Movie Review
Content
Running head: CRITIAL FILM REVIEW
Mona Lisa Smile: A Critical Review Through the Use of Student Development Theories
Alison L. Reimel
Loyola University Chicago
1
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
2
Film Synopsis
“The grade that matters most is the one that he gives you” (Red Om Productions, 2003,
29:52) explained the instructor of Poise 100 at Wellesley College in the fall of 1953. This
statement accurately sums up the expectation of the women during this era. Mona Lisa Smile
(Red Om Productions, 2003) follows the journey of four young women as they finish their time
at Wellesley College. With the influence of Katherine Watson (played by Julia Roberts), the
young, progressive Art History instructor, these women are challenged intellectually and
personally to look “beyond tradition, beyond definition, beyond the image” of what it means to
be a woman (1:50:30).
The film begins as the young instructor, Ms. Watson, arrived to campus hoping to make a
difference in the lives of Wellesley students, all seemingly White, heterosexual, and wealthy
females. During her first lecture, she quickly realized all of the students in her class read and
memorized the text book, reciting verbatim the names, dates, and artists of all the pieces she
showed. She was also quick to see the pressure put onto students to fulfill stereotypical roles of
women as housewives and mothers upon, if not before, graduation. Faculty and staff reinforced
these expectations and norms, as they outwardly encourage women to seek husbands and have
children, considering all other paths “subversive” (01:01:33). As the film continued, Ms.
Watson challenged students to create their own knowledge through critical thinking and
exposure to differing ideas, rather than simply memorizing material assigned to them. As
students were challenged intellectually, they are also encouraged to become the author of their
own lives rather than blindly accepting their expected role as a housewife. Specifically for
students Betty Warren and Joan Brandwyn, senior year served as a transformative experience in
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
3
which they realized that they are capable of creating their own knowledge and writing their own
lives.
Belenky’s Women’s Ways of Knowing
Characters demonstrated development intellectually and personally throughout the film.
Their cognitive structural development was evident when viewed through Mary Field Belenky,
Blythe McViker Clinchy, Nancy Rule Goldberger, and Jill Mattuck Tarule’s (1986) theory called
Women’s Ways of Knowing. Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory is based on research of 135 women
that come from different identities, but all of which either were recent college graduates or were
affiliated with agencies that support women in parenting. Researchers found that there were five
perspectives from which women come to know and understand the world.
The first perspective of Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory is silence, which is characterized
by the unquestioned acceptance of knowledge from external authorities. Women in this
perspective do not recognize anyone but authority figures as capable for possessing or creating
knowledge. Women are rendered voiceless by their culture and were commonly found to be
isolated and fearful (Love & Guthrie, 1999). The second perspective is that of received
knowledge. From this perspective is, women begin to develop a voice, but only one capable to
parroting information and knowledge gained from authorities. Similar to Perry’s dualism, there
is only what is true or untrue, which is gained from listening and receiving information from
others. The transition from the second to the third perspective was found to typically be a result
of a failed authority figure, usually a male, elevated expectations of in college, or exposure to
new and differing view points (Love & Guthrie, 1999). In operating from the third perspective,
subjective knowledge, women realize that knowledge exists within them, relying foremost on
their own experiences and feelings as the source of truth and knowledge. Knowledge is
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
4
internally felt, rather than well-thought out and reasoned. Women operating from this
perspective seek like-minded others to affirm their feelings and understanding of the world. The
fourth perspective is procedural knowledge. Women in this perspective are able to objectively
and critically receive and create knowledge. Within this perspective there are two distinct tracks
for knowing. The first is separate knowing, in which a women utilize critical thinking and
reasoning skills to process information seeing it as separate from themselves. The other track is
connected knowing, where in women tend to find truth in other’s experiences, utilizing empathy
and care to understand experiences and create knowledge. The last perspective is constructed
knowledge. In operating from this perspective, women have engaged in deep self-reflection.
They recognize that knowledge and truth is a “constant process of construction, deconstruction,
and reconstruction” (Love & Guthrie, 1999, p. 26). These women tend to be extremely selfaware and able to integrate subjective and objective ways of knowing.
Betty Warren’s Development through Belenky et al.
Based on Betty’s developmental characteristics, it is evident that her development
process was consistent with the findings of Belenky et al. (1986). Throughout the film, Betty
matriculated through the majority of the perspectives that make up the theory. There is evidence
of her operating from the received knowledge throughout most of the film, finally showing
developmental evidence of subjective knowledge, and procedural knowledge, never showing
clear characteristics of silence or constructed knowledge. Consistent with Belenky et al.’s (1986)
findings, Betty did not seem to ever operate in silence, seeing that typically this perspective
appears in economically and educationally deprived women.
At the beginning of the film, Betty’s behaviors imply that she is operating from the
second development perspective of received knowledge. All of the students, including Betty,
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
5
recite verbatim the artists, names, and dates of every painting listed in the syllabus (7:25).
