed by a shot of Michael Callan eyeing it (Dyer 1998: 70). However, it was really after marrying French filmmaker Roger Vadim that Jane’s sex star image was truly born.
Tall Story 1960
http://www.thingslife.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/hlZwxyK-jane-fonda-thingslife.jpg Cat Ballou 1965
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8b/dd/77/8bdd77e18646bc70 1f05e4addbea3175.jpg The Chapman Report 1962
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/galleries/x 701/89203.jpg |
Walk on the Wild Side 1962
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/41/af/ec/41afec8337d71d2c7b7b7 6c86de40b57--jane-fonda-s.jpg Barefoot in the Park 1967
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZjI3MWY2NGQtZDUzNS00MzE5LTllZDIt MmRhYmJkMDM2YWNlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUwNzk3NDc@._V1_.jpg Hurry Sundown 1967
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/40/12/ee/4012ee2d5afe8496c1d50 d32c131cf0a--henry-fonda-jane-fonda.jpg |
The Chase 1966
http://pics.imcdb.org/0is517/combcda3.9809.jpg
http://pics.imcdb.org/0is517/combcda3.9809.jpg
Fonda did three films for Vadim: La Ronde (1965 Roger Vadim), La Curée (1966 Roger Vadim) and Barbarella (1968 Roger Vadim), as well as starring in Vadim’s segment ‘Metzengerstein’ for the anthology film Histoires Extraordinaires (1969 Roger Vadim, Louis Malle, Federico Fellini). Not only did all four of these vehicles foreground sexuality and emphasize sex through their narratives and mise-en-scène, but also, Jane Fonda for the first time in her career, appeared nude in three of these works (Dyer 1998: 73). Hence instantly, from 1965 until 1969 Jane Fonda became an international sex symbol, labeled a ‘nudie cutie’ and a ‘sex bon-bon’ by Pauline Kael and Variety, respectably (Dyer 1998: 70). Fonda’s sexuality was ultimately exploited as the fact of her doing nude scenes was used as both promotion and publicity for Vadim’s pictures. Not only was Fonda’s sex image being exploited, but her image of being Henry Fonda’s daughter was corrupting as well, as Henry represented everything decent in America, whereas his daughter, with all her sex films, was, in a way, undoing everything Henry did.
La Ronde 1965
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uvbiqTAzx4U/TsnB7S1m2-I/AAAAAAAAmjE/Re0l-__6WAI/s1600/jane+fonda+la+ronde+1.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uvbiqTAzx4U/TsnB7S1m2-I/AAAAAAAAmjE/Re0l-__6WAI/s1600/jane+fonda+la+ronde+1.jpg
With all of this sexploitation and newly established sex star persona, the fate of Jane Fonda’s image could have easily fallen to that of Vadim’s ex-wife’s: Brigit Bardot, being remembered mainly for her looks and sex appeal, as opposed to her acting. However this was not the case for Ms. Fonda. The way Jane converted her sex star image into that of a great actress with integrity and charisma, advocating sexual freedom and feminist ideology, will be scrutinized firstly through her performance in Roger Vadim’s Barbarella (1968 Roger Vadim) and then through that of in Klute (1971 Alan J. Pakula).
Barbarella 1968
https://www.magnumphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/cortex/lon25304-overlay.jpg
https://www.magnumphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/cortex/lon25304-overlay.jpg
On the surface, Jane Fonda in Barbarella appears to be a sex craving loony without any integrity or morals, who lets herself be seduced by men, who seduces men herself, and who derives pleasure from robotic sex machines. This persona is also enhanced by the film’s mise-en-scène and costume. The rug in Fonda’s spaceship, although cozy, resembles pubic hair. Jane carries a gun that’s a phallic symbol, and her astronaut uniform is made of plastic, thus concealing and revealing her breasts, and her uniform’s high stiff neck plate hints at bondage (Dyer 1998: 75). The film itself without a doubt exploits Jane Fonda’s sexuality, with her appearing completely nude during the film’s opening credits, Claude Dauphin starring at her naked body while giving her orders, Ugo Tognazzi and David Hemmings wanting to have sex with her, and succeeding, Fonda also being seduced by a woman, and her sexual drive being so strong that it destroys the machine that was supposed to kill her with extreme erotic pleasure. However, below the surface of all this sexploitation, there is a more complex image and interpretation of Fonda, which she and Vadim both intended (Dyer 1998: 76).
At the beginning of the picture, Barbarella crash lands on the planet Weir where Mark Hand, played by Ugo Tognazzi, saves her from being eaten alive by the planet’s evil robotic dolls. Being grateful to Hand for saving her, Barbarella asks him what she can do for him in return. Hand courteously asks if he could make love to her and Barbarella agrees to the favor and starts to take out her exaltation-transference pills in order to perform earth’s modern efficient and faultless way of making love by simply swallowing a pill each and connecting to one another simply by touching palms. Hand objects to this and asks Barbarella if he could make love to her the old fashioned way. Bedazzled, Barbarella accepts, Hand starts moving towards Barbarella and the scene cuts away. After a rather long suggestion of the love making taking place with a God’s-eye-view shot of Hand’s ship traveling in circles and then finally approaching Barbarella’s ship, we then cut to the next scene in which we see Barbarella, covered solely with a hair-like blanket, lying on the also hair-like carpet of Hand’s ship, in total ecstasy.
