Manhattan (1979): Revisiting its Female Characters
Why am I writing about a Woody Allen’s movie in the light of the exposés surfacing in Hollywood?
Well, let me start this post by saying that I am quite aware of the allegations towards Woody Allen. I don’t worship his persona but I admire his contributions to cinema. He has created many films and characters that have made us fall in love with this art form. His dialogues are neat and full of relevant references. However, I acknowledge that some of his works, mainly his recent ones, follow a disturbing storyline: a neurotic old man falls in love with a much younger girl. Actress Kate Winslet, who worked with him last year, claims that Woody understands his female characters. I wouldn’t go so far, he certainly presented us outstading female leads in his movies. Interiors (1978) was made one year before Manhattan and brings a cast formed by mostly women, following a Bergman style of analyzing the characters’ psyche. His approach to the creation of these female characters was, perhaps, in accordance with the Women’s Lib movements that were occurring at that time — he goes on to reference its influence in Manhattan. The thing is, when we talk about a man understanding a woman and her world, she will be seen through his gaze, and that’s a dangerous thing. So, I admire Allen’s contributions to the development of strong female characters, specially in Manhattan, at the same time that I am suspicious of his persona behind cameras and I can’t trust him fully to represent women as they really are. He’s not entitled to that, but at least, I can’t condemn him for his significant legacy in the way women are represented culturally.
An intellectual high school student, a lesbian feminist writer and an urbane journalist form the cast of Manhattan
In Manhattan, we have portrayals of women that live in the Upper East Side of the borough, therefore, not all women will be able to connect with their social conditions. But, as we get to know each one of the three female leads of this movie, we understand that in the context that they were inserted, they were far from the stereotypes that have been formed about women. We have three characters with distinct personalities, although all of them are independent. Tracy is a 17 year -old-girl, played by Mariel Hemingway. She was, in fact, 16 at the time the movie was shot. She attends Dalton School and is not interested in talking about boys or in girl rivalry. Tracy dates a TV male writer that is 30 years older than her… guess who he is portrayed by? Woody Allen himself. Isaac, or Ike, as he is called by some characters, is just like many of Allen’s appearances in his movies: an intellectual, talkative and neurotic man confused about the women in his life. Isaac is also immature and dating a teenager offers him a comfort zone. He’s constantly in doubt of himself while Tracy, despite her age, is tender and self-assured. Usually, when Hollywood portrays young girls, they are shown as shallow and most of their dialogues are about boys. Their identities are not explored; thus, they end up perpetuating stereotypes in relation to how it is to be a girl. Tracy is not part of this single story about girls. She can be as clever as she is romantic. Although she is committed to her relationship with Ike, he tries really hard to keep her away from him. Allen’s alter ego believes that the young girl is just an ephemeral experience and that she is not someone who can take a relationship seriously. He tells her that he is in love with another woman, the urbane journalist Mary, who is just about his age. What he actually meant by breaking up with her was that his brittle ego couldn’t handle his partner apparent maturity. He wanted to keep her young and unexperienced so he could feel safe, but Tracy wants to pursue a career in London and she will not give up on her future for a man. Ikes breaks her heart without regretting it because he wants to see her just as a young and naïve little girl. In their last encounter, the writer tells Tracy that he doesn’t want the thing he likes about her to change. The last line of the movie is hers as she says “ Not everybody gets corrupted. You have to have a little faith in people.” . This can be interpreted as if she will not meet his expectations on a woman experiencing independence as she becomes the owner of her choices. He believes that she will be easily manipulated by other people, but Hemingway’s character is confident that her future and her career matter much more than relying on a volatile relationship.
Diane Keaton has consolidated her career as one of the most distinguished actressess. Her stripped-down style marked by her high-waisted pants and ties — she played with both feminine and masculine designed clothes — as well as her witty personality allowed Diane to play similar characters in Woody’s movies. The wry journalist in Manhattan reminded me of the flighty singer in Annie Hall. Ike meets Mary as his best friend’s affair. Their conversations flow just like the connection Keaton-Allen works. It’s delightful but Mary disagrees with most of his opinions. One of their encounters happens at an Equal Rights Amendment fund-raising event, which was hosted by one of the Women’ s movement leaders, Bella Abzug. It’s important to highlight that this reference says a lot about what was going on in United States at that time. Allen developed female characters that were in accordance to the social changes back then. Mary and Ike like complicated relationships and end up dating each other. However, Mary still has feelings for Ike’s best friend, yet, she decides that she is better on her own. I am much younger than Keaton’s character and a bit older than Hemingway’s, yet, I can relate to both of them. Even though we have sought to have our own independence instead of committing ourselves to relationships, knowing that they can get in the way of our goals, it is hard to not think of love as a scape, as something necessary to make us feel complete. Whether we meet someone as Ike — whose insecurities spoil his relationships — or not, we should put ourselves first and not let our wholiness be defined by someone or something that won’t linger or won’t stay. This message is powerful to women who feel trapped in relationships that prevent them from their own choices and their own freedoms.
The last of the three women depicted in Allen’s 1979 movie is Ike’s ex-wife, Jill Davis. She’s the one who caught my attention the most once she defied delicate issues regarding female sexuality and empowerment. Jill Davis and Ike had a child together, but she left him for a woman. Ike ridiculously attempts to claim masculine superiority over Jill’s choice. Both Jill and her partner Connie fight back, and they don’t seem not even a bit threatened by his macho assumptions. Besides, Streep’s character has been writing a book about how she felt trapped in her marriage with Ike. In Marriage, Divorce, and Selfhood, she details her former husband’s quirky mannerisms and other issues that can mislead the audience to interpret her as misandrist. I firmly believe that Allen’s intention was not to satirize the women’s movement, but to show a powerful woman ahead of her time. Jill’s new family and choices are an insult to moral values and to Ike’s fragile ego. Even nowadays, each of these three women frightens society once they do not subject themselves to men and they pursue their own selfhood, just like Jill Davis’ book title suggests.