During the next class, Betty hesitated when Ms. Watson asks the class if a piece of modern art,
unknown to the students, is art at all. Betty finally responded “No. It is just the rotted side of
meat” (15:56). She went on to explain that art is not good unless someone who matters says it is
good. This demonstrates that she did not see herself as capable of creating knowledge, but
merely receiving what is true and untrue, right or wrong from external authorities. During these
scenes, Betty was in not shy to utilize her voice, but her voice was merely that of others. As Ms.
Watson challenged her and the other students to consider creating their own definition ‘good art,’
Betty also began to experience dissonance between her needs and desires and others expectation
of her as a wife.
This tension acted as a vehicle for enabling her to move from receiving knowledge to
operating from a subjective knowledge perspective. Consistent with Belenky et al.’s (1986)
findings, the failure of male authority, in this case her husband’s cheating and the lack of
connection she felt with him, propeled her see herself as the authority of what is true. In an
attempt to honor her own feelings, she confronted her mother, who also failed her by looking
past the apparent pain Betty faced in order to preserve the image of her family. In an angry
voice, she said “let me tell you something” going on to declare that she filed for divorce and is
moving to New York City (01:49:00). Suddenly, she is the one to create her own internal truth
based on her feelings and experiences. She sought the comfort and affirmation of a like-minded
person, specifically Giselle Levy, another character who pushed back on women submissive role
as wife as a result of a failed father figure. In doing so, demonstrated another condition that was
found to be present in women operating from a subjective knowledge perspective (Evans,
Forney, Guido, Patton & Renn, 2010).
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
Betty closed the movie by narrating an article she was writing about Ms. Watson. She
demonstrated procedural knowledge, specifically connected knowing, as she honored Ms.
Watson’s view of world as different from many other’s, but true in her own right. Ms. Watson
helped Betty realize that “not all who wander are aimless, especially those who seek their truth
beyond tradition, beyond definition, beyond the image” (1:50:30). Though the movies ends,
Betty is demonstrating the intense reflection necessary to move into constructive knowledge.
Joan Brandwyn’s Development through Belenky et al.
Similar to Betty, Joan also showed developmental growth that is consistent with the
findings of Belenky et al. (1986). Like Betty, Joan did not demonstrate characteristics of
silence, likely due to her social, economic, and political capital. There is evidence that she
operated from a received knowledge perspective at the beginning of the film. During the first
classroom scene, Joan, like most other students, was able to recite information directly from the
book. When asked a question, she quotes verbatim from the texts asking Ms. Watson “is that
right?” grinning when Ms. Watson affirms her (00:07:25). The next class, Joan became visibly
uncomfortable when Ms. Watson asked her the class if they would consider he shown painting
any good. Joan put her head down and avoided eye contact as to deflect having to answer a
question for which there is no one right answer (00:16:56). Even as the movie progressed, Joan
showed little advancement in her way of knowing. When she confronted Ms. Watson about
receiving a ‘C’ on an assignment, Ms. Watson informed her that she merely “copied Strauss”
when she wanted Joan’s analysis of a piece of art (00:33:09). Defensive, Joan said she was
“referencing an expert” (00:33:16).
Evidence of operation from a subjective knowledge perspective was not apparent
throughout the course of Joan’s development. Later in the film, when Joan did demonstrate
6
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
7
seeing herself as capable of creating knowledge and developing an inner voice, she also
possessed the ability to critically think, reason, and reflect in the knowledge creation process.
This is representative of separate knowing within procedural knowledge (Belenky et al., 1986).
Ms. Watson prompted Joan to realize that she has in fact given thought to law school and
encourages her to apply. She seemed to weight her options and take multiple factors into
consideration as she navigated the decision of whether or not to attend law school. She then
applied and later told Betty that she was accepted to Yale. When Betty responded by saying
“you don’t want to go to be a lawyer, you’re getting married,” Joan exclaimed, “maybe I do, I
can do both! (00:50:40). Joan recognized that her experience can be different from the norm
without it being wrong.
However, in the end, Joan decided that getting married and staying in the home to raise a
family was the best choice for her. In explaining this decision to Ms. Watson, Joan demonstrates
many aspects of constructed knowledge. She articulated that in making this decision she needed
to address her wants and desires, but did not through critical reasoning process. She readily
recognized that her truth is different from Ms. Watson’s as truth, but that does not make it
wrong, a knowledge and truth is contextual (Belenky et al., 1986). She explained, “It is my
choice… I know exactly what I am doing and it does not make me any less smart. You’re the
one who said I could do anything I wanted. This is what I want” (01:32:01). She then reminded
Ms. Watson to “look beyond the image,” as that is what she asked the students to do all year. “A
housewife can have intellect, depth, and interests” (01:33:00).
Baxter Magolda’s Self-Authorship
Just as Betty and Joan developed over the course of the film in their ability to create their
own knowledge, they also developed in defining themselves outside of external authority.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
8
Marcia Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship is centered around how one comes to
define the self. Specifically, Baxter Magolda (2008) defined self-authorship as “the internal
capacity to define one beliefs, identity, and social relations” (p. 269). Her study was conducted
on only thirty men and women, all of which identified as educated and White. Aside from
gender, the characteristics of her participants are congruent with the characters in Mona Lisa
Smile. In the journey toward self-authorship, Baxter Magolda identified four phases, all of
which include elements of cognitive, personal, and relational dimensions.
The first phase is that of following formulas. Individuals in this phase are defined by
others rather than themselves and driven by acceptance from others. Decisions and plans are
made for them by external authorities such as parents, although they might frame these to sound
as though they are their own (Evans et al., 2010). These formulas can show up as career path,
college choice, marriage, or relationship role. The second phase is crossroads, in which
individuals no longer want to be defined by other people. Friction exists between the formulas
and expectations applied to them and their own wants and needs, and they seek to resolve this
tension. However, they are not yet able to act on the urge to become more autonomous for fear
of the negative reactions of others. In the third phase in development toward self-authorship, an
individual is becoming the author of one’s life. During this time, individuals have the capacity to
develop their own beliefs and stand up for them even in the face of conflict. This tends to be a
very self-reflective phase in which individuals begin to develop a strong self-concept that is base
on their self-determined belief system. The renegotiation of relationships occurs as individuals
consider their needs, wants, and values and those of the people around them. Individuals can be
vulnerable during this phase as congruence with this newfound belief system and the
renegotiation of relationships can be difficult. The final phase is that of internal foundations.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
9
During this phase, individuals are more firmly grounded in their self-developed belief system,
which results in feelings of peace, fulfillment, and strength. Individuals are aware of and open to
the possibility of change in their belief system and have the capacity to react calmly and
rationally to feelings. This self-determined belief system acts as a guide to making decisions in
all aspects of life.
Betty Warren’s Development through Self-authorship
In some of the same situations that portrayed Betty’s journey through Belenky et al.’s
(1986) theory, Betty also demonstated Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship. Betty,
like almost all the other students and faculty members a Wellesley College, allowed and
encouraged external authorities and greater society to define and make decisions for her.
Throughout most of the film, Betty bought into the idea that a woman’s role was in the home and
that “the grade that matters most is the one he gives you” (29:12). Betty desired to blend in and
be accepted by abiding by the expectations of her mother and society, considering anything but
following formulas “subversive” (01:01:33)
However, as the film progressed, so did the tension between Betty’s wants and needs and
the formula she was committed to following. She demonstrated the crossroads phase primarily
through non-verbals, as she was not yet willing to openly act upon this friction. While having
dinner with her husband, Joan and Joan’s fiancé, there was visible tension and disconnect
between Betty and her husband (49:53). She consistently sought out his affection, only to be
rejected. As this occurred time and time again, Betty appeared to be acutely aware of her
unhappiness, rejection, and frustrations, but continued to present to others that “it’s everything
we ever wanted” (35:30).
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
10
With the support of another student who recognized her internalized anger, Betty was
able to begin becoming the author of one’s life. Consistent with Baxter Magolda’s (2008)
theory, she stood up for her self, her needs, and her desires even when they were clearly
unwelcome by others such as her mother. In doing so, she renegotiated her relationship with her
mother and husband in order to honor herself and her beliefs. Although she knew her mother
would not approve, Betty told her mother that she “filed for divorce” and “since we know I am
not welcome in your home” she chose to move to New York with Giselle (1:42:25). The film
came to an end shortly after this confrontation and realization that she would no longer allow her
mother or society to dictate her path. This left little room to demonstrate evidence of
successfully creating an internal foundation.
Joan Brandwyn’s Development through Self-authorship
Like Betty, Joan developed a more advanced perspective of knowledge creation and
understanding as she simultaneously struggled to develop her own definition of self. Joan
followed formulas for much of the film, accepting others definition and expectations of her. Her
path of wife and mother is defined and reinforced by others. Joan readily accepted this role even
when challenged to think differently. When Ms. Watson brought up that Joan’s file indicated
she was studying pre-law, she asked Joan where she planned to attend law school. Joan
responded that she “hadn’t really thought about it that. After I graduate, I plan on getting
married” (00:33:45). Ms. Watson asked “and then what?” (00:33:47). Joan appeared puzzled
and said “and then I’ll be married” (00:33:48) implying that there is nothing beyond this step.
However, Joan quickly entered into crossroads, as Ms. Watson asked her where she
would go if she could attend law school if she could go anywhere (00:34:30). . Joan said Yale
and explained that Yale keeps five spots open for women, one of which was for a Wellesley
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
11
student. Ms. Watson challenges her to realize that she did in fact give a lot of thought to law
school and encourages her to consider it further. Joan appeared at first confused, and then
reflective.
During the next class, as Ms. Watson handed out exams, she instead handed Joan an
application to Yale law school. Again, at first, Joan looked unsure, but then she acted. She
applied, recognizing that her path and belief system could be different from society’s. However,
Joan does not seem to have a strong self-determined self-concept yet, which Baxter Magolda
(2008) found to be an important aspect of becoming the author of one’s own life. Though
unsure, Joan still stands up about her beliefs even in conflict. When Betty tells her that does not
really want law school because she will soon be married, Joan pushed back. She told Betty that
maybe she does want to become a lawyer and there was no reason she could not do both
(0:50:40).
In the same situation that demonstrated Joan’s ability to operate from constructed
knowledge, there existed evidence of developing Baxter Magolda’s (2008) final phase of internal
foundation. Though Joan’s internal foundation was not built upon the idea that she could be a
lawyer and a mother, she still demonstrated many aspects of this phase. In explaining to Ms.
Watson that she was going to marry and raise a family while staying in the home, she was
explained how her beliefs were indeed self-determined, not determined by others (Baxter
Magolda, 2008). She challenged Ms. Watson to recognize that the way she defined herself was
not based on social expectations, but rather as a result of deeper reflection. Although she may
fill a role that is expected of her by society, she recognized her worth and viewed herself
“beyond the image” of a housewife (01:32:00).
Practical Application
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
12
Though this Mona Lisa Smile is set in the early 1950’s, expectations that women should
be submissive to men and the pressure to receive an “MRS. degree” while in college are ever
alive. In my experience working closely with sorority women, many do not attend college
looking to create their own knowledge and become the authors of their own lives. Rather, they
tend to view older members’ knowledge as truth and may submit to the pressures of becoming
the woman that some fraternity men define as a sorority girl. Luckily, professionals that work
with sorority women and fraternity men, as well as many of the members of these organizations,
are able to create opportunities for development as they relate to Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory
of women’s ways of knowing and Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship.
Fraternity and sorority practitioners can utilize many techniques to encourage
development in the ways in which some women view knowledge and understand the world
around them when they present in ways similar to Betty and Joan. When members present as
operating from Belenky et al.’s (1984) received knowledge, they might rely solely on older
members for knowledge like what makes a good member and what should my sorority
experience be like. In some cases this can be problematic. To encourage development towards
subjective knowledge, an advisor might host a program only for new members and facilitate
activities and bring in speakers that encourage women to realize that they have control of their
experience. The goal should be to foster the realization that they create the experience, it does
not have to necessarily be what older member know and practice. This program have also serve
as a vehicle to create connected knowing. Members across organizations can share experiences,
fostering the idea that one individual does not know what it means to have a valuable sorority
experience. Experiences are contextual and truth and knowledge about created through our
collective experiences. Individually and as a group, members can develop and create what it
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
13
means to be a sorority woman on a given campus when the space and opportunity are created for
it.
Additionally, using Baxter Magolda’s (2008) self-authorship to guide the practices and
techniques of fraternity and sorority advisors can facilitate the development of self-definition
rather than conforming to sorority stereotypes or gender expectations. In my experience working
with sorority women, many do not recognize the ways in which being a member of a Greeklettered organization can reinforce stereotypical roles and expectations of both men and women.
Fraternity’s come serenade and bring flowers to the sororities while singing about how ‘hot’ the
women are, fraternity’s philanthropies require women’s groups to compete for the attention of
men, and the party culture creates an environment for sexual assault just to name a few. It is
essential that fraternity and sorority professional create opportunities for men and women to
critically look at the events, programs, and ‘traditions’ that enforce formulas of women as
defined by men. Utilize members who recognize these issues to create tension and dissonance
within the community about how some fraternity men define women and women want to define
themselves. I can envision an event that pulls from social media, popular article and blogs like
Total Frat Move and prompt when to reflect on how they are viewed and how they want to be
viewed, urging them to reclaim the definition themselves as sorority women.
Positionality
In reviewing the film and theories, and then applying then to current-day student affairs
work, it is important to not the lens from which I view them. Identifying as a White,
heterosexual, upper-middle class, and Christian woman, I identify strongly with the characters in
the film. Similarly, I also hold many of the characteristics of the researchers and participants in
their studies as an educated women working in a human services profession. These theories, the
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
14
film characters, and the application I used are personal to me, as they resonate with parts of my
identities are salient to me. Although this made of personal experience, it also makes for a
limited one. My identities, as well as the characters’, make-up possible experiences of women
with agent backgrounds. The ways in which other students with differing identities move the
these theories may look vastly different than the experiences of Betty and Joan as might the
interpretation of the film and application of the theories.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
15
References
Baxter Magolda, M. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student
Development, 49, 269-284.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s Ways of
knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F., Patton, L., & Renn, K. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Edition). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Love & Guthrie (1999). Women's ways of knowing. New Directions for Student
Services (88). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Red Om Productions (Producer), & Newell, M. (Director). (2003). Mona Lisa smile. [Motion
picture]. United States: Revolution Studios and Columbia Pictures.
Mona Lisa Smile: A Critical Review Through the Use of Student Development Theories
Alison L. Reimel
Loyola University Chicago
1
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
2
Film Synopsis
“The grade that matters most is the one that he gives you” (Red Om Productions, 2003,
29:52) explained the instructor of Poise 100 at Wellesley College in the fall of 1953. This
statement accurately sums up the expectation of the women during this era. Mona Lisa Smile
(Red Om Productions, 2003) follows the journey of four young women as they finish their time
at Wellesley College. With the influence of Katherine Watson (played by Julia Roberts), the
young, progressive Art History instructor, these women are challenged intellectually and
personally to look “beyond tradition, beyond definition, beyond the image” of what it means to
be a woman (1:50:30).
The film begins as the young instructor, Ms. Watson, arrived to campus hoping to make a
difference in the lives of Wellesley students, all seemingly White, heterosexual, and wealthy
females. During her first lecture, she quickly realized all of the students in her class read and
memorized the text book, reciting verbatim the names, dates, and artists of all the pieces she
showed. She was also quick to see the pressure put onto students to fulfill stereotypical roles of
women as housewives and mothers upon, if not before, graduation. Faculty and staff reinforced
these expectations and norms, as they outwardly encourage women to seek husbands and have
children, considering all other paths “subversive” (01:01:33). As the film continued, Ms.
Watson challenged students to create their own knowledge through critical thinking and
exposure to differing ideas, rather than simply memorizing material assigned to them. As
students were challenged intellectually, they are also encouraged to become the author of their
own lives rather than blindly accepting their expected role as a housewife. Specifically for
students Betty Warren and Joan Brandwyn, senior year served as a transformative experience in
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
3
which they realized that they are capable of creating their own knowledge and writing their own
lives.
Belenky’s Women’s Ways of Knowing
Characters demonstrated development intellectually and personally throughout the film.
Their cognitive structural development was evident when viewed through Mary Field Belenky,
Blythe McViker Clinchy, Nancy Rule Goldberger, and Jill Mattuck Tarule’s (1986) theory called
Women’s Ways of Knowing. Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory is based on research of 135 women
that come from different identities, but all of which either were recent college graduates or were
affiliated with agencies that support women in parenting. Researchers found that there were five
perspectives from which women come to know and understand the world.
The first perspective of Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory is silence, which is characterized
by the unquestioned acceptance of knowledge from external authorities. Women in this
perspective do not recognize anyone but authority figures as capable for possessing or creating
knowledge. Women are rendered voiceless by their culture and were commonly found to be
isolated and fearful (Love & Guthrie, 1999). The second perspective is that of received
knowledge. From this perspective is, women begin to develop a voice, but only one capable to
parroting information and knowledge gained from authorities. Similar to Perry’s dualism, there
is only what is true or untrue, which is gained from listening and receiving information from
others. The transition from the second to the third perspective was found to typically be a result
of a failed authority figure, usually a male, elevated expectations of in college, or exposure to
new and differing view points (Love & Guthrie, 1999). In operating from the third perspective,
subjective knowledge, women realize that knowledge exists within them, relying foremost on
their own experiences and feelings as the source of truth and knowledge. Knowledge is
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
4
internally felt, rather than well-thought out and reasoned. Women operating from this
perspective seek like-minded others to affirm their feelings and understanding of the world. The
fourth perspective is procedural knowledge. Women in this perspective are able to objectively
and critically receive and create knowledge. Within this perspective there are two distinct tracks
for knowing. The first is separate knowing, in which a women utilize critical thinking and
reasoning skills to process information seeing it as separate from themselves. The other track is
connected knowing, where in women tend to find truth in other’s experiences, utilizing empathy
and care to understand experiences and create knowledge. The last perspective is constructed
knowledge. In operating from this perspective, women have engaged in deep self-reflection.
They recognize that knowledge and truth is a “constant process of construction, deconstruction,
and reconstruction” (Love & Guthrie, 1999, p. 26). These women tend to be extremely selfaware and able to integrate subjective and objective ways of knowing.
Betty Warren’s Development through Belenky et al.
Based on Betty’s developmental characteristics, it is evident that her development
process was consistent with the findings of Belenky et al. (1986). Throughout the film, Betty
matriculated through the majority of the perspectives that make up the theory. There is evidence
of her operating from the received knowledge throughout most of the film, finally showing
developmental evidence of subjective knowledge, and procedural knowledge, never showing
clear characteristics of silence or constructed knowledge. Consistent with Belenky et al.’s (1986)
findings, Betty did not seem to ever operate in silence, seeing that typically this perspective
appears in economically and educationally deprived women.
At the beginning of the film, Betty’s behaviors imply that she is operating from the
second development perspective of received knowledge. All of the students, including Betty,
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
5
recite verbatim the artists, names, and dates of every painting listed in the syllabus (7:25).
During the next class, Betty hesitated when Ms. Watson asks the class if a piece of modern art,
unknown to the students, is art at all. Betty finally responded “No. It is just the rotted side of
meat” (15:56). She went on to explain that art is not good unless someone who matters says it is
good. This demonstrates that she did not see herself as capable of creating knowledge, but
merely receiving what is true and untrue, right or wrong from external authorities. During these
scenes, Betty was in not shy to utilize her voice, but her voice was merely that of others. As Ms.
Watson challenged her and the other students to consider creating their own definition ‘good art,’
Betty also began to experience dissonance between her needs and desires and others expectation
of her as a wife.
This tension acted as a vehicle for enabling her to move from receiving knowledge to
operating from a subjective knowledge perspective. Consistent with Belenky et al.’s (1986)
findings, the failure of male authority, in this case her husband’s cheating and the lack of
connection she felt with him, propeled her see herself as the authority of what is true. In an
attempt to honor her own feelings, she confronted her mother, who also failed her by looking
past the apparent pain Betty faced in order to preserve the image of her family. In an angry
voice, she said “let me tell you something” going on to declare that she filed for divorce and is
moving to New York City (01:49:00). Suddenly, she is the one to create her own internal truth
based on her feelings and experiences. She sought the comfort and affirmation of a like-minded
person, specifically Giselle Levy, another character who pushed back on women submissive role
as wife as a result of a failed father figure. In doing so, demonstrated another condition that was
found to be present in women operating from a subjective knowledge perspective (Evans,
Forney, Guido, Patton & Renn, 2010).
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
Betty closed the movie by narrating an article she was writing about Ms. Watson. She
demonstrated procedural knowledge, specifically connected knowing, as she honored Ms.
Watson’s view of world as different from many other’s, but true in her own right. Ms. Watson
helped Betty realize that “not all who wander are aimless, especially those who seek their truth
beyond tradition, beyond definition, beyond the image” (1:50:30). Though the movies ends,
Betty is demonstrating the intense reflection necessary to move into constructive knowledge.
Joan Brandwyn’s Development through Belenky et al.
Similar to Betty, Joan also showed developmental growth that is consistent with the
findings of Belenky et al. (1986). Like Betty, Joan did not demonstrate characteristics of
silence, likely due to her social, economic, and political capital. There is evidence that she
operated from a received knowledge perspective at the beginning of the film. During the first
classroom scene, Joan, like most other students, was able to recite information directly from the
book. When asked a question, she quotes verbatim from the texts asking Ms. Watson “is that
right?” grinning when Ms. Watson affirms her (00:07:25). The next class, Joan became visibly
uncomfortable when Ms. Watson asked her the class if they would consider he shown painting
any good. Joan put her head down and avoided eye contact as to deflect having to answer a
question for which there is no one right answer (00:16:56). Even as the movie progressed, Joan
showed little advancement in her way of knowing. When she confronted Ms. Watson about
receiving a ‘C’ on an assignment, Ms. Watson informed her that she merely “copied Strauss”
when she wanted Joan’s analysis of a piece of art (00:33:09). Defensive, Joan said she was
“referencing an expert” (00:33:16).
Evidence of operation from a subjective knowledge perspective was not apparent
throughout the course of Joan’s development. Later in the film, when Joan did demonstrate
6
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
7
seeing herself as capable of creating knowledge and developing an inner voice, she also
possessed the ability to critically think, reason, and reflect in the knowledge creation process.
This is representative of separate knowing within procedural knowledge (Belenky et al., 1986).
Ms. Watson prompted Joan to realize that she has in fact given thought to law school and
encourages her to apply. She seemed to weight her options and take multiple factors into
consideration as she navigated the decision of whether or not to attend law school. She then
applied and later told Betty that she was accepted to Yale. When Betty responded by saying
“you don’t want to go to be a lawyer, you’re getting married,” Joan exclaimed, “maybe I do, I
can do both! (00:50:40). Joan recognized that her experience can be different from the norm
without it being wrong.
However, in the end, Joan decided that getting married and staying in the home to raise a
family was the best choice for her. In explaining this decision to Ms. Watson, Joan demonstrates
many aspects of constructed knowledge. She articulated that in making this decision she needed
to address her wants and desires, but did not through critical reasoning process. She readily
recognized that her truth is different from Ms. Watson’s as truth, but that does not make it
wrong, a knowledge and truth is contextual (Belenky et al., 1986). She explained, “It is my
choice… I know exactly what I am doing and it does not make me any less smart. You’re the
one who said I could do anything I wanted. This is what I want” (01:32:01). She then reminded
Ms. Watson to “look beyond the image,” as that is what she asked the students to do all year. “A
housewife can have intellect, depth, and interests” (01:33:00).
Baxter Magolda’s Self-Authorship
Just as Betty and Joan developed over the course of the film in their ability to create their
own knowledge, they also developed in defining themselves outside of external authority.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
8
Marcia Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship is centered around how one comes to
define the self. Specifically, Baxter Magolda (2008) defined self-authorship as “the internal
capacity to define one beliefs, identity, and social relations” (p. 269). Her study was conducted
on only thirty men and women, all of which identified as educated and White. Aside from
gender, the characteristics of her participants are congruent with the characters in Mona Lisa
Smile. In the journey toward self-authorship, Baxter Magolda identified four phases, all of
which include elements of cognitive, personal, and relational dimensions.
The first phase is that of following formulas. Individuals in this phase are defined by
others rather than themselves and driven by acceptance from others. Decisions and plans are
made for them by external authorities such as parents, although they might frame these to sound
as though they are their own (Evans et al., 2010). These formulas can show up as career path,
college choice, marriage, or relationship role. The second phase is crossroads, in which
individuals no longer want to be defined by other people. Friction exists between the formulas
and expectations applied to them and their own wants and needs, and they seek to resolve this
tension. However, they are not yet able to act on the urge to become more autonomous for fear
of the negative reactions of others. In the third phase in development toward self-authorship, an
individual is becoming the author of one’s life. During this time, individuals have the capacity to
develop their own beliefs and stand up for them even in the face of conflict. This tends to be a
very self-reflective phase in which individuals begin to develop a strong self-concept that is base
on their self-determined belief system. The renegotiation of relationships occurs as individuals
consider their needs, wants, and values and those of the people around them. Individuals can be
vulnerable during this phase as congruence with this newfound belief system and the
renegotiation of relationships can be difficult. The final phase is that of internal foundations.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
9
During this phase, individuals are more firmly grounded in their self-developed belief system,
which results in feelings of peace, fulfillment, and strength. Individuals are aware of and open to
the possibility of change in their belief system and have the capacity to react calmly and
rationally to feelings. This self-determined belief system acts as a guide to making decisions in
all aspects of life.
Betty Warren’s Development through Self-authorship
In some of the same situations that portrayed Betty’s journey through Belenky et al.’s
(1986) theory, Betty also demonstated Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship. Betty,
like almost all the other students and faculty members a Wellesley College, allowed and
encouraged external authorities and greater society to define and make decisions for her.
Throughout most of the film, Betty bought into the idea that a woman’s role was in the home and
that “the grade that matters most is the one he gives you” (29:12). Betty desired to blend in and
be accepted by abiding by the expectations of her mother and society, considering anything but
following formulas “subversive” (01:01:33)
However, as the film progressed, so did the tension between Betty’s wants and needs and
the formula she was committed to following. She demonstrated the crossroads phase primarily
through non-verbals, as she was not yet willing to openly act upon this friction. While having
dinner with her husband, Joan and Joan’s fiancé, there was visible tension and disconnect
between Betty and her husband (49:53). She consistently sought out his affection, only to be
rejected. As this occurred time and time again, Betty appeared to be acutely aware of her
unhappiness, rejection, and frustrations, but continued to present to others that “it’s everything
we ever wanted” (35:30).
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
10
With the support of another student who recognized her internalized anger, Betty was
able to begin becoming the author of one’s life. Consistent with Baxter Magolda’s (2008)
theory, she stood up for her self, her needs, and her desires even when they were clearly
unwelcome by others such as her mother. In doing so, she renegotiated her relationship with her
mother and husband in order to honor herself and her beliefs. Although she knew her mother
would not approve, Betty told her mother that she “filed for divorce” and “since we know I am
not welcome in your home” she chose to move to New York with Giselle (1:42:25). The film
came to an end shortly after this confrontation and realization that she would no longer allow her
mother or society to dictate her path. This left little room to demonstrate evidence of
successfully creating an internal foundation.
Joan Brandwyn’s Development through Self-authorship
Like Betty, Joan developed a more advanced perspective of knowledge creation and
understanding as she simultaneously struggled to develop her own definition of self. Joan
followed formulas for much of the film, accepting others definition and expectations of her. Her
path of wife and mother is defined and reinforced by others. Joan readily accepted this role even
when challenged to think differently. When Ms. Watson brought up that Joan’s file indicated
she was studying pre-law, she asked Joan where she planned to attend law school. Joan
responded that she “hadn’t really thought about it that. After I graduate, I plan on getting
married” (00:33:45). Ms. Watson asked “and then what?” (00:33:47). Joan appeared puzzled
and said “and then I’ll be married” (00:33:48) implying that there is nothing beyond this step.
However, Joan quickly entered into crossroads, as Ms. Watson asked her where she
would go if she could attend law school if she could go anywhere (00:34:30). . Joan said Yale
and explained that Yale keeps five spots open for women, one of which was for a Wellesley
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
11
student. Ms. Watson challenges her to realize that she did in fact give a lot of thought to law
school and encourages her to consider it further. Joan appeared at first confused, and then
reflective.
During the next class, as Ms. Watson handed out exams, she instead handed Joan an
application to Yale law school. Again, at first, Joan looked unsure, but then she acted. She
applied, recognizing that her path and belief system could be different from society’s. However,
Joan does not seem to have a strong self-determined self-concept yet, which Baxter Magolda
(2008) found to be an important aspect of becoming the author of one’s own life. Though
unsure, Joan still stands up about her beliefs even in conflict. When Betty tells her that does not
really want law school because she will soon be married, Joan pushed back. She told Betty that
maybe she does want to become a lawyer and there was no reason she could not do both
(0:50:40).
In the same situation that demonstrated Joan’s ability to operate from constructed
knowledge, there existed evidence of developing Baxter Magolda’s (2008) final phase of internal
foundation. Though Joan’s internal foundation was not built upon the idea that she could be a
lawyer and a mother, she still demonstrated many aspects of this phase. In explaining to Ms.
Watson that she was going to marry and raise a family while staying in the home, she was
explained how her beliefs were indeed self-determined, not determined by others (Baxter
Magolda, 2008). She challenged Ms. Watson to recognize that the way she defined herself was
not based on social expectations, but rather as a result of deeper reflection. Although she may
fill a role that is expected of her by society, she recognized her worth and viewed herself
“beyond the image” of a housewife (01:32:00).
Practical Application
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
12
Though this Mona Lisa Smile is set in the early 1950’s, expectations that women should
be submissive to men and the pressure to receive an “MRS. degree” while in college are ever
alive. In my experience working closely with sorority women, many do not attend college
looking to create their own knowledge and become the authors of their own lives. Rather, they
tend to view older members’ knowledge as truth and may submit to the pressures of becoming
the woman that some fraternity men define as a sorority girl. Luckily, professionals that work
with sorority women and fraternity men, as well as many of the members of these organizations,
are able to create opportunities for development as they relate to Belenky et al.’s (1986) theory
of women’s ways of knowing and Baxter Magolda’s (2008) theory of self-authorship.
Fraternity and sorority practitioners can utilize many techniques to encourage
development in the ways in which some women view knowledge and understand the world
around them when they present in ways similar to Betty and Joan. When members present as
operating from Belenky et al.’s (1984) received knowledge, they might rely solely on older
members for knowledge like what makes a good member and what should my sorority
experience be like. In some cases this can be problematic. To encourage development towards
subjective knowledge, an advisor might host a program only for new members and facilitate
activities and bring in speakers that encourage women to realize that they have control of their
experience. The goal should be to foster the realization that they create the experience, it does
not have to necessarily be what older member know and practice. This program have also serve
as a vehicle to create connected knowing. Members across organizations can share experiences,
fostering the idea that one individual does not know what it means to have a valuable sorority
experience. Experiences are contextual and truth and knowledge about created through our
collective experiences. Individually and as a group, members can develop and create what it
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
13
means to be a sorority woman on a given campus when the space and opportunity are created for
it.
Additionally, using Baxter Magolda’s (2008) self-authorship to guide the practices and
techniques of fraternity and sorority advisors can facilitate the development of self-definition
rather than conforming to sorority stereotypes or gender expectations. In my experience working
with sorority women, many do not recognize the ways in which being a member of a Greeklettered organization can reinforce stereotypical roles and expectations of both men and women.
Fraternity’s come serenade and bring flowers to the sororities while singing about how ‘hot’ the
women are, fraternity’s philanthropies require women’s groups to compete for the attention of
men, and the party culture creates an environment for sexual assault just to name a few. It is
essential that fraternity and sorority professional create opportunities for men and women to
critically look at the events, programs, and ‘traditions’ that enforce formulas of women as
defined by men. Utilize members who recognize these issues to create tension and dissonance
within the community about how some fraternity men define women and women want to define
themselves. I can envision an event that pulls from social media, popular article and blogs like
Total Frat Move and prompt when to reflect on how they are viewed and how they want to be
viewed, urging them to reclaim the definition themselves as sorority women.
Positionality
In reviewing the film and theories, and then applying then to current-day student affairs
work, it is important to not the lens from which I view them. Identifying as a White,
heterosexual, upper-middle class, and Christian woman, I identify strongly with the characters in
the film. Similarly, I also hold many of the characteristics of the researchers and participants in
their studies as an educated women working in a human services profession. These theories, the
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
14
film characters, and the application I used are personal to me, as they resonate with parts of my
identities are salient to me. Although this made of personal experience, it also makes for a
limited one. My identities, as well as the characters’, make-up possible experiences of women
with agent backgrounds. The ways in which other students with differing identities move the
these theories may look vastly different than the experiences of Betty and Joan as might the
interpretation of the film and application of the theories.
CRITICAL FILM REVIEW
15
References