At the beginning of the picture, Barbarella crash lands on the planet Weir where Mark Hand, played by Ugo Tognazzi, saves her from being eaten alive by the planet’s evil robotic dolls. Being grateful to Hand for saving her, Barbarella asks him what she can do for him in return. Hand courteously asks if he could make love to her and Barbarella agrees to the favor and starts to take out her exaltation-transference pills in order to perform earth’s modern efficient and faultless way of making love by simply swallowing a pill each and connecting to one another simply by touching palms. Hand objects to this and asks Barbarella if he could make love to her the old fashioned way. Bedazzled, Barbarella accepts, Hand starts moving towards Barbarella and the scene cuts away. After a rather long suggestion of the love making taking place with a God’s-eye-view shot of Hand’s ship traveling in circles and then finally approaching Barbarella’s ship, we then cut to the next scene in which we see Barbarella, covered solely with a hair-like blanket, lying on the also hair-like carpet of Hand’s ship, in total ecstasy.
Barbarella (Jane Fonda) and Mark Hand (Ugo Tognazzi) on the Planet Weir
https://static.kino.de/wp-content/gallery/u/g/ugo-tognazzi/barbarella-jane-fonda-ugo-tognazzi-1-rcm0x1920u.jpg
https://static.kino.de/wp-content/gallery/u/g/ugo-tognazzi/barbarella-jane-fonda-ugo-tognazzi-1-rcm0x1920u.jpg
Now for the casual viewer this heated event justifies and adds to Jane Fonda’s ‘sex bon-bon’ image, due to this scene of the film even including a shot of Barbarella lying down on her back, stretched out and allowing Hand to ‘take her’, makes Fonda seem like a sexually immoral woman, exploited and even being shown as having enjoyed this immoral act of using her body as payment for a favor. However, when understanding Vadim and Fonda’s relationship and their intent for the Barbarella character, one sees a different image of Fonda. According to Richard Dyer, both Fonda and Vadim claimed that in their lives together and in their films, Vadim was liberating Fonda (Dyer 1998: 76). Fonda claimed in Showtime in 1967 that ‘The moment I realized Roger was only letting me be myself, I trusted him completely’ (Tomkies 1967: 21). Mike Tomkies from Showtime says that Vadim wanted Fonda to be sexually free (ibid.). Supporting the claims of Dyer and Tomkies, the scene between Fonda and Tognazzi represents, in fact, Barbarella’s sexual awakening, and not exploitation and immorality as some would view it. In order to prove this argument of Jane Fonda’s image of sexual freedom instead of that of purely a sex star in Vadim’s film, one must analyze Barbarella’s next sexual activity, being the scene in which she sleeps with the angel Pygar, played by John Phillip Law, thanking him for saving her life.
Jane Fonda with husband and director Roger Vadim
http://static1.purepeople.com/articles/4/18/51/4/@/132519-jane-fonda-dirigee-par-son-premier-950x0-1.jpg
http://static1.purepeople.com/articles/4/18/51/4/@/132519-jane-fonda-dirigee-par-son-premier-950x0-1.jpg
After crash landing onto the lower layer of the planet Weir, she is rescued from the Black Guards by a blind angel named Pygar (John Phillip Law), who has lost his will to fly. Barbarella sleeps with him and Pygar ultimately regains his will to fly. Having fornicated a second time with another stranger makes Barbarella seem like an indecent woman without morals. However, the fact that it was Barbarella’s choice to engage in love with Pygar makes her be a sexually liberated and free person, being able to choose how she acts sexually, promoting the idea of a woman’s right to be sexually free, backing the ideas of the 1960s sexual revolution in America. Similar to Fonda’s character in Klute, which will be under analysis shortly, Fonda’s character by having the right to choose with who she sleeps with and ultimately doing it, empowers Barbarella, making her a free and independent woman, thus Jane Fonda here is ultimately promoting feminist ideology.
Analyzing the scene, Barbarella is not shown being disgusted by the sex she has just had, but instead, just like in the scene with Mark Hand, she is lying nude, smiling and in ecstasy. Due to this direction by Vadim of making Fonda be in a state of bliss after having had intercourse by her own will, reduces her previous ‘sex bon-bon’ exploitative image and instead, makes Fonda be completely in-control of her actions, ultimately supporting feminism once again. This makes Jane Fonda’s image in Barbarella be that of a sexually free woman, being free to use her sexuality in whatever way she wants, such as helping another person to regain his will to fly. This liberal message that both Fonda and Vadim tried to push, as stated by Dyer, is one that came straight from the sexual revolution and the hippie movement of the 1960s in America, pushing the idea of free love and its benefits, such as a depressed character regaining his will to fly from some free love from Barbarella.
