A film passes Bechdel’s Law when
1) there are at least two named female characters, who
2) talk to each other about
3) something other than a man.
A character in Bechdel’s online comic Dykes to Watch Out For explains that she only watches films that meet these requirements. It was misquoted as also specifying that the women be named characters. While the setting-straight corrected this perception, I consider it a significant enough corollary to hold onto it.
I’ve also decided to apply it to people of color, because though the dynamics of marginalization differ from one group to another, I think the emphasis that Bechdel’s Law places on characters’ visibility, significance, and independence is equally useful.
Honestly, who cares?
It’s interesting that one of the most crucial media of our time largely ignores most of the population. Do with the information what you will — if nothing else, tracking how the plot keeps women separate, focuses all their attention on men, or even has only one woman to begin with, is a diverting game during lousy films or ones you’ve seen a thousand times. Films play similar games with people of color, more often than not casting them as sidekicks to aid the white hero in his more fully realized struggle.
Is that such a bad thing?
In terms of movies and books, what happens in Vegas doesn’t stay in Vegas. The images and ideas people pick up at the cineplex and in a bestseller mix in with everything else that’s going on in their minds — like how you end up quoting your favorite movie in a conversation with a friend, or how a real-life situation reminds you of an event in that book you read in high school. People and situations that our cultural mirrors don’t end up reflecting don’t get as much recognition in our minds, and that is a bad thing.
Recent Comments