Killing Eve and the Female Gaze

This is an essay about Killing Eve’s visual narratives, and the potential of a Female Gaze.

But it’s also just a love letter from a fan.

I first came across this BBC America’s series one night a couple years ago. I watched a random trailer, and immediately knew I was going to enjoy every episode, something to do with my fixation on visual story-telling (which why I’m currently doing a PhD in a film related topic), and women narratives on the screen. The trailer is linked here; you should definitely watch it if you haven’t already. There is also something appealing, at least to me, in stories where women go utterly crazy. Lose their minds. Break every rule in the book in the face of adversity. Here I feel the need to explain that I am in no way romanticising mental illness; this is more about female characters sidelining what capitalist patriarchal societies consider polite, demure, and submissive when it comes to our existence as women.

I once read an article by Teo Bugbee on this very topic, in which she concluded that perhaps this fascination with “crazy women” on the screen is linked to the fact that in real life we have to conform to an endless cycle of unrealistic standards. As a result, living vicariously through a fictional character may feel nice, cathartic even. In the case of Killing Eve the queer element certianly plays another vital factor, offering nuanced takes on the complexity of gender and sexuality.

My journey with this show coincided with a personal and academic interest in feminist film theory. As a natural consequence, I found myself often drawing upon the knowledge I had gained since beginning my screen studies PhD.

I find one element to be especially noticeable throughout the series, and that is the undeniable presence of what I can only describe as the Female Gaze. I definitely did not invent this term; it’s also a relatively new term in the field of academia, and visual media in general. But before I explore it further, it is perhaps necessary to, first, explain the concept of the Male Gaze. If you’re a film academic, or a young woman on TikTok you’re probably tired of hearing about the Male Gaze- granted it is often misinterpreted on social media. This term was essentially created by Laura Mulvey in her famous (infamous?) 1975 essay Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. Her exmaination drew upon psychoanalysis ( a field I only know of superficially) in order to analyse female representation in film. In simpler words, Mulvey believed ( she still does, to a certain extent) that mainstream films (and other fictional media formats) depict female characters from a male perspective. According to this theory, women are essentially objectified on the screen. This gaze doesn’t only come from the filmmaker and the audience, it also comes from male characters in films. She exists for and is represented through the male gaze.

Mulvey has since written other essays expanding on and re-interpreting some of her initial views; her Male Gaze theory was criticised for especially erasing the experiences of women looking. Overall her work certainly opens the door for further questions regarding the ways in which gendered looking or a gendered gaze is developed and experienced in relation to culture, and sexual identity. What about queer women, for example, or black women? Both have a drastically different relationship with the gaze than their heterosexual or white counterparts. I suggest reading Bell Hook’s brilliant response essay titled Oppositional Gaze.

Nontheless, and Even though I agree with some of the criticism, I still believe that Mulvey’s work remains revolutionary in today’s society, opening our eyes to the imbalances between male and female represenations on the screen. After all there’s a general understanding that women are often objectification in the film industry, not only on screen, but also behind the scenes. The #MeToo movement is the best example of this very toxicity which has existed for decades. Growing up, I often felt uncomfortable with certain representations of women in films and TV shows. Take Megan Fox’s character in Transformers for example. Lindsay Ellis produced an insightful series on this film franchise, which I highly recommend. Ellis brings up another critical point in relation to the Male Gaze; she reminds us that this gaze also impacted the way male characters are presented. The womanisers, the “alpha” males, these are all tropes developed due to the Male Gaze.

One final point I bring up here in relation to the Male Gaze is that it’s not exclusively produced by men. While men dominate the film and TV industry due to a global patriarchal system, female filmmakers can be do the same too. Anyone, regardless of their gender identity, is able to perpetuate patriarchal ideals such as the male gaze.

So now that we know the basics of the Male Gaze, what is the Female Gaze?

Benson-Allott (2017) says that this gaze is defined by what it is not, and I agree with her. For example, the Female Gaze is not a reversal of the Male Gaze. The Female Gaze is not turning women into “players”, and men into sexual objects, because this reversal would still be constructed on the very same basis of the Male Gaze. While many women (and men and everyone in between) enjoyed Magic Mike, I am here to tell you that, even though it is nice to see women reclaim their sexuality for once at the expense of cishet men, that is not what the Female Gaze is about.