Another way in which Jane Fonda triumphs over her sex image in Barbarella, is through her innocence and independence. According to Dyer, ‘[Practically] all the American critics of Barbarella insisted on Jane’s ‘normal’ [and] ‘healthy’ performance in this ‘kinky’ film’ and Pauline Kael, in the New Yorker wrote about her as ‘the American girl triumphing by her innocence over a lewd comic-strip world of the future (Dyer 1998: 67). In both of the scenes in which Barbarella is seduced by The Great Tyrant (Anita Pallenberg) and in which she is locked in a cage with hundreds of birds attacking her, she reacts in a normal and innocent way towards them. When the Tyrant asks Barbarella if she wants to play with her and calls her ‘pretty pretty’ Barbarella is first confused, not understanding that the woman is hitting on her and then angrily draws back and confidently and firmly responds: ‘My name is not pretty pretty, it’s Barbarella’, giving her character charisma and proving the argument of Fonda triumphing with integrity over her sex image façade in the film. Same goes with the birds scene. Just as the birds starts filling Barbarella’s cage, she reacts innocently exclaiming: ‘How darling!’, until shortly after realizing that the birds are out to hurt her. This innocence and naivety supports Kael’s statement as well as the overall argument of Fonda negotiating her sex image in Barbarella into that of an image of integrity, innocence, and sexual freedom and will, ultimately advocating feminist ideals.
Analyzing the scene, Barbarella is not shown being disgusted by the sex she has just had, but instead, just like in the scene with Mark Hand, she is lying nude, smiling and in ecstasy. Due to this direction by Vadim of making Fonda be in a state of bliss after having had intercourse by her own will, reduces her previous ‘sex bon-bon’ exploitative image and instead, makes Fonda be completely in-control of her actions, ultimately supporting feminism once again. This makes Jane Fonda’s image in Barbarella be that of a sexually free woman, being free to use her sexuality in whatever way she wants, such as helping another person to regain his will to fly. This liberal message that both Fonda and Vadim tried to push, as stated by Dyer, is one that came straight from the sexual revolution and the hippie movement of the 1960s in America, pushing the idea of free love and its benefits, such as a depressed character regaining his will to fly from some free love from Barbarella.
Another way in which Jane Fonda triumphs over her sex image in Barbarella, is through her innocence and independence. According to Dyer, ‘[Practically] all the American critics of Barbarella insisted on Jane’s ‘normal’ [and] ‘healthy’ performance in this ‘kinky’ film’ and Pauline Kael, in the New Yorker wrote about her as ‘the American girl triumphing by her innocence over a lewd comic-strip world of the future (Dyer 1998: 67). In both of the scenes in which Barbarella is seduced by The Great Tyrant (Anita Pallenberg) and in which she is locked in a cage with hundreds of birds attacking her, she reacts in a normal and innocent way towards them. When the Tyrant asks Barbarella if she wants to play with her and calls her ‘pretty pretty’ Barbarella is first confused, not understanding that the woman is hitting on her and then angrily draws back and confidently and firmly responds: ‘My name is not pretty pretty, it’s Barbarella’, giving her character charisma and proving the argument of Fonda triumphing with integrity over her sex image façade in the film. Same goes with the birds scene. Just as the birds starts filling Barbarella’s cage, she reacts innocently exclaiming: ‘How darling!’, until shortly after realizing that the birds are out to hurt her. This innocence and naivety supports Kael’s statement as well as the overall argument of Fonda negotiating her sex image in Barbarella into that of an image of integrity, innocence, and sexual freedom and will, ultimately advocating feminist ideals.
Fonda’s character is also full of independence. The independence of Barbarella is not only reflected through her making her own choices of sleeping with whoever she wants, but also through her accent. Fonda throughout the film speaks in a distinct American accent and this automatically gives her a distinct character of her own as well as isolates her from the kinky galaxy and from its French and British sounding characters, further supporting the strong independent woman, feminist image Jane Fonda reflects through her role of Barbarella in Vadim’s sex-filled picture. In addition, the argument of Fonda not being completely sexually exploited in Barbarella and in fact promoting sexual liberation through her character, is supported by Fonda herself, stating in 1968 that ‘[Barbarella] is a kind of tongue-in-cheek satire against bourgeois morality’ (Fonda 1968).
Barbarella holding The Great Tyrant (Anita Pallenberg) hostage
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/39/dc/10/39dc10d41ff7c7764d61446497d284f2.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/39/dc/10/39dc10d41ff7c7764d61446497d284f2.jpg
Although in 1968 Barbarella was the second most popular picture in the UK after The Jungle Book (1967 Wolfgang Reitherman), it ultimately failed to gain financial success in the US. However, Fonda’s next picture: Sydney Pollack’s They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (1969) was blessed with an unexpected excellent performance from her, getting Fonda her first Oscar nomination. However Jane’s next film: Alan J. Pakula’s Klute (1971), added ‘a great actress’ to her image forever.
Klute 1971
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/fashion/2016/12/21/rexfeatures_5882152n_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqLUm2LqZ7QfPrWh62iB90Nb4vYB4aDWG4_84dN-gl2io.jpg?imwidth=450
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/fashion/2016/12/21/rexfeatures_5882152n_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqLUm2LqZ7QfPrWh62iB90Nb4vYB4aDWG4_84dN-gl2io.jpg?imwidth=450
Klute is a film about a private detective named Klute, played by Donald Sutherland, who is assigned to investigate a missing business executive, and his only lead turns out to be a New York call girl named Bree Daniels, played by Fonda. Jane’s extraordinary performance in Klute incorporated two things into her image: an instant inauguration into the realm of the greatest actresses of all time and feminist advocation, which started already with Barbarella.
Pauline Kael, in her 1971 review of Klute, said that Jane ‘Disappears into the role of Bree, that she is never outside it and that she is always in full control’ (Kael 2000: 280). Kael continues praising Fonda’s performance, giving her the single best compliment an actor can receive: that Fonda’s performance is totally pure and unadorned by acting (ibid.). In order to prove the validity of Kael’s claims, Bree’s second psychoanalyst visit scene will be scrutinized.
