Search

This thesis aims to study two different approaches which dissent from the dominant imaginary, through the analysis of the FEMEN movement’s direct actions and performances derived from the post-porn approach. Both dissenting approaches highlight and question, each in their own way, the sexualization of bodies, which is inherent to certain schema of the dominant imaginary: the FEMEN movement refuses it, while the post-porn approach offers other ways of sexualizing the body. An in-depth comparison of FEMEN's modes of action with those of the actors and actresses of the post-porn scene entails engagement with two different ways of re-working the notion of dominant sexual imaginaries, and also the re-signification of trans and/or non-heterosexual female bodies. Starting from the sexualization of bodies, I show how the way we look at bodies is locked in, structured by an imaginary shaped by power relationships: there are hegemonic ways to narrate the bodies of the dominant and the dominated. By disseminating themselves into the social world, corporal scripts – these fictions created through logics of domination – shape the way we look at bodies, corporal practices and social interactions. However, this locking in of the gaze contains in itself the conditions of its own unlocking. These modes of unlocking will be questioned through the prism of actions by FEMEN and post-porn activists. Does suggesting alternative body narrations unlock the gaze brought to bear on the body? What relation do these dissenting approaches have with hegemonic fictions?, La présente thèse vise à étudier deux différentes modalités de contestation de l'imaginaire dominant, à travers l'analyse des actions directes du mouvement FEMEN et des performances issues de la démarche post-porn. Ces deux démarches contestataires mettent en exergue et questionnent, chacune à leur manière, la sexualisation des corps, inhérente à certains schèmes de l'imaginaire dominant : les FEMEN la refusent ; la démarche post-porn propose d'autres façons de sexualiser les corps. Une comparaison approfondie de modes d'action des FEMEN et des acteur-ice-s de la scène post-porn implique de s'intéresser à deux façons différentes de retravailler les imaginaires sexuels dominants et de re-signifier les corps féminins, trans et/ou non hétérosexuels. A partir de la sexualisation des corps, je montre comment le regard sur les corps est verrouillé, structuré par un imaginaire traversé par les rapports de pouvoir : il y a des façons hégémoniques de raconter les corps des dominant.e.s et des dominé.e.s. En essaimant dans le monde social, les scripts corporels, ces fictions forgées par les logiques de domination, structurent le regard sur les corps, les pratiques corporelles et les interactions sociales. Mais ce verrouillage du regard contient en lui-même les conditions de son déverrouillage. Ce sont des modalités de ce déverrouillage qui seront interrogées, à travers les actions des FEMEN et des activistes post-porn. Proposer des narrations alternatives de corps déverrouille-t-il le regard sur les corps ? Quel rapport ces démarches contestataires entretiennent-elles aux fictions hégémoniques ?

This essay argues that, in Manhood, the Judith Salome diptych has a deeper and more structuring effect than Cranach's Lucrèce and Judith, even though Le iris himself used the latter in order to frame his autobiographical volume. The Judith I Salome' diptych is composed by the very two figures whose merging Panofsky (he could have mentioned the Judith II (« Salome ») that Klimmt painted in 1911) singled out as one of the most flagrant symptoms of modern ignorance of iconology : for the sexuali^ation of Judith entailed by this coupling is an iconographie blasphemy ; no humanist would have dared equate her patriotic virtue with Salomé' s capricious perversity. But, in Leiris's logic, Holophernes' s beheading is a sufficient ground for retroactively motivating, even if fantasmatically , her sexualization (his Judith is a praying-mantis figure who transforms her lover into an Acephalus) . The present essay, however, argues that, inspite of Leiris's insistence, his identifying with the beheaded Holophernes (or Saint John) is not primarily rooted in sexual fantasies, but in a deeper articulation between the self-portrait as a genre (literary as well as pictorial) and exemplary figures of beheading., Hollier Denis. À l'en-tête d'Holopherne. In: Littérature, n°79, 1990. Michel Leiris. pp. 16-28.