Joey Soloway’s 2016 TIFF speech is a good introduction into current theorisation of the Female Gaze. You can access it here. In this speech Soloway offers thoughts, relfections, and suggestions on the Female Gaze. They highlight three points:

1- “Feeling Seeing”: a term Soloway uses to describe the process of using the camera to evoke a feeling of “being in the feeling”, instead of a focus on the seeing aspect or the visuals. In other words, it is a way to get inside the protagonist instead of just showing them. Soloway states, “ take the camera and I say, hey, audience, I’m not just showing you this thing, I want you to really feel with me.”

2- Using the camera to show the audience how it feels to be the object of the gaze, and representing what Soloway refers to as the “gazed gaze”, or “the camera talks out at you from its position as the receiver of the gaze”.

3- Gazing Back: Here the female charater gazes back. It is the “the gaze on the gazers”. It says, “We see you seeing us”, reclaiming power on the screen, reclaiming a level of subjectivity that women have often been denied.

Overall It is clear that the film industry has been going through a process of awakening, and perhaps the Female Gaze is the next great step forward…

Contains spoilers from this point onward….

I believe that these notions of the Female Gaze can easily be spotted in Killing Eve; it can be in the characters as well as camera work, editing, and how it makes the audience feel. Not only is this show dominated by women (on screen and off…With some criticism regarding the majority being white but that’s a different topic for a different piece), it also fully delves into female subjectivity, probes, and examines it to the core.

The female characters in Killing Eve ( Eve Polastri and Villanelle) are multi-dimensional, flawed, and very humanised; traits often ignored/shamed in real life women, and avoided in fictional women. They are in charge of their sexuality but never visually objectified. They fight back. They are not put on the screen to be looked at by you. Instead, they are there to gaze back. They are there to also gaze at each other, to perceive each other’s subjectivity, and ignore your very curious looks. You, as the viewer, do not matter to them.

Season one Eve is a bored (and boring) employee of MI5. Her job is mainly office bound, and she has a relatively calm life. Her relationship with her husband seems healthy. As Sandra Oh (who plays the role) describes her in multiple interviews (one of which is linked here), she is a woman who is initially not interested in being “seen”. She likes to observe, but she’s rarely “observed”. One of the many ways the show visually symbolises this aspect of her personality is through her fashion choices. Simple. Practical. Mostly dark shades. And probably nothing above Uniqlo. I believe that this in itself is a defiance of the Male Gaze. By refusing to be looked at, she is essentially rejecting what Mulvey describes as the “to-be-looked-at-ness”, a prominent characteristic of women in mainstream cinema (and TV). I’m sure many women, myself included, can relate to this urge. The urge to hide yourself, because you don’t want to be seen or perceived by men.

Things, However, shift when Villanelle sees her. Truly and utterly looks into the deepest depth of her soul, and tells her that they are “the same”. One incident that comes to mind, which, in my opinion, triggered “the rise of dark Eve” as the fans call it, is the suitcase gift. Or when Villanelle decided to send Eve a suitcase full of new and glamorous clothes. Eve is being seen, but she’s being seen by another woman. And she likes it. Even though Villanelle is a highly trained international assassin, that doesn’t seem to scare her. If anything, she is intrigued. In a conversation with her colleague Hugo (Season Two, Episode 4), Eve admits that she enjoys both, observing Villanelle and being observed by her. Perhaps she feels more comfortable being seen by a female killer than she does by the rest of society. I might be reaching here (academia is all about reaching), but if that’s not some sort of analogy for our actual world, and the trauma that women endure under patriarchy, I don’t know what is.

As the seasons progress, we start to realise that Eve is a flawed character. She also realises that about herslef pretty quickly, though it takes her some time to accept it; not being a “good” wife anymore, the “obedient” employee, no longer someone who is entirely neutral/apathetic about their own feelings, values, morals, and identity. Dark Eve (or just Eve?) not only develops a toxic (mutual) obsession towards Villanelle, she is also sexually attracted to her. The nice thing about this series is that Eve’s sexuality is never questioned, or fetishised. It’s never even made into a “thing”. No one has a “conversation” with her about it. She doesn’t “come out”. She doesn’t feel conflicted over her sexual feelings.

