. 3’»

‘II V 4...? ¥§.
22‘. 93...:
1339...... a I.

.z :3 t.

In?! .9.
2.1.3213! .{E .
3.1.1.;5

£3.13? .
.. 6‘ '1. s» A‘l.o..\x:. .I.
3:. :3: . ‘.. 2
I. )a 22....
3 pt... 1.
:3!

 

n z .7. . I.
2.: it

 

‘1 . .
.2. x .34 1.1;)
2:14.27 12(19-
.‘ l. «a

:3. v

u.
an

.‘n 71.3 f
;.-..I::\
v.

 

$9
.(t.2 .

.3! I ..

 

. -.—---

300 i

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

An Interdisciplinary Approach to Identifying the Creation
of Feminist Narrative Spaces in Law & Order:
Synthesizing Narrative Analysis, Focus Groups, and
Viewer-Response Criticism

presented by

Melissa Camacho

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph 0 D 0 degree in Mass MEdia'

 

 

.r

/ Maior professor

Date May 30. 2001

 

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

W”
Michigan State

University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c-JCIF!CIDateDue.p65p15

AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH TO IDENTIFYING THE CREATION
OF FEMINIST NARRATIVE SPACES IN
LAW & ORDER:
SYNTHESIZING NARRATIVE ANALYSIS, FOCUS GROUPS, AND
VIEWER-RESPONSE CRITICISM

By

Melissa Camacho

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Communication Arts and Sciences
2001

ABSTRACT
AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH To IDENTIFYING THE CREATION
OF FEMINIST NARRATIVE SPACES IN
LAW & ORDER:
SYNTHESIZING NARRATIVE ANALYSIS, FOCUS GROUPS, AND
VIEWER-RESPONSE CRITICISM
By

Melissa Camacho

This study is an interdisciplinary feminist exercise in applied media aesthetics.
' The purpose of this study is to look at specific televisual texts in depth in order to
determine how narratives might incorporate points of resistance for women.
Accordingly, this research sets out to identify the creation of feminist narrative spaces
within a televisual text.

Narrative theory is expanded to reflect multiple subject positions in both verbal
and pictorial constructions of ideational space in a televisual text. Specifically, it is
expanded to account for the patriarchal point of view from which a text can be
understood, and to account for a reverse discourse, which challenges this patriarchy. By
expanding narrative theory, one can examine how each of the narrative exchanges
identified in a televisual text creates an ideational patriarchal space (ClPS) or a
constructed ideational space of resistance (CISR). In determining whether the ideational
spaces of each individual narrative support or resist the dominant subject position of
patriarchy, one can begin to explore whether a reverse discourse, in the form of a secOnd

implied authorship, is present in the text

Law & Order was selected for this study because it is one of several sophisticated
dramas on television today. it is known for its inventive use of story telling, and
maintains on-going discussions of real-life events in the text (Unger, 1996). A textual
analysis of three Law & Order episodes identified a patriarchal story world experience.

It also revealed evidence of a reverse discourse or second implied authorship that
challenged the patriarchal point of view that guides the text.

The second part of this study looks at the extent to which the viewer of the Law &
Order text recognizes that these multiple points of view are being circumscribed by the
over all paniarchal space of the story world. It is assumed that viewers of televisual
media texts are active sense makers of the information being offered in the text (Chisolm,
1991, pg. 389). Wolfgang Iser’s (1978) audience-response framework is helpful in
understanding this sensemaking process, including the creation of a dominant reading and
a resistive reading of a text.

In order to uncover whether a viewer is guided by a patriarchal point of view
when watching Law & Order, a series of focus group interviews was conducted. The
data collected from these interviews suggests that (a) viewers assert a patriarchal
dominant reading when engaging the text; and (b) they are able to challenge this

patriarchy, asserting a point of view that resists this dominant discourse.

Copyright by
MELISSA CAMACHO

2001

To Mom, Dad, and the Camacho Girls

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I begin by thanking the members of my committee—Dr. Steve Gold, Dr. Joyce
Ladenson, Dr. Bruce Vanden Bergh, and my Chair, Dr. Gretchen Barbatsis. Gretchen,
you have been a wonderful advisor, mentor, and best of all, Friend. Your support and
guidance is invaluable. '

God gives us the gift of creativity to allow us to look at old things in new ways
(Exodus 31:15). Thanks Mom and Dad for the unconditional support and
encouragement you have given me always, particularly when I pursue my creative
endeavors. Your recognition of my creativity makes my world complete. Thank you
Camacho Girls: Aileen, Carin, and Liana, for your continual rallies of encouragement
year after year. Even though we are far away you are always a daily part of my life. My
deepest love and appreciation goes out to my extended family, from the Camacho-
Hemandez family in Puerto Rico, to the Vallejo—Liman family in New Jersey, and all of
you in between. Thank you for being an important part of my life. Thank you Ivonne,
Tameka, Hiromi, Peter, and the rest of my friends for being there for the fun times as well
as the bad. And finally, a special thanks to James, for taking it upon himself to remind
me, in his own way, that my life is no less wonderful because I chose a different path to
follow.

I would also like to acknowledge Charles Kingsley, who passed away before he
had the chance to complete his labor of love. Thank you, Charles, for quietly sharing

your love of learning with the world.

vi

LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 1:

CHAPTER 2:

CHAPTER 3:

CHAPTER 4:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Parts of a Narrative

Narrative Space

Television Narrative

Pictorial Narratives

Ferninism(s) and Patriarchy

Feminism Television Criticism: An Overview
Ferninisms, Space, and Points of Resistance
Narratives and Reverse-Discourse

Opening Narrative Theory: Multi-Nanative
Televisual Texts

A Feminist Approach to Multi-Narrative
Televisual Texts

Summary

A TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF
LAW & ORDER

Coding

Findings
Sample A: Humiliation
Sample B: Ritual
Sample C: Harm

Discussion

Summary

AUDIENCE RESPONSE THEORY

Iser, Audience Response, and the Text-
Reader Relationship

Blanks and Negations

Themes and Horizons

vii

PAGE

xii

A

:wxlm-kcfi

l4
l6

17

18
20.

CHAPTER 5:

CHAPTER 6:

CHAPTER 7:

Summary
METHOD

Focus Group and Feminist Scholarship
Focus Groups and Television
Focus Groups and Self-Reflexivity
Discussing Law & Order: Data Collection

Sample

Scheduling and Procedure

The Questioning Route

Sample Questions

Coding and Analytical Framework
Summary

RESULTS

Viewer Profiles

Category 1: Patriarchy as the Dominant Point of View
Category 2: Identification of Patriarchy and Patriarchal
Structures in the Text

Category 3: Reactions to the Criminal Aspects of the
Case

Category 4: Reactions to the Legal Aspects of the Case
Category 5: Relationships between Characters
Category 6: Shifts in Assertions in the Conclusion of
the Episode .

Category 7: Shift in Attitudes after Thinking about the
Episode in its Entirety

The Rejection of Patriarchy

Applying an Expanded Narrative Framework
Summary

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Asserting a Resistive Subject Position
Example 1: Lieutenant Van Buren has power in a
patriarchal system.
Example 2: Mrs. Washington tells her story.
Example 3: Detective Curtis vs. Detective Briscoe.
Example 4: Viewing prostitutes as empowered
women.
Example 5: Clare Kincaid’s pursuit of justice.
Example 6: Julia Danforth as an empowered
criminal.

viii

72

73

73
75
75
77
77
78
80
82
86
88

89

88

91

102
107
109
111
115
115
116
117
118
119
119

120
121

124

Example 7: The show as representative of female

empowerment 125
Discussing the Framework 126
Summary 128
BIBLIOGRAPHY 130
APPENDICES 136
APPENDEX A:
' Viewer Profiles 137
APPENDIX B:

Focus Group Questioning Route 138

ix

TABLE

3.A.l

3.A.2

3.A.3

3.A.4

3.B.1

3.B.2

3.8.3

3.8.4

3.C.l

3.C.2

3.C.3

3.C.4

5.1

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

6.6

LIST OF TABLES

Scene 3. Lt. Van Buren’s Office (Cat. 1)

Scene 31. Assistant D.A. Jack McCoy’s Office (Cat. 1)
Scene 39. McCoy is being seated. (Cat. 1)

Scene 43. (excerpt) District Attomey’s Office (Cat. 2)

Scene 40. (excerpt) Eric Martin testifying before the
Grand Jury (Cat 2 & 3)

Scene 43. (excerpt) N. Martin in Family Court (Cat 2)
Scene 44. (excerpt) Outside of Court Room (Cat. 1)

Scene 7. (excerpt) Lieutenant Van Buren’s Office
(Cat. 2)

Scene 14. (excerpt) Interrogation Room. (Cat 1 & 2)
Scene 33. DA Adam Schiff’ s Office. (Cat. 1)

Scene 37. (exerpt) Nurse Panati on Stand (Cat. 1 & 2)
Scene 42. Carmichael and McCoy at Courthouse (Cat. 1)
Content Categories

Defining Patriarchy and Patriarchal Structures

Specific Examples of Patriarchy in Law & Order:
Humiliation .

Participant Reactions to the Criminal Investigation
Reactions to the Legal Aspects of the Case
Relationships between the Characters in the Text

Shifts in Attitudes at the Conclusion of the Episode

PAGE

27

31

34

38

51
54
87

91

98
100
103

108

6.7

6.8

Shifts in Attitude after Thinking about the Episode in
its Entirety

Issues of Gender, Race, Class, and Age

110

112

FIGURE
2.1
2.2

2.3

3.1

3.2

4.1

LIST OF FIGURES

Television Discourse and Narrative Theory

Pictorial Narrative

Feminist Narrative

Constructed Ideational Patriarchal Space (CIPS) and
Constructed Ideational Space of Resistance (CISR) in
Multi-structured Narrative Discourse

Feminist Narrative in Law & Order

Humiliation: Scene Three, Lt. Van Buren with
Detectives

Pictorial Narrative
Humiliation: Scene Three, Lt. Van Buren w/Detectives

Following a Theme and Horizon Order of a Text

xii

PAGE

19

62

69

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

As feminist scholarship has evolved and become more widely accepted among
larger academic communities, so has the acceptance of feminist approaches to
television criticism. Since the 1950’s, feminist scholars have engaged in feminist
television criticism in order explore women’s participation in televisual discourse.
This exploration, however, has taken place within the context of the different feminist
movements that have evolved over time. As a result, feminist television criticism
often reflects one or more strands of feminist agendas in its analyses (Kaplan in
Allen, 1992, van Zoonen, 1994).

In the 1990’s the feminist movement exists as a de-centered, and oftentimes
contentious realm (Maglin and Perry, 1996). Yet, amidst the different voices being
heard, in feminist television criticism (at least) there appears to be a common thread:
the portrayals of women and the issues they face on television today are remarkably
similar to the portrayals and issues of the late 1950’s. As a result, what appears to be
progressive representations of women on television today often continue to do little
more than reinforce the male-articulated patriarchal structure of every day life that
existed a half a century ago. The difference lies in how their stories are being
narrated (Brundson, et.al., 1997).

This study proposes that because women’s stories are being told differently,
some of the ways that they are narrated resist the patriarchy that is being portrayed on
television. Thus the goal here is to look at specific televisual texts in depth in order to

determine how narratives might incorporate points of resistance for women.

Accordingly, this research sets out to identify the creation of feminist narrative spaces
within a televisual text.

This study, while feminist in nature, is an exercise in applied media aesthetics.
It is an attempt at applying a reconceptualized narrative framework in order to
understand the conventions of an aesthetic object—in this case, a televisual text.
Narrative theory is useful in identifying an intended point of view from which a
televisual text can be read. However, in assuming that a televisual text there tells a
woman’s story in various, and sometimes opposing ways, one must also assume that
there can be a variety of points of view from which the meaning of this a text can be
asserted. To identify the various viewpoints from which a text can be read, narrative
theory must be expanded in order to include them. This study attempts to “open up”
narrative theory to include multiple points of view, and apply this expanded
conceptual framework to the deconstruction of a specific televisual text.

Law & Order was chosen as the televisual text for this study for several
reasons. The show has received critical acclaim, and it is said that it helped spark the
growing genre of the “prime time novel” (McGrath, 1995). It contains a complex
combination of linguistic and visual narratives. Because of its sophisticated narrative
structure, it is an ideal text for identifying multiple and opposing points of view being
reflected by the text.

Howard S. Becker (1982) suggests that audiences learn the conventions of an
aesthetic object “by experiencing them, by interacting with the work, and, frequently,
with other people in relation to the wor ” (Becker, 1982, pg. 64). To this end, focus

group interviews were conducted in order to observe and record how women learned

the conventions that guided their understanding of Law & Order. These interviews
also provided greater insight into the perspectives offered by participants, including
those that were created from the aesthetic conventions of the text, and from personal
experiences as well. In allowing for the application of prior knowledge to the
sensemaking process, one can have a better sense of how and why a reader creates a
particular meaning in relation to the text (Iser, 1978). Wolfgang Iser’s audience-
response framework is helpful in understanding how and under what conditions a text
has meaning for a viewer (Holub, 1984, pg. 82).

This research attempts to understand how interview participants ideate the
Law & Order text in order to assert that the overarching point of view it is reflecting
is patriarchal. It also attempts to identify a participant’s willingness and ability to

recognize narratives in the text that oppose this overarching patriarchal discourse.

CHAPTER 2

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

To narrate is to engage in an act of communication. According to Seymour
Chatrnan, the objective of narrative theory is to pose questions about how narrative
structures organize themselves (Chatrnan, 1978). For this reason, narrative theory is
appropriate in identifying multiple points of view in a televisual text. The following
discussion elaborates on how narrative theory can be expanded and applied to television.
. It will also review the application of narrative theory to previous feminist television
analyses.
W

When examining a text from a narrative perspective, one can analytically separate
the nanative story and the narrative discourse. The story consists of the content or
existents of the narrative, which includes events, characters, and settings. Within the
narrative discourse one looks at the structure of the narrative transmission and how it
manifests itself in the overall text. In short, the story is the content or the “what” of the
narrative, while the discourse is the expression or the “how” of the overall
communication (Chatrnan, 1978).
W

‘Story space’ is an important aspect of narrative analysis. The reader of a
narrative may construct or reconstruct the information in order to make sense of it. The
reader cannot avoid interpreting the experience, and she must “fill in the gaps” with

possible events, traits, and objects which may have gone unmentioned throughout the

transmission of the narrative. The result of this sensemaking process leads to the
construction of objects and/or experiences that only exist when a reader interprets a
narrative. Such a construction marks the creation of a metaphorical or “ideational”
space”—a non physical space in which the narrative is made sense of, or “performed” by
the reader (Barbatsis. et.al., 1999). It is here where words and images of a narrative
become concrete.

I I . 1 II I'

In television, as in other visual media, the space in which the narrative is
performed is ideational because the viewer performs the image created by a camera. It
does not physically exist. The visual story—space is the explicit segment of the world
shown on the television screen, and the implied story-space is what occurs outside of the
frame. Thus, while the viewer does not see the implied story space, the story’s characters
see, know, and allude to it. The discourse space is the segment of the story-world that
provides the point of view of the visual text.

Sara Kozloff (1992) argues that the world on television is a world shaped by the
rules of discourse (Kozloff, 1992). Because it is a socially produced way of talking and
thinking about the world, one must look at the discourse’s social experience, social
location, and signifying system. Television discourse must be approached by looking
carefully at the participants engaged in the telling of and the listening to the story. In

order to do so, participants of a discourse can be organized into the following:

FIGURE 2.1: Television Discourse and Narrative Theory

 

TEXT
r— Real Author Real Viewer ‘—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

’ Implied 9Narrator-9Narratee-Mmplied
Author Viewer

 

 

 

The real author and real viewer are located outside of the televisual text. The real authors
of a televisual text are the creators, directors, producers, and writers of the program itself.
The real viewers are those who form the television audience. Within the televisual text,
the implied author is a textual construct; the point of view from which the narrative is
being told. It is the organizing force behind the world of the televisual text. In turn, the
televisual text creates an implied viewer who is positioned according to the point of view
of the implied author (Kozloff, 1992). Also a textual construct, “the implied viewer of
television narratives is a position who communes with the implied author perfectly”
(Kozloff, 1992, pg. 80). The point of view challenges a reader to take up a particular
subjectivity vis a vis the discursive action.

Kozloff states: “Identical story events can seem radically different depending
upon the narrator’s slant and on the degree of the narrator’s power, remoteness,
objectivity, or reliability” (Kozloff, 1992, pg. 85). The narrator within the televisual text
does not have to be a specific person, although the telling of the tale could be personified
by the story-existents telling it. Often the narrator is not personified, but exists as an
organizing presence or agency which chooses to tell the narrative a certain way.i The

narratee can exist as a character (or characters) in the text to whom the story is being told

either verbally and/or visually, and who will respond to what is being said in the text.
The narratee serves as the only device within the text by which the implied author
informs the real reader how to perform as implied reader (Chatrnan, 1978). The real
reader then, based on the position s/he chooses to take in relation to this action, may opt
to make sense of the text according to the subjective position of the implied reader, or
s/he may choose to resist it and even engage in an oppositional reading.
W

When analyzing a televisual text, one must keep in mind that the visual or
pictorial aspect of it provides another source of narration. While on-screen patterns of
motion in front of a camera are important for the reader, it is the camera motions and
editing sequences that provide a vantagepoint from which pictorial narrative constructs
can be read. Each camera shot is purposely constructed and edited to create an aesthetic
or ideational space within the pictorial narrative. In this case, however, the “Real

Author” of the text is the Director—the person behind the camera, as noted in Figure 2.2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2.2: Pictorial Narrative
TEXT
Director Viewer

Pictorial _ Exemplify Express Pictorial

POV speaking listening Position
objective showing seeing observer
subjective participant
reverse involved
angle

 

 

 

 

The construction of pictorial narrative is guided by the director’s need to clarify
and/or intensify an event for the real viewer. It is not just what the Camera allows the
viewer to “see” through the lens, but also from what subject position or pictorial point of
view (POV) the camera is telling the story (Barbatsis, 1999). In what Robert Allen
(1992) refers to as the “cinematic mode of engagement” of television, the viewer’s
knowledge of the television world comes through the camera, “positioned in some place
relative to the action in every shot” (Allen, 1992, pg. 117). The point of view of the
camera determines the pictorial position the visual structure will take, and presents a way
the viewer can interpret the text.

Understanding the subject position created by the camera means understanding
how the camera allows the viewer to approach the screen event. As noted in Figure 2.2,
an objective point of view shot allows the viewer to approach the pictorial story-world as
an observer with no involvement. However, a subjective point of view actively
participates in the discourse, prompting the viewer to identify closely with a character or
screen event. Meanwhile, an over the shoulder point of view and/or cross shooting will
position a viewer to visually enter into a picture world from a vantagepoint of
involvement. Such camera shots allow the viewer to become involved in the narrative
structure without assuming a subjective viewing position. For example, two characters
may be speaking to each other in a televisual narrative. Instead of the two characters
facing the camera, they may face each other. As they speak, the camera may shoot from
behind one character, looking over her shoulder in order to focus on the other. By cutting
back and forth between over the shoulder shots, the viewer becomes involved in the

narrative exchange between the two characters in the story. Or the camera may cross-

shoot: looking past a character in the foreground and bring into focus another character in
the background so that the viewer may recognize the other character’s point of view
within the narrative.

The shifting points of view relayed by shooting over-the-shoulder or cross-
shooting are highlighted by the use of reverse—angle shots. Camera angles in a pictorial
narrative serve to show multiple points of view from which the viewer may choose to see
the screen event. The directional shifts that are perceived as changing viewpoints may
also serve to intensify screen space, adding a dramatic edge to the visual image. A
camera tilting up, or high angle shot, may enhance the image of the individual or object
in the frame by making it seem larger, or it may diminish the image by shooting it from
above, making it seem smaller. Either angle impacts the way the image is presented to
the viewer, and the vantage point from which the story world is experienced.

The ideational space of a verbal narrative and pictorial narrative structure offers a
subject position from which the text is experienced. Much of television criticism seeks to -
determine what the subject position or point of view of the overall text is in order to
understand how both the verbal and visual narratives impact the performance of the
viewer. Feminist television criticism, (however, assumes that the subject position
intended by a televisual text is patriarchal, and as a result seeks to understand how these
narratives interpolate their patriarchal subject positions.

E I . I ] I If I . I

It is important to begin this section by stating that there is no unified definition of

feminism (Oleson, 1994). Among the feminisms that exist today, several theorists focus

on the need to look at the place in which women find themselves within what these

theorists define as patriarchal structures. Feminist Sheila Ruth defines women’s
subordination to the masculist ideal as the foundation on which a patriarchal structure
rests (Ruth, 1995). She writes that patriarchy “denote[s] a culture whose driving ethos is
an embodiment of masculist ideals and practices” (Ruth, 1995, pg. 53). Her model,
which reflects what she defines as the two parts of contemporary masculinity, does not
exclude women. Instead, it highlights the valuing of men above women, placing women
in a position of subordination (Ruth, 1995).

Ruth identifies a need for domination, controlled emotions, eliminating neediness,
and protecting the male ego as necessary traits for the contemporary man to have. His
personality should also reflect a “machismo orientation”, in which unruliness, violence,
and sex-as-power is embraced and accepted (Ruth, 1995, pg. 57). Women, on the other
hand, negate these imperatives by being sensitive, needy, tender, and emotional. Men,
argues Ruth, need this “feminine ideal” to complement them so that they can ultimately
reject these traits as signs of male weakness (Ruth, 1995, pg. 62). Thus, the feminine
ideal is devalued, and the masculine ideal is presented as universally correct.

Dorothy Smith (1987) takes a more systematic approach, noting that the
construction of gender-defined patriarchy as a dominant force does not rest solely with
the individual, but is supported and endorsed by the social organization, or institution, of
which the individual is a part (Smith, 1987). She defines patriarchal structure as
“textually mediated relations of ruling” (Smith, 1987, pg. 3), which include power,
organization, direction, and regulation. as pervasive structures that permeate the

complexly organized practices of everyday life. Families, governments, businesses, and

10

the legal system, among others, are, in effect, constructed texts that become sites of
action.

Multiracial feminists, Third World feminists, and self-identified women of color,
approach issues of race, class and gender differently.ii Embedded in their definitions of
patriarchy are discussions of race and class within fenrinist thought and practice. (books,
1994) Each of these movements recognizes that while gender-based patriarchy is a
dominant force, it is not the primary dominant force over individuals, and the social,
and/or economic structures of which they are a part (Di Stefano, 1990). To assume so,

. according to bell hooks (1994), is to focus only on the concerns of white upper-class
women. This excludes the lived experiences of individuals who live in poverty and/or
who are of color. This exclusion, according to Baca Zinn, Cannon, Hi gginbotham and
Dill (I986), “renders feminist theory incomplete” (Baca Zinn, et. al., 1986, pg. 205).

Early feminist television scholarship does not focus on the relationship of class,
race, and gender. It also does not recognize any resistance to the masculist ideals being
presented. Instead, this early body of work assumes that a woman’s presence on
television serves to reflect a point of view that defines women as subordinate to men and
masculine ideals. The following section highlights some of this research.

E "IIl'i C'l'l '!Q .

Early feminist television scholarship includes discussions that focus primarily on
female stereotypes in television programming. Early sitcoms, such as The Honeymooners
and I Love Lucy, introduce female characters who fulfill the roles of housewife and
mother, and who often fall victim to their own far reaching attempts to escape their

assigned domesticity (Press and Strathman, 1993). Meanwhile, soap operas provide rich

ll

texts for narrative analyses because of their on-going multiple narrative structures
(Brown, 1994). As a result, early scholarly discussions of these televisual texts
concentrated on exploring the multiple ways in which women’s roles were defined.
Often, as scholar Tania Modleski argues, women’s domestic roles in soaps were depicted
as pleasurable, and it was the day-to—day dramatic events that forced them to interrupt
their otherwise pleasant daily responsibilities in the home (Modleski, 1979).

More recently, the attention has shifted from identifying domestic stereotypes to
looking at Hollywood’s creation of the “New Woman”. Reflecting what was perceived
to be the more progressive, “liberal” woman of the decade, the 1980’s produced a
“second wave” of female television characters. “' These characters are active members of
the professional community, many while simultaneously participating in the domestic
roles of wife and mother. Other female characters of this “new wave” move farther away
from this role, becoming icons for single motherhood, female friendship, and lovers
(Brundson, et. al., 1997).