Pauline Kael, in her 1971 review of Klute, said that Jane ‘Disappears into the role of Bree, that she is never outside it and that she is always in full control’ (Kael 2000: 280). Kael continues praising Fonda’s performance, giving her the single best compliment an actor can receive: that Fonda’s performance is totally pure and unadorned by acting (ibid.). In order to prove the validity of Kael’s claims, Bree’s second psychoanalyst visit scene will be scrutinized.
High-class prostitute Bree Daniels (Jane Fonda) visits her shrink
The scene at hand consists of Bree Daniels telling her doctor that she enjoys making love with detective John Klute, a physical feeling she has not experienced in a long time. The power of Jane’s performance in this scene comes from its naturalism. In the period of ‘New Wave Hollywood’ from roughly 1967 until 1977, good acting was synonymous with authenticity therefore the incorporation of pauses, mumbling, hesitation, tics and interrupted speech in ones performance were largely welcome as they all gave an air of improvisation to the performance (Dyer 1998: 77). Mastering this way of performing meant good acting, and Jane had it all. In the psychoanalyst scene at hand, Jane’s performance largely consists of two of the elements stated above: pauses and hesitation. Bree Daniels takes her time thinking what she is going to say to her shrink. She keeps repeating certain words while thinking of what to say and takes long pauses between her words and sentences such as: ‘….annn….and a…..and relax about it…’ and ‘…to, to, to break it off, to..(long pause)...go back to the, to the…the comfort of being numb again, um..(long pause)...’(Klute). In order to add an even greater sense of naturalism and improvisation to her performance, Fonda uses words like ‘um’ (as seen in the previous example), stutters and cuts herself off mid-sentence and starts saying something different: ‘…Now I…I’d…(long pause + sentence change)…and that’s what so strange is that I’m not…’ and ‘…something is…I mean I….yyyy…mmmmm….you obviously know what this is like but…’ (Klute). Taking the same kind of scene in a completely different film such as, for example, in Woody Allen’s segment ‘ Oedipus Wrecks’ in the anthology film New York Stories (1989 Woody Allen, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese), Allen’s character Sheldon says directly how he feels about his mother to his shrink without truly pausing or incorporating any kind of naturalistic technique into his performance: being the opposite of what a real patient would most probably do in a real shrink’s office. Although Allen’s performance at the psychoanalyst’s is a quality one, it doesn’t feel natural due to him not making any real pauses to think about what he wants to tell him doctor. However, Fonda’s performance in her scene is the opposite of Woody’s, as it is filled with pauses and hesitations, making the scene so natural with her performance that the audiences feel as though they are the doctor in the scene, listening to a real patient called Bree Daniels and her problems.
The use of the word ‘performance’ instead of ‘acting’ in relation to what Fonda does in the scene under scrutiny as well as in the rest of Klute, is used because, supporting Pauline Kael’s claims, Jane’s performance, due to her naturalistic methods, is in fact not acting but living the character of Bree Daniels, which makes Fonda’s image as an actress truly stand out, finally rightfully regaining the image of being ‘Henry Fonda’s daughter’.
Jane Fonda’s image as an actress was already in focus two years earlier with Pollack’s They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?, however that performance, although great, lacked variety and elaboration, which Klute’s loose narrative gave her freedom to do, making Klute a more profound performance to have analyzed than the one in Pollack’s film.
The use of the word ‘performance’ instead of ‘acting’ in relation to what Fonda does in the scene under scrutiny as well as in the rest of Klute, is used because, supporting Pauline Kael’s claims, Jane’s performance, due to her naturalistic methods, is in fact not acting but living the character of Bree Daniels, which makes Fonda’s image as an actress truly stand out, finally rightfully regaining the image of being ‘Henry Fonda’s daughter’.
Jane Fonda’s image as an actress was already in focus two years earlier with Pollack’s They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?, however that performance, although great, lacked variety and elaboration, which Klute’s loose narrative gave her freedom to do, making Klute a more profound performance to have analyzed than the one in Pollack’s film.
Jane Fonda and Michael Sarrazin in They Shoot Horses Don't They?
https://theredlist.com/media/database/films/cinema/1960/they-shoot-horses-dont-they/012-they-shoot-horses-dont-they-theredlist.jpg
https://theredlist.com/media/database/films/cinema/1960/they-shoot-horses-dont-they/012-they-shoot-horses-dont-they-theredlist.jpg
Interestingly enough, the fact that Fonda plays a prostitute in Pakula’s film echoes her earlier roles and sex star image, however, in Klute, Jane’s sex star image is inflected towards feminism. Quoting Sheila Whitaker that the prostitute can be seen ‘...As the most honest and most despised of women’ (Whitaker 1975: 13). The sole and crucial narrative element that makes Fonda’s image in Klute be a revolutionary one, reflecting feminism and not simply sex and sexploitation, is the fact that Fonda’s character Bree Daniels switched from working full-time on Park Avenue to working independently, only when she wants to and on her own terms. This independence in her work echoes the same feminist ideas that were essentially echoed in Barbarella, about female empowerment. Before scrutinizing the prostitute side of Bree, Fonda’s character is also an aspiring model and actress. Throughout the film, Bree Daniels is portrayed as a self-reliant and self-determining woman, pushing herself to go to acting auditions as well as modeling gigs (Johnson 2013). These characteristics of Bree already reflect the image of strong and independent women due to Bree’s self-motivation of chasing a career and due to her not having a husband, ultimately being able to take care of herself. Now we move on to the fact of Bree also being a part-time prostitute. Throughout her two psychoanalyst visits, the audiences learn that Bree’s particular prostitution work has given her real independence. Bree is glad that she stopped working for and being under the control of a pimp, finds that prostitution on her own time gives her psychological autonomy, finding her sessions with her ‘johns’ empowering (Johnson 2013). Sheila Whitaker’s claim of the prostitute being the most honest and most despised of women, fits in perfectly with Fonda’s character of Bree Daniels who ultimately reflects feminism through her gritty but honest and liberated sexual mentality. There are two scenes in Pakula’s picture that perfectly reflect Fonda’s feminist image.