On the contrary, Villanelle likes to be looked at…but on her own terms. She knows that she is attractive, and while her entire identity doesn’t revolve around her sexuality and physical appearance, she clearly finds power in knowing that she is “beautiful”, a term she uses to describe herself as she examines her mirror reflection in the very first episode of season one. She loves spending money on fashion, and looking like she just stepped out of a magazine. Her fashion sense is bright, and loud, and attention-seeking. Villanelle also believes- no, she knows that she is brilliant. She knows that she’s smart, and she definitely uses her mind to manipulate almost everyone around her, including her victims. I don’t condone killing people, but from a visual/artistic perspective, witnessing the way V executes her kills can be a pleasant experience.

Villanelle can definitely be considered a classic case of psychopathy. At least in season one and two.

The bad/evil/nightmare woman trope is common in mainstream media as she stands against the good/loyal/obedient woman. And that’s not surprising given that society itself put women in very specific boxes, not allowing us to be more than one thing. And society also pits women against each other. When it comes to the presence of female psychopathy/Sociopathy within such restricting mainstream tropes, I find it to be one sided, almost entirely based on overt sexuality told from a Male Gaze (think Basic Instinct, Kill Bill, Fatal Attraction..etc). But Villanelle is different. Her character is not presented within such an overtly simplified framework. V is not a fetish. She is not there for the visual pleasure of men. She is a dangeorus violent murderer, and we love her for it!

Initially we don’t know a lot about her background, except that her real name was/is Oksana, and she was recruited from a Russian prison to work for a secret agency which aims to destabilise the world- through a series of random yet connected political murders. By the end of season one, we find out that she had a fascination with her former high school teacher Anna. They developed a sexual and romantic relationship, which was going well before Villanelle decided to kill Anna’s husband and chop his penis off. These castration murders become a big part of Villanelle’s ID as a killer as we move in the seasons.

Just like Eve, Villanelle, too, goes through a transformation so big that by the end of season 3, the term psychopath may not apply to her anymore. Through her relationship with Eve, she starts to show genuine feelings, and her obsession with her becomes real affection. She gets her heart broken. She cries. She confronts her birth mother. She shows empathy towards her found siblings. And she leaves the agency that hired her.

We don’t know what season 4 holds for them; in fact as I write this, season 3 finale hasn’t come out yet. But I do believe that their conjoined journey is just starting to reveal itself.

Here, it is perhaps vital to mention that Killing Eve is based on a series of novellas by British Author Luke Jennings. But the show itself is written (first season) and produced (2018-present) by the amazing Phoebe Waller-Bridge. I won’t dig deep into the novellas as I only listened to the audio version of the first book (Codename Villanelle) and was not impressed. But what I will say is that, PWB managed to truly turn coal into diamond ( again just my personal opinion).

Killing Eve female characters are allowed to exist in a grey area, and they are so deeply flawed, which makes them extremely human. Benson-Allott (2017) talks about the possible connection between representations of “Female Abjection” on screen, and the concept of the Female Gaze.

This Female Gaze also exists in relation to the male characters here who are positioned in a way that opposes mainstream represenations of mascuinity and manhood. I see the female gaze in Bill, a middle aged man who is not afraid to love and be loved by people of all genders. A loving father to his baby girl, and a good husband to a woman just as open as he is ( I wish we could see more of her!!!). We see it in Eve’s husband Niko who is supportive, and open about his feelings. We see it in Kenny, who is respectful of every woman in his life. Toxic Masculinity Whomsstttt???

Killing Eve characters are constructed through a female gaze. And they also look at each other from a female gaze. A gaze that is emotional and fragile and strong and transparent. And raw. A gaze that confronts. A gaze that gazes back at you. A gaze that taps into our shared humanness. It values our feelings, experiences, and how we see/perceive the world, especially as people who don’t identify as cishet men. It makes us look deep within ourselves just like we look deep into the characters on our screens.

To conclude (or perhaps to open up the conversation), Killing Eve is doing it like no other bitch.