For scholars such as Marjorie Ferguson the “New Woman” phenomena has born
limited change in television’s use of female stereotypes (Ferguson, 1990). She and others
have suggested that while female television characterizations are seemingly less
stereotypical than in the 1950’s and 1960’s, further narrative analysis reveals that the
discourse serves to undermine the supposed progress these women reflect in both the
public and private realms of the story-world. Jeremy Butler contends that the dialogue of
sitcoms marketed as “women’s situation comedies” that appear to provide clear-cut
examples of the “New Woman” construction are still overarchingly patriarchal (Butler,

1993). In other words, while there appeared to be evidence of feminist narrative among

12

the female characters within televisual texts, the narrative was embedded in and
overwhelmed by the patriarchal discourse in which it was situated. In fact, much like the
stereotypical female character in early sitcoms, the “New Woman” is the source of
ridicule throughout the discourse. The female character that personifies the “New
Woman” ideals is often demeaned within the existing patriarchal text in which she must
exist. For example, Bonnie Dow argues that while characters such as Mary Tyler Moore
and Murphy Brown appear to represent progressive feminism (Dow, 1992, 1994
respectively), “popular conceptions of liberal feminism can be co—opted and used as part
of a rhetorical strategy to reaffirm patriarchal definitions of femininity and feminism”
(Dow, 1992, pg. 144). Kathleen Rowe parallels this argument, noting the presence of
both a strong female figure and as an excessive and unruly spectacle in the popular blue-
collar sitcom Roseanne (Rowe, 1990). While scholars such as Zita Dresner make similar
observations about the sitcom, others such as Janet Lee cite Roseanne as a powerful
example of feminist resistance, arguing that Roseanne’s contradictions are part of her
overall representation of autonomous womanhood (Dresner, 1993; Ice, 1992).

Narrative analyses of television programs in the 1990’s have continued to
identify dominant patriarchal narrative structures, even though they do not readily appear
to be the dominant point of view in the televisual discourse. Alcock and Robson conclude
that the discourse of the popular television detective series Cagney and Lacey, while
seeking to appeal to viewers through its two strong female characters, suggests an
underlying opposition to strong women (Alcock and Robson, 1990). As a result, the
stronger the women are within the story, the more severe the opposition is evidenced

within its discourse. According to Alcock and Robson, this opposition is so strong that

13

the female existents are punished within the televisual story-world. Sirrrilarly, Vande
Berg (1993) explores gender ideology within the discourse of China Beach, a prime-time
dramatic television series that centers on the role of women in the Vietnam War. She
argues that while the central characters of this show are women, the narrative reaffirms
patriarchal masculinity and militarism by employing narrative strategies that ferninize
war in order to provoke a backlash against feminism."

Overall, feminist television scholarship has identified a patriarchal reading as the
dominant reading of these texts. However, it is important to point out that it is a singular
subject position that is being looked at; for the narrative analysis of a text only yields
itself to a single point of view. Unlike previous scholarship, the first half of this research
attempts to open up narrative theory in order to include more than one point of view in
the text. Developing a multi-narrative framework allows for resisting positionality to
patriarchy within a televisual text possible. The second half of this research is designed
to apply this multi-narrative framework.

Before opening this framework to look at points of feminist resistance within a
televisual narrative, it is helpful to provide some general discussion of feminist resistance
in dominant patriarchal social structures. It is with these approaches in mind that one can
proceed to devise a means of expanding narrative theory to include ferrrinist narratives as

an important part of the overall narrative structure of a televisual text.

 

The idea that the everyday world is created, defined, and reflected by patriarchal
social systems suggest to some scholars that society is largely white-male dominated. As

a result, they argue, women have become invisible in patriarchal social structures because

14

they are being controlled, silenced and/or ignored by men (Smith, 1987). Men, according
to this definition, are acting out in ways that are defined by the social organization(s) they
are part of, and by the texts from which these organizations are created. Thus, a space
within these institutions and their texts needs to be created for women’s absent voices
(McCall and Wittrrer, 1990, Morris, 1995).

According to Doreen Massey, space is defined by gender (Massey, 1994).
Traditionally, physical space has been defined in terms of “public” and “private”: public
referring to a space which is regarded as that which exists within a realm of working
professionals, and private referring to the home. Women’s work is often viewed as
existing within the private domain of the home (Spain, 1992). Massey claims that “[t]his
gendering of space and place both reflects and has effects back on the ways in which
gender is constructed and understood in the societies in which we live” (Massey, 1994,
pg. 186).

The concept of space not only defines the physical places in which a woman finds
herself, but the ideational space created by “. ..the simultaneous coexistence of social
interrelations and interactions at all spatial scales” (Massey, 1994, pg. 265). Therefore,
the constant and dynamic social intricacies of everyday life create a text within which
women have to perform. The ideational space created by these performances can serve to
form, resist, and/or transform the overall text through their own performance. For
example, women can operate within the institution in which they find themselves, such as
in a police precinct, or in a courtroom. If the institution is controlled by a patriarchal
order of some kind, these women may either be coerced or persuaded to limit their

participation to smaller, less important dynamics of the institution. However, these same

15

women may create an ideational space of their own through their voice or actions, while
still operating within the confines of the patriarchal system. A person may vocalize her
disapproval, may choose not to follow the rules of the institution, or openly rebel. She
may, through her performance within the space she has created, be able to create a sense
of empowerment for herself. This sense of empowerment is extremely important to
recognize, regardless of whether an individual is able to escape from a patriarchally
structured physical space. Her attempts to create a site of resistance should not be
downplayed or ignored, for it is often these attempts that provide the foundation for
transformation later on.

W

The act of narratingor “telling” is a way of creating an ideational space, where
empowering moments can be created for the nanator, and a moment of potential
consciousness raising for the narratee. Personal narratives can be perceived as a means of
resisting a dominant patriarchal position. As Kathryn Anderson states: “When women
speak for themselves, they reveal hidden realities: new experiences and new perspectives
emerge that challenge the “truths” of official accounts and cast doubt upon established
theories” (Anderson, et.al., 1987, pg. 104).

Scholar Chris Weedon argues that this kind of story telling can serve as reverse
discourse (W eedon, 1997). Discourse exists as relations of power that take on specific
forms in particular societies. She defines power as a “relation, exercised within
discourses” by the way in which it constitutes and governs individual subjects (Weedon,
1997, pg. 110). Reverse discourse serves to challenge the meaning of the power within

which the individual finds herself to allow for the production of new, resistant discourses.

16

By engaging in opposing positions to that of the dominant power structure, Weedon
argues the dominant discourse can gradually be over taken.

Reverse discourse exists in oral and written narratives, as well as in the social
practices of everyday life (Weedon, 1997). While there are multiple ways in which one
can engage in reverse discourse, personal story-telling allows for a narrative approach to
feminist texts (Reinharz, 1992). Furthermore, if the social organizations that comprise
everyday life are manifested through texts, and reveal a patriarchal consciousness, the

narratives voiced by women within these social organizations may reveal a feminist

consciousness of resistance.

 

A narrative approach to a televisual text usually accounts for only one point of
view—the dorrrinant subject position of the overall text. However, if one were to open
narrative theory in order to look at alternative perspectives within the same text, it would
be also be possible to identify points of resistance against the dominant subject position.
For this to happen there is a need to expand narrative theory in order to reflect multiple
subject positions in both the verbal and pictorial constructions of ideational space in a
televisual text.

If one assumes that a text may contain more than one narrative, there is a
possibility that, while embedded in the dominant discourse, an ideational space can be
constructed in which an alternative subject position is developed. For example, character
to character story-telling is a narration embedded within the overarching discourse of
narrative agency (Kozloff, 1992). One might envision, then, a character-to-character

story-telling structure that contradicts the point of view of the dominant or overall

17

narrative structure. That is, what the characters are discussing may serve to create an
ideational space where a point of resistance is being created. Note, however, that instead
of an extended verbal narration, this resistance may come in the form of a question or
seemingly inconsequential remark. Accordingly, the ideational space created by this
opposition (however slight) potentially becomes a resistive space with a narrating voice
different from that of a dominant narrative discourse. Because the narration is performed
in her own words, providing her own point of view, the ideational space she creates as a
result of her narration(s) serves as an indicator that there is a second implied authorship

. within the text. This implied authorship or point of view serves as a reverse discourse

because of its reflection of an alternative subject position to that of the overall discourse

space.

 

In Women Watching fIfelevision, Andrea Press (1991) suggests that television

functions “complexly and paradoxically in our society, simultaneously fostering
conformity and encouraging resistance to it among dominated groups” (Press, 1991, pg.
177). If one continues the tradition of early feminist scholarship, one begins with the
assumption that the dominant point of view in a televisual text is patriarchal because it is
a point of view what Ruth defines as the male ideal. The narrating voice is one that will
organize the power relations of the story world accordingly. In turn, a feminist narrative
can been defined as “a system of representation that confronts [patriarchal] practices”

' (Butler, 1993, pg. 20). Thus, a feminist narrative seeks to resist what is recognized as the
this masculine or patriarchal discourse in which it finds itself, and the ideational space it

- constructs is one which reflects a reverse discourse of resistance.

18

As noted in Figure 2.3, the resistant space constructed by a reverse discourse
leads to the creation of a second implied authorship (implied author/R), a point of view
. which reflects this alternative discourse. It also creates a second implied viewer (implied
viewer/R), which supports the performance of this construction as a potential ideational
space of resistance. Theoretically, because all the narratives are affected by the
patriarchal discourse, they either reflect or resist this patriarchy in some way.
Accordingly, a constructed ideational space of resistance (CISR) impacts and is impacted
by both implied authorships. This expanded narrative model reflects the various ways in

. which the patriarchal discourse might impact multiple narratives presented in a text.

Figure 2.3: Feminist Narrative

CoutuetedldeadomlPanhrchalSpncuClPSMndComuuctedldeatiouflSpace
“Resistance (CISR) In Mum-structured Narrative Discome

—-| Real Author J . [Real Viewer l6-

 

 

 

Dbcourse (Assumed Patriarchal)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

The patterns of motion that take place in front of a camera, and/or created by the
camera and editing sequences contribute to the overall creation of an ideated space of
resistance. Shifts in points of view in the screen space resulting from these patterns may
help create and/or enhance a pictorial resistance to patriarchy, or reflect a dominant
patriarchal discourse. Furthermore, the use of non-verbal sound in a television text may
serve to enhance the sense of space both in front of the camera and off-screen (Zettl,
1990, pg. 345). Off-screen sounds, referred to as “background music”, may serve to
implicate particular physical spaces that contribute to the over all narrative. It is a
. production element often used in a televisual text to predict situational changes within a
scene (Zettl, 1990, pg. 346). However, such predictors may also identify potential shifts
in point of view within the text, particularly when accompanying a verbal narrative.

For these reasons it is imperative when conducting feminist television narrative
analysis to examine each of these elements. It is possible for tensions to be created
between what is being structured verbally by a character and the pictorial and non-verbal
sound cues present in the overall text. The co-existence of these narratives within an
overall televisual text may reflect a single point of view, or may act as subtle points of
resistance.

Summary

This chapter reviews the theoretical frameworks that are being opened up in order
to develop a multi-narrative approach to narrative theory. Expanding upon the
frameworks of Kozloff and Channan, an expanded narrative framework will be able to
incorporate multiple points of view by allowing for the inclusion of a reverse discourse in

the narrative analysis. The recognition of a reverse discourse in a televisual text will

20

provide a new approach from which feminist television analysis can be conducted.
Discussions of patriarchal media texts can be expanded to include any resistance to the
masculist points of view being offered by the implied authorship of a text. The following
chapter will apply this multi-narrative framework developed here to a textual analysis of

a televisual text.

 

‘ Because the presence of the narrator is difficult to define and often impersonal, it is
sometimes substituted by a human face or voice-over which serves to solidify the
narrator’s role in the discourse-space (Kozloff, 1992, pg.79). This is different, however,
from a narrated text in which the narrator addresses a studio audience or a camera lens
directly, and in order to acknowledge the presence of both a narratee as well as a real
television audience. In this case, the narrator, while still inside the text, is not a
participant in the story-events. S/he is simply transmitting the narrative to the listener
and/or viewer.

2 Multiracial feminism asserts that race as a power structure is central to the
understanding of unequal power relations in the United States. See Baca Zinn, Maxine,
Thornton Dill, Bonnie. (1997) Theorizing Difference from multiracial feminism. In:
Baca Zinn. Maxine. et a! (1997) flrmughthem'smwdffreetrearmmmd
gondor. Third world feminists (which include those feminists from lesser developed
countries and rrrinority peoples in the United States),despite existing socio-historical
differences, share a common struggle against structures that are sexist, racist, and
imperialist. See Mohanty, C. ,Talpade. R, A. & Torres, Lourdes. (1991)f1fnirg world
Wmmlimgofifonn’nisrn. However, not all minority women in the US view

themselves as “third world women”, but as women of color. See Anzaldt’ra, Gloria. (Ed. )
(1990) WWW; Moraga, C. & Anzaldria, G. (Eds)
(.1983) Thi ri e c lled m ack: w ' ° 8 di wo n c l r. In both cases,
gender issues are viewed within the context of cultural differences, and are analyzed
within a culturally relevant framework.

”Late in this second wave, feminist television criticism also shifted towards the analysis
of female viewership response to televisual texts. In particular, female oppositional
readings to the narrative was being recognized as being fundamental in the understanding
of women’s responses to television. For more extensive examinations of female
viewership, see Press, Andrea. (1991) Women watohing television; Joyrich, Lynne.
(1996) Won. See also Jenkins, Henry III. (1988) “Star Trek rerun,
reread, rewritten: fan writing as textual poaching” W
W; Ang, Ien. (1990) “Melodramatic identifications: television fiction and
women’s fantasy” In: Mary Ellen Brown (ed.), (1990) WWW
tho mlitics of the 1821221813; and Thomas, Lyn (1995) “In love with Inspector Morse”.
W (4) 1-25-

‘ According to Vande Berg, the strategies employed include portraying women as
volunteer sex objects in order to reaffirm central masculinity; portraying men as

21

 

‘victims’, which allows them to appropriate female loss and suffering, and appropriating
male rrrilitary perspectives to female characters, establishing a ‘male spectacle’ which
establishes the warrior as an erotic figure.

22

CHAPTER 3

A TEXT UAL ANALYSIS OF LAW & ORDER

The case study discussed in this chapter applies the multi-narrative feminist
framework described in Chapter 2 to the contemporary televisual text Law & Order. In a
multi-narrative patriarchal discourse, various narratives can be identified by who the
nanators and narratees are, as well as the content of their exchange. By applying the
framework outlined in Figure 2.3, one can examine how each of the narrative exchanges
identified may serve to create an ideational patriarchal space (CIPS) or a constructed
ideational space of resistance (CISR). By determining whether the ideational spaces of
each individual narrative support or resist the dominant subject position of patriarchy,
one can begin to explore whether a reverse discourse, in the form of a second implied
author, is present in the text.

Created by Dick Wolf for NBC television, Law & Order is the longest running
prime-time television melodrama on network television (Back Stage, 1997). Filmed on
location in New York City, the show is well known for its “realistic” portrayal of how
both sides of the criminal justice system work towards solving crimes and convicting the
guilty (Weber, 1992, Miller, 1995). Its straightforward two-part formula separates the
main cast of characters from each other. This includes, on one side, a Police Lieutenant
and two detectives (Law), and on another side a New York District Attorney and two of
his Assistant District Attorneys (Order).

Law & Order is one of several sophisticated dramatic television programs

classified as “prime time novels” because of their inventive use of epic story telling

23

(McGrath, 1995). It distinguishes itself from other television dramas of this type because
of its discussions of real-life occurrences. (Unger, 1996).

Throughout its ten seasons on the air, there have been ten character changes, some
specifically made in order to include more women (Rudolph, 1998). Many critics argue
that the Show has managed to survive these changes because the television program is
completely story-driven, suggesting that the events being discussed by the characters
appear to be much more important than the characters themselves (Meisler, 1994, Higbie,
1995).

The three episodes selected for this case study include one of the three different
female Assistant District Attorneys. Each provides examples of the ADAs serving as
actual liti gators in the courtroom. All three episodes were dubbed onto videotapes and
transcribed. These transcriptions include a word-for-word recording of every word
spoken by every character, identifying the narrator and nanatee. Also completed was a
frame—by-frame transcription of the production elements of the story-world.

Carlin:

Drawing on what Larry Gross (1974) calls “modes of communication”, the
. nanatives of the three Law & Order episodes are coded into four primary categories:
verbal or linguistic narratives, gestural narratives, iconic narratives, and musical
narratives (Gross, 1974, pg. 60). The first category, linguistic narratives, is broken down
into three secondary modes, or subcategories. The first subcategory includes those
narrative exchanges that serve to provide general information necessary for the successful
telling of the overall story. These narratives consist of characters speculating about

pieces of the storyworld, which are not clear to them as they proceed with their discovery

process. The second subcategory includes those narrative exchanges that are life
histories: individual narratives told by characters describing personal experiences and
their thoughts and feelings about them. Finally, the third subcategory identifies those
nanatives that appear to be life histories because they include the telling of experiences,
thoughts, and feelings about a specific character, but are told by someone else. In this
instance, the character’s voice is not her/his own.

Both the gestural and the iconic categories are used to organize particular
elements of the pictorial narrative in order to determine the pictorial point(s) of view
within the text, as noted in Figure 2.2. The gestural category includes actions (including
gestures)that indicate the intentions of the characters in the text (Gross, 1974, pg. 67).
This includes the motion of the actors as they move in front of the camera, as well as
their expressions. The iconic category includes camera movements and motion induced
by editing sequences, also known as secondary and tertiary motions respectively (Zettl,
1990).

Musical narratives are sounds that originate off-screen. Background noise and/or
music is coded into two separate but related subcategories: sound effects used for spatial
orientation, and sound effects and/or music that are used to predict upcoming events. The
repeated use of predictive sounds, or leitrnotivs, are also noted (Zettl, 1990).

Each narrative is examined to see if it reflects a dominant patriarchal subject
position, or if it offers a space in which points of resistance to this position are being
formed (Riessman, 1993). Specifically identifying and analyzing each of these narratives,
one may reveal whether the point(s) of view of each clarifies and/or intensifies the

subject position, whether it be a patriarchal or resistive.

25

Findings
The following analyses include a summary of the episode in its entirety, as well as
sample transcripts from each one. Each episode is analyzed independently from the
others in this section. Conclusions drawn from the comparisons between them are

discussed in the next section.

S ll°Ii 'I'I'

Synopsis: The murder of a prostitute leads to the conviction of Dr. Danforth, a prominent
plastic surgeon, in Assistant District Attorney Clare Kincaid’s first homicide trial. After
the conviction, Kincaid suspects that Mrs. Julia Danforth’s testimony was a deliberate
attempt to secure her husband’s conviction. After revisiting the evidence, against the
advice of Executive ADA Jack McCoy, Clare Kincaid uncovers Julia Danforth’s plan to

have her husband imprisoned for the crime she committed.

The shooting death of Gwyn George is initially presumed to be a drug-related
killing because of a crack pipe that is found in her possession at the murder scene.
Because she is identified as a prostitute, the crime sparks limited concern from police
detectives Briscoe and Curtis. Despite their lack of interest in her murder, they are

ordered to pursue an investigation by their superior, Lieutenant Anita Van Buren.

26

Table A.1 :

Scene 3. Lt. Van Buren’s Office (Cat. 1)

 

Linguistic Narrative

Space

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative
Space

 

 

Briscoe: We figure she
finished her business,
ducked into the alley to
do some crack and never
knew what hit her.

V. Buren: You run down
the local dealers?

Curtis: Waste of time.
She had $2000 in her
purse. If there was a
dealer, there’d be
nothing left.

Briscoe: Lovely lady.
Twenty-five years old.
Out on bail for
possession. Six arrests
for prostitution two for
public disturbance,

one for attempted grand
larceny.

V. Buren: What? She
Tried to rob a bank?

Briscoe: She blackmailed
One of her Johns, some
Ambassador from the
Mideast.

Curtis: Two grand...she
Might be at it again.

V. Buren: But don’t you
think her mark would
have shot her before he
gave her the money?
What else?

Briscoe: A meatball
Hero from Little Tony’s. I
missed breakfast.

 

[hand held camera]
Back of V. Buren sitting at
computer. Camera pans

left past Briscoe, follows V.

Buren as she gets up and
walks past Briscoe sitting
next to the computer, in
front of camera past
Curtis.

Camera follows V. Buren
walking around office, then
rests on Briscoe.

Briscoe walks towards
camera,towards V. Buren.

Cut to V. Buren, over
shoulder of Briscoe.

Cut to Briscoe (med.

close). Can see Curtis on
far right, in back.

Cut to V. Buren, over
Briscoe shoulder.

Cut to Briscoe, walks
towards door past Curtis.

Briscoe stops, turns. Cut

 

Office activity
(phones, doors,

‘ muted voices), and

traffic noise (sirens,
horns, etc.)

 

27

 

 

to Van Buren.
V. Buren: You know (close-up)
what?

Lion King’s playing at the
Cineplex. Maybe after
your sandwich you can Cut to Briscoe.
catch an afternoon show.

Briscoe: Come on, a

junky Camera pans left to Curtis,

hooker? I don’t think we who approaches Briscoe

need the cavalry. and walks towards V.
Buren.

Curtis: I think what Curtis grimacing.

Lenny ‘

means is, we don’t have
any witnesses, we don’t Cut to Van Buren, over
have any evidence. Curtis shoulder.

V. Buren: Oh, what a
relief. For a minute there Cut to Briscoe
I thought he didn't give a
damn. Who posted bail?

Briscoe: Jaleel Cut to V. Buren, over
Washington. Curtis shoulder.
(gn'maces)

V. Buren: Well it could
be her pimp. You wanna

get on it?

 

 

 

 

 

While this exchange allows the viewer to follow the discovery process along with
the detectives, it also demonstrates Lt. Van Buren’s resistance to apathy of the two
detectives. She must exert her authority in order to have them pursue the case. The use of
reverse angle shots throughout the scene reflects the opposing viewpoints being presented
by the characters. Cutting back and forth between the characters using over the shoulder
shots allows the viewer to “see” where the balance of power lies among the three

characters—the final cut to Van Buren indicates that she has the final word.

28

The investigation leads to the arrest of surgeon Mark Danforth. Dr. Danforth
never admits to killing the woman, but does admit to soliciting George and other
prostitutes on previous occasions. As a result, there is a certain amount of sympathy for
him on behalf of the male attorneys, who find it unfortunate, but not disturbing, that
Danforth was apprehended as a result of these solicitations. It is Assistant District
Attorney Clare Kincaid who reminds the male prosecutors of the criminality of
solicitation. Furthermore, it is Kincaid who is determined to convict Dr. Danforth in
order to seek justice for Gwyn George. The power relationship between the prosecutors is
different from that of the police. While Van Buren may not change the opinions of her
detectives, she is in a position that allows her to exercise authority over them. Kincaid is
neither in a position to change Jack McCoy’s attitude, nor can she compel him to argue
the casein front of a jury. She is, however, able to openly contradict the patriarchal

perceptions being upheld by her male counterparts, both verbally and visually, as noted in

 

 

Table A2.

Table A.2:

Scene 31. Assistant D.A. Jack McCoy’s Office (Cat.1)
Linguistic Narrative Pictorial Narrative Space: Musical Narrative
Space Iconic and Gestural Space
Clare: Bn'scoe and Curtis Looks at Jack McCoy’s Office
are right, she’s obviously back; McCoy typing on noise(phones,
lying to protect him. computer. Medium long muted voices)

looking from behind Clare
Jack: She takes this ‘tiI Kincaid. Can see Kincaid’s
death do us part’ thing arm at right of screen.

seriously

Clare: ldon’t think the McCoy turns to Kincaid.
vows include committing Cuts back and forth
perjury for a murderer. between two characters.
Clare is looking down at
Jack: We still don’t McCoy. McCoy seated
have enouflto prove throughout entire

 

 

 

 

 

29

 

that Danforth killed Gwyn
George.

Clare: What about the
calls from the phone
booth on the corner
where Gwyn did
business? What?
They’re just coincidence?

Jack: He stopped for
cigarettes, maybe he
called in for messages.

Clare: You believe that?

Jack: We don’t have a
murder weapon, Clare. If
the wife sticks to her
story, we can’t prove
motive. Face it, we don’t
really have a case.

Clare: (Pause) lthink we
do.

Jack: Then go ahead.
You try it.

 

 

discussion.

Cut to McCoy from behind
Kincaid.

Camera pans right, following
McCoy rolling his chair from
computer to behind desk.

Cut to Kincaid. (Medium
Close)

Kincaid folds arms in front
of her.

McCoy looks up, waves
hand up at her. Kincaid
wears expression of
determination.

 

While McCoy’s gestures and position in the screen may signify his indifference about
the case, Kincaid’s position in front of the camera, as well as her gestures, demonstrate a
strong willingness to counter this indifference. For example, while she voices her
concerns, the camera tilts up as Kincaid stands over Jack McCoy as he remains seated at
his desk. She is not shot over McCoy’s shoulder, but is viewed from a medium close
shot that allows her to be the central point in the scene. The camera allows a viewer to

clearly see her facial expressions, as well as other gestures that record her determination

3O

 

 

to resist the patriarchal point of view being offered by McCoy. Her resistance to their
points of view lead to her being given the authority to try the case herself. Thus, while
they are still exerting authority over her, she is given leave to seek justice for Gwyn .
George through the legal system.

