Laura Mulvey has theorized that in narrative film, shots issuing from a protagonist's point of view compel viewers to identify...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Laura Mulvey has theorized that in narrative film, shots issuing from a protagonist's point of view compel viewers to identify with the character. Such identification is heightened by 'invisible editing,' or editing so inconspicuous that it renders cuts between shots almost unnoticeable. Conversely, Mulvey proposes that conspicuous editing or an absence of point-of-view shots would induce a more critical stance toward a protagonist. Consider, for example, the attic scene in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds, a conspicuously edited sequence of tens of shots, few of which correspond to the protagonist's point of view. According to Mulvey's logic, this scene should affect viewers by ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
obscuring their awareness of the high degree of artifice involved in constructing the montage.
lessening their identification with the protagonist, if not alienating them from the character altogether.
compelling them to identify with the film's director, whose proxy is the camera, and not with the protagonist.
diverting their attention away from the film's content and toward its stylistic attributes.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Laura Mulvey has theorized that in narrative film, shots issuing from a protagonist's point of view compel viewers to identify with the character." |
|
| "Such identification is heightened by 'invisible editing,' or editing so inconspicuous that it renders cuts between shots almost unnoticeable." |
|
| "Conversely, Mulvey proposes that conspicuous editing or an absence of point-of-view shots would induce a more critical stance toward a protagonist." |
|
| "Consider, for example, the attic scene in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds, a conspicuously edited sequence of tens of shots, few of which correspond to the protagonist's point of view." |
|
| "According to Mulvey's logic, this scene should affect viewers by ______" |
|
Part B: Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Mulvey theorizes that specific film techniques (point-of-view shots and editing styles) directly influence how viewers relate to protagonists.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes Mulvey's theory about how different filming techniques create opposite effects on viewer identification, then presents a concrete example (The Birds) that matches the conditions for creating a critical stance, asking us to predict the outcome.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The Birds attic scene has both conditions that Mulvey says create a critical stance: conspicuous editing AND few point-of-view shots
- According to her theory, when these conditions are present, viewers should develop "a more critical stance toward a protagonist"
- This means viewers would be less likely to identify with the protagonist - they'd be more detached, analytical, or even alienated from the character
- So the right answer should describe viewers becoming less identified with or more distanced from the protagonist
obscuring their awareness of the high degree of artifice involved in constructing the montage.
✗ Incorrect
- This suggests viewers wouldn't notice the conspicuous editing, but Mulvey's whole point is that conspicuous editing IS noticeable - that's what makes it "conspicuous"
- The theory depends on viewers being aware of the editing techniques
lessening their identification with the protagonist, if not alienating them from the character altogether.
✓ Correct
- This directly matches Mulvey's prediction that conspicuous editing and absence of POV shots create "a more critical stance toward a protagonist"
- "Lessening identification" or "alienating them from the character" is exactly what a "critical stance" means
- Perfectly applies her theory to The Birds example
compelling them to identify with the film's director, whose proxy is the camera, and not with the protagonist.
✗ Incorrect
- Mulvey's theory doesn't mention viewers identifying with the director instead
- Her framework is about the degree of identification with the protagonist, not shifting identification to someone else
diverting their attention away from the film's content and toward its stylistic attributes.
✗ Incorrect
- While conspicuous editing might draw attention to style, this misses Mulvey's main point
- Her theory specifically predicts effects on protagonist identification, not general attention to filmmaking techniques