The first happens at the beginning of the film, being the scene in which Bree Daniels services a shy Chicago john. In this scene, Bree is invited into the john’s apartment. From the moment the john opens the door, Bree, with a big confident smile says: ‘ Hi, I’m Bree’. The john, nervous, lets her in and Bree sits on the couch self-assured, spreading her arms on both sides of the couch, completely in-control of the situation. As the john sits down next to her, she immediately gets intimately close to him and starts confidently flirting with him. Bree is completely sexually assertive and always fully in control of the situation. Just like the real hooker Xaviera Hollander, New York’s number one call girl at the time, Bree Daniels’ own choice to use her body to service men for her own personal gain, in Daniels case being money as well as a feeling of empowerment, advocates feminist ideals of a woman doing what she wants, and using her female body in the way she pleases. Fonda’s feminist image is enhanced by her acting in the particular scene at hand, as Bree is totally confident and in control of the situation and of her male client, but the man on the other hand is extremely shy and nervous, which shows that the woman is stronger than the man (Bree even states herself that she feels empowered by her sessions), as the man submits to her sexuality by literally paying her money for it. Thus ultimately, the fact that Bree Daniels chooses, independently, to use her female sexuality and body to service johns on her own terms (being fully in control of the encounters) in order to receive money and empowerment, demonstrates her superiority over men as well as Fonda’s feminist image that is evoked from this, as the men are submitting to her and even paying her for her sexuality.
The first happens at the beginning of the film, being the scene in which Bree Daniels services a shy Chicago john. In this scene, Bree is invited into the john’s apartment. From the moment the john opens the door, Bree, with a big confident smile says: ‘ Hi, I’m Bree’. The john, nervous, lets her in and Bree sits on the couch self-assured, spreading her arms on both sides of the couch, completely in-control of the situation. As the john sits down next to her, she immediately gets intimately close to him and starts confidently flirting with him. Bree is completely sexually assertive and always fully in control of the situation. Just like the real hooker Xaviera Hollander, New York’s number one call girl at the time, Bree Daniels’ own choice to use her body to service men for her own personal gain, in Daniels case being money as well as a feeling of empowerment, advocates feminist ideals of a woman doing what she wants, and using her female body in the way she pleases. Fonda’s feminist image is enhanced by her acting in the particular scene at hand, as Bree is totally confident and in control of the situation and of her male client, but the man on the other hand is extremely shy and nervous, which shows that the woman is stronger than the man (Bree even states herself that she feels empowered by her sessions), as the man submits to her sexuality by literally paying her money for it. Thus ultimately, the fact that Bree Daniels chooses, independently, to use her female sexuality and body to service johns on her own terms (being fully in control of the encounters) in order to receive money and empowerment, demonstrates her superiority over men as well as Fonda’s feminist image that is evoked from this, as the men are submitting to her and even paying her for her sexuality.
Daniels checking how much longer the john has...
The other scene of scrutiny is the one in which Bree comes over to John Klute’s house, due to being frightened of being left alone, and ultimately has intercourse with Klute, having initiated the act herself. The fact of Bree having initiated the love making, empowers Fonda’s image as a woman being in charge and in control, being strong and independent ultimately promoting the ideals of feminism in her image. This idea is enhanced when Bree tells Klute that she never climaxes with clients, demonstrating her dominance and power over the detective. However Bree ends up falling in love with Klute and feeling un-empowered when making love to him, and then telling her psychiatrist that, although enjoying this feeling she has never experienced before, she wants to break it off, and be left alone and faceless. Thus the film’s narrative takes a turn, essentially against the strong independent woman that Bree starts out being. However it is Jane Fonda’s image which is under scrutiny in this essay and not the profound narrative changes of her characters. The media and film image of Jane Fonda that is in fact remembered from Klute is not ‘a scared and internally tormented woman’ but Jane Fonda, being a strong and independent heroine, who is also a prostitute on her own terms, evokes feminism and great acting in her image.
Daniels seducing Klute (Donald Sutherland)
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02162/PD51825004_437528l_2162173b.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02162/PD51825004_437528l_2162173b.jpg
A third and less profound image of Fonda that Klute reflects is, once again, the image of Jane as a sex symbol. She is in fact playing a very attractive and seductive prostitute, is nude in the film several times (although the film does not reveal her full naked body) and she wears seductive clothing at times such as a backless dress. All of these sex elements within the picture without a doubt reflect Fonda’s sex side of her image, however the elements of great acting and feminism tend to have a more dominating presence in Fonda’s image in Klute. However, whether one sees Fonda as a feminist advocator, great actress or sex symbol, or all three, in Klute, is subjective to one’s own knowledge and interest of Fonda (Dyer 1998: 70) as well as to one’s own interpretation of the film and to Fonda’s performance in it.