Kincaid succeeds in convicting Dr. Danforth as a result of his wife’s, Julia
Danforth, inability to present coherent testimony on the witness stand. Left uneasy by
this, Kincaid begins to question the validity Dr. Danforth’s conviction, as noted in the

table below.

Table A.3:
Scene 39. McCoy is being seated. (Cat.1)

 

 

Linguistic Narrative Pictorial Narrative Space: Musical Narrative
Space Iconic and Gestural Space

Jack: Two days of McCoy walking towards Muted voices and
victory celebration, a camera. bustle of

little excessive, wouldn’t Camera turns left and goes restaurant activity.
you say? behind him as he sits down

across from Kincaid and
Clare: lwas checking up smiles. See Kincaid ruefully
on Mrs. Danforth. smile over McCoy’s
shoulder. (Medium Close)
Jack: The case is over,
Clare. Cross over to McCoy, as he
smiles, shaking head.

Clare: Actually, lthink it (Medium Close)

is just starting. I Cross over to Kincaid.
checked with vice, it (Medium close)

seems this wasn’t her

husband’s first stop in Waiters and movement
Hell’s Kitchen. behind Kincaid.

Jack: 50? Over shoulder to McCoy

(Medium Close)
Clare: (Quieter) So what
if Julia Danforth knew all Cross over, tighter shot

about it? The night of over McCoy’s shoulder as

 

 

 

 

the murder, Dr. Kincaid leans in.
Danforth’s car was Holds up two fingers.
reported in the

neighborhood twice. Over Kincaid shoulder.

 

31

 

 

Jack: So there’s more
than one concerned
citizen.

Clare: Sure, that’s a
logical conclusion, only
the second call to the
cops was at 10:30.
Danforth was already on
to his second Scotch by
then.

Jack: And, maybe,
concerned citizen
number two paused to
make himself a sandwich
before he called the
police.

Clare: I thought about
that. But it seems
extremely curious that
the second call was
placed by a woman, who
conveniently forgot to
give the cops her name.
Julia Danforth had no
idea Abe Pomerantz was
recording the license
plate numbers. If she
wanted us to suspect her
husband...

Jack: You think Julia
Danforth killed George?

Clare: I don’t know what
to think. But there’s a
chance she’s been
manipulating all of us to
assure her husband’s
conviction.

Jack: (Pause)Then why
didn’t she give us the
gun. Ballistics would
have matched, conviction
would have been a slam

 

Over McCoy shoulder.

Over Kincaid shoulder.

Cross over McCoy shoulder.

Over Kincaid shoulder as
McCoy leans in.

Cross over McCoy.

Cross over Kincaid shoulder.
McCoy looks away (towards
left) in reaction to her
words. Has doubtful
expression.

Cross over McCoy shoulder.

Cross over Kincaid shoulder
as Mcng smiles slightly.

 

32

 

 

 

dunk.

Clare: I talked to her.
She’s a very smart lady. Cross over McCoy shoulder
If she gave us the gun, as Kincaid shakes head.
Dr. Danforth would have
known she was involved. Cut to McCoy, looks
No one else had access suddenly taken back.
to it.

Jack: 00 you know what
lthink? lthink you’ve
been reading too much
James M. Cain.

Clare: Maybe. But if
this were your case, what
would you do?

 

 

 

 

 

Note the last sentence in transcript A.3. By asking McCoy what he would with the case,
Kincaid relinquishes some of her authority over it. As a result, McCoy helps Kincaid
instigate an unorthodox scheme to prompt Julia Danforth to confess to the crime.

It can be argued that Clare Kincaid’s non-traditional actions empower her,
because she is able to pursue justice for Gwyn George within the patriarchal confines of
the criminal justice system. However, it can also be argued that Kincaid does not solve
the crime alone, nor does she succeed in changing the preconceptions held by her male
counterparts. McCoy underscores this fact by reminding her that her victory will not
prevent Dr. Danforth from soliciting another prostitute in the future.

Julia Danforth also manipulates the system: instead of going through divorce
proceedings, she chooses to frame her husband for the murder of Gwyn George in order
to avenge his extra-marital activities. She shares some of this frustration with her

husband and Clare Kincaid, as noted in Table A.4 below.

33

Table A4:
Scene 43. (excerpt)

District Attomey’s Office (Cat. 2)

 

Linguistic Narrative

Space

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative
Space

 

J. Danforth: What does
it matter where I found
it? Just test the
ballistics....

Kincaid: I don’t think we
Have to, Mrs. Danforth,
(shaking head) We both
know this gun killed Gwyn
George.

J. Danforth: I’m telling
you, Mark didn’t...

Kincaid: No, but you did.

Dr. Danforth: What the
hell are you talking
about?

Kincaid: Your wife
wasn’t at the movies,
'Doctor. She

was on West 47m the
same you were. She
used this gun to kill Gwyn
George and to frame you.
The money, the phone
calls, everything.

Dr. Danforth: This is crap!
Come on!

Kincaid: Did you kill
Gwyn George, Doctor?

Dr. Danforth: Of course
not!

Kincaid: ‘Cause the
ballistics on this are
gonna match. Now if you
didn’t do it, who else

 

 

[hand held camera]
closeoup: J. Danforth
(sitting at conference table)
on right side of screen...see
her profile. Dr. Danforth
facing camera on left,
farther back.

Cut to Kincaid, standing up
over conference table. (high
angle)

Cut to J. Danforth: close-up,
facing camera. Looking up
at Kincaid.

Cut to profile of J. Danforth,
can see Dr. Danforth facing

camera on left with puzzled
expression.

Cut to Kincaid.

Cut to McCoy, standing
away from conference room
near window.

Cuts to Dr. Danforth, can
see J. Danforth’s profile on
far right of screen (half of
her is cut off)

Cut to Kincaid.

Cut to defense attorney,
standing quietly against
bookcase away from table.
Cut to Kincaid (close-up as
she leans forward toward J.
Danforth)

Cut to close-up: Dr.

 

(Muted
background traffic
noises.)

 

34

 

 

 

could’ve?

(long pause) You can
wait for ballistics, Mrs.
Danforth...

J. Danforth: You should
understand...

Kincaid: Murder? ldon’t
think so.

Dr. Danforth: You
conniving... how the hell
could you?

J. Danforth: Me? You
can’t keep it in your
pants. And I’m supposed
to smile, and fix you
breakfast and bounce
around the bed once a
week.

Dr. Danforth: This girl...it
was meaningless.

J. Danforth: Well, how
the hell do you think that
makes me feel?

Dr. Danforth: You’re

, unhappy, so I should go
to jail for the rest of my
life?

J. Danforth: I want you
to hurt. Hurt as bad as I
do. For the record, what
was it that turned you
on? Was it the cheap
lipstick? The short skirt?
Orjust doing it in the
back seat of a car? I
married you, Mark. That’s
supposed to mean I can
trust you!

 

Danforth (realization)
Cut to close-up of J.

Danforth, turning to Kincaid.

Cut to Kincaid. (cross
shoot)

Cut to Dr. Danforth. See
partial profile of J. Danforth,
which looks diminished.

Cut close-up of Dr.
Danforth, over J Danforth
left shoulder.

Cut Mrs. Danforth (close-
up)/over Dr. Shoulder

Cut Dr. Danforth (over
shoulder of J. Danforth)

Cut J. Danforth (over Dr.
shoulder)

Cut Dr. Danforth (over
shoulder)

Cut J. Danforth (over
shoulder)

Cut Dr. Danforth (over
shoulder)

Cut J. Danforth (over
shoulder)

Cut to Kincaid standing with
arms crossed.

 

[MUSIC BEGINS.]

 

35

 

Julia Danforth’s comments do not take away from the fact that she committed a
crime. Nonetheless, her narration defines her criminal behavior as an attempt, in her
mind, to resist what she recognizes as her husband’s abusive behavior. While her plan to
frame her husband failed, her attempt at resisting this abuse is not completely lost. By
creating a space where she can voice her frustrations about the patriarchal relationship
between her and her husband, she challenges it.

This resistance is noted in the visual narrative as well. As Kincaid reveals Julia
Danforth’s criminal plot, only a partial profile of Julia Danforth can be seen in the frame.
' She is visually diminishing. High angle shots reveal Kincaid looking down on her.
However, when she begins to give the reasons for her actions, she faces the camera in
close-up shots. She becomes larger and stronger visually. While over the shoulder shots
reveal her husband’s disbelief in her reasoning, they also reveal how Julia Danforth truly
believed that her actions were justified in resisting her husband’s behavior.

By murdering Gwyn George, Julia Danforth may have succumbed to a criminal
justice system that is male dominated. However, at- the individual level, her actions can
be interpreted as a means of resisting the overarching patriarchy of her marriage. Her
actions also suggest that she, like the detectives, placed little value on Gwyn George’s
life. Her reaction to Dr. Danforth’s involvement with the prostitute appears to be a
motivating factor behind the murder. One can also question whether she would have
been as willing to commit this murder had Gwyn George not been involved in the sex
industry. As a result, it appears that Julia Danforth, while resisting patriarchy on the one

hand, appears to have reinforced patriarchy on the other.

36

W

Synopsis: The discovery of Mr. Moussad’s body near a residential parking lot
uncovers a secret plan by traditional Egyptian family members to circumcise Allison
Martin, the daughter of American Eric Martin and his Egyptian wife Noreen. While
Executive ADA Jack McCoy pursues the prosecution of Eric Martin for the death of his
wife’s uncle, ADA Jamie Ross goes to family court in order to remove Allison from her
home, away from the influence of her conservative Egyptian grandmother, Amira Wassir.
Eric Martin argues that he murdered Moussad to protect his daughter, but agrees to a plea
bargain on the grounds that Allison is placed in the custody of his parents, away from .

both Egyptian women.

Ritual attempts to cope with the conflicting efforts of a multicultural family to
protect a young daughter. The issue of female circumcision serves as the focal point of
tensions between US-Anglo patriarchal culture and the patriarchal cultural traditions of
Egyptian immigrants in New York City. In the center of the dispute is thirteen year old
Allison Martin, who is being raised in this dual cultural system. She is half-American.
She does not speak Arabic. But she is being brought up in a matriarchal household where
Grandmother Amira Wassir speaks in the voice of the traditional Egyptian matriarch, a
matriarchy that is controlled by the Egyptian male. In accordance with Egyptian tradition,
Grandmother Amira asks her brother to arrange the ritualistic procedure for Allison in
order to preserve her virginity until marriage. For Grandmother Amira, to not perform the
ritual would be a disgrace to the family, and would sever the few ties Allison has with her

Egyptian heritage.

37

A message left on Monssad’s answering machine in Arabic leads detectives to

initially suspect a terrorist plot in the works. It is not until they discover that the

individual who left the message was a gynecologist who was flown in from Egypt to

secretly perform the circumcision. Further complicating the issue is Allison Martin’s

insistence that her mother, Noreen Martin, followed Moussad out of their apartment after

he visited them on the night of the murder. It is not until Allison is forced to tell the truth

that Eric Martin concedes to the crime, and is forced to testify in front of the Grand Jury,

As he testifies, Martin combines his personal story with some narration about his wife.

As seen in transcript 8.], he serves as narrator for both himself and Noreen.

Table 8.1:
Scene 40. (excerpt)

 

Eric Martin testifying before the Grand Ju (Cat. 2 8: 3)
Linguistic Narrative Pictorial Narrative Space: Musical Narrative
ace Iconic and Gestural Space

 

E. Martin: The night this
happened I was supposed
to go to a hockey game.
When I got home Uncle
Joseph was there. I
found out he and
Allison’s grandmother
had paid a doctor to
come from Egypt to do
this...
(pause)...operation.

they were going to cut
out Allison’s clitoris the
next day. I couldn’t
believe it. We started
screaming at each other.
They told me it wasn’t
any of my business. This
was how things were
done in their culture.

The worst part is that my
wife just sat there. She
was just going to let
them do it. Uncle Joseph

 

 

hand held remote Camera
(180°) around Eric Martin,
sitting in Witness box.
Martin looking at Jury box.
(close-up)

AMERICAN flag clearly
visible in back of Martin as

camera continues to move.

Cut to jury box, see 1
male/ 1 female

African -American sitting
still, expressionless,
motionless. (med.close)

Cut to Eric Martin. (close-
up)

 

 

 

38

 

left even though nothing
had been resolved. I
went out after him. I
knew where he parked.
He wouldn’t listen to me.
He said it was his duty to
see that Allison became
a proper woman. When I
heard that I just lost it. I
grabbed him and threw
him down against the
wall hard...(pause)...had
to stop him. It was
either that or have him
destroy an important
part of Allison’s life. ‘
(pause)

My wife had this thing
done to her when she
was a little girl, so I know
about the effect. She’s
always been embarrassed
to talk about it, even to
me. But I can tell. She
worries that I’m not
satisfied with our sex life,
and there is a sadness...
(quietly) that never really
_goes away.

 

 

Martin looks directly at
McCoy at his right; camera
then cuts to McCoy and
holds. McCoy has no
reaction. (med. close)

Cuts to jurists, holds on Af-
Am. woman sitting in the
middle of two men. Cuts
back to Martin.

Cut to McCoy, who looks
down.
Cuts to Martin close-up.

Looks down.

 

Martin describes the shame associated with the ritual which he claims Noreen is
unable to talk about. By placing the discussion of the murder in the context of her shame,

the issue moves away from the crime committed against Moussad to what he perceives as

a crime that was to be committed against his daughter.

Martin alludes to the cultural tensions that exist in his family. During Eric
Martin’s testimony, the camera constantly reminds us of the cultural tensions present in
the case by allowing the viewer to see the American flag, and to see the diverse make-up

of the grand jury. In these instances the pictorial narrative makes visible the underlying

39

 

 

cultural tensions which exist in the criminal justice system, potentially negating the idea
that ‘justice is blind’.

Assistant D.A. Jamie Ross openly sympathizes with Eric Martin’s desire to
protect his daughter, but it is not enough of a defense for Jack McCoy, who insists on
pursuing a murder conviction against Eric Martin. McCoy’s disinterest in pursuing the
allegations of a proposed circumcision prompts Jamie Ross to pursue represent Allison
Martin in family court. She does this “pro bono”, and without the support or
compensation of the District Attomey’s office. Jamie Ross’ decision to represent Allison
Martin in family court allows her to serve as Allison’s voice, and the voice of countless
other young girls who are subjected to the ritualistic practice. Her personal relationship
with her own daughter, as well as her commitment to protect the rights of children,
appears to provide the reasons for her moral aversion to the practice itself.

Professionally, Ross is prompted by the New York justice system’s disregard of
the immediacy of the problem. McCoy is unwilling to enter into a .battle against the
ritualistic practice. Once in family court, Ross finds herself facing a judge who dismisses
the idea of female circumcisions being performed in New York City as too fantastic
(Scene 45). As a result, Ross is prompted by McCoy to negotiate what is in the best
interest of both Eric Martin and Jack McCoy: a lighter jail sentence for Eric Martin in
exchange for the removal of Allison from her mother’s custody. Eric Martin accepts, but
only after he is promised some authority over his daughter’s custody arrangements in the
future.

Noreen Martin must contend with the authoritative role her husband now plays in

her ability to raise their daughter. This is compounded by the tensions she feels exist

between a conservative Egyptian way of life and the permissiveness she perceives from

“American” culture, as seen in Table 8.2 below.

Table 8.2:
Scene 43. (excerpt)

N. Martin in Family Court (Cat. 2)

 

Linguistic Narrative

grace

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative
Space

 

Noreen: My mother is
from a different culture.

Jamie: And she wanted
Allison to have this
operation?

Noreen: Yes.

Jamie: Did you object?
Noreen: My mother says
it is the only way we can
protect her. And the
family honor.

Jamie: Did your mother
protect you when you

were a little girl?

Noreen: (low voice) Yes.
When I was eight.

Jamie: In a hospital?
Noreen: No.

Jamie: Was anesthesia
used?

Noreen: No.

Jamie: (Quietly)Did you
want to have this done?

Noreen: They don’t ask
the child.

 

Jamie: Then somebody

 

[hand held camera]

Cut to Grandmother Amira,
sitting in back of courtroom
close-up.

Cut to Noreen Martin close-
up.

Cut to Jamie Ross sitting at
table. (medium)Cut to other
attorney. (medium)

Cut to Noreen close-up.

Cut to Ross medium-close.

Cut to Noreen close-up,
looking away and wiping
tears.

Cut to Ross, who stands up
and walks towards Noreen
(towards camera).

Cut to Noreen close-up.
(cross shoot)

Cut to Ross close-up. (cross
shoot)

Cut to Noreen close-up.

 

 

41

 

 

must have held you
down. Who did that?

Noreen: (after pause)
My mother and my aunt.

Jamie: And who
performed the surgery?

Noreen: A man in the
village.

Jamie: Did they explain
to you that they did this
because they didn’t trust
your judgement?

Noreen: They said it was
a passage to
womanhood.

Jamie: And this what
you were willing to have
done to your daughter?

Noreen: Everything

here, the magazines, the
television, it’s all sex.
Little girls dressing like
prostitutes, school girls
having babies (pause)
Where are the parents? I
was afraid for her.

 

 

(cross shoot)

Cut to grandmother looking
sad but slightly nodding.
Cuts back to Noreen.
(close-ups)

Wipes away tears.

Cut to Ross close-up. (cross
shoot)

Cut to Noreen close-up.
(cross shoot)

Cut to Ross close-up. (cross
shoot)

Cut to Noreen. (cross
shoot)

Cut to Grandmother close-
up, slightly nodding. Quick
cut to Noreen close-up.

 

[MUSIC BEGINS]

 

In telling her story, Noreen Martin reveals the paradoxical situation in which she finds
herself. She wants to protect her daughter from the ritualistic practice that has caused her
pain, but also alludes to circumcision as a means of protection from the promiscuity
North American culture appears, in her mind, to tolerate. Yet, while Noreen verbally

expresses an understanding for the importance of the ritual, the close-ups on her tearful

face indicate resentment towards her own circumcision.

42

 

Noreen Martin appears to be trapped between two patriarchal systems, and is at a
disadvantage in both of them. She must cope with her subordination to her American
husband, who, with the help of the American criminal justice system, can exercise some
authority over the placement of their daughter. She must contend with the patriarchal
customs of her Egyptian heritage, which are imposed upon her by Amira Wassir. Yet,
while she loses her daughter, she finds her voice long enough to oppose her mother, as

noted below.

Table 8.3:

Scene 44. (excerpt) Outside of Court Room (Cat.1)

Linguistic Narrative Pictorial Narrative Space: Musical Narrative
ce Iconic and Gestural Space

Jamie Ross leads

Grandmother Amira to

room next to Family Court

room. Ross does not close

door completely behind her.

 

 

Amira: In this country

your children turn out no Cut to Ross Hear limited
better than dogs! Cut to Amira background noise

(muted voices in
Jamie: In this country, hallways)

you abuse a child you
risk the penalty...

Amira: It is not abuse, it
is a family matter. We
are saving Allison... Cut to Ross

Enter Noreen behind Ross.
Jamie: By maiming her?

Amira: Allison is none of Cut to Amira.
your business. You
Americans think you are
better and smarter than
we are.

Noreen approaches mother,
Noreen: Mother, she is tearful. (Medium long

only trying to help shot.)

Allison.

 

 

 

 

 

43

 

Amira: She is not
helping. She will bring
disgrace to our family.
This woman will never Cut to close-up of
understand. But you grandmother.
know it is true.
Cut to Noreen, hand held

 

 

 

 

Noreen: All I know is camera.

what I have lived with

since I was eight years Grandmother shakes head
old. How could you love slightly, apparent shock and
me and do this to me? sadness.

 

The exchange between the three women indicates the different perceptions
surrounding the importance of female circumcision. Grandmother Arnira’s reaction to her
daughter’s opposition indicates a loss that she herself is experiencing amidst the efforts to
stop the practice. She loses a brother. She loses the right to have contact with her
granddaughter. And what she finds to be the most tragic is the breakdown of her family
and the cultural traditions that protect her family’s honor.

The cultural tensions that are present between two cultures are reflected in the
racial tensions that exist in the United States. This is highlighted early in the episode
when, in a separate but related incident, Lt. Van Buren announces to Briscoe and Curtis
her intent to file a racial discrimination lawsuit against the police department. Van
Buren’s announcement serves both as a reminder to others about the oppressive system
she must operate in, regardless of her position of authority over her detectives, and to
announce her intent of resisting this system. This is reinforced visually, as the detectives

appear slightly larger in the frame and closer to the camera, despite the fact

Table 3.4:

Scene 7. (excerpt)Lieutenant

Van Buren’s

Office. (Cat. 2)

 

Linguistic Narrative

Space

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative
Space

 

Briscoe: Who’s she?
The new community
affairs liaison?

V. Buren: No. What do
you have?

Curtis: C’mon L.T.
what’s up?

V. Buren: Better you
hear it from me. She’s
my lawyer. I was up for
captain. One Police Plaza
passed me over.

Briscoe: You’re suing
the department?

V. Buren: Title Seven.
They promoted a white
woman with the same
score on the exam. I
have the seniority.

Briscoe: Sorry we
asked.

V. Buren: (sarcastic
inflection in voice) Right.
Your turn.

 

 

[hand held camera]

Med. shot following
detectives from behind
walking towards V. Buren’s
door as blonde woman in
business attire walks out.
Detectives glance towards
direction of departing
woman.

V. Buren turns sharply into
office. Detectives look
back at woman, exchange
glances. Camera continues
to follow detectives from
behind as they walk into
office. V. Buren turns from
staring at bulletin board.

Cut to V. Buren who turns
to them with arms crossed
(facing camera). Can see
her between detectives
(facing her), looks
“surrounded” by them.

Cut to detectives (med
shot).
Cut to V. Buren (med close)

Cut to face detectives from
left side.

 

(can hear office
bustle: phones,
voices, echoes,
footsteps of
detectives.)

 

4S

 

that their backs are turned. Van Buren, seen from behind and between the detectives,
appears as if she is being engulfed. Finally, Briscoe’s lack of enthusiasm for her efforts
suggests that her declaration of resistance, while not immediately dismissed, is not
embraced. Thus, Van Buren’s effort to fight what she perceives as discrimination is
challenged by the lack of support from the two men, exemplifying the reasons for her

lawsuit.

W

Syngpsis: Briscoe and Curtis’ attempt to find a motive for the assault of a retired divorce
lawyer leads the way to a homicide investigation of thirty—five year old Mrs. Gerard, who
died during a routine gynecological surgical procedure. ADA Abby Carmichael pursues
the case, despite the misgivings of Executive ADA Jack McCoy. As a result of her own
investigation, Carmichael discovers that Mrs. Gerard’s doctors allowed a salesperson for
the Biotech Medical Equipment company to operate malfunctioning equipment as part of
a promotional scheme. During the trial, one of OB/GYN group members commits
suicide, but not before informing his attorney that his colleague, Dr. Peter Rudnick, had
agreed to receive kickbacks and rebates from Biotech if the hospital agreed to purchase
the equipment. Carmichael successfully convicts Dr. Rudnick on manslaughter charges

after the judge orders the defense attorney to reveal this information to the jury.

The story begins with the assault of a retired divorce attorney by a disgruntled
divorcee. Kelly McFarland’s personal story below leads to the investigation of her ex-
husband, Dr. Robert Weiss, and of his former colleagues at the Medical Offices of

Rudnick, Weiss, and Michaels.

Table C.1:
Scene 14. (excerpt)

Interrogation Room. (Cat.1&2)

 

Linguistic Narrative

Pictorial Narrative Space:

Musical Narrative

 

 

Space Iconic and Gestural Space
McFarland: I wasn’t [hand held camera]
trying to kill him! close-up on McFarland

Mr. Shay: Kelly, lthink
you should wait.

McFarland: No, no, I
want to tell my side. I
don’t know how he did it,
but my ex-husband
bought Slattery off.

Carmichael: Ms.
McFarland, I’m not
interested in...
McFarland: We had a

summer house in
Duchess County. To
keep it out of my hands
he used an old power of
attorney and sold it to
his brother for a tenth of
what is was worth.
That's what Jacob does.

Briscoe: Right. Every

- ex-husband is the bad

guy.

McFarland: I played the
game too, I’m not saying
I didn’t. But Ken Slattery
lied. He knew. I didn’t
waive away my rights. I
went to see him to beg
him to just tell the truth.

And he refused.
Carmichael: So you hit
him?

McFarland: He tried to
push me out the door.

 

sitting down at table.

Cut to Briscoe and ADA
Abby Carmichael, who are
standing (medium).

Cut to McFarland close-up.

Cut to Briscoe and
Carmichael (medium)

Cut to McFarland.

Cut to Briscoe and
Carmichael.(medium)

Cut to McFarland close-up.

Cut to Carmichael, who sits
down near McFarland at
table (medium close).

