Wisdom 1

Grace Wisdom

Professor Daniel Stefanelli

ENC 2135

31 October 2022

A Rhetorical Analysis of Women’s Status in Behind-the-Scenes Roles

Introduction

The first woman to win an Academy Award for Best Director was Kathryn Bigelow in

2010. The second was Chloe Zhao in 2021. The third was Jane Campion in 2022. The Academy

Awards have been going on for 93 years. There is an extreme lack of women in directorial roles

within Hollywood and greater moviemaking. There is not a lack of females, or female talent, but

rather a lack of support for the women who want to pursue motion picture arts. In 2021, amongst

the top 250 grossing films, only 25% of directors, 17% of writers, and 6% of cinematographers

were women.

The lack of women in behind-the-scenes roles has tangible implications. Women,

naturally, are can more accurately portray and represent fellow women on-screen. A correct and

positive representation is imperative to young and impressionable audiences, growing up with

such values as realistic beauty standards, understanding of their own power and worth, and pride

in being a woman.

Though the issue is improving, there is still much to be done. It is essential to understand,

appreciate, and work to help this issue. Because there has been little change in female

representation behind the scenes, both artifacts function to help solve the issue: Artifact 1
 Wisdom 2

focuses primarily on experts in the field and how they work towards solutions, while Artifact 2

speaks directly to the average person and urges them to take action.

Artifact 1: Harriet Constable: “Why Aren’t There More Women Film Directors?”

Constable, in her piece entitled “Why Aren’t There More Women Film Directors?” offers

optimism on the lack of female filmmakers. She begins by pointing to The Morning Show, a

microcosm of what could happen in all major motion picture arts productions. After a brief

introduction to an example of positive change, she backtracks into discussing the problem at

hand. She transitions from the issue into examples of solutions, focusing on organizations and

individuals making a difference. She ends with the conclusion equal representation in the

industry will not happen overnight, but collective change and work will get us there.

Constable utilizes two main devices to inform and call her audience to action: logos,

through facts and figures, and ethos, through utilization of quotations from experts in the field.

Constable, in her piece, aims to inform the audience of both discrepancies of women in behind-

the-scenes roles and what famous and notable people are doing to fix it.

After beginning with an attention-grabbing device in the form of a quote from The

Morning Show, Constable utilizes facts and figures to contextualize the extent of the issue. In

bold, large font, Constable quotes “In the US, women comprised just 8% of directors working on

the top 250 US domestic grossing films in 2018”. She expands on this quotation to relate to the

lack of female best director winners and nominees, as well as how the statistic decreases as you

decrease the number of grossing films in question.

From here, she offers her next point: “this is not for a lack of talented women in the

industry”, once again supported by figures. She points to films directed by women that were
 Wisdom 3

some of the most successful based solely on monetary value. Using these examples, she expands

the importance of the issue from domestic to a global scale.

Constable’s successive points are supported solely by quotations from experts in the

field. She asks, “if there are plenty of talented women who want to make films, why aren’t there

more female directors?”. To answer this question, Constable turns to Dame Heather Rabbatts,

Chair of Time’s Up UK, a group “founded by high-profile actresses in response to the #MeToo

movement”. Rabbatts examines the issue is twofold: “people tend to recruit their own image”

and “women have not seen many other women role models”. To follow up this conclusion, she

references Ava DuVernay (director of Selma) and her ability to call out The Academy for

disqualifying a Nigerian film directed by a woman.

To elaborate on the example above, Constable once again references an expert in the

field, an actress, and how she believes “in the power of women at the top calling out issues and

pushing for change”.

For a majority of her piece, Constable relies on quotes and claims made by experts in the

field to develop her article’s argument. The emphasis on the ethos of the individuals she

references appeals to the audience’s trust in the claims; if they are made by experts, they must be

true and valid. Though ethos is primarily used to describe expressing one’s own validity,

Constable cleverly outsources claims and conclusions to notable figures. Further, she focuses on

informing the reader on the qualification of these individuals. Although it is not personal,

Constable still relies on ethos to gain the audience’s trust.

After establishing the importance of notable individuals acting within the issue,

Constable goes on to reference numerous women who have created organizations to help solve
 Wisdom 4

this discrepancy. She points to a “talent-discovery solution” and “lobbying”, once again

supported and founded by experts and notable individuals in the field.

Another possible option Constable points to is streaming services, which provide

opportunities for women filmmakers. To conclude, she once again quotes Dame Rabbatts in

saying “this isn’t just about how we get women directors up there in terms of their recognition-

now it’s about them staying there”.

Essentially, Constable utilizes quotations from notable individuals to support her entire

argument, being though the average person can do their part, it is people at the top who hold the

most power and knowledge about lack of representation. Her piece functions in two ways:

Constable informs the average reader on the issue at hand and what is being done to address it. If

her reader was a notable or powerful individual, her piece functions to persuade said individuals

to take part and join their peers.

Artifact 2: Naomi McDougall-Jones’ TedTalk

Naomi McDougall-Jones, in her 2016 TedTalk, discusses the lack of female filmmakers

and presents a four-point plan on how to start a “film revolution” to help solve this issue. She

utilizes pathos in the form of anecdotes and humor, a development of her ethos via personal

stories and accomplishments, and a call to action to convince her audience to make a difference.

Further, her physical body language and delivery contributes to the emphasis of the importance

of the issue and puts pressure on her audience to follow through with her call to action.

Initially, McDougall-Jones introduces herself through comical anecdotes from her

childhood and onward. She expresses she was raised by a feminist and makes jokes about her

naïveté as a young actress in the industry. She transitions into humorous casting calls and
 Wisdom 5

examples of “dialogue”. Seemingly ridiculous jokes, she changes her tone when she reveals they

are real.