Fonda's mugshot from 1970
https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/jane-fonda-mug-shot-horizontal-tony-rubino.jpg
https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/jane-fonda-mug-shot-horizontal-tony-rubino.jpg
Fonda’s image as a radical is much larger than just her feminism. The star started getting politically involved with the Native American issue in 1969, the Black Panther movement and with the anti-war movement against Vietnam, being arrested in a GI coffee-house in 1969 for her anti-war work (Dyer 1998: 77). The star also starred in and promoted two anti-Vietnam documentaries: Free The Army (1972 Francine Parker) and Vietnam Journey (1972 Christine Burrill), the latter of which she starred in with her radical husband Tom Hayden (Dyer 1998: 78). 1972 was a big year for Fonda’s radical image. Apart from marrying SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) leader Tom Hayden and making two anti-Vietnam films causing her anti-war image to be despised by many in America, resulting in the circulation of nasty anti-Fonda propaganda such as images from her hanging scene in Cat Ballou, Fonda’s image in 1972, was also involved overseas with France’s problems with bourgeois revolutionaries, with Fonda acting in Jean-Luc Godard’s and Jean Pierre Gorin’s radical picture Tout Va Bien (1972 Jean-Luc Godard, Jean-Pierre Gorin).
Fonda in Tout Va Bien
http://medias.unifrance.org/medias/6/218/55814/format_page/tout-va-bien.jpg
http://medias.unifrance.org/medias/6/218/55814/format_page/tout-va-bien.jpg
Fonda’s image of an actress or a revolutionary started being under negotiation from 1969. However, in 1972, Fonda’s image took a radical turn in favor of a revolutionary as opposed to that of an actress, in the French film Tout Va Bien. Godard’s and Gorin’s pedagogical picture is about Her/Suzanne, played by Fonda, and Him/Jacques, played by Yves Montand, witnessing a workers’ strike at a sausage factory somewhere unspecified in France. Analyzing the opening sequence of the film, the first time we see Jane Fonda she is very small, her face concealed behind glasses, and walking in the distance of the frame, with Yves Montand, along an almost lifeless and grey bit of nature, slowly approaching the camera. Before Fonda gets even close enough for the audience to get a proper look at her face, Godard and Gorin cut to, as though, another take of the same shot, with Fonda starting off, this time miniscule, at the very far right hand corner of the frame. Fonda walks up the park, approaching the camera slowly, but never close enough for one to get a decent look at her face. When Fonda gets as close to the camera as this scene allows her to get, which is an extreme long shot of her full body in frame, her face still hardly observable, she then even turns around, away from the audience, giving them the back of her head. The only element that lets the audience recognize the slim woman in the frame as being Jane Fonda, is her seventies ‘shag’ hairstyle she wore a year earlier in Klute.
Hardy visible Fonda and Yves Montand in Tout Va Bien
The complete lack of Jane Fonda as a star is enhanced in this scene by the fact that Fonda starts speaking in a voice-over, in French. Known for her all-American image, Fonda’s star image is completely subverted in this scene, speaking in a foreign language and being turned into a mere extra in the background. The opening sequence continues to a next shot of Jane Fonda, this time her famous face completely recognizable and clear, but her all-American image becomes skewed once again, by suddenly saying the f-word to Yves Montand. The sequence continues by a voice-over establishment of the film’s setting, showing shots of the city and countryside. Then we cut to a shot of Jane Fonda, combing her hair, and then suddenly she turns towards the camera, and looks directly at the audiences, breaking the forth wall. We then cut to a shot of both Fonda and Montand, turning around simultaneously and looking at the camera. This new Fonda, is a manipulated Fonda, her star image and persona being completely under the control of Godard and Gorin.
In the next shot of Fonda, being a shot of only her head in the frame, isolated by a black background, turning from looking directly at the camera, to a profile shot. The film’s voice-over says during this shot that ‘She and He must be placed among them’, referring to placing the two stars among ordinary people, explaining the odd blocking choices at the beginning of the sequence. The sequence ends with another shot of Fonda, a profile head shot of her, wearing glasses, and broadcasting news, in English this time, of what’s happening in France. Although this shot of Fonda is the longest of all the shots of her so far, lasting a little less than a minute, and her speaking her native language, her star persona is still reduced by the camera not showing her face from the front, and due to her wearing glasses, once again covering her star presence to an extent.
In the next shot of Fonda, being a shot of only her head in the frame, isolated by a black background, turning from looking directly at the camera, to a profile shot. The film’s voice-over says during this shot that ‘She and He must be placed among them’, referring to placing the two stars among ordinary people, explaining the odd blocking choices at the beginning of the sequence. The sequence ends with another shot of Fonda, a profile head shot of her, wearing glasses, and broadcasting news, in English this time, of what’s happening in France. Although this shot of Fonda is the longest of all the shots of her so far, lasting a little less than a minute, and her speaking her native language, her star persona is still reduced by the camera not showing her face from the front, and due to her wearing glasses, once again covering her star presence to an extent.
Her/Suzanne (Fonda) reporting the news
The directors’ decisions to employ their two stars in this Brechtian way, distancing them from the audiences and directing their performances to be undemonstrative, is not uncommon with French New Wave filmmakers, with the purpose being to draw the film’s audiences away from the stars and towards the film’s meaning. However, what is uncommon is the affect this technique has on a major star’s image. The answer is two things. First of all it is the very fact that Fonda allowed herself to be involved in this precarious project demonstrates the fact that she supports Godard’s and Gorin’s cause. In the opening sequences analyzed as well as throughout the entire film, Fonda as the star is undermined and is not the focus of the picture. Apart from the opening sequence presenting Fonda almost unrecognizable at times, the rest of the picture is filled with scenes in which the star is always behind some insignificant character, mainly captured quite far away from the camera, and no true star attention is given to her, nor does she take herself, apart from one scene in which she talks about her mainly sexual and mindless relationship with Montand, which echoes back to her sex star image. However, due to allowing herself to be presented in this particular way in Tout Va Bien, Fonda’s image is moved away from her as a star and onto her as a political involver. Not only having made two anti-Vietnam films, Jane Fonda decided to go to France to give up her star image towards a cause so distant to her, being the problems of bourgeois revolutionaries after France’s May 1968 unrest. Thus this move shows Fonda as being a star who not only cares about the political problems in and involving her own country, but in others’ as well.
The second image that Tout Va Bien brings out in Fonda is that of a great actress, once again, as it is very rare for a Hollywood star to take up her time to act in a picture that demands her to give up her star presence and persona so literally, as to physically be in the background of most of the film. However, this is what Jane did, which brings out her image as a great actress, dedicated to give her all towards the creation of great motion pictures.
Jane Fonda, after 1972, went on to give great performances in films such as A Doll’s House (1973 Joseph Losey), Julia (1977 Fred Zinnemann), Coming Home (1978 Hal Ashby) and California Suite (1978 Herbert Ross), playing strong women in all four, continuing to advocate feminism through her image. The title given to Fonda in this essay is ‘The Pin-up Revolutionary. The pin-up girl image of her is evident through her breathtaking beauty, early exploitative roles and her sex-based work with Roger Vadim, such as Barbarella. The revolutionary image of Fonda comes from her advocation of free-love and feminism, particularly in Klute, through female independence, power, sexual freedom and dominance, as well as her advocation of radical politics such as being anti-Vietnam and supporting the post-1968 cause in France. Jane Fonda proves to be a revolutionary in another sense as well, through her acting. Her extraordinary performance in Klute, proved through her naturalism and total immersion into the role of Bree Daniels, that she is a revolutionary actor, fighting for the very best, ultimately winning an Oscar for the part, as well as her incredible performances in They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? and later, in Coming Home, gaining her second Oscar for the role, also support her revolutionary actress image.
The second image that Tout Va Bien brings out in Fonda is that of a great actress, once again, as it is very rare for a Hollywood star to take up her time to act in a picture that demands her to give up her star presence and persona so literally, as to physically be in the background of most of the film. However, this is what Jane did, which brings out her image as a great actress, dedicated to give her all towards the creation of great motion pictures.
Jane Fonda, after 1972, went on to give great performances in films such as A Doll’s House (1973 Joseph Losey), Julia (1977 Fred Zinnemann), Coming Home (1978 Hal Ashby) and California Suite (1978 Herbert Ross), playing strong women in all four, continuing to advocate feminism through her image. The title given to Fonda in this essay is ‘The Pin-up Revolutionary. The pin-up girl image of her is evident through her breathtaking beauty, early exploitative roles and her sex-based work with Roger Vadim, such as Barbarella. The revolutionary image of Fonda comes from her advocation of free-love and feminism, particularly in Klute, through female independence, power, sexual freedom and dominance, as well as her advocation of radical politics such as being anti-Vietnam and supporting the post-1968 cause in France. Jane Fonda proves to be a revolutionary in another sense as well, through her acting. Her extraordinary performance in Klute, proved through her naturalism and total immersion into the role of Bree Daniels, that she is a revolutionary actor, fighting for the very best, ultimately winning an Oscar for the part, as well as her incredible performances in They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? and later, in Coming Home, gaining her second Oscar for the role, also support her revolutionary actress image.
A Doll's House 1973
http://cinemaneuf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/a-dolls-house.jpg
http://cinemaneuf.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/a-dolls-house.jpg
Julia 1977
http://old.cinapse.co/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/julia2-e1466050838674.jpg
http://old.cinapse.co/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/julia2-e1466050838674.jpg
California Suite 1978
https://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2088/2881/1600/Image26.27.jpg
https://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2088/2881/1600/Image26.27.jpg
Coming Home 1978
http://www.movingimagesource.us/images/articles/coming-home001-20080627-122003-medium.jpg
http://www.movingimagesource.us/images/articles/coming-home001-20080627-122003-medium.jpg
Bibliography
Dyer, R. and McDonald, P. (1998). Stars. London: British Film Institute.
Fonda, Jane (1968) Photoplay, February, 63.
Johnson, Rachael (2013) ‘Female Identity and Performance: An Appreciation of Alan Pakula’s Klute’ Bitch Flicks, 15 Oct. Available HTTP:
http://www.btchflcks.com/2013/10/female-identity-and-performance-an-appreciation-of-alan-pakulas-klute-1971.html#.WPqfPIU1hxU (19 April 2017).
Kael, P. (2000). Deeper into Movies. 1st ed. London: Marion Boyars.
Tomkies, Mike (1967) Showtime, March, 21.
Whitaker, Sheila (1975) ‘The Rebel Hero’ Hollywood and the Great Stars Monthly 8, 10-13.
Fonda, Jane (1968) Photoplay, February, 63.
Johnson, Rachael (2013) ‘Female Identity and Performance: An Appreciation of Alan Pakula’s Klute’ Bitch Flicks, 15 Oct. Available HTTP:
http://www.btchflcks.com/2013/10/female-identity-and-performance-an-appreciation-of-alan-pakulas-klute-1971.html#.WPqfPIU1hxU (19 April 2017).
Kael, P. (2000). Deeper into Movies. 1st ed. London: Marion Boyars.
Tomkies, Mike (1967) Showtime, March, 21.
Whitaker, Sheila (1975) ‘The Rebel Hero’ Hollywood and the Great Stars Monthly 8, 10-13.
Filmography
A Doll’s House (1973) Directed by Joseph Losey [Film]. USA: World Film Services.
Barbarella (1968) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Dino de Laurentiis Cinematografica.
Barefoot in the Park (1967) Directed by Gene Saks [Film]. USA:Wallis-Hazen.
California Suite (1978) Directed by Herbert Ross [Film]. USA: Columbia Pictures.
Cat Ballou (1965) Directed by Elliot Silverstein [Film]. USA: Columbia Pictures Corporation.
Coming Home (1978) Directed by Hal Ashby [Film]. USA: Jerome Hellman Productions.
Free The Army (1972) Directed by Francine Parker [Film]. USA: Duque Films.
Histoires Extraordinaires (1969) Directed by Federico Fellini, Louis Malle, Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Les Films Marceau.
Hurry Sundown (1967) Directed by Otto Preminger [Film]. USA: Otto Preminger Films.
Julia (1977) Directed by Fred Zinnemann [Film]. USA: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.
Klute (1971) Directed by Alan J. Pakula [Film]. USA: Warner Bros.
La Curée (1966) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Les Films Marceau-Cocinor.
La Ronde (1965) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Interopa Film.
New York Stories (1989) Directed by Woody Allen, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese [Film]. USA: Touchstone Pictures.
Tall Story (1955) Directed by Joshua Logan [Film]. USA: Mansfield Productions.
The Chapman Report (1955) Directed by George Cukor [Film]. USA: Darryl F. Zanuck Productions.
The Chase (1966) Directed by Arthur Penn [Film]. USA: Horizon Pictures.
The Jungle Book (1967) Directed by Wolfgang Reitherman [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Productions.
They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (1969) Directed by Sydney Pollack [Film]. USA: American Broadcasting Company.
Tout Va Bien (1972) Directed by Jean-Luc Godard, Jean-Pierre Gorin [Film]. France: Anouchka Films.
Vietnam Journey (1972) Directed by Christine Burrill [Film]. USA: Indochina Peace Corporation.
Walk on the Wild Side (1955) Directed by Edward Dmytryk [Film]. USA: Famous Artists Productions.
Barbarella (1968) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Dino de Laurentiis Cinematografica.
Barefoot in the Park (1967) Directed by Gene Saks [Film]. USA:Wallis-Hazen.
California Suite (1978) Directed by Herbert Ross [Film]. USA: Columbia Pictures.
Cat Ballou (1965) Directed by Elliot Silverstein [Film]. USA: Columbia Pictures Corporation.
Coming Home (1978) Directed by Hal Ashby [Film]. USA: Jerome Hellman Productions.
Free The Army (1972) Directed by Francine Parker [Film]. USA: Duque Films.
Histoires Extraordinaires (1969) Directed by Federico Fellini, Louis Malle, Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Les Films Marceau.
Hurry Sundown (1967) Directed by Otto Preminger [Film]. USA: Otto Preminger Films.
Julia (1977) Directed by Fred Zinnemann [Film]. USA: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.
Klute (1971) Directed by Alan J. Pakula [Film]. USA: Warner Bros.
La Curée (1966) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Les Films Marceau-Cocinor.
La Ronde (1965) Directed by Roger Vadim [Film]. France, Italy: Interopa Film.
New York Stories (1989) Directed by Woody Allen, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese [Film]. USA: Touchstone Pictures.
Tall Story (1955) Directed by Joshua Logan [Film]. USA: Mansfield Productions.
The Chapman Report (1955) Directed by George Cukor [Film]. USA: Darryl F. Zanuck Productions.
The Chase (1966) Directed by Arthur Penn [Film]. USA: Horizon Pictures.
The Jungle Book (1967) Directed by Wolfgang Reitherman [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Productions.
They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (1969) Directed by Sydney Pollack [Film]. USA: American Broadcasting Company.
Tout Va Bien (1972) Directed by Jean-Luc Godard, Jean-Pierre Gorin [Film]. France: Anouchka Films.
Vietnam Journey (1972) Directed by Christine Burrill [Film]. USA: Indochina Peace Corporation.
Walk on the Wild Side (1955) Directed by Edward Dmytryk [Film]. USA: Famous Artists Productions.