Cut to McFarland close-up.

Cut to Shay, standing next
to McFarland.

 

[MUSIC BEGINS]

 

47

 

 

And I was just in such a
rage I...l picked up this
mug and I...l swung it at
him.

Mr. Shay: It sounds like
there’s a lot of mitigation
here, Ms. Carmichael.

Curtis: A million and a
half dollars’ worth.

McFarland: Oh, No. I ...I
don’t care about the
money. It’s Jacob. You
don’t’ understand what
it’s like to...to fight
somebody who always

Cut to Curtis standing

(med. close).

Cut to Carmichael over
shoulder of McFarland)

Cut to McFarland close—up.
(cross shoot)

Cut to Curtis close-up
(cross shoot)

Cut to Carmichael, who
stands up, walks past
Curtis and camera.

Cut to McFarland close-up,
looking down.

gets in his way.

Carmichael: Alright, we’ll
look into it...

 

 

 

 

 

It is McFarland’s narration that sets into motion a series of events that lead to a criminal
investigation of Dr. Rudnick and Dr. Michaels. As a result of the detective’s investigation
into Dr. Weiss’ finances, they discover that Dr. Weiss is selling his share of his medical
practice in order to disassociate himself from a series of malpractice claims lodged
against the two doctors. Their investigation leads them to the suspicious death of
Maureen Gerard.

Indicating a strong prejudice against male doctors and the attitudes they may have
towards female patients, Abby Carmichael takes it upon herself to investigate and issue
indictments against Glynnis Ward, the sales representative responsible for illegally
operating machinery during Dr. Gerard’s surgery, as well as Michaels and Rudnick. In
doing so, Carmichael has to confront both the medical community and the District

Attomey’s office, as noted in Transcript C2.

48

Table C.2:

Scene 33. D.A. Adam Schiff’s Office. (Cat. 1) .

 

Linguistic Narrative

Space

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative

Space

 

 

Carmichael: Criminally
negligent homicide. I feel
like I’m going to the
prom with the stamp
club geek.

Schiff: Two to four,
maximum security. No
picnic for a couple of
Park Avenue doctors... if
we make it stick. That’s
the problem.

Carmichael: The nurse
who saw the sales rep in
the operating room
couldn’t pick her out of
the photo array.

McCoy: It may be time
for us to make the best
deal we can with all of
them. Two years
probation, fine...

Carmichael: Oh, a fine,
ouch! Poor doctors
might have to hock one
of their Porsches.

McCoy: Abby, there isn’t
much of a case left.
Carmichael: But
there’s still a victim.
Jack, she went in a
healthy woman. She
came out a corpse.

McCoy: Between us,
depraved indifference
was a reach. Criminally
negligent homicide is a
gift, I wouldn't squander

 

[hand held camera]
Carmichael pacing, camera
pans past her towards right,
holds on McCoy and Schiff.

Camera pans left, following
Schiff as he walks in front
of camera past Carmichael.
Camera holds close-up on
Carmichael

Cut to Schiff sitting down.

Cut to McCoy.

Camera pans left to
Carmichael.

Cut to McCoy over
Carmichael’s shoulder.

Cut to Carmichael close-up.

Cut to Schiff medium close-
up.

Cut to McCoy over
Carmichael shoulder.

 

Background traffic
noise

 

It.

49

 

 

Cut to Carmichael over
Carmichael: You make McCoy shoulder.
excuses, I’ll make the Cut to McCoy over
case. Carmichael shoulder.

Cut to Schiff, medium close,
picking up telephone.

Schiff: Death by a
salesman. Just put it in
the win column.

 

 

 

 

 

Both the medical and criminal justice institutions fail to recognize Gerard’s death as a
homicide, insisting that it is an issue of medical malpractice. Carmichael’s determination
in pursuing a murder conviction against the doctor’s responsible for Mrs. Gerard’s death
clearly goes against the judgement of Jack McCoy. For McCoy, the case cannot stand on
its own merits within the context of the New York State penal code. For Carmichael,
however, the case is not about the code, but instead about seeking justice for Maureen
Gerard and all other patients whom may have shared the same fate.

The strong feelings Abby Carmichael has about the case are further evidenced by
her presence in the frame. She is constantly moving, the camera being forced to follow
her as she argues her point of view with her male counterparts through a series of pans
. and cross over shots. However, her clear resistance to McCoy’s interpretation of the case
is highlighted by a final close-up on her face, showing the intensity of both her opinions
and of the moment

As the victim, it is impossible for Maureen Gerard’s to narrate her own story. As
a result, others serve as her voice in the courtroom. Witnesses such as her husband and

attending nurses, describe the events that led to her death. In some cases, Maureen

50

Gerard’s story is intermixed with the narrator’s personal story, as noted in Nurse Panati’s

testimony below.

 

 

Table C.3:

Scene 37. (excerpt) Nurse Panati on Stand. (Cat. 2 8r 3)
Linguistic Narrative Pictorial Narrative Space: Musical Narrative
gace Iconic and Gestural fiace
Panati: Dr. Rudnick came Cut to Carmichael, who Echoes of slight
in. He had another walks away from hand held movement in the
surgery scheduled for camera towards courtroom.
nine o’clock, and he had prosecution table...tums (Attorney's
a patient in labor. He to face Panati. footsteps, etc.)

told us we’d have to be Cut to Drs. (med.
finished with Mrs. Gerard close)seated at defense

by 8:45. table.

Carmichael: And what Cut to Carmichael (med.
happened during the close)

surgery?

Panati: We were going at
a pretty good clip. Ms. Cut to Panati, med. close-
Ward was administering up centered in middle of
the electrolytic fluid. frame.

Then halfway through I
noticed that the fluid
wasn’t draining out of
Mrs. Gerard. I told the
doctors. Dr. Rudnick said
he didn’t see a problem Cut to Dr. Rudnick, camera
and he didn’t want to pans right to Dr. Michaels.
stop the surgery.

Carmichael: And what
did Dr. Michaels say?

Panati: Nothing. He just
ignored me.

Cut to Panati.
Carmichael: What
happened when the
surgery was over? Cut to Carmichael.

Panati: The lights had
been dimmed for the
video monitor, and when Cut to Panati.

 

 

 

 

 

51

 

 

they came back on, we
all saw that Mrs. Gerard
was bloated and in a lot
of distress.

Carmichael:
did she look?

How exactly

Panati: Her abdomen
was severely distended,
her arms and legs were
puffy, her face was
swollen, she was hardly
recognizable. They
rushed her to the ER.

Carmichael: Were you
later able to determine
how much fluid had been
pumped into Mrs.
Gerard?

Panati: Yes, just under
ten liters.

Carmichael: And how
much is considered safe?
Panati: Three to four
liters.

Carmichael: Thank you.

Brolan: Ms. Panati, if
you were convinced Mrs.
Gerard was in danger,
wasn’t it your duty to
warn the doctors again,
even to stop the
surgery?

Panati: If I had tried to
do that, Mr. Rudnick
would’ve fired me.

Brolan: (to Judge) Move
to strike.

 

Cut to med. close of two
female jurists.

Cut to Carmichael, camera
follows her, walking left.

Cut to Panati.

Cut to med. close of Mr.
Gerard behind prosecution
table.

Cut to Carmichael close-up
as she moves closer to
Panati...slight high angle.

Cut to Panati, close-up.
(cross shoot)
Panati grimacing, pausing.

Cut to Carmichael, who
walks away from camera.
Camera pans right towards
defense table, then left as
Defense Attorney Brolan
walks towards Panati.

Cut to Panati close-up.

Cut to Brolan (med. shot)

Cut to judge behind bench.
(med. long)

 

52

 

 

 

 

Judge: Denied.

Brolan: Nurse Panati,
you testified that ten
liters of fluid were
pumped into Mrs. Gerard,
yet the charts only
indicate four liters.

Panati: (broken voice) I
wrote that.

Brolan: You falsified
these documents?

Panati: Yes.

Brolan: Why? To cover
up your own failure to
act? Your own
negligence?

Panati: No. I did it to
protect Dr. Michael’s.

Brolan: No more
questions.

 

Cut to Carmichael sitting
behind Brolan, over
Brolan’s shoulder.

Cut to Panati, close-up.
Eyes well with tears.

Cut to Brolan, medium
shot.

Cut to Panati close-up.

Cut to Dr. Michaels (med.

shot)

Cut to Panati close-up.
Panati tearful.

 

MUSIC BEGINS

 

In assembling the separate narratives, Carmichael is able to piece together

53

Nurse Panati’s testimony reveals the suffering endured by Mrs. Gerard during the
operation. However, this narrative is also a personal one, as she reveals her own attempts
to protect Dr. Michaels, despite the fact that she admits that he ignored her in the
operating room. Close-up shots of Panati’s expressions while she is testifying suggest

that she knew her behavior, and that of Dr. Michaels, was criminal.

Maureen Gerard’s story, revealing the true reasons behind her death for the jury. The
ability to do so despite the obstacles placed in front of her by both the medical and legal

professional clearly empower her. Despite this fact, she is not convinced that her work is

 

enough to convince the jury to find the defendants guilty of murder. These doubts are

further compounded by the death of Dr. Michaels, who commits suicide after Camrichael

refuse to plea him out on a lesser charge.

Table C.4:

Scene 42. Carmichael

and McCoy at Courthouse (Cat. 1)

 

Linguistic Narrative

Space

Pictorial Narrative Space:
Iconic and Gestural

Musical Narrative
Space

 

Jack: Nice finish.
Abby: It wasn’t enough.
Jack: Hung jury?
Abby: Smells like.

Briscoe: Counselors!
Guess who won’t be
making any more house
calls. State police in

Michaels in his car at the
bottom of a gully.

Jack: Accident?

Briscoe: No skid marks,
but no proof it’s a
suicide.

Jack: Thanks...that’s
one verdict you don’t
have to worry about.

Abby: Jack, Michaels
came to me asking for a
deal. He said he had
evidence to convict
Rudnick. I might have

 

Putnam County found Dr.

 

[Hand held] Camera follows
McCoy following Carmichael
as she walks out of
Courthouse (from left).
Raining, wet, lots of
movement as people with
umbrellas and rain gear go
up and down the long Court
House steps. Can see large
marble columns. McCoy
follows Carmichael, who is
looking dejected.

Camera turns left towards
voice, as McCoy turns left.
Lenny Briscoe enters from
back left side of screen.
Camera follows Briscoe as
he approaches the ADAs
and stops when they are
together.

McCoy looks at Briscoe,
Abby looks down as Briscoe
speaks.

Person crosses in front of
them. Can see street and
cars behind them. Lots of
movement.

Briscoe'nods and turns,
walks back towards
direction he came from.
Abby looking down as
McCoy begins to walk away,
towards camera. Turns back
towards Carmichael, who is

 

Traffic noise.
Thunder and wind,
as well as rain
falling on
pavement.

 

54

 

 

set terms he couldn’t live looking upset.

with. She looks up at McCoy, her
gaze aligned with the

Jack: No, no, no, no. marble columns (vertical

no...his choice, Abby. vectors).

His lawyer know he asked

for a plea?

Over Carmichael shoulder to
Abby: Yeah, his lawyer McCoy. Camera moves
was there. towards the left, allowing
profile of Carmichael to be
Jack: Call the judge for seen, while getting full view
a conference. of McCoy. Carmichael nods.

McCoy nods, giving her a
reassuring look, turns to
walk away, Carmichael
follows.

 

 

 

 

 

The largess of New York City seems to surround Abby Carmichael as she discusses Dr.
Michael’s death with Briscoe and McCoy. There is a lot of activity surrounding their
conversation, the hand held camera following some of this movement. Carmichael
appears to be looking up at McCoy as they are speaking, the direction of her gaze
paralleling the vertical lines carved into the marble columns of the Courthouse.

However, while both are in the frame, McCoy seems larger than Carmichael, and appears
to be standing over her, much like the architectural design of the Courthouse. Only a
profile of Carmichael is seen when McCoy offers his advice.

Up until this point, McCoy’s involvement in the case, despite his doubts, is noted
only by his presence in the back of the courtroom during the trial. When Camrichael finds
herself turning to McCoy after Michaels’ death, he takes some control over the case by
insisting that Carmichael call the judge. As a result, it is both McCoy and Carmichael
that convince the judge to coerce Michaels’ defense attorney to reveal the testimony Dr.

Michaels had planned to offer. In succeeding to enter this normally protected speech into

55

evidence, Abby Carmichael convicts Dr. Rudnick and Ms. Ward, and dismantles the
corrupt medical practice. However, as a result of his own actions, Jack McCoy remains
unconvinced that the case was won on its own merits, pointing out in the end that the real
reason behind the victory was convincing the judge to ignore “attomey-client privilege”.
What he suggests, in essence, is that his involvement in the case minimizes Carmichael’s

successful prosecution of the case.

Discussion

Law & Order depicts the criminal justice system working as two separate but
equal units when attempting to solve and try a criminal case. Theoretically, each unit
works as a team towards the same end. However, the obstacles faced by Lt. Van Buren
and each of the female ADAs within the New York criminal justice system reveal that
this is not the case. What is seen, instead, is an unyielding patriarchal institutional system
that puts these women in marginal positions of power and authority (Corcos in Jarvis and
Paul, 1998).

The cases dealt with in these three episodes are clearly ‘women centered’: the
death of a female prostitute, female circumcision, greedy gynecologists. While these
criminal acts are a violation of the statutes of New York, they seemingly carry little
weight in the eyes of the system. It was only because Jack McCoy saw the cases of
having limited legal merit within the scope of the law, that the ADAs were given the
authority to prosecute these cases.

The character to character narrations that take place when addressing the merits of

these issues, and the true victims of the crime, reveal a dominant patriarchal subject

56

position from which the text can be read. However, in these narratives the four women
often voice objections, offer resistance, and/or reject this patriarchal system. Their words
and actions offer a different subject position from that of the dominant patriarchal point
of view. Van Buren’s admonishment of Briscoe for his lack of interest in a prostitute’s
murder, as well as her plans to seek legal action against the department despite the
detective’s lack of support evidences this fact. The female ADAs’ insistence on pursuing
these cases in court, despite the objections and criticism of their male superiors, also
implies the existence of a reverse discourse. These are feminist spaces in which the
viewer can perform the text.

Jack McCoy’s character reminds the viewer that ideating these spaces of
resistance does not necessarily change the balance of power within the system itself. His
comments about the merits of each of the cases presented here serve to assert the
patriarchal nature of the legal system, and reassert his interest in supporting that
patriarchy. The actions of both McCoy and his female counterparts suggest that that they.
are not able to win by working within the criminal justice system, so they have to
manipulate it in order to succeed. Nonetheless, while they appear to be working together,
McCoy’s comments often serve to discredit the efforts made by the assisting DA. He
consistently reminds her that it was their manipulation of the system, and not the value of
her argument, that allows her to “win” that case.

This does not, however, minimize the significance of the spaces of resistance
these women reflect. While the overall patriarchal point of view of a male dominated

criminal justice system remains unchanged throughout the text, this point of view is

57

indeed being challenged. These challenges come in the form of both speech and action,
as being presented by the pictorial narratives.

Those who are not part of the criminal justice system, but are forced to work
within it as a result of their actions or the actions of others, are also subject to its
masculist ideals. Gwyn George, despite being a homicide victim, is all but blamed by the
detectives for her murder. McCoy dismisses Allison Martin’s planned circumcision as a
secondary problem to that of Mr. Moussad’s homicide. Maureen Gerard’s death is
classified by both McCoy and Schiff as a mere case of medical negligence. Because the
victims are not able to articulate a resistive space, they must rely on other members of the
system to help them. If it were not for the Lieutenant and the assistant DAs working
against the patriarchal system, justice would not have been served.

The choice to engage in criminal behavior by some of the defendants also reflects
the creation of resistant spaces. Julia Danforth murders Gwyn George and attempts to
frame her husband in an attempt to punish him for his extra-marital activities. Martin
kills Mr. Moussad in order to prevent him from orchestrating Allison Martin’s
circumcision. Kelly McFarland assaults Slattery as a result of her resisting her ex-
husband’s attempt to steal from her again. Their actions were attempts to resist a
patriarchal system in which they were living at the time. While these defendants are
ultimately punished by the system they are resisting, the transition from being a victim of
the system to an empowered resistor of the system is apparent when describing their
illegal actions. Their personal narratives contribute to an overall ideational space of
resistance in the text, as does their unwillingness to turn to the criminal justice system to

confront the injustices.’

58

The number of character to character narratives that reflect a resistance to the
dominant patriarchal position of the criminal justice system suggests that a reverse
discourse is present in the overall Law & Order text If one were to apply the expanded
narrative framework outlined in Figure 2.3, it is possible to extricate a feminist narrative
from the episodes analyzed here. Using the third scene of Humiliation (Transcript A. l)
as an example, one can interpret Lt. Van Buren’s responses to Briscoe’s dismissal of
Gwyn George’s homicide as a reaction to the dominant patriarchal position the text is
implying. As noted in Figure 3.1, Van Buren’s comments to Briscoe can be performed
' both as a narrative that reflects a dominant patriarchal subject position, and as a narrative
that opposes this patriarchy. This suggests that the scene is a multi-narrative text from
which multiple point of views can be asserted.

Some of the stories told by the female characters suggest that they are caught
between these two conflicting points of views within the story world. Noreen Martin is
caught between the two patriarchal systems influencing her life, which includes the
patriarchal cultural traditions of her Egyptian heritage and the custodial constraints
placed on her by the criminal justice system. She is also torn between the importance of
protecting her daughter from the ritual, and protecting her from engaging in sexual
behavior with men before marriage. Meanwhile, Nurse Panati struggles with her desires
to be loyal to her male superiors, particularly Dr. Micheals, while recognizing that Mrs.
Gerard had been a victim of their gross malpractice. Hence, both Martin and Panati
pay a price for their struggle: they ultimately lose the people they are trying to protect

altogether.

59

 

 

 

 

 
   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

528a 32:5 5.3— > T
38.33 . , 53%
28558 8 .2985!—
Efiofifid I'll :23— > I 3.50 8 O 3
=2=m > _AIV.A..V 303m _ _
9325...!— 35985 8.5889
6305 .8“ 62m to? x05 fill.

 

 

 

 

8593»: a... 55: =9 .3 .025 88m 885:5:

.35 a £3 a 2:952 issue ”an new...

In Law & Order, the focus is on the narrative; there is very little action. The
viewer is present when the participants of the criminal justice system question what is
around them, simultaneously engaging in the discovery process with the characters in the
story. An objective hand held camera acts as the viewer’s eyes, follows the dialogue as it
is being spoken. It often lingers on one character, as if mulling over what s/he was
saying, while another character begins to speak.

The pictorial nanati ve also combines reverse angle camera shots when guiding
. the viewer through each verbal narrative. By reversing the angles throughout a scene, the
camera permits the viewer to recognize shifting points of view during character to
character exchanges. By allowing the viewer to become more involved with the text
through the eyes of the camera, the viewer can take a closer look into the process of
criminal justice. For example, the inclusion of high angle shots of ADAs standing over
defendants serves to remind the viewer of the power the criminal justice system has over
individuals who seek to challenge it. Meanwhile, the continual use of over the shoulder
shots allows the viewer to “listen in” on more intimate exchanges during a defendant’s
confession, which may reveal conflicting points of views among the characters as noted
in Figure 3.2.

As the camera cuts back and forth throughout the exchange between Van Buren
and the detectives, it reflects the presence of two points of views being reflected by the
text. The pictorial point of view during this exchange includes a series of reverse angle

shots, including some over the shoulder, opening the pictorial narrative for reverse

61

discourse. This allows for a pictorial reading of discussions between the characters in the

scene, and suggests that the pictorial position of the viewer can be more involved in

Figure 3.2: Pictorial Narrative

Humiliation: Scene Three, Lt. Van Buren w/Detectives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dick Wolf Prod. Viewer
TEXT (Discourse)

Pictorial Close-up 0 Close- —i Pictorial ‘
POV: V. Buren up POSitiOIl:
Reverse Talking Briscoe Involved
angle, to and Viewer
over the Briscoe Curtis
shoulder and Curtis listening

To

VBuren

 

 

 

 

 

 

negou'ating the significance of their conversations to the over all narrative discourse if the
viewer so chooses.

Note, also, the number of close-ups while each of the individual defendants is
narrating his/her story. These shots are also used to intensify the empowering moments
of the characters as they create their ideational space. The use of cross-shooting
techniques in the pictorial text allows for these close-ups during narrative exchanges. By
centering the character in the frame, and by allowing the viewer to get closer, the

character visually appears larger and stronger. Being alone in the frame reflects the

62

character’s success in securing a space for her/himself within the pictorial narrative
structure, from which s/he can reflect a reverse discourse.

There is a limited use presence of musical narrative throughout the Law & Order
text. The use of sound effects depicting off-screen activities such as office activity and
city traffic continually remind the viewer of the active space of the story worid in which
the narrative is taking place. This is most notable during discussions in offices and
conference rooms. However, when in court, background noises are subdued. For
example, the individual testimonies of the Martins, and that offered by Nurse Panati, are
heard without off-screen sounds to complement their narrations. The camera allows us to
get close to them through the use of close-ups and cross-shots, but there is limited
gestural movement outside of the attorney questioning the individual on the stand. The
controlled use of sounds and movement makes the linguistic narrative central to the
scene.

Throughout select narratives, the same brief musical score indicates 'a point of
view being asserted by the narrative discourse. This Ieitrnotiv is introduced to the viewer
when a defendant or a witness’ actions and/or feelings are being narrated. In each of these
cases, the tone of the music indicates an admission to their violation of the overarching
social and/or legal norms by their actions. The accompanying explanations, however,

reflect alternative points of view that resist the overarching patriarchal structure.

Summary
This analysis is an initial attempt at opening narrative theory in order to recognize

alternative readings to that of the dominant subject position found in a televisual text

63

The findings indicate that, by expanding narrative theory, it is possible to identify
multiple subject positions in both the verbal and pictorial constructions of ideational
space in a televisual text. In Law & Order, the dominant point of view of a patriarchal
criminal justice system that represents and defends masculist ideals is challenged by the
numerous attempts by characters within the story world to resist it through both word and
action. Character-to—character storytelling provides a number of narratives that do not
reflect the dominant subject position, but instead yield a position that appears to resist
and/or reject it. While this alternative position does not replace the dominant point of

view, its presence suggests that both positions can co-exist within the same text.

 

' It is possible that some feminists, power feminists in particular, would argue that
violating the rules of the criminal justice system, such as committing acts of violence
against others, are not empowering. Instead, they are viewed as using their own
victimization as an excuse to commit criminal acts. For a further discussion refer to
Maglin, Nan. B. & Perry, Donna. (1996) “ ad 'rls” /” ' ls”' w w r
W. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

CHAPTER 4

AUDIENCE RESPONSE THEORY

The textual analysis in Chapter 3 identifies a patriarchal story world experience
that guides the Law & Order text. It also reveals evidence of a reverse discourse or
second implied authorship that provides an alternative point of view to that of patriarchy.
Keep in mind, however, that up until this point the concern has been specifically about
the televisual text, and the multiple points of view from which a viewer can engage it. In
the following chapters we move on to look at the extent to which the viewer of this text
recognizes that these multiple points of view are being circumscribed by the over all
patriarchal space of the story-world.

To begin investigating this question, one must assume that viewers of televisual
media texts are not passive recipients, but instead are active sense makers of the
information being offered in the text (Chisolm, 1991, pg. 389). Like any other aesthetic
object, the conventions of a televisual text are dictated by what Howard Becker (1982)
refers to as the “abstractions to be used to convey particular ideas or experiences”
(Becker, 1982, pg. 28). However, viewers of televisual texts rely not only on these
conventions, but also on their prior knowledge to contribute to their interpretation of the
text In order to understand the process of how this sensemaking takes place, the focus of
this research moves from narrative theory to theories of reception. Reception theories
refer to a body of work that shifts the focus of concern from an author and a work to a
text and a reader (Holub, 1984). For the purpose of this research, the theoretical work of

Wolfgang Iser, which falls under the umbrella of reception theory, is the most useful.i

65

 

Wolfgang Iser’s audience response framework specifically looks at how and
under what conditions a text has meaning for a reader (Holub, 1984, pg. 82). While
Iser’s work focuses on literary texts, it can be equally applied to televisual texts. To this
effect, the following discussion replaces the term “reader” with the more appropriate term
of “viewer”. Iser’s work is based on the assumption that the text is a set of instructions
that guides a viewer into an intended aesthetic experience. This aesthetic experience, or
story world, is created by the ideations of a viewer, which are stimulated by a text (Iser,
1978). A textual system of information that is given and not given also guides the
production of meaning. It is in the engagement of text and reader where meaning is
produced (Allen, 1994, pg. 102).

A narrative text is made up of segments of ideas, where each segment provides an
opportunity for the viewer to create meaning. According to Iser, it is what is implied
within a text that gives “shape and weight to [its] meaning” (Iser, 1978, pg. 168). As
discussed in the previous chapters, the implied author(s) of a narrative offers a point of
view a viewer can assert as s/he maneuvers through a text. However, unlike narrative
theory, audience response assumes that the way in which a viewer is instructed to adopt a
text’s point of view relies not only on the text, but also on a viewer’s prior knowledge
acquired through her/his prior experiences. Thus, while the information provided by the
text does not change, the way in which the reader can ideate a story world, regardless of
the information provided, may vary.

A viewer’s prior knowledge is not randomly brought into the story world, but is

guided, ultimately, by the implied authorship of the text. As a result, the viewer modifies

her/his knowledge in order to construct a story world in accordance with the set of
instructions in the text. Over time, as a viewer is guided through a text, s/he begins to
comprehend the text as a sum of her/his ideations.

A text is comprised of potential meanings that stimulate the ideational process of
the viewer who is engaging it. This results in the construction of an aesthetic space. It is
not a reproduction of a referenced reality, nor is it a recreation of the viewer’s personal
experience. A viewer is guided by the points of view offered by a text without being able
to respond or question it. This establishes a contingent relationship between a text and
viewer that is not only indeterminate, but, as Iser argues, asymmetrical in nature (Iser,
1978).

W

Between the segments of a narrative are gaps that break up the continuity of a text
and stimulate a viewer’s ideation process. Within these gaps, the viewer relies on what
Iser refers to as blanks that are in a text to be guided into the intended story world.
Blanks stimulate ideations that bridge together those segments that appear to follow a
pattern of meaning. When confronted with a blank in a text, a viewer is able to bring
forth her/his experiences to the text, and still be guided by the segments themselves,
allowing a balanced text-viewer relationship to continue.

However, a viewer may come to a segment in the text where the ideation
stimulated fails to create a logical connection to the next one. This negation prompts the
viewer to (a) consider that something might be different in the connection, or (b)
reevaluate the ideations s/he has already made (Holub, 1984). As Iser points out,

negations are “an active force that stimulates the reader into building up the ideational

67

space of the text” (Iser, 1978, pg. 213). Therefore, by negating what the viewer has
brought to the text at the moment, the text guides the viewer into a different, but
intended, point of view. As a viewer’s familiar experiences are brought to a text and
negated, they are not eliminated. S/he continues to draw upon her/his familiar points of
view while searching to create images that will allow her/him to adopt a position
“commensurate to the intentions of the text” (Iser, 1978, pg. 214).

Often, blanks appear in a text because the real authors seek to enhance the
viewer’s ideational experience through a structured uncertainty. For example,
withholding details or purposely providing misleading information in a text may provide
the viewer with the opportunity to experience suspense, fear, or other intense emotions
that contribute to the process of creating a specific aesthetic space (Iser, 1974, 1978).
However, if a viewer is unable or unwilling to engage a text according to the guidelines,
regardless of the experiential opportunities they offer, the text-viewer relationship will
ultimately break down. In short, disorientation occurs, and the viewer may stop engaging
the text altogether.

Themaudflnriznns

Multiple points of view arise from encountering blanks in the texts, specifically
when they guide a viewer away from her/his own views and those implied in the story-
world of the text. Iser argues that the multiplicity of ideas that arise from this process is a
result of the shifting or “wandering” vieWpoints, which “allows the reader/performer to
perform multiple and interconnected textual perspectives that are 'offset whenever there is
a switch from one viewpoint to another” (Iser, 1978, pg. 118). However, a wandering

viewpoint is actually structured because it follows a “theme and horizon” order that is

accomplished through the structure of blanks and negations. As noted in Figure 4.1,
when creating blanks along a syntagmatic axis of a text, the reader is following a specific
theme. When new information is introduced, resulting in a paradigmatic shift or negation,
a new theme emerges, relegating the old theme to a horizon. Over time a reader can note
apatternofthematic change which allowsthetextto be understoodasasumofa
viewer’s ideations, as opposed to multiple individual points of view. A viewer must
combine these wandering viewpoints in order to establish a sense of coherence when the
ideation process is taking place (Iser, 1978). If the engagement of a text is successful, the
underatandingofitwill ultimatelyfall withintheparameters ofl‘ered bytheinscrihed

implied author or point of view in the text.

figure4.l:FollowlngaThemeandHorlzonOrderofaText'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recall that the successful engagement of a text relies on the understanding of that
text within the parameters offered by the inscribed implied author or point of view. The
analysis in Chapter 3 demonstrates that narrative theory can be opened up to allow for a
reverse discourse to challenge what is asserted by the reader/viewer as the dominant point
of view of the text. The co-existence of multiple viewpoints in the story world of a text
provides a viewer with more than one set of instructions to guide her/his ideational
process. Recall that the contingent and asymmetrical relationship between a text and
viewer must be maintained throughout the ideation process in order to guide the creation
of a story world. For a viewer to experience an ideated non-patriarchal space within the
story world, s/he must be able to do so while still engaging the overarching patriarchal
narrative text. Therefore, a viewer must contend with several sets of instructions within

the text in order to engage in a reverse discourse within a patriarchal text.

 

When engaging a televisual text the process becomes more complicated, as the
viewer must engage not only the verbal narrative, but pictorial and musical narratives as
well (Allen, 1992). These narratives come together in a single text, upon which the
viewer must rely to create a story world through the ideational process.

Within a pictorial narrative one must look at the use of space, or “spatial
arrangements” that are given or present within a frame (Barbatsis, 1993, pg. 10). The
viewer is guided not only by the linguistic narrative, but also by the presence of reverse

angles, point of view shots, cuts, and other visual cues offered by the gestural and iconic

7O

narratives in the frame. The viewer makes sense of the patterns or images created by
these cues. However, what is not seen within the frame is also significant. What is not
seen in the frame functions as a “pictorially structured gap” which the viewer must fill in
order to understand the significance of what is being seen within it (Barbatsis, 1996).

The viewer must also fill the gaps created by musical narratives, including those
that do not correspond to the events occurring directly in the frame. In engaging the
musical narrative, several things may happen. A viewer’s performance of a text may be
facilitated by the predictive nature of off-screen music and/or noise (Zettl, 1990, pg. 345)
of the musical narrative, which complements the linguistic and/or pictorial narratives. On
the other hand, a viewer may be guided towards a point of view if the musical narrative
contradicts what the viewer sees and hears on-screen. The negation that results from this
incongruence may prompt the viewer to reevaluate what s/he has heard and seen within
the frame. Thus, the potential exists for a non-linguistic narrative to serve as a narrative
of reverse discourse, creating an ideated space where alternative point of view can be
asserted.

! II B I E . .

Audience response criticism is helpful in understanding the sense making process
that occurs when a viewer engages a televisual text. This aesthetic framework allows the
researcher to think about how a viewer is guided by the text’s dominant subject position.
How a viewer does so allows for the identification of less obvious but no less important

competing points of view within a text (van Zoonen, I994).

71

Summary
The goal of this study is not to “tell” viewers what the dominant reading should
be, but to induce information that will allow the researcher to note whether viewers
interpret the Law & Order text as asserting a patriarchal point of view that is defined by
masculist ideals. Furthermore, by looking at the process by which the viewer ideates
meaning when engaging this text, it can be identified if a viewer, within the parameters of
the patriarchal text, is willing and able to ideate spaces within the story world that reflect

an alternative or ‘competing’ point of view.

 

‘ According to Robert C. Holub (1984), there are several features that separate reader
response criticism from reception theory. Reader response is not a critical movement;
reader response critics influence each other very little. On the other hand, reception
theorists present themselves as a more cohesive group, representing a more collective
undertaking. The work of Wolfgang Iser is, thus far, the only contact between reception
theory and reader response theory. See pp. xi-xiv.

2 This diagram was adapted from Camacho, M. & O’Gorman, K. “Developing a
Universal User-Created Homepage Interface to Address the Specific Needs of Unique
Communities”. Presented at the Conference on Theory and Research of Communication
and culture, California State University at Fullerton. March 29, I996.

72

CHAPTER 5

METHOD

In Chapter 3, a textual analysis of Law & Order revealed a dominant patriarchal
discourse in which resistive spaces to this patriarchy were identified. At this stage of the
project it is important that viewers of the same text be allowed to describe, in their own
words, the process of creating a dominant reading. It is helpful to understand the process
of ideation that occurs when these viewers engage the Law & Order text. The audience
response framework facilitates this understanding. By analyzing their reactions to and
observations about the televisual text, researchers can note if they identify the dominant
discourse in the text as patriarchal, as well as identify any ideated spaces they construct
that resist that patriarchal point of view.

Qualitative techniques are welcomed tools for many feminist and critical scholars
who study television because it allows them to collect and analyze data that exposes
“both the conscious and unconscious construction of meaning by media producers and
audiences” (van Zoonen, 1994, pg. 135). The method most useful for this research must
allow for open expression and opinion building. Because focus groups interviews
produce qualitative data that provide insights into the attitudes, perceptions, and opinions
of its participants (Krueger, 1994), this research instrument is most useful in obtaining
data regarding the process of the viewer as s/he engages in a text-viewer relationship.

Focus groups are samples of shared experiences where participants build on each
other’s verbalized ideas (Fingerson, 1999). The group interaction that takes place has the

potential of providing greater insight into the perspectives offered by each of the

73

participants. The focus group presents a more natural environment than that of other
kinds of interviewing methods because participants are influencing and influenced by
others, similar to what is experienced in real life (Krueger, 1994). Furthermore, in the
process of self-disclosure, participants provide the potential of allowing the researcher to
hear their reality with a minimal amount of assumptions being created by the researcher
beforehand. This potential is further realized when the moderator provides the space for
participant discussion by minimizing her/his interruptions of the conversations. Not only
does this provide an atmosphere of open exchange among the participants, but it also

3 reduces the unbalanced power relationship that is often present between a researcher and
a research participant (van Zoonen, 1994).

Reducing the power relationship between the researcher and a research participant
makes focus group research attractive to feminist researchers. For feminist media
scholars, focus groups are both suited to feminist research as well as media scholarship.
According to Frngerson (1999), television and media content are often talked about and
interpreted within groups, thus making focus groups particularly useful in mass
communication research. As Lunt and Livingstone (1996) point out. “focus groups is a
method in tune with current media research, which are redefining media processes and
the conception of the audience” (Lunt and Livingstone, 1996, pg. 90). They are used to
examine the everyday ways in which audiences make sense of television, helping to
uncover the process by which meaning is “socially constructed through every day talk”
(Lunt and Livingstone, 1996, pg. 85). As a result, focus groups provide an additional

advantage for feminist scholarship, because they enable a participant to enhance the

74

“awareness of their situation in a way similar to the processes of consciousness-raising
groups” (Callahan, quoted in Reinhartz, 1992, pg. 223).
Wan

Audiences use television and other media in their daily lives as a means of
creating meaning and developing an understanding of the world around them (Fingerson,
1999). Focus groups facilitate this process of meaning creation by encouraging
interaction with others in a group while discussing televisual texts. The social interaction
between members of the group may also facilitate the discussion of the multiple points of
view that are offered by the text’s verbal, visual, musical, and gestural narratives. The
information generated from these focus groups allows an inductive search for emergent
patterns in the data, permitting the researcher to look for major themes and corresponding
points of view that are tied to the critical viewing process.

Methodological concerns often arise when a textual analysis is previously
performed on a television text that participants will be viewing and discussing. The
possibilities of not only exploring a participant’s experiences, but exploiting them for the
purposes of research is a difficulty often experienced in data interpretation (Reay, 1996,
pg. 63). Scholars must consider, when working with this data, the ways in which her/his
own points of view impact both the story that is being told, and the discourse that is
produced (Anderson, et. al., 1987, Reay, 1996).

Issues of self-reflexivity when conducting qualitative research is of paramount
importance to the feminist researcher (Reay, 1996). In an attempt to overcome the

exploitation of 'a participant’s voice in feminist research, same-sex interviews are often

75

conducted in order to establish a shared understanding of the stories being told. While
helpful, “gender congruity” is often not enough to overcome the misunderstandings that
often take place between an interviewer and a participant (Reissman, 1987, pg. 188).
Careful attention must always be paid to racial and ethnic differences, as well as to
differences in social class and cultural values. Failure to recognize the unique and
diverse nuances of a discussion between an interviewer and a participant will lead to
incomplete and inaccurate data.

One must question at all times what story is being told: that of the participant, or a
story that results from the collaboration between participant and researcher (Anderson, et.
al., 1987). To alleviate this, steps are taken so that the original voice and intent of the
participant can be heard, understood, and recorded. (Reissman, 1987). Proper
interviewing skills, listening without analyzing, probing for explanations, and
recognizing the context in which stories are told, are all techniques that a facilitator
should employ to allow for the appropriate recording of a participant’s self-expression.

The most important way of alleviating methodological concerns is by ensuring
that the research tool is appropriate in both design and effectiveness (Krueger, 1994).

Specifically, the success of a focus group interview relies primarily on the effectiveness
of the questioning route. This predetermined guide is designed to elicit responses about
the research topic in a participant’s own voice, and on her/his own terms, without
compromising the quality of the information being provided. It is also simultaneously
providing mental cues which may spark spontaneous discussions among participants,

allowing for the exploration of the “range of perceptions” about the topic (Krueger, 1994,

P8. 54).

76

Discussing Law & Order: Data Collection

Chapter 3 reveals an overarching masculist point of view in the Law & Order
text, as well as the simultaneous existence of a reverse discourse that rejects this
patriarchy and attempts to assert a feminist point of view reflected by the same text. In
order to identify whether a viewer is guided by the intended patriarchal reading of the
text, a series of focus group interviews was conducted. A questioning route was designed
to serve as a means of guiding the focus group conversations towards a discussion of the
reactions of the participants. The following is a detailed account of this data collection
process.

W

Because this is a foundational study intended to identify feminist perspectives of a
televisual text, the focus group participants were female. Women attending
undergraduate school at Michigan State University were recruited from four separate
courses in Advertising, Telecommunication, Women’s Studies, and Video Production.
These courses were selected based on the professor’s willingness to provide extra credit
points as an incentive for participating in the focus group interviews. Women who are
fluent in English, including those who consider English their second language, were
invited. Forty-nine women participated in six focus group interviews.

In order to maximize the effectiveness of the research method, the first focus
group served as a pilot or initial ‘run-through” of the focus group procedure, questioning
route, and audio recording. Sixteen students, both male and female, were randomly
invited to participate in this session by word of mouth and email. Seven agreed to

participate. In order not to risk changing the dynamics and/or seriousness of the

77

interview, the students were not informed that this was a pilot session. Their discussions
' were recorded and transcribed, but the data was not analyzed for this study. Based on the
dynamics of the initial focus group, the questioning route was slightly tailored in order to
ensure more quality responses.

W

The seven focus groups were conducted in approximately a week and a half in
early February 2001. The sessions were held during the afternoon on weekends, and on
Thursday and Friday evening. Because no more than twelve participants are desired for a
focus group discussion (Krueger, 1994), students were pre-assigned a date and time to
participate and were issued reminders by electronic mail and by phone. Because the
meeting times coincided with lunch or dinner hours, those who appeared at their assigned
session were provided a meal of pizza and a variety of snacks and beverages.

The meetings took place in a classroom that was set up for audio recording,
including suspended microphones from the ceiling and soundproof walls. An assistant
was responsible for the recording of the conversations in an adjoining audio laboratory.
At the beginning of each interview the assistant drew a “seating chart”, allowing her to
record where each participant was seated in the room in order to assist in identifying
participant’s voices on the audio tape later on. She also used this chart to write the names
of each participant, their racial and ethnic characteristics, and salient comments, gestures
and other points of interest corresponding to each particular individual. Following each
focus group interview, the assistant transcribed the recorded discussions with the

assistance of the seating chart. The researcher then reviewed each tape and transcript.

78

At the beginning of each of the l 1/2hour focus group sessions that were
moderated by the researcher, participants were asked to complete a university-approved
consent form. Following this, the researcher/moderator briefly explained the purpose of
the research and the focus group format. She also explained to the participants that there
were no “right” or “wrong” answers to the questions being posed, inviting each
participant to simply share what s/he felt was relevant to the discussion.

Once the recording began, participants were asked to introduce themselves by
their first name, and to tell the group how often they watched Law & Order. This
opening question was asked not only to “break the ice” between the participants and the
respondent, but to also assess the familiarity of each of the participants with the text, as
noted in Appendix A. While previous experience watching Law & Order could enhance
a viewer’s sensemaking process, a participant who already knew the outcome of the
specific episode could have potentially impacted the ability of other participants to
speculate about the outcome of events in the story world. To avoid this, an alternative
viewing session was scheduled for those who had already seen the episode.

Next, a taped episode of the Law & Order episode Humiliation was shown in five
separate segments. The end of each segment coincided with the beginning of a
commercial break. At each of these points, a discussion was initiated and sometimes
guided by the predetermined questioning route. Each of the discussions lasted from
seven to fifteen minutes, depending on what the participants chose todiscuss at length. A

ten-minute break was taken after the third discussion.

79

I] Q l' . R |

Recall that the purpose of the focus group interviews is to identify what viewers
assert as the dominant point of view of the overall Law & Order narrative, and to note if
any of them ideate a narrative space that resists this patriarchy. By discussing the viewing
experience with others, it was hoped that participants identify the conventions of the text
as well as the prior experiences that guided their sensemaking experience when engaging
in the text-viewer relationship.

The questioning route is a sequence of questions designed to encourage
participants to discuss the points of view being asserted by the narrative structure. It is a
tool that stimulates discussions about the changing perceptions about what participants
are viewing as the television narrative progresses. The questioning route also provides the
opportunity for participants to identify specific examples from the text that evidences
their responses.

Recall that feminist research has traditionally defined ‘patriarchy’ as a system that
places women in a position of male subordination. The textual analysis in Chapter 3
applies this definition of the term. For this study, it was important to identify if
participants also defined patriarchy as a system of masculist'ideals. Participants were
asked questions in order to determine if they asserted the reflection of this patriarchal
point of in Humiliation. They were also given the opportunity during the interview to
define patriarchy differently. Both kinds of questions gave the researcher a context
within which to categorize the assertions being made while they engaged the text.
Furthermore, based on the participant’s definition(s) of patriarchy, the researcher could

note if participants asserted a point of view that challenged this patriarchy.

80

Introductory, transitional, and key questions asking for responses about specific
events in the text were carefully organized to elicit reactions about the segment of the text
the participants just viewed (Krueger, I994). Open-ended questions were posed
throughout the discussion to provide an opportunity for participants to relate the
discussions of what they had just seen with earlier discussions about previous events.
After each segment, the researcher/moderator also repeated 3 series of open—ended
questions, including an invitation to comment on the pictorial narrative. The
researcher/moderator then summarized the responses at the end of each segment in an
' attempt to establish a sense of cohesion among the varying perspectives offered by the
participants. By offering a summary at the end of each segment, they were better
equipped to recall information from the segment during later discussions with a bit more
case. The participants were also invited to add additional comments to the summary that
they felt were important to add, as well as to offer perspectives that they felt had been left
out.

Before returning to the viewing of the text, the researcher/moderator concluded
the discussion by asking ,“Based on what you have seen so far, what do you think is
going to happen next?” By speculating about a future sequence of events. based on the
pattern of sensemaking established up until that point between the text and themselves,
participants provided examples from the narrative that reinforced their interpretations.
When events in the discourse unfolded differently from their expectations, participants
were asked to describe what they felt when they realize that they earlier interpretations

were incorrect.

81

Sampleflufitions

Following the first scenes of the show, including the opening credits, a series of
introductory questions was offered to begin easing participants into critically thinking
about what they were viewing, as noted in Sample 1 below.

WM:

1. During the opening of the show, what were some of the things that you noticed?

2. Was there anything that‘struck you about
2-a. events that took place in the opening scenes?

2_-b. the clnracters? Gestures, facial expressions...?
2-c. music, noise, sounds effects?
2-d. production elements, such as lighting, camera angles ...?

Transition questions were asked after the second viewing segment in order to stimulate a

discussion about the actual events in the text, as noted in Sample 2 below. This

encouraged participants to begin broadening the overall topic while focusing on the
criminal aspects of the case.

W:

2. What opinions, if any, do you have about any of the characters and their
discusdons about the moral and criminal implications of soliciting a prostitute?
After the third viewing segment, a combination of transition questions and key

questions were asked in order to begin facilitating discussion about the point(s) of view

being offered by the text. As noted in Sample 3, transition questions were first

82

introduced to allow participants to begin organizing, among themselves, the sequence of

events up until that point in the text.

WM:

1. Any comments or observations you have about what you’ve just seen?

2. If you were to the list the reasons behind Dr. Danforth’s ultimate arrest, what
would you include?

Note that the above question asked respondents to list a series of events that resulted in a

major development in the text By doing so, it helped clarify and sum up what has

occurred so far in the text, and it also provided a specific context in which to begin

talking about what had happened in the story world so far. This was particularly

important to do after the third viewing segment, because the televisual text changed

direction as it switched from focusing on events about the “law,” to focusing on events

about the “order” of the criminal justice system.

Key questions were introduced after the third segment to initiate disCussion about
the intended reading of the text They were designed to stimulate discussions about the
ideas participants previously had about the text Throughout the discussion, they were
asked to return to those ideas to see if they had changed. These questions were intended
to bring to the conversation discussions about a dominant patriarchal point of view in
Humiliation, as noted in the sample questions below.

W:
2-b. Some researchers would describe male behavior as macho centered,

and/or wanting to be dominant and powerful. Do you think this applies to

83

what you’ve seen so far? Why? Does this have anything to do with Dr.
Danforth’s arrest?
3. Who appears to be more dominant in the text, the men or the women? Can you
share your reasons behind your opinion(s)?
The questions in Sample 4 have two very specific functions. The first is to provide a
definition of patriarchy that participants could use, add to, or discard. By doing so, the
participants were given the opportunity to offer their definition of patriarchy, if they have
one. Second, they are specifically being asked to think about patriarchy within the
context of the televisual text, and to apply the concept to what they see. By offering
perspectives about what they have seen, they are offering the subject position(s) from
which they are engaging the text up until that point Participants were encouraged to
provide examples in the text that supported the point of view from which they were
viewing the text, and where other points of view may be asserted in the discursive space.
A discussion of the model developed by the researcher in Chapter 3, Figure 3.3 is
initiated following the above discussion.
W:
Take a look at this model. It’s trying to outline where different points of view come
outinthestory. Doyouthinkthisisusefulintryingtodescribewherethereisa
shift in the points of view?
In order to facilitate the discussion, the researcher/moderator passed out copies of
the model to the viewers, allowing time for them to read and reflect what they saw in the

hand out Participants were encouraged to ask questions about the model, and were asked

to apply it to the nanatives offered by the characters that reflected the points of view
from which they were viewing the text.

The introduction of key questions about the text and the points of view being
reflected by it continued to be introduced after the fourth viewing segment. This set of
questions was specifically designed to initiate discussion about the details surrounding
the legal aspects of the case, as well as the relationship between the new set of characters
they were being introduced to in the second half of the episode.

Walnut:
3. How do you feel about Kincaid’s willingness to prosecute Dr. Danforth?

2-a. How would you characterize McCoy’s attitude towards Kincaid her

effortsintryingandresolvingthecase? Whatdidyouseeorhearthatledto

that opinion?

2-b. Did her having doubts contribute to your characterization?

2-c. Do you have any specific thoughts about the relationship between the

McCoy and Kincaid? Do you think gender plays a part in this specific

relationship?

The final key questions were posed after the fifth viewing segment These
questions helped identify shifts in the thinking of the viewers as a result of the resolution
of the criminal case. They also encouraged participants to reconnect with the responses
they offered earlier about the events and characters of the story-world.
W:

1. Now that we all know that Mrs. Danforth, and NOT Dr. Danforth committed the

murder, what are your ideas about her reasons for murdering Gwyn George?

85

l-a. Do you think her reasons in some way justify her actions?

l-b. Can you describe your feelings about Dr. Danforth while Mrs. Danforth

admitted to the killing?

l-c. Can you recall some of your thoughts about Mrs. Danforth before you

knew that she killed Gwyn George? Did your opinion of her change at the

end of the program? If so, how?
Asking viewers to connect their discussions with previous points made in earlier
segments gave them an opportunity to look at the text as a whole, and not simply a series
of segments. It encouraged them to discuss interpretations of the over all narrative, and
to return to earlier interpretations. This helped determine what stimulated changes in how
they made sense of the text
W

Recognizing that what are being analyzed and discussed in the following chapters
are the reactions, opinions, and attitudes viewers had about Law & Order, it is understood
that “the thematic content of the discussions among the participants is the unit of
analysis” (Lunde and Livingstone 1996, pg. 92). In order to identify these themes, the
viewer’s responses were coded and analyzed according to the perspectives they offered
about the structure and content of the narrative.

The initial analysis of the data looked at how viewers characterized the structure
of the text, noting comments made about the linguistic, pictorial and musical narratives in
the Law & Order text Specific events in the story that created moments of confusion
about specific events, caused intense moments of emotion, or prompted speculations

about the outcome of the show are also identified. These particular moments in the

86

discussion can provide the researcher with concrete examples of events that guided a
viewer’s interpretation of the narrative space.

To facilitate this analysis, the data was organized into content categories
generated by the questioning route in order to provide a more systematic presentation of

the viewer’s sensemaking process, as noted in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.1: Content Categories

 

 

 

 

 

CATEGORY Identification of patriarchy and patriarchal
ONE: structures.

CATEGORY Specific examples of where and how patriarchy
TWO: is evidenced in the discourse.

CATEGORY Participant reaction to the criminal aspects of
THREE: the case.

CATEGORY Participant reactions to the legal aspects of
FOUR: the case.

CATEGORY Attitudes about the relationships between the
FIVE: characters in the text.

 

CATEGORY SIX: Shifts in assertions about the intended reading
of the text that result from viewing the
conclusion of the episode, including comments
that re-connect with specific reSponses offered
earlier by participants about the events and
characters of the story world.

CATEGORY Shifts in assertions made after thinking about-
SEVEN: the episode in its entirety, including those
responses that return to questions asked
earlier in the focus group interview.

 

 

 

 

 

The second level of analysis includes identifying the shifting or “wandering”
attitudes and opinions that viewer’s asserted when engaging the text In doing so, the

ability and willingness of viewers to assert a patriarchal point of view as the story unfolds

87

is identified. Responses are further examined to see if viewers identified narratives in the

text that resisted this point of view.

Summary

The method discussed here is useful in collecting data that helps researchers
understand how viewers make sense of a televisual text Focus group interviews are a
valuable tool for understanding how assumed subject position of a text can guide a
viewer to assert a particular point of view while engaging it. It is also an ideal tool for
I feminist researchers because it allows participants to articulate and discuss ideas in their
own words and on their own terms. In this study, focus group interviews not only
enables viewers to share the dominant point of view they assert when viewing the Law &
Order text, but also allows them to assert points of view that may challenge this dominant
subject position.

The next chapter reviews the data generated by the focus group interviews. These
results will indicate if participants assert a masculist-centered patriarchal position when
viewing the text The results will also identify additional points of view from which they
are interpreting the text, including those that challenge the dominant patriarchal narrative

discourse.

88

CHAPTER 6

RESULTS

Focus group interviews were conducted to permit viewers to voice their reactions

about the Law & Order text. The data generated from these interviews was recorded and

is being introduced in this chapter. Participant’s reactions to Humiliation are analyzed to

see if (a) participants assert a patriarchal dominant reading when engaging the text; and

(b) they become resistive readers, providing opposing interpretations of the Law & Order

discourse. To provide a more organized presentation of the results, content categories

have been generated from the questioning route. These seven categories include

1.

2..

defining patriarchy and patriarchal structures;

examples of patriarchy in the discourse;

reactions to the criminal aspects of case;

reactions to the legal aspects of case;

attitudes about relationships in text;

shifts in assertions about the intended reading of the text following conclusion of
episode; and

shifts in assertions about aspects of the text as a result of thinking about the episode in

its entirety.

Comments about the linguistic, pictorial, and musical narratives are folded into

corresponding categories to provide a more complete understanding of the participants’

assertions about the narrative spaces generated by the discourse. If a specific element or

event in the text prompted similar remarks throughout the interviews, a sample comment

89

that best reflects the over all reactions of participants was recorded in the corresponding
table. Comments were also subcategorized in order to reflect the main ideas that define
each category as identified by the interview participants.
W

Out of the forty-nine women who participated in the study, forty are
. White/Caucasian. (See Appendix A.) Six participants are African-American, two are
Asian, and one participant identifies herself as Latina. Thirty-eight of these women
reported that they had never seen an episode of Law & Order, or that they had only seen
one or two episodes in their lifetime. Two participants reported watching an episode
once or twice a month, and two participants reported watching the show weekly. Only
five participants stated that they watched episodes of Law & Order several days a week.
Among all the participants, only one woman indicated that she was familiar with

Humiliation, but stated that she had only seen part of the episode and had not seen the

conclusion.

 

Most of the women who participated in the study asserted that the way they made
sense of the text was guided by what they argued to be a “male point of view’. However,
several women rejected the idea of gender based patriarchy as a guiding force behind the
construction of the discourse space, stating that they did not think it was “necessarily a
gender issue”. Other participants did not reject the notion that the text reflected a
predominantly male point of view, but argued that it was a combination of factors,

~ including gender, race, class, and age, that guided their sensemaking process.

 

Participant’s definitions of patriarchy were offered without using the specific term
“patriarchy” or ‘patriarchal structures’. Instead, they were embedded in their comments
indicating attitudes and beliefs about gender relationships they see on television, as well
as the attitudes and beliefs about gender relationships they possessed based on prior
experiences in their personal lives. There was a strong sense among many of the viewers
that there was an unequal power relationship between men and women throughout the
text. When-reviewing the data, it was found that participant’s interpretations of these
unequal power relationships consisted of comments (1) characterizing the television show
as patriarchal; (2) generally defining patriarchy; and (3) describing the relationship
between patriarchy and prostitution.

Table 6.1: Definipg Patriarchy and Patriarchal structures

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses
Catggories
Show as ' Show ‘based around guys...”
patriarchal ' “They don’t show many women. ..” -

° "T here are more men than women in the show”.

0 “Men are more dominant than women in the show”

' “I think this show really delves around a weak woman...”
General ' "The men are macho. . .”
definitions 0 “Men see women as objects. ..she’s just a trophy”.
of 0 “Men judging women by physical appearance is typical
patriarchy behavior.”

0 “Women must work harder to prove themselves at work

because of stereotypes.”
0 “Women have emotional responses to problems, men do
not”.

Patriarchy 0 “Relationships between women and their “johns” is a power
and issue, because women are always in a less powerful position
prostitution then that of men. . .”

' “Women are there to serve men”.

' “Men don’t think going to a prostitute is a bigdeal. . .”

 

 

 

91

Participants suggested that men “dominated” women because men outnumber the
women in the episode. For example, “Liz,” along with several other focus group
participants observed that “all the cops on the street were male. ..”, which, in her opinion,
reflected the balance of power men have over women in society. Viewers drew upon
their general feelings and opinions about gender issues as they interpreted character
behavior. “Gina” argued that women “men bash” because of the patriarchal or “macho”
behaviors of men, some of which are depicted on the show, “. . .so, be (Dr. Danforth)

. judges women by physical appearance.. .she (Julia Danforth) could very well be an
object. ..the trophy wife”. Meanwhile, many participants, including “Leslie,” argued that
the gender stereotyping of women impedes their job performance. According to “Leslie,”
Lieutenant Van Buren’s presence in the text characterizes this problem, “ ...having a
position where she’s been boss she maybe has to, maybe she feels like she’s got to work
harder because she is a woman and there’s already stereotyping of women’s ability to do
the jobs that traditionally men have done...” “Euny” added that a woman’s job
performance was also affected by the idea that a woman’s approach to a problem is
“more emotional”.

Prostitution was identified by most of the viewers as an occupation that is
motivated by the patriarchal position that assumes that women are subordinate to men.
“.. .[I]t’s still like the whole power issue, like women are there to serve the men, and it
just keeps putting them in a lower place. ..” said one participant, who argued that men
who solicit prostitutes are not viewed as negatively as the women they are soliciting. As

a result, many sympathetically argued that the prostitutes were, in effect, victims of this

gender-based patriarchal structure. However, all the women in the group did not share
this interpretation. “Lori” laughed as she announced her disinterest in Gwyn George’s
demise, “I really don’t care that the prostitute died. I know that sounds mean, but I
don’t. . .”. When asked by other viewers to explain her attitude, she stated, “When you
have a job like that, when you know that you are probably going to die or asking to die, I
don’t feel bad for you”.

The responses recorded in Table 6.2 indicate specific events in the Law & Order
text participants interpreted as examples of a patriarchal dominance. These televisual
events are characterized by the events in the story world that the characters in the text
discussed, and how they discussed them. Both iconic and gestural narratives are also
identified. Most of the responses included in Table 6.2 are reactions to how male
characters voiced opinions that contributed to a patriarchal reading of the Law & Order
narrative. For example, “Melissa” reacted to the words being used by the police officers,
stating that “the language that they used to talk about the prostitutes and stuff was really
vulgar.” “Jacquelyn” added another perspective to the discussion, noting that the men
being questioned about soliciting prostitutes are “not ashamed at all” of their behavior.
This particular comment sparked questions from several viewers about the legality of
prostitution.

Briscoe’s attitude towards prostitution was also interpreted as gender-biased,
which prompted some negative reactions to his opinions about marital infidelity and
hiring prostitutes, “. ..he said after the honeymoon, you know, everything just kind of
goes like to hell from there. . .to him it’s no big deal”. However, some of the women

were not as willing to include Detective Curtis in this criticism, as one woman stated, “I

93

Table 6.2: Specific Examples of Patriarchy in Law & Order: Humiliation

Sub- Sample Interview Responses

Categpries

Prostitution 0 Male cops discussing and treating prostitutes in a manner
that “disrespects, degrades, and objectifies them” during the
opening sequence.

' “The police seemed to say that because she was a prostitute
she couldn’t be raped. That just isn’t true”.

° Dr. Danforth maintained a power relationship over Gwyn
George by not giving her his name.

' Detective Briscoe’s and other men’s attitude towards men
cheating on their wives and soliciting prostitute, “It’s no big
deal...”

' Dr. Danforth tells detectives that he has a beautiful wife, and
therefore has no need for soliciting a prostitute. . . “She’s like
a trophy...”

° The prostitutes go to jail, and the men (johns) don’t”.

' Prostitute takes off blouse in front of Kincaid, exposing a red
brassiere. . . “Gratuitous change of clothes...”

Women care ' Detective Briscoe unwilling to pursue investigation “because

 

 

 

more about Gwyn George is a prostitute”.
the 0 “She (Lieut) had to force them to investigate the case.. .”
prostitutes ° Lieutenant Van Buren’s attitude towards death of prostitute
then the is “impacted by her gender and rank”. . . “It’s her job to
men care...”
' Kincaid’s attitude towards death of prostitute is more
personal...” -

° Male District Attorneys appears to feel more may for Dr.
Danforth then the murdered prostitute.
Depiction of 0 “Dead prostitute was seen as ‘a dead dog’”.

 

women in ‘ Females(V an Buren, Kincaid) give orders, but men are more
episode dominant
' “She (Van Buren) has to use humor and sarcasm to defend
her position.”

° Julia Danforth is presented as a “blonde bimbo”, “weak”,
“floaty”, and “stupid”... “The camera was always close up
on her expressions”

 

 

 

 

guess my attitude toward [Curtis] changed a little bit when I saw some of his values

coming through, at least with respect for his wife, and how he felt bad for the wife of the

guy that was getting prostitutes”. “Diana” noted that Curtis also voiced his support for
the investigation when he admitted that it was a “. . .homicide, just like any other”.

Viewers also identified linguistic cues in the narrative that suggested the women
working within the criminal justice system appeared to care more about the resolution of
the crime then their male counterparts. The reactions of Lieutenant Van Buren and Clare
Kincaid’s towards their male colleagues’ indifference to the crime suggested to some
participants that the two women appear to take a special interest in seeking justice for
Gwyn George. The Lieutenant’s interest in solving the murder is highlighted, according
to some participants, when she orders her detectives to proceed with the investigation. “In
the beginning”, stated “Alexis,, “when he was talking about going to lunch. ..she was
like, kind of yelling at him in a way, it seemed like she was doing that maybe because she
was like the woman”. However, other participants interpreted the Lieutenant’s efforts to
impose authority over the two detectives as being counterproductive. “Alyssa” agreed
that, as the superior, the Lieutenant was trying to be “dominant”. However, she felt that
her use of sarcasm when addressing the detectives took away from her authority, “I think
that if she just told them directly you have to do this, you have to do that, I don’t drink
they’d like her as much.. .she’s more feminine-towards them. It’s almost like she’s not
really their boss...” “Heather” argued that Van Buren had to be a “smart ass” to get her
point across, suggesting she had “ to take a different route to be the authority figure.
They just don’t seem to have a lot of respect for her.” “Becky” echoed this sentiment,
remarking that “she just couldn’t say ‘do this because I told you to’.”

Kincaid’s conversations with her colleagues in the District Attomey’s office

caused some of the participants to question her “dominance” as well. While “Julie” felt

95

that Kincaid’s image was strong “because she admitted she was wrong and wanted to fix
the case”, other participants argue that the way the detectives and the DA8 discussed the
case with her indicates that they were actually “working against her” instead of
supporting her efforts. “Rachel” pointed out that Kincaid appeared to have “some kind of
authority” over the detectives, but her authority was demeaned when Briscoe made a
comment about her breasts. According to her, “it was kind of like them saying, ‘Oh well,
you’re a woman, I’m just going to bring that up again so that you know that you don’t
really have authority over me’.” Schiff and McCoy’s expression of sympathy for Dr.
Danforth upon his arrest was also perceived as “really degrading to all women”.

When asked about production elements they may have noted during this part of
the interview, participants began to identify both iconic and gestural narrative elements.
“Camille” noted that there were “a lot of medium shots, a lot of seeing a part of one
character and then another characters there, and how they’re conversing. . .”. “Alexis”
argued that Briscoe did not smile a lot, and is “really stern” when he discussed the case.
Yet, “Gina” found that when Briscoe made quips about Gwyn George’s death, camera
angles were used to make him appear amusing. She stated that “when [Detective
Briscoe] was on the stand and he said ‘She would never make $2000 a night, she doesn’t
work for Heidi Fleiss’ . . .[there was] a quick shot over to the jury and everybody was
laughing.” Other participants noted that the camera “made them focus” on Julia
Danforth’s expressions, stating that she “seemed confused” and that “she always had that
weird smile...”

A medium shot on Gwyn George’s roommates undressing in front of Clare

Kincaid prompted a reaction from many of the focus group participants. Viewers

questioned the necessity of the visual image for their understanding of the discourse.
“Kate” speculated that she didn’t “know if they were trying to make it like, ‘Oh, this is
what prostitutes do. You know, they’re not women, they’re just whores. They just strip

down all the time’.” Others interpreted the choice of including it in the scene by simply

stating that it made the show “definitely a show for guys”.

 

The responses in the first two questionnaire—generated categories assert a gender-
based patriarchy based on masculine ideas as the dominant subject position of the text.
The next two categories, which organize participant reactions to both the criminal and the
legal aspects of the case, identify how viewers make sense of the events in the story
world within the context of this patriarchy. Category 3 organizes those responses that
appeared throughout discussions of the events surrounding the criminal investigation.
Participant comments indicate that they were thinking about the crime more in-depth, and
as a result were identifying details about the characters in the story world. Remarks were.
made about Gwyn George, McCracken, and other characters in the story world that were
regarded as suspicious by the detectives.

During these discussions viewers began to rethink earlier ideas they had about
Gwen George’s death. As participants began to piece together the narrative some of the
ideas about the crime that were offered earlier in the interview were rejected. In
particular, events surrounding Julia Danforth prompted some reevaluations of earlier

opinions.

Table 6.3: Participant Reactions to the Criminal Investigation

 

 

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses
Catgories
Following ' The detectives investigating the homicide originally leads to
the leads the belief that Gwyn George was blackmailing Dr. Danforth.
offered by “She saw a guy with MD plates and charged him more...”
the ' Shop Owner (McCracken) appears suspicious at beginning
Detectives because “he clearly does not want the prostitutes near his
while store”. He also provides conflicting stories about his
investigating whereabouts on the night of the murder. “He changed his
the case story. . .”
° Expectations that Roscoe (Gwyn George’s pimp) will be in
some way connected to her death. “He was a bit shaky. . .”
0 Homeless man rouses some suspicion because “...they
(police) are too casual about his innocence”.
0 Accountant appears suspicious, because “he stands to lose a
lot of money if Danforth goes down”.
Suspicious Julia Danforth arouses suspicion when interviewed by
regarding Detectives:
Julia ' “Her reaction when she can’t find the gun was weird...”
Danforth as ° “She had a “flaky” approach.
a result of ' “When Julia says “What money?” “She seemed to make it
the up as she went along”.
narrative. Julia Danforth’s reaction to her husband’s conviction
(Causes arouses suspicion, particularly after being unable to produce
shifts in evidence explaining the missing money from the ATM:
attitudes ' “I felt that she was guilty”.
and 0 “Husband’s attorney looked surprised at her answers on the
opinions stand”.
about ' “ I’m thinking that her naivete covers her motive”.
events) Julia Danforth’s conversation with Kincaid also adds to the '

 

suspicion:

' “When Julia says to Kincaid seriously ‘I don’t think he did
it’ it was the only time she seemed sincere. When she
discussed him cheating on her she was more emotional:
‘What am I supposed to do?’ It seemed to indicate
something.”

0 “She had a creepy smile”. “She seems like she’s
lying. . .isn’t convincing”.

' “She is obviously staging it ATM Withdrawals, phone
calls, purchases, missing gun.. .it’s not convincing”.

0 “I think that Julia Danforth KNOWS that Dr. Danforth did
it”.

' I think she (Julia) did it!”

 

98

 

When making sense of the events surrounding the trial and conviction of Dr.
Danforth, puzzled expressions worn on the faces of the attorneys and on Julia Danforth’s
face served as pictorial cues for some viewers. “His wife’s involved somehow...” stated
“Bethany,” who noted that while the detectives had some good leads, they appeared to be
missing something. Others confessed that while they were not sure of the reason, they
kept wondering about Julia Danforth, “I keep coming back to the wife, like all along I
just kind of get this creepy sense from her...she’s got something kind of up her sleeve.”
Julia Danforth’s reaction to her husband’s arrest also suggested to many that she was
. somehow involved, “I was expecting her, when they found him guilty, to stand up and
say, ‘It was me!’...They’re just kind of overlooking something, they’re not looking
deeply enough into something.”

As participants listed the events leading up to his arrest, some of the women
began to speculate about specific events in the text that appeared to be redirecting their
understanding of events, “I think that [Gwyn] called the doctor from the pay phone.
Then the lady (Julia) followed her husband. Then he went there to meet the prostitute.

When he left she gave her the $2000 and killed her. Told her to leave her alone or

whatever. . . ”

 

In Category 4, the events relating to the prosecution of the case prompted
participants to reevaluate certain details they noted earlier in the text “[T he detectives]
are getting evidence, and evidence, and evidence, and they’re getting ideas from it all, but
Clare was the only one who said that there’s something strange about this”, said one

woman. Participants also noted Kincaid’s efforts to convince wimesses to provide more

detailed testimony. For instance, a participant claimed that she was unfairly manipulating
an antique dealer, claiming that “she blackmails the guy there about the sales tax
bureau. .” Kincaid’s actions, according to participants, prompted them to rethink earlier
ideas about the case and about her ability to try it.

Perceptions of the crime began to change when Kincaid successfully convicted
Dr. Danforth, and continued to change during the events that followed. Because of her
facial expression following the announcement of the verdict, as noted in Table 6.4,
participants began to question the resolution of the case. “I don’t think she was happy”
was a comment heard following this specific scene. Kincaid’s subsequent decision to
revisit the case altered earlier opinions about her personality. “She seems to have more
instinct. . .”, and in some cases, more respect, as “Vanessa” indicated, “.. .it’s good she

followed her mind. . .that takes a lot of courage to stand up and do the right thing and not

Table6.4:ReactionstotheLegalAspectsoftheCase

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses

Categories

Reasons for ' “She (Kincaid) takes the case more personally because she is
Kincaid’s a woman and young”.

desire to try 0 “Lack of support from male District Attorneys eggs her on”.
the case ‘ “She seems to favor the women (Gwyn George and Julia
against Dr. Danforth) and wants to find justice for them.. .The men
Danforth appear to support the men...”

° “Kincaid stands for the ‘female point of view’ “. . .she has the
most instinct amonLthe characters”.
Conviction ° “Kincaid’s expression was strange. . .

 

 

 

 

 

of Dr. 0 (Kincaid) “didn’t seem happy when they found him guilty.
Danforth Like she made a mistake or something”.

0 (Julia) was unprepared on the stand, “I think (Kincaid) is not

buying:

Attitudes at 0 Kincaid must defend the need to try Dr. Danforth as the male
District DAs appear to be sympathetic. “He felt sorry for they guy.”
Attorney’s ° “McCoy just didn’t think there was enough evidence. . .”
Office 0 “McCoy didn’t seem to care either way...”

 

100

won'y about what you are gonna look like”.

The tension between Kincaid’s commitment to the case and McCoy’s attitude to
towards the case was an issue for some participants. “Katy” interpreted McCoy’s attitude
towards both Kincaid and the trial as professional disinterest, “I think he’s like, ‘I don’t
want to waste my time, so if you want to do it then do it.’ It didn’t seem like he even
cared either way.” A few participants supported his decision, claiming that the case was
“circumstantial.” “He didn’t want to waste his time with it because he didn’t think they’d
win, argued “Erin”. Once the doctor was convicted, Kincaid’s feelings about the
resolution of the case led some participants to re-evaluate the detectives’ and McCoy’s
efforts:

I think [Kincaid] felt like nobody else was willing to do the footwork,

to fill in the holes. And she felt like at that point it was her job to

take over and to do that She had to fill in the empty spaces that weren’t

taken care of by the detectives. . .because [McCoy] made it sound like

the case was basically impossible...

Some of the participants argued that Kincaid’s strong interest in the case was a result of
her “favoring women” over men, stating that if Gwen George had been a man she would
have been disinterested. Others suggested that it was not simply gender, but her age that
influenced her as well, arguing that her youth influenced her decision to “take the case
more personally”. “Melissa” argued that it was both Kincaid’s age and her inexperience
that impacted her behavior, “I think maybe [Kincaid’s gender] has something to do with
it, and I also think it’s because she’s the youngest of all three of them”. Julie questioned

this as well, stating that “maybe both in the sense that she’s a woman, and she’s young,

so it’s kind of like a double negative”. But for “Kristen,” Kincaid’s actions were the

101

 

result of “not having support from the two men” in the District Attomey’s office,

particularly that of Jack McCoy.

 

The relationships between the characters in the story world reflect a subject
position from which a narrative can be read. Here, participants offered interpretations
about all the relationships they felt contributed to the dominant point of view reflected in
the Law & Order discourse. In particular, they noted a pattern among the relationships
between the characters that supported their patriarchal reading of the televisual text

Because most of the focus group participants had limited or no previous viewing
experiences with the Law & Order narrative, their comments about the relationships
between characters in the story world were not segregated into primary or “regular”
characters and secondary characters in the show. As noted in Table 6.5, their remarks
include descriptions of those relationships they felt were significant to their
understanding of the over all text.

Participants noted that the police officers had a more congenial relationship with
an unemployed homeless man on the street than the women employed as prostitutes did.
The negative relationship between the two groups was identified as a major influence on
the relationship between Lieutenant Van Buren and Detectives Briscoe and Curtis. This
was noted when the Lieutenant pressured the two men to take the case more seriously.
However, viewers interpreted this relationship in different ways. Some argued that it is
the Lieutenant’s gender that required her to exert this pressure, “if the detectives were

women, the whole thing would be going a lot differently. . .”; while others felt that

102

Table 6.5: Relationships between the Characters in the Text

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses

Categories

Cops/ ' “Cops made fun of the prostitutes, but had sympathy for the
prostitutes homeless man.

0 “Police degraded, insulted, and demeaned prostitutes”.

Detectives ' “They don’t seem to have a lot of respect for the
/Lieutenant Lieutenant..the way they talk to her. . .”

0 “Her rank allows dominance over the detectives, but she still
has to fight for respect because she’s a woman”. “She must
be a smart ass” (to get them to do something). “She has to
use sarcasm and humor”

0 I don’t think her being a woman has anything to do with
it...it’s her job. . .” (Telling them what to do)

' “I’m sure they don’t like the idea of having_a female boss...”

Detective ’ “Curtis seems more idealistic. It’s like Briscoe should be the
Briscoe/ mentor, but is instead indifferent. . .”

Detective 0 “Curtis reflects new way of thinking [about women], while
Curtis Briscoe is old fashioned”.

° “Because Curtis is young and has been on the job less time

he’s less callous than the more experienced Briscoe.
Gwyn ° “Her step dad was the only one who cared. . .”
George ° “She didn’t seem to really care that she was dead because
Imother she’s aprostitute”
Briscoe! ' When (Briscoe) pointed to her breasts and said “You mean
Kincaid those aren’t real...? That was really unprofessional...”
“That was unnecessary...”

° “. . .she had some kind of authority over them. . .they had to
get her permission for that, and it was kind of like them
saying, ‘Oh well, you’re a woman...I’m just going to bring
that up again so that you know that you don’t really have
authority over me.”

McCoy] ' “McCoy is a like a father figure”

Kincaid ' “McCoy talks down to Kincaid. .

Kincaid! 8. “Kincaid uses her femininity to get information from other

Female prostitutes. . .”

suspects ' “She (Julia Danforth) said “you should understand” to Clare
‘cause she’s a woman...why didn’t she look at McCoy?”
“She automatically assumed that since she’s a woman she
can relate to her...”

Dr. ' “She (Julia) says she has to keep on a smile all the time and

Danforth fix him breakfast and do what ever he wants. . .”

[Julia ° “When he goes out and cheats. . .”

Danforth 0 “Her marriage needed to seem perfect it wasn’t by any

 

means...”

 

103

 

it was her rank in the police department that prompted her behavior. The relationship
was discussed within the context of how much respect the detectives had for the
Lieutenant. “Melissa” felt that because the Lieutenant allowed the detectives to talk to
her disrespectfully, she appeared as the weaker party in that relationship, “. . .her job is
like a high kind of position. But then the way she let Briscoe talk to her kinda’ makes me
feel like she’s kind of meek...l don’t think she’s very strong”. Others disagreed, saying
that they respected her because, as “Diana” stated, “[she] doesn’t let them walk on her”.

Participants also felt that the attitudes held by each detective define their
relationship with each other. Briscoe’s attitudes towards women were defined as “old
fashioned”, while Curtis’ attitudes about women are interpreted as “nicer” and more
progressive. The age and experience of each of the detectives, according to many of the
women in the group, also explained why they felt the way they did. “[Curtis] kind of
doesn’t want to come out and say that the murder didn’t matter because he’s younger and
he hasn’t maybe seen as much as the older detective”. Some of the women make clear, .
however, that despite the fact that Briscoe might appear more dominant than Curtis
because of his chauvinist attitude, Curtis is still a strong man, arguing that his opinions
about women didn’t make him “seem like a wus either. . .”

The prior relationship between Gwyn George and her mother, Mrs. Washington,
was important to participants as well. Because it was revealed that George’s stepfather,
Jaleel Washington, had posted bond for her on previous occasions, some of the
participants felt that he was the only one who really cared for the woman. As a result,
they speculated, Gwyn George turned to prostitution. Note that this interpretation was

made despite the fact that he was never actually seen or heard from throughout the show.

104

 

Others argued that Mrs. Washington’s lack of emotional response to the news of her
daughter’s death seemed to indicate a lack of love for her daughter because she was a
prostitute. For others, such as “Camille” and “Leslie”, Mrs. Washington’s reaction was
interpreted as one of relief because her daughter’s life “wasn’t going to get any better in
the world”. The fact that George’s mother was caring for her son was also an indicator of
her mother’s love for her daughter. Viewers interpreted the conversation between
detectives and Mrs. Washington about George as a forum that provided the dead woman
with an identity in the story world. “It made her seem more like a person” because
“when the detectives left, the case wasn’t just about a prostitute any more”.

Briscoe’s relationship with Kincaid was defined by some as patriarchal because of
the comments he made about Kincaid’s physical appearance. To them, his words
minimized her status in the workplace. Others interpreted his comments as “friendly”,
suggesting that the relationship between the two was one of joking and understanding,
and not one that is defined by patriarchy. As “Kelly” stated: I think besides the silly
comments she holds her own for the most part...” “Rachel” agreed, suggesting that
Kincaid “blew it off in a way that seemed like she probably dealt with that all the time...”

As noted in Table 6.5, some viewers characterized McCoy’s relationship with
Kincaid as one of “father and daughter”. According to this interpretation, their gender,
age, and experience defines the relationship. For some, McCoy acting as a father figure
indicated a position of power, as “Camille” pointed out, “I thought he was condescending
at times, like ‘You think you can do it? You do it Find what you’re worth little girl”.
“Kelly” noted that this power relationship can be seen visually during one scene, where

Kincaid is sitting at the desk and he was “like on top of the desk, so he was above her. . .”.

105

Some participants, while recognizing this inequality, also felt that this power relationship
did not necessarily render Kincaid weak, arguing that “she still fights” with her male
colleagues. A handful of participants did not find their relationship to be unequal,
claiming that “they just had opposing viewpoints”. The fact that Kincaid approached
McCoy with doubts after her success convicting Dr. Danforth did not diminish this idea,
as “Kelly” explained, “I think that’s the kind of thing that she’s just seeking advice, like
any co—worker would. . .”.

Viewers offered various interpretations of Kincaid’s relationship with other
. women in the story world. Julie asserted that Kincaid used her gender to “connect” with
the women she questioned, “I think she used her femininity, when she went to talk to the
other hookers, and she was kinda like saying, ‘C’mon, you can tell me, I’m another
woman’”. Others noted that because of her gender, Kincaid is able to identify Gwyn
George’s roommates, which enabled her to obtain information that the detectives failed to
get earlier, as “Heather” points out, “It’s kind of like women helping women. . . you know
if there’s a bunch of macho cops and the way they treat women, you see that a lot. . .” .
Ironically, while she supported Kincaid’s efforts to relate to the prostitutes. “Heather”
disliked Julia Danforth’s assumption that Kincaid would relate to her because of their
gender, “I didn’t like when she was like ‘you should understand’ to Clare ‘cause she’s a
woman. . .well why didn’t she look at Mr. McCoy?”

Many participants interpreted Julia Danforth’s need to be understood by Kincaid
as a result of her husband’s inability to understand her, because “.. .he didn’t make her
feel loved or anything in their marriage...” A few participants also had some

reservations about Julia Danforth’s marriage philosophies, and interpreted them as being

106

“needy” because “when he didn’t bring her flowers or something it was awful. . .she
sounds like one of those people that are so dependent”. For “Lori”, the marriage was
ultimately not about Julia Danforth’s fulfillment, but instead about pleasing Dr. Danforth,

“her whole attitude about being happily married was probably just to make him happy...”

 

The sixth category is comprised of those responses that reflect the viewer’s
shifting attitudes that result from viewing the conclusion of Humiliation. As Table 6.6
indicates, these shifts were most evident when participants viewed Julia Danforth’s
confession to the murder. The sympathy felt earlier for Julia Danforth (in relation to her
marital problems) was tapered somewhat by the knowledge that she committed a murder,
“I can see why she did it, but it’s wrong...I can see what she might be thinking, but she
shouldn’t have followed through on that...” The fact that she presented herself as a
victim angered some of the viewers, who felt her efforts to maintain her image as the “the
perfect wife” was an attempt to make her seem more sympathetic to the viewer,

“.. .people will be like, kinda like feel sorry for her in a way.”

As seen in Table 6.6, sentiments expressed about Julia Danforth were
accompanied by some expressions of sympathy for Gwyn George, not simply because
she is a murder victim, but also because Julia Danforth targeted her and not her husband.
Said “Alexis”, “she should’ve left the girl out of it and done something to him. . . just

something to get back at him for cheating. . .it’s not her fault that he paid.”

107

Table 6.6: Shifts in Attitudes at the Conclusion of the Episode

 

 

 

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses

Categories

Feelings ‘ Sympathy for Julia Danforth vs. intolerance for killing

about Julia another individual: “She needed to do something else. . .”

Danforth ' “She had everybody in her entire life fooled about who she
was. . .”

Feelings ‘ “Gwyn George was just doing her job.. .”

about the ' “The prostitute, that’s what she’s doing for a living”.

murder of a ' “It’s not her fault he paid...”

prostitute

 

 

Speculations arose as to why Julia Danforth killed George instead of confronting her
husband. For “Rachel”, her choice to kill rendered her weak, as she asked, “why didn’t
she leave him? [. ..]this is the way that she could maintain her place of being like a really
feminine, assertive woman. . .”. The fact that Julia Danforth chose to commit the crime
evoked a strong sense of frustration from “Diana,” “I’m kind of annoyed.. .that they’d
have this poor, emotionally distraught woman who was just torn to pieces when her
husband couldn’t keep it in his pants”. Yet, for “Janna,” Julia Danforth’s actions
suggested that she was strong, “I think Julia is a strong person because she didn’t come
outright and confront him and take the easy way out and divorce him; She plotted and
planned.”

As the understanding of the crime and her reasons for committing it was further
discussed, some viewers began to change some of the Opinions they formulated earlier in
the interview. For example, upon finding out that Julia Danforth committed the murder,
“Bethany” claimed that she “felt sorrier for the wife than [she] did earlier in the show”.
However, after further discussion with other women in the group, she admitted to

changing her mind.

108

The more I think about...all the pre-meditation, like right initially I

felt bad, but now that I think about it more, I don’t know that I feel so

bad when I think that she took all that money out, and she really did

have it all set up so that she could frame him.
Other perceptions of Julia Danforth shifted dramatically after participants spent time
discussing the televisual text as a whole. The remarks that identify this shift in attitude
are discussed in the final category.

{gear a ‘ II ° .- rum 'v:~ =_i.' In: .I' put, .I' r.t.c' n' 1' 'i

There were many opinions formulated about Julia Danforth early in the focus
group interview that were challenged once viewers had an opportunity to think about the
whole text, and not just the segments that had been presented to them. For example,
“Liz” was one of many viewers who argued that Julia Danforth was an intelligent
woman, and not the “flighty bimbo” they took her to be when first engaging the text,
because of the complexity of the crime

I think she’s pretty damn smart. “Cause she did everything. She screwed

up at the end. But phone calls? She had everything planned. And no

one suspected anything, except for that one lawyer.
“Melissa” agreed with this assessment, claiming that“ the fact that she had it all plotted
out makes her really like calculating and smart”. However, she did not define this
intelligence as a positive thing

[W]hen I had an idea that I thought it might be her, then my sympathy

kind of went away, and I kinda’ looked at her negatively. I looked at her

really because she was conniving...
To others, the conviction of Dr. Danforth was seen as accidental, and not a result of Julia

Danforth’s intelligent planning. “1 don’t think she ever expected anyone to believe it was

her husband”, said one participant, “. . .I think that once they camped and found his car

109

was there then she kind of tried to use it to her advantage, but she was kind of making the

story up.”

Table 6.7: Shifts in Attitude after Thinking about the Episode in its Entirety

 

 

Sub- Sample Interview Responses

Categories

Feelings ' “I don’t know that I feel so bad when I think that she took all
about Julia that money out, and she really did have it all set up so that
Danforth she could frame him...”

0 “She had people fooled by her naivete, but was actually
smart. . .she definitely was not a dumb blonde.”

° “She (Julia Danforth) was actually more dominant because
she was framing him (Dr. Danforth)...”She was more
powerful in that relationship for a while, until she was
caught...”

' I don’t think she was ever out to put the husband in jail. . .”

Existence of ' “I don’t know if the dominance changed so much for me

 

 

 

 

Patriarchy throughout the show, but I think I feel like in the end the

in the text men ended up on top, like the doctor, he’s getting off, he’s
clear. And the other DA, he’s getting a little piece of the
pie”

 

At the conclusion of the episode, discussions also returned to the subject of male
dominance in the text. For example, “Camille”, “Tanya”, and “Leslie” argued that
McCoy was able to take over the case at the very end. “ He ended up getting into the
case, getting a little bit of glory for helping...when it all came down to when the show
was all done the men kind of came in and they swept things over and they were there”.
As a result of this, some women who previously rejected male dominance as the
dominant point of view reflected in the Law & Order narrative began to interpret the text
from a patriarchal standpoint. Other women simply cited this as more evidence in the
narrative that supported their patriarchal reading of the text But despite the conclusions

and subsequent discussions, a few women continued to assert that gender-based

110

patriarchy was not predominant in the text “Kate” suggested, “I think there are far many
more shows .. .where men are the dominant ones, and the women are just like the butt of

the joke. I don’t think this show is as bad as many I’ve seen, so I don’t think it’s that big

of an issue in this show”.

 

While some participants completely asserted or rejected the notion that the Law
& Order narrative was being told from a gender-based patriarchal point of view, others
argued that it was a combination of factors, including gender, that guided their patriarchal
reading of the text As discussed in Chapter 2, many contemporary definitions of
patriarchy incorporate issues of race and class as well as gender. By doing so, gender is
recognized as only one of many forces that impact unequal power relationships in a
political, social, and/or economic system. In this case, however, some viewers identified
issues of gender, race, class, and age that defined the patriarchal structure that guided
their sense making process when engaging the Law & Order text While some of these
definitions were offered when specifically asked about male dominance and patriarchy,
most were offered as they made sense of the dynamic events in the story world

Table 6.8 identifies some of responses offered by participants that identify this

broader definition of patriarchy. Each of the comments have been organized according to
their references to race, class, and age, and subcategories have been created to indicate

the context in which these statements were offered.

111

Table 6.8: Issues of Gender, Race, Class, and Age

 

 

 

 

RACE ' “Prostitutes are primarily minorities”.

' “An African American Lieutenant , especially a woman, is a
rarity”.

° The “Lieutenant’s attitude” is a result of both her race and
gendet

° The police’s attitude towards the dead prostitute “is impacted
more by the prostitute’s gender than her race”.

0 “It seems that the bigger problem is that “white upstanding
males are being called into question than the fact that a
pmstimtggot murdered.”

CLASS Class, men, and prostitution

' “Men can screw around on wives because they have
money...”

' Getting a prostitute “seems socially acceptable...”

0 “It seems easier to get women with money”.

' Briscoe assumed that just because (Dr. Danforth) was very
educated that he couldn’t have killed a prostitute”.

Class and prostitution

0 “If it were an upper-class murder, there would be more
concern. . .”

' “I’m sure it made her feel worse with a prostitute”.

° “It seems that the bigger problem is that “white upstanding
males are being called into question than the fact that a
prostitute got murdered”

° Prostitution as social issue: “People fall on hard times; are
social implications. . .This is not a consideration here. . .these
women are seen as a drag on society.. .”

Class and divorce

0 (Julia) “didn’t divorce Dr. Danforth because she liked her
wealthy lifestyle”

° “In her social rank, divorce my be unacceptable”.

AGE DETECTIVES

 

' Curtis reflects new way of thinking [about women], Briscoe is
old fashioned.

' Curtis is young and on job less time, is less callous [about the
death of prostitutes] than the more experienced Briscoe.

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

' Kincaid is young, is at a disadvantage being an inexperienced
young woman '

' McCoy is older, and more like a father figure to Kincaid

° Kincaid, because her gender and age, needs to prove herself.

 

112

 

Discussions of race included the ethnic makeup of the cast as well as the criminal
justice system, “Lot’s of diversity on the show, but most of the positions of the police
officers and the chief are Caucasians and the prostitutes are minorities, and the homicide
[victim] was a minority...” “Kellie,” one of the few African American women who
participated in the study, was the first participant to openly discuss Van Buren’s race,
“[It’s an issue] that she’s a woman, she’s black, and she’s a prostitute...it’s a combination
of all of it.”

For some viewers it was not merely the fact that Gwyn George was black, but that
' her solicitors (johns) were Caucasian, that also defined the patriarchal power structure
being reflected in the text. Discussions of “whiteness” were combined with comments
offered by participants that identified class levels as variables that impacted the way
women were treated in the story world, which influenced the way the text was read. The
fact that Gwyn George’s clients and Julia Danforth were white prompted several
participants to speculate about the impact of class on Julia Danforth’s behavior. “Keng”
wondered if Julia Danforth “would have killed the woman that her husband cheated on
her with even if she was not prostitute...” “Lori” suggested that Julia Danforth’s true
motivation for killing Gwen George was a reaction to George’s social status, “ I’m sure it
made her feel worse with a prostitute, with the lowest class person, because she worked
so hard to be that trophy wife”. Interestingly, “Gina” argued that class differences
among Gwyn George and Julia Danforth made thinking about gender issues complicated
for her, “it’s hard to look at a woman’s role on this show because you have a dead

prostitute, and an upscale white woman, which are two extreme ends”.

113

“Camille”, who identified herself as an avid Law & Order viewer, noted that
while she was against prostitution personally, she could identify some of the reasons why
women choose to enter the profession, “I mean, you don’t wake up one day and decide
that you want to be a prostitute. There are certain factors in your life that causes you to
become, like whether it’s because you’re on drugs, whether it’s because you have six
children and no high school”. According to her, the episode did not delve into these
issues. Instead, participants cued into the class differences in the story world by those
characters that were higher on the social ladder. Said one participant about Dr. Danforth,
“he’s a doctor, prestigious, very well liked by all his peers. . .in a way I got this sense
from him that he can get away with anything he wants”.

Age was primarily brought up during discussions about Briscoe, as well as during
discussions about the relationship between Kincaid and McCoy. Some viewers felt that
Briscoe’s disinterest in the investigation was a result of his chauvinist Opinions about
women, but argued that his patriarchal attitude was a result of his being “older, and from .
an older generation.” Kincaid’s age was also a factor. Because she was young, McCoy
could establish a “father—daughter” relationship with her even though they are in a
professional legal environment. For some viewers, her youth was a license for both
Schiff and McCoy, as well as other members of the criminal justice system to “talk down
to her”. They also argued that her age put her in a position where she had to struggle to
prove herself, both as a woman and as a young and inexperienced prosecutor in the

criminal justice system.

114

 

Discussions of the model shown in Figure 3.3 were limited. Specific comments
were made about how the characters were being defined within the context of the
framework. For example, “Melissa” told the respondent that she “did not agree” with the
researcher’s characterization of Detective Curtis, “1 maybe think there’s like a mix. I
don’t think he. . .is as brash as Briscoe is. . .” Both “Melissa” and “Kate” also noted that
Curtis at times agreed with the Lieutenant, and at times appeared to disagree. The
majority of participants claimed that they find it difficult to apply their thoughts to a

theoretical model, stating that it was “too difficult” to make their ideas “fit.”

Summary

The results presented in this chapter indicate that the majority of the viewers of
the Law & Order text asserted that the intended reading of the text was patriarchal
because it reflected a male-dominant point of view. Participants cited examples in the
text that evidenced this patriarchy, identifying attitudes and perspectives that they had
about events and characters in the text that appeared to reinforce their patriarchal reading
of the narrative. Viewers also identified when their early ideas about the events and
characters in the text shifted as a result of viewing the conclusion of the episode, as well
as discussing, with each other, the televisual text in its entirety.

The multiple and sometimes conflicted perspectives the participants offered while
they engaged the text suggested a pauem of resisting a dominant patriarchal point of

view. In the next chapter, these narratives of resistance are identified and discussed.

115

CHAPTER 7
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study was to develop a framework that extends narrative
theory to include multiple points of view, particularly those that resist the dominant
subject position. The results of this study indicate that this initial attempt at extending
narrative theory does, in fact, recognize multiple points of view that exist in a televisual
text It also demonstrates that narrative spaces in a text can resist the dominant point of
view it is reflecting. Participants of the focus group interviews were invited to interpret
the Law J: Order text and identify the points of view that guided their interpretation. In
doing so, they provided the researcher with the opportunity to determine if they first
adopted a patriarchal point of view as the dominant subject position when viewing the
televisual text, and then how they made sense of the televisual text within an overarching
patriarchal discourse.

The majority of the young women who viewed the show asserted a gender-based
patriarchal reading, arguing that a “male point of view” was reflected in the Law & Order
i text Each of the data categories discussed in Chapter 6 provided sample remarks that
supported this assertion. However, participants also ideated subjective spaces that they
felt resisted this patriarchy. These narrative spaces challenged this unequal power

structure that was guiding their viewing experience.

116

l l' Bill 81' IEII'

A reverse discourse is a discourse that challenges a narrative’s dominant power
structure, and challenges the meaning of that power (Weedon, 1997). By opposing the
dominant power structure, the dominant discourse can gradually be taken over. Both the
textual analysis and the focus group interviews conducted here evidence a dominant
patriarchal point of view that is being reflected in Law & Order text

However, narrative spaces have been identified in the text, which supports the
assertion that a feminist point of view both co-exists and challenges the text’s dominant,
masculist subject position. This feminist narrative is embedded in the overarching
patriarchal discourse of the narrative, and does not eliminate the patriarchal structure it is
reflecting. However, in challenging the patriarchal point of view, this reverse discourse
heightens a viewer’s awareness about the patriarchally guided discourse they are
engaging.

Viewers identified seven examples of feminist narrative spaces as they discussed
various attitudes and opinions about law & Order: Humiliation. These examples
combine data from all the categories discussed in Chapter 6. Four of these narrative
spaces were identified from the various moments in the narrative where Lt Van Buren,
Mrs. Washington, the prostitutes, Clare Kincaid, and Julia Danforth were characterized as
being empowered in a patriarchal system. One feminist narrative space appears more
subtly in the text because it reflects the actions and reactions of a male character,
Detective Ray Curtis. A feminist narrative space of resistance is also identified by

remarks made about production elements in the show.

117

 

The first indicator of a narrative space that resists the dominant patriarchal
discourse is noted in the discussions about Lieutenant Van Buren’s relationship with the
detectives and her reaction to the crime. Many of the conversations Van Buren had with
the detectives were cited as examples of patriarchy in the text, as recorded in Table 6.2.
While participants recognized the patriarchal system Van Buren found herself in, (“. . .she
gives orders, but the detectives just seem to be more dominant. . .”), she evidences, to
some participants, an ability to counteract it Her sometimes—contentious relationship with
the detectives was also identified as examples of patriarchal structures in the text, as was
recorded in Table 6.5. But it was during the times that she spoke to them, notes “Tanya,”
that “she has the last word in the scene.” While some of the participants regard the
Lieutenant’s tone as “nagging” and “sarcastic,” thus taking away from her authority,
there were others that found her ability to exert leadership, regardless of her tone or
manner, as a sign of empowerment.

Van Buren’s interest in Gwyn George’s murder was also perceived as a resistive
space. While she is not necessarily able to convince the detectives that the death of
Gwyn George is important, participants recognized that she was able to maneuver the
investigation of the crime in order to seek justice for the dead woman. One participant
argued that Van Buren “didn’t really see a prostitute. . .she saw a woman that was killed”,
and that her attitude was not overpowered by the opposition offered by Lieutenant
Briscoe. As a result, some viewers recognized Van Buren as being a strong, empowered

woman, who successfully challenges the system she must work within.

118

Wanna.

While Gwyn George’s mother appeared briefly in the narrative, her presence
impacted the way participants make sense of the narrative’s discourse. According to
some of the women, it was Gwyn George’s mother, not the Lieutenant, who prompted the
detectives (particularly Briscoe), to change their attitudes about the importance of solving
the case. “Seems like once they left her mother’s they were kind of like, paid more
attention to the crime, you know trying to solve it.. .they realized she wasn’t just a
prostitute, she was like a real person”. Despite the negative attitudes the detectives have F
about prostitution, participants interpreted Mrs. Washington’s life history and the life a?
history of her daughter as a strong narrative, strong enough to reverse the way the
detectives looked at her daughter, and at the crime, in that moment.

E IJ'DII'CI' DII'BI

It is not only the female characters whose actions contribute to the narrative
spaces of feminist resistance in the Law & Order text Participants identified Detective
Ray Curtis as a character whose opinions helped guide their resistive readings. When
looking at the remarks participants offered when characterizing each of the detective’s
personalities (Table 6.7), and their attitudes about women (Table 6.5), it was evident that
participants based their opinions of each detective on the attitudes they each possessed
about women, marriage, and prostitution.

The age of each man was also important to the viewers. Many of the women
attributed Briscoe’s “traditional male”lfeelings about women to his age (“he’s like my
grandpa”) and experience on the job (“he’s been there longer”). As “Camille” noted,

“.. .that older cop was like ‘c’mon. . .every guy goes out and gets a hooker. ..and what the

119

wife doesn’t know won’t hurt her”. However, the opinions offered by Curtis challenged
those of his partner. Viewers felt that Curtis’ philosophies about life were “more
sympathetic” towards women. They acknowledged that he was willing to openly
challenge Briscoe’s attitudes about extramarital activities. Said one participant, “Curtis
has values...he was like “you know, I’ve never thought about [cheating] on my wife...”
Interpretations like these suggest that viewers ideated a narrative space that challenged

Briscoe’s comments in an effort to counter the patriarchal point of view his comments

reflected.

 

The personal opinions of each participant about the legality and morality of the
profession, as they related to prostitution, were guiding interpretations of the narrative.
Prostitution was viewed mostly negatively because it was an example of how women are
seen as subordinate to men. As indicated in the remarks recorded in Table 6.2,
prostitution is a patriarchal structure because “women are there to serve men,” leaving
them in a “less powerful position” in the relationship. However, most viewers argued
that regardless of their profession and social status, women deserved to be treated fairly,
and with respect Aside from Lori, who admitted to not respecting any prostitute, most of
the viewers were disturbed by the way the police in the story world devalued the
prostitutes they came in contact with. Participants were unwilling to judge these women
harshly regardless of their opinions about prostitution in general.

Perhaps because of this unwillingness to judge, viewers asserted that the Law &
Order narrative evidenced moments where unfair “power relationships” in which

prostitutes found themselves were being challenged. For example, during the initial

120

criminal investigation, some participants perceived Gwyn George to be a powerful player
in her relationship with Dr. Danforth when the events in the narrative initially led them to
believe that she had been blackmailing him. This is recorded in Table 6.3. Until this
view was negated, viewers ideated a narrative space that empowered her.

Meanwhile, “Julie” argued that the producers of the show made the prostitutes
appear self-empowered, stating that “. . .they make them look like they have authority
over their own lives”. While some participants rejected the notion that these women
were empowered, to “Julie,” the demeanor of the prostitutes when speaking to the
detectives and Clare Kincaid supported her opinion. She suggested that the resistance of
the prostitutes to the efforts made by members of the criminal justice system to extract
information from them during their investigation evidenced a reversal in a power
relationship. The criminal justice system, which the viewer’s defined as patriarchal,
usually controlled the prostitutes. Their reactions to the detectives and Kincaid appeared
to challenge this control. Within this context, the prostitutes are seen as being
empowered within a masculist defined space.

E IE’CI K' .1, '1 [° 1'

The relationships between Kincaid and her colleagues were as equally interesting
to the viewers as her ability to solve the crime. As noted in Table 6.5, most of the
remarks made about Kincaid’s relationships were geared towards the kind of relationship
she had with both Briscoe and McCoy. Some viewers argued that Briscoe was a ‘friend’
who joked with Kincaid, which made his remarks about her breasts socially acceptable.
Jack McCoy was seen as a father figure who was helping Kincaid ‘leam the ropes’ of a

job where “she’s the youngest” and most inexperienced. Because he appeared to be more

121

parental to these viewers, his attitude towards her was interpreted as justified and
appropriate.

Other women interpreted the relationship between Kincaid and her male
colleagues as examples of male-dominated patriarchal structures. These viewers argued
that Briscoe and McCoy’s behavior was “disrespectful” and ‘demeaning.” Interpreted
this way, their characterizations of both men’s relationship with Kincaid paralleled the
unequal balance of power between prostitutes and their johns that viewers found
problematic earlier in the interview.

When Kincaid goes to McCoy with doubts, his response is interpreted as “taking
over the case” (Table 6.7), which minimized the impact of her efforts to resolve the case
at the end of the episode. In the context of the over all narrative, this behavior upheld the
her patriarchal reading of the text However, viewers who resisted this reading of the
narrative argued that Kincaid, regardless of the behavior of Briscoe and McCoy, was
willing and able to stand up to her male counterparts. “She has the last word” suggested
“Diana,” indicating that within the male dominated prosecutor’s office, she is able to
exert some authority.

Viewers interpreted Kincaid’s willingness to try the case against Dr. Danforth
and, later, to pursue the investigation of Julia Danforth as both a sign of weakness and a
sign of empowerment. For some, Kincaid’s desire to pursue the case against Dr.
Danforth was a result of “taking the case too personally.” She clearly disliked Dr.
Danforth’s interest in soliciting prostitutes, which is why she took the case to trial even

though “she knew that it wasn’t as strong as it should be.” As a result she wrongly

122

convicted the doctor, a mistake that reinforced her inexperience and need for McCoy’s
guidance.

Meanwhile, some viewers argued that Kincaid made the case personal on
purpose. One viewer claimed that she attempted to manipulate witnesses by “playing the
feminine card”—a term they used to acknowledge Kincaid’s use of her femininity to
obtain information. They also claimed that she was using her sex to create a sense of
solidarity between herself and the Gwyn George’s roommates, as well as with Mrs.
Danforth, when she wanted something from them, “She was like ‘C’mon, I’m on your
side’.” But some women opposed the idea that Kincaid was manipulative. They
interpreted Kincaid’s interest in pursuing the case to be the result her personal strength
and sense of professionalism, as well as a strong sense of values. “Rachel” suggested
that “when she’s trying the case, she goes about everything in a really logical way and
gets the job done, but her wanting to win the case doesn’t overshadow her moral
obligations...” Both interpretations highlight Kincaid’s abilityto successfully work her
way through both the criminal and prosecutorial parts of the over all case. Her ability to
do so suggested to viewers that, despite the difficulties she faced in solving the crime, she
was both “a strong and independent woman” who was able to “follow her mind.” From
this perspective, Kincaid’s attitudes and actions challenged the patriarchal criminal
justice system. Thus, her efforts to pursue justice for Gwyn George are seen as actions
that reflect a resistance to the patriarchal point of view being asserted in the nanative

discourse.

123

 

The frustration Julia Danforth felt about her husband’s extramarital affairs was
both identified and understood by all the participants. But while they had sympathy for
her, they were unwilling to justify Gwyn George’s murder. As noted in Table 6.6,
participants would not justify killing for any reason, but were struck by the fact that Julia
Danforth killed the woman in order to avenge her husband’s behavior. To the
participants, her behavior was not only extreme, but irrational as well.

Julia Danforth’s confession at the end of the episode was viewed as an attempt to
excuse her criminal behavior. For some participants, her confession demeaned her.
Viewers also argued that her over all behaviors “turned her into the bad person at the
end.” As a result of her extremist measures, viewers noted, the criminal and immoral
behavior of Dr. Danforth was unfairly minimized at the conclusion of the episode. They
pointed out that while Dr. Danforth had been engaging in criminal solicitation, his wife
would always be seen as the “real criminal” due to this one extreme act Because of this,
they felt that her actions should be read as patriarchally motivated. They represent a
weak feminine ideal that emphasizes “the stereotyped irrationality of women caught up in
their emotions. . .who breaks out crying at the end.”

Despite the strong opinions that exist about Julia Danforth, there is a pattern in the
shifts in viewer’s attitudes about her that indicated their ability to resist a patriarchal
reading of her character in the text. For example, before the conclusion of the show,
most viewers argued that Julia Danforth was both unintelligent and weak. Comments

recorded in Table 6.2 indicate that her demeanor was an example of patriarchy in the text

124

(“she’s “weak, floaty, and stupid. . .”). But after viewing the conclusion, some viewers
rejected this perspective.

Feelings about Julia Danforth, as noted in Table 6.7, also shifted while
participants thought about the episode as a whole. They changed their opinions about the
woman, characterizing her as both intelligent and strong because “she actually had the
upper hand.” In a criminal justice system that is recognized as supporting masculist
viewpoints about prostitution and marital infidelity, Julia Danforth was seen by some
participants as a woman who was able to manipulate the police, the district attorneys, and
her husband. While viewers did not justify her activities, her actions were, in the eyes of

viewers like “Janna,” representative of someone who was empowered enough to fight the

system.

 

Much of the viewer’s responses to questions about production elements supported
the patriarchal reading they were engaging in. However, gestural and iconic narratives
often prompted viewers to rethink earlier opinions they had formed about events in the
text Evidence of a reverse discourse that challenged the dominant patriarchal point of
view of the Law & Order text was supported, for some viewers, by the rank and/or
professional position of the female characters in the text While much is made of the
patriarchal roles in the show, including women who play prostitutes and emotionally
distraught housewives, there were some viewers that interpreted the casting of the show
as “female empowered,” suggesting a strong feminist presence in the overall narrative.
This was noted specifically by one viewer who stated, “I do like where they put women,

like the Lieutenant and the District Attorney. They’re in high positions and not like the

125

secretary.” Other viewers were less specific about their ideas, but suggested that the
show had “ a lot of strong women.” Occasional camera angles, such as camera tilts that
made Kincaid appear higher in the frame when talking to McCoy and the Danforths, also
supported this argument

WW

While some respondents felt that the model was useful for asserting that there was
an alternative point of view in the text, many found it difficult to insert the different
opinions they had about each of the characters into the outlined framework. The multiple
viewpoints offered about some of the characters throughout the interviews suggest that
viewers had some difficulty interpreting the thoughts and actions of many of the women
in the text Women such as Lieutenant Van Buren, Clare Kincaid, and Julia Danforth
were seen as strong and empowered, as well as weak, and (in some cases) victimized.
These varied interpretations appear to be a result of the ambiguous presentation of these
women in the text as well as the varied experiences the viewers bring to the text-viewer
relationship. Respondents also argued that the framework did not account for the
multiple and somewhat ambiguous perspectives offered by Detective Curtis, whose:
responses to events in the text were interpreted by both reflecting and rejecting the
overarching patriarchal discourse.

Furthermore, note that in Table 6.8, the various comments recorded throughout
the interviews suggested that some viewers perceived race, class, and age as important as
gender. For them, defining patriarchy as “an embodiment of masculist ideals” was too
limiting. As a result, participants were unable to apply the framework in a way that that

they felt adequately represented their interpretation of a patriarchal narrative. Their

126

responses indicate that in order to address the multiple narratives that co-exist in and
challenge a patriarchal text, one needs to look at the power relationships that exist vis a
vis class, race, gender, and age.

The existence of these power relationships among the viewers of Law & Order
was evident by the way they offered their alternative interpretations of the patriarchal
text. Often, a viewer would offer her resistive interpretation apologetically, beginning her
statement with “I’m sorry, but I just see it differently.” Phrases like this indicates that
the viewer brings to the text her experiences and points of view, some that require her to
I apologize for resisting an overarching point of view. Others apologized for recognizing
racial and class distinctions among the characters in the story world. In this case, it is
possible that the ages of the viewers (18-24) influenced their responses, their youth
impacting their ability to comfortably question what they perceive to be dominant point
of view. Furthermore, the racial makeup of the participants may have also influenced
their responses. Because of the small number of women of color who participated in the
focus group interviews, it is possible that these women felt uncomfortable voicing points
of view that identified a reverse discourse within what they defined as the patriarchal
text, even if this reverse discourse reflected their experiences as they engaged it.

Despite these limitations, and perhaps because of them, the results of the focus
group interviews support the idea that there is no single definition of ‘feminism.’ This, in
turn, explains the various definitions of ‘patriarchy’ viewers offered when engaging the
text The results reflect the varied and sometimes opposing philosophies feminists bring

to television criticism today. However, regardless of how patriarchy is defined, this study

127

suggests a television narrative can be interpreted as both patriarchal and resistive to this

patriarchy.

Conclusion

According to E. Ann Kaplan (1992), feminism requires researchers to look at
“women and the place they are assigned in society” (249). This exercise in television
aesthetics contributes to feminist scholarship in that it looks at how and where women are
assigned positions within the story world of a televisual text However, this study goes
further, as it looks at how a woman’s placement in a televisual text can be resisted.

The results of this study demonstrate some of the ways women’s stories are being
narrated on television, and how they can both reinforce and resist the masculist defined,
patriarchal structure of every day life. The results also suggest that while nanative theory
is a useful tool in understanding how a point of view is reflected in a televisual text, it
must be expanded to included multiple, ambiguous, and opposing points of view from
which the narrative can be engaged. The definition of patriarchy and the narrative
framework must be also be broadened when conducting a narrative analysis in order to
include issues of class, race, and age, as well as gender. Feminist television critics must .
continue to pursue ways aesthetic theories can be used to address the diverse social
contexts in which patriarchal systems are being reflected, maintained, and challenged on
television. By doing so, one can attempt to better understand how viewers of a televisual
text assume a patriarchal point of view when engaging the text It will also be helpful in
understanding how a viewer may ideate narrative spaces of resistance, reflecting a

reverse discourse that challenges this patriarchy.

128

The ideation of a reverse discourse that resists the overarching patriarchal
discourse of a televisual text is a feminist act of resistance. By engaging the text from
both the intended and resistive points of view, the viewer is, in effect, challenging the
patriarchal structures the television narrative is reflecting. By attempting to create a site
of resistance, s/he provides the foundation for future transformations of television
narratives. It is these feminist narrative spaces that, some day, may become the dominant

point of view from which a televisual text can be understood.

3

129

BIBLIOGRAPHY

130

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alcock, Beverly & Robson, J. (1990). “Cagney and Lacey revisited”. Feminist Review,
L42-54.

Allen, Robert C. (1992). Audience—oriented criticism and television. In R. Allen (Ed.).

Channels gf discourse massembled. (pp. 101-137) Chapel Hill, NC: The
University of North Carolina Press.

Anderson, K, Arrnitage, 8., Jack, D.,& Wittner, J. ( 1987). “Beginning where we are:
feminist methodology in oral history. OE history review,]5_, 103-107.

Ang, Ien. (1990). Melodramatic identifications: television fiction and women’s fantasy.

In Mary Ellen Brown (Ed.). flfelevisign and wgmen’s gultgre: the pglitics 91 the
pgpulg. (pp. 75-88) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Baca Zinn, M., Cannon, L.W., Higginbotham, E. & Thornton Dill, B. (1986). The costs
of exclusionary practices in women’s studies. SignsLLL 290-303.

Baca Zinn, M. Honduagneu-Sotelo, P., & Messner, M. A. (1997). W
W— Needham Heights, MA. Allyn & Bacon.

Back Stage salutes Law & Order; behind the scenes with today’s longest-running prime
time TV show. (1997, December 19) W Al-A14.

Barbatsis, Gretchen. (I999). Seeing stories: representational communication in pictorial
form. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University.

Barbatsis, G. Fagen, M. & Hansen, K. (1999). The performance of cyberspace. an

exploration into computer mediated reality. W
W. [www.ascuse.org/jcmc/volS/issue1lbarbatsis.html]

Barbatsis, Gretchen. (1996). ‘Look, and I will show you something you will want to see’:
pictorial engagement in negative political campaign commercials. AW
nihilism}; 69-81-

Becker, Howard S. (1982). Alt_wgd_d§. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Brown,M..E (1994). 2. -’ -2 : -=. 1' fr '
Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.

‘. Thousand

   

Brundson, C., D’Acci, J. & Spigel, L. (Eds). (1997). W
reader. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

131

Butler, Jeremy. (1993). Redesigning discourse: feminism, the sitcom, and Designing

Women. Jguma] gf frlm and video 45, ( I) 13-27.

Chatman, Seymour. (1978). Story and discourse: namtive stmgture in fictign and film.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Chisolm, Brad. (1991). Difficult viewing: the pleasures of complex screen narratives.

W 389403

Corcos, Christine A. (1998). Women lawyers. In R.M. Jarvis & P. R. Joseph (Eds).
Prime-Time Law. (pp. 219-248) Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

DiStefano, Christine. (1990). Dilemmas of difference: feminism, modernity, and

postmodernism. In L. Nicholson (Ed..) W. New York:
Routledge.

 

Dow, Bonnie. (1992). Femininity and feminism rn Murphy Brown. Southern
CcrnmnnicatioulorrmaLiZ. 143- 155

Dow, Bonnie. (I990). Hegemony, feminist criticism and The Mary Tyler Moore Show.
MW 261 -274

Dresner, Zita. (1993) “Roseanne Barr: goddess or she-devil”. JQLmaLQLAmeflcan

gunman. 37-44.

Ferguson, Marjorie. (1990). Images of power and the feminist fallacy. Wu
MassCommrrnieationJ. 215-230.

Fingerson, Laura. (1999). Active viewing. WW,
389-418.

Frye, Northrop. (1957). W. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.

Gross, Larry. (1974). Modes of communication and the acquisition of symbolic

competence. In 0 Olson (Ed.). WW
communication, and educan'gn. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.

Higbie, A. (1995, November 26). A new catalyst in the ‘Law and Order’ chemistry.
W. W 38. 40.

Holub RobertC (1984) W New York. NY:
Methuen publishing.

hooks, bell. (1994, March). Dissident heat: assessing Naomi Wolf’s Fire with Fire.
Mel. 26-29.

132

Iser, Wolfgang. (1978). flfhg net pf mnding. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.

Iser, Wolfgang. (1974). flfhg implied reader. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.

Iser, Wolfgang. (I971). lndeterrninacy and the reader’s response in prose fiction.
In J. H, Miller. (Ed.). Asimcts of ngn‘mtive. (pp. 1-45) New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.

Jenkins, Henry III. (1988). Star Trek rerun, reread, rewritten: fan writing as textual

poaching. Cn'ticnl Studies in Mms Communication, 5, 85-107.
Joyrich, Lynne. (1996). Reviewing reception: television, gender, nnd mstmodern

culture. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

 

Kaplan, EA. (1992). Feminist criticism and television. In R. Allen (Ed.) Channelspf
djsgmnsdmnssgmblpd. (pp. 247-283) Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press.

Kozloff, Sarah. (1992). Narrative theory and television. In R. Allen (Ed.). thnnnlsnf

discourse, mnsmmbled. (pp.67-100) Chapel Hill, NC: University of North
Carolina Press.

Krucgcr Richard A (1994) W
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lee, Janet (1992). Subversive sitcoms: Roseanne as inspiration for feminist resistance.

anen’s st_u_di95,21, 87-101.

Livingstone, Sonia. (I994). Watching talk: gender and engagement in the viewing of
audience discussion programmes. W19, 429447.

Lunt, P. & Livingstone, S. (1996). Rethinking the focus group in media and

Communications research. .10qu pt Communignn'nn Ad, 79-98.
Maglin, N-- B- & Perot. D. (1996). WWWMM

nineties. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Massey, Doreen. (1994). W. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.

McCall, M. & Wittner, J. (1990). The good news about life history. In M. McCall, &

1 Winner: SW4 (pp 46-89) Chicago 11
University of Chicago Press.

133

 

McGrath, C. (1995, October 22). The triumph of the prime-time novel. The new york
n' mes mngazinp. pp. 52-59, 68, 76, 86.

Meisler, A. (1994, September 25). A new face at ‘Law and Order’. Any objections?
The new york times p.H33.

 

Miller, S. (1995, September). "Order’ takes to streets for local flavor. Variety ,31, 18-24.

Modleski, Tania. ( I979). The search for tomorrow in today’s soap operas: notes on
feminine narrative form. Film Qnarterly, 33, 112-21.

Morris, Jenny. (1995). Creating a space for absent voices: disabled women’s experience
Of receiving assistance with daily living activities. Fpminist mvigw, d i ,
pp. 68-93.

. Oleson, Virginia. (1994). Fenrinisms and models of qualitative research. In N. Denzin &

Y. Lincoln (Eds). Handbook of gnalitan've resgrch (pp. 158-174) Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Nicholson, Linda J. (Ed.). (1990). Feminismimstmgemism. New York, NY: Routledge.

Press, Andrea. (1991). angn watching ielpvisipn; ggndgr, glass, and ggngmtign in thg
Ampripmi tglevision gnpgrignge. Philadelphia: PA: University of Pennsylvania

Press.

Press, Andrea & Strathman, T. (1993). Work, family, and social class in television
images of women: prime time television and the construction of postfeminism.

Women nnd lnngnnge, 16, 7-16.

Reay, Diane. (I996). Insider perspectives or stealing the words out of women’s mouths:
interpetation in the research process. Eeminist Revigw, 53, 57-73.

Reinharz, Shulanrit (1992). Feminist methms in 5min! researgh. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.

Reissman, Catherine K. (1993). Nnnntive Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Reissman, Catherine K. (1987). When gender is not enough: women interviewing

women. Gendgr d; Smieiy, 1, 172-207.
Rowe, K. (1990). Roseanne: unruly woman as domestic goddess. Scregn ,3 1, 408-419.

Rudolph, I. (1998, March 28-April 3). Arresting women. TV Guide, 18-21.

134

 

Ruth, Sheila. (1995). The dynamics of patriarchy. S. Ruth (Ed.) Issues in feminism.
(pp. 53-62) Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.

Smith, Dorothy E. (1987). The gvgiydny wofld as problgmatip. Boston, MA:

Northeastern University Press.

Spain, Daphne. (1992). Gendemd spnces. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina
Press.

Thomas, Lyn (1995). In love with Inspector Morse. Feminist Revigw, 51, 1-25.

Unger, A. (1996). It’s in the writing, stupid! Telgvisinn Qnarterly, 28, 1023.

van Zoonen, Liesbet. (I994). Feminist Media Studies. London: Sage Publications.

Vande Berg, Leah R. (1993). China Beach, prime time war in the postfeminist age: an
example of patriarchy in a different voice. WWW
349-366.

Weber, B. (1992, March 1). Dick Wolf breaks and enters with ‘Law and Order’ on NBC.
jifhe ngw ynm Limes. pp. 31, 36.

Weedon. Chris. (1997). WWW Cambridge:
Blackwell Publishers.

Zettl, Herbert. (1990). S' ht sou m 'on' i media aesthe 'c . Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Co.

135

APPENDICES

136

APPENDIX A

VIEWER PROFILES

49 Participants
100% female
Age: 18-24

Racial/ethnic makeup:

Caucasian
African American
Asian

Latina

9888

Previous Viewing Experience:

Avid Viewer (watches more than once a week)

Habitual Viewer (watches once a week)

Occasional Viewer (watch once or twice a month)

A Rare Viewer (have only seen a few episodes in a lifetime)
Non-viewer

9999’.”

137

APPENDIX B

FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONING ROUTE

Introduction:

The purpose of this discussion is to hear how the points of the view of the overall
narrative of Law & Order are identified and understood by viewers as they share their
opinions, attitudes, and perceptions of what they see in the televisual text

“I
1

Introductory Question: (to ea. Participant)

..a-LV
. 1‘}
I

Have you seen Law & Order before? If so, how often do you watch it?
W

After first commercial break: Opening Questions (after credits):
Purpose: Begin easing participants into critically thinking about what they are
viewing in order to let participants connect with the general topic.

1. During the opening of the show, what were some of the things that you
noticed?

(Potential follow-ups ONLY if limited response) Was there anything that struck you
about:

l-a. the events that took place in the opening scenes?

1-b. the characters? Gestures, facial expressions...

l-c. music, noises, sounds effects

l-d. production elements (lighting, camera angles, props, etc.)
(Sum Up)

After second commercial break: Transition Questions

Purpose: Begin discussion of actual events and ideas about those events in the text
in order to begin broadening the overall tepic while focusing on the criminal aspects
of the case.

1. Any comments or observations about what you’ve just seen?

2. What opinions, if any, do you have about any of the characters and their
discussions about the moral and criminal implications of soliciting a
prostitute?

138

3. Now that you’ve been exposed to some of the characters a bit more, are there
any more thoughts about them?
PROBE:
3-a. Do you feel that the attitudes of the detectives and their interaction with each other
are somehow impacted by the fact that they are men? Does this impact the way they
proceed to investigate the crime.
(SUM UP) *what do you think will happen next?

After third commercial break: Key Questions (cont)
Purpose: To inspire discussion specific to the points of views introduced in the text.

1. Any comments or observations you have about what you’ve just seen?
2. If you were to the list the reasons behind Dr. Danforth’s ultimate arrest, what
would you include?

PROBE:

2-a. Some researchers would describe male behavior as macho centered, and/or wanting
to be dominant and powerful. Do you think this applies to what you’ve seen so far?
Does this have anything to do with the arrest?

3. Who appears to be more dominant, the men or the women? Can you share the
reasons behind your opinion?

(SUM UP)
MODEL: Take a look at this model. It’s trying to outline where different points of ,

view come out in the story. Do you think this is useful in trying to describe where
thereisashiftinthepointsofview?

(break: 10 Minutes)

W
After Fourth Commercial Break: Key Questions
Purpose: Initiate discussions regarding points of view, focusing on the legal aspects
of the case.
1. Any comments about what has taken place so far?

2. How do you feel about Kincaid’s willingness to prosecute Dr. Danforth?

139

PROBES: .

2-a. How would you characterize McCoy’s attitude towards Kincaid throughout her
efforts in trying and resolving the case? What did you see or hear that led to that
opinion?

2-b. Did her having doubts contribute to your characterization?

2-c. Do you have any specific thoughts about the relationship between the McCoy and
Kincaid? Do you think gender plays a part in this specific relationship?

2—d. Are there any other elements (production, narrative, etc.) that contribute to your
ideas about Schiff, McCoy and Kincaid, as well as any other characters you have been
introduced to?

3. Discuss your feelings, if any, about the resolution of the case. What do you think
is going to happen next?

After fifth (last) commercial break: Final Key Question

1. Now that we all know that Mrs. Danforth, and NOT Dr. Danforth committed the
murder, what are your ideas about her reasons for murdering Gwyn George?

PROBES for this final question:

l-a. Do you think her reasons in some way justify her actions?

l-b. Can you describe your feelings about Dr. Danforth while Mrs. Danforth admitted
to the killing?

l-c. Can you recall some of your thoughts about Mrs. Danforth before you knew that
she killed Gwyn George? Did your opinion of her change at the end of the program? If
so, how? -

2. What do you feel about the way Kincaid and McCoy went about resolving the
case?

2-a. The prosecutor’s “plan” to elicit a confession from Mrs. Danforth.
2-b. Kincaid’s final discussion with Dr. and Mrs. Danforth.
2—c. The final discussion between McCoy and Kincaid.

3.Are there any other elements (camera, background noise/music, facial gestures,
etc.) you noticed throughout the last several scenes?

Conclusion:

1. Are there additional comments you would like to share about what you just saw?

140

2. Is there anything else that you think is important to add?

Thank you for participating in this discussion.

141

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

m’iijljwmwuuuwzflmw

   

310