09/07/24
The Collective Gaze: Diffusing Voyeurism Through the Lens
In Mike Figgis' book In the Dark, he discusses his film Hotel and the surprising discovery he made while using a four-screen technique. Figgis explains, "When you use four screens and you deal, for example, with something erotic, it somehow diffuses the perversity because you are not one person looking through a keyhole anymore. You are one of four, in the case of a quadrant, so you are able to look more analytically. Anything which technically allows you to look at any subject—life, death, sex, tragedy, whatever—with four different angles at the same time can help to open it up".
When watching a film, we are not just spectators; we become part of the world onscreen, moving through it with the characters. Typically, we remain unseen, which is why breaking the fourth wall can be so refreshing in movies—it acknowledges our presence. However, the use of four quadrants complicates the viewer’s role, blurring the line between being a passive recipient of a fragmented story and an active participant piecing together a cohesive narrative.
Figgis' choice to use four quadrants in his film delves into the psychology and ethics of viewing, particularly in terms of voyeurism and the sociological phenomenon of the diffusion of responsibility. Voyeurism typically involves a power dynamic where the viewer is given exclusive access to something hidden and private, with the gaze being both singular and isolated. Figgis' quadrant technique, however, diffuses this dynamic by multiplying the gaze, transforming it from a personal, illicit pleasure into a collective observation. This also reduces the potential for bias or taboo and creates a more objective narrative. Now, the audience is no longer a solitary voyeur but part of a larger, fragmented consciousness that observes from multiple angles. The question then arises: Is it still voyeurism if it involves a collective gaze?