Author AlSayyad presents different layers of observation of the city in the modern world, especially in a time where mass surveillance and mediums like film are available to the masses. He elaborates on the “gaze” and how the notion of viewing and observing both people occupying the city and the actual concrete infrastructure captures the mundanity of life, generating a new archetype of experiencing space. A feature of the article that I found really interesting was the consideration of different gazes such as the token ‘male gaze’ inspiring power imbalance and a different “modern sexual economy.” Using examples from three films (“Rear Window,” “Sliver,” and “The End of Violence”) he showcases people’s innate voyeuristic tendencies and how they “project fantasies” despite having differing time and location contexts, varying social casts and status. I understand how with urbanization and growing density of living, it is inevitable to observe, given the “panopticon” like tall glass monoliths we live in. Voyeurism creates relationships and “facilitates interaction between people” even if it is non-verbal.I believe that this is only enhanced by the film genre, the act of watching stories and characters is quite inherently voyeuristic, allowing the viewer to project their fantasies similar to what was elaborated by the author. It presents almost a metaphysical portal through which voyeurs can gaze into alternate realities. - Rishima Mathur (UID: 3035841996)
You pointed out several key points raised by AlSayyad. I wonder if you could expand on what you found interesting about the two ideas you quoted – “male gaze” and “modern sexual economy.” For example, can you relate them to any examples you observe? It is also interesting that you mentioned that film watching is also voyeuristic. How would you characterize the power relations between those being viewed and those viewing in this case? Do take note not to exceed the word count excessively in future.