The use of comedy in her introduction is two-fold: she can build her ethos in a humble

way- she comes from humble beginnings, she is self-aware- yet she is an actress, and she does

have notable experience. Second, her comedy allows difficult statements to be made in a

digestible way. The casting calls are visceral examples of the mistreatment of women and the

lack of depth in female characters, though McDougall-Jones makes it seem like a joke. The fact

they are not jokes is the first of many wake-up calls for the audience.

From here, McDougall-Jones introduces her main ethos; the fact she is not only an

actress (and a woman), but has written, directed, and produced her own movie and therefore

knows, firsthand, what it is like to be a female filmmaker. She discusses the numerous obstacles

she had to overcome and the triumphs at the end of the tunnel. From a critical standpoint, she

created a small, low-budget independent movie that did not receive high ratings. Instead of

pointing this out or adding this to her life experience, she presents her film as a great success.

Although the fact she created a movie is a tremendous success on its own, the exclusion of some

facts offers a slightly less genuine than obvious nuance.

Because her TedTalk deals with women as filmmakers, establishing herself as a female

filmmaker establishes essential credibility on the subject. However, instead of continuing to

develop her ethos, she transitions back to pathos through expanding her personal experience to a

universal experience women face, not just as filmmakers but as members of society. Through

connecting a small occurrence to a universal one, her audience develops an emotional connection

to the situation.
 Wisdom 6

Through her tone and presentation, this entire section is very serious and bleak. She does

not move around the stage and gestures infrequently. However, as she transitions into her call to

action, she begins joking and moving around the stage once more.

Like the beginning of her presentation, McDougall-Jones uses funny and interesting facts

to help with the digestion of more difficult concepts. She points out the effect of media on

society through attention-grabbing examples, but then connects it back to how the overwhelming

number of movies made by men (which also misrepresent women) affect the way we understand

our society.

Once more, she transitions from comedy to serious points when discussing this issue.

However, she picks up her tone again as she offers her take on how to resolve the issue.

McDougall-Jones utilizes examples, facts, figures, and visible excitement when informing her

audience on the positives that exist within the issue. Though she utilizes other devices, her

primary method for persuading her audience to take action is through establishing herself as a

charismatic expert in the field and through appealing to their emotions.

For the rest of her presentation, McDougall-Jones explains her four-point plan which

encourages her audience to start a “film revolution”: watch one film by a female filmmaker, be

brave, invest in each other, and disrupt through business. For each point, she encourages

audience participation such as raising their hands or nodding ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

McDougall-Jones creates an engaging presentation filled with comedy and excitement

while still informing her audience of a serious issue. The goal of her presentation was to call her

audience to action to the extent that they will “revolt” against Hollywood itself in the name of

women. For a slightly outdated presentation (2016), many of her themes remain true. It is the
 Wisdom 7

audience’s responsibility to demand what they want to see; this has the potential to be in the

interest of women.

Discussion

Both articles focused on the same issue: the lack of women as filmmakers. Both women

utilize examples and facts and figures to support their respective arguments, developed an ethos,

and offered solutions for the issue. However, both women used different devices to appeal to the

audience and, in the end, offered slightly different solutions.

Constable focused primarily on credibility when establishing her argument. The

argument was supported by extensive quotations from experts in the field. Instead of building her

own character, Constable focused on building the character and credibility of those who she was

quoting. Further, she utilized logos (through the form of facts and figures) to contextualize her

claims. She did not develop a connection with her audience and did not aim to call them to

action. Rather, she focused on informing the audience on how others are more effective at

solving the issue.

Conversely, McDougall-Jones focused extensively on how the audience were the only

ones who could effectively solve the issue. She emphasized her own credibility and utilized

comedy to both connect to her audience and build trust within the relationship. Though

McDougall-Jones also used facts and figures, her primary devices fell within appealing to her

audience’s emotions and establishing trust. Therefore, when she presented a tangible plan of

action for her audience to utilize, they were exposed to the necessary persuasion techniques to

take her recommendations seriously. Her frequent change in tone coupled with her body

language created an exciting and interesting presentation, building the necessary environment for

motivation needed to initiate a call to action.

 Wisdom 8

Conclusion

Both artifacts are important for understanding the multi-dimensional approach to

resolving this issue. On one hand, notable and important individuals hold the power necessary to

push Hollywood in the right direction. On the other hand, it is the audience who inevitably

consumes the media, and it is their job to respond to its lack of equality.

In recent years, female-directed films have gained popularity and recognition (Academy

Awards, Golden Globes, etc.). This is not to say the issue has resolved since the publication of

these two artifacts, but rather that it is likely a combination of both approaches that has pushed

Hollywood in a slightly more positive direction. A third approach could argue large

organizations, such as the Academy, purposefully award women to downplay their continued

lack of diversity. Understanding and staying informed on the nuances of our reality is essential if

we cannot enact change ourselves.

We must understand the gravity and implications of lack of female representation in

behind-the-scenes roles, pressure notable figures to make change, and do what we can, as the

audience, to make change ourselves.

 Wisdom 9

Works Cited

Constable, Harriet. “Why Aren't There More Women Film Directors?” BBC Culture, BBC,

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20191129-why-arent-there-more-women-film-

directors.

McDougall-Jones, Naomi. TEDxTalks. “The Women in Film Revolution Begins with You |

Naomi McDougall-Jones | TEDxBeaconStreet.” YouTube, YouTube, 6 Dec. 2016,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj2pWl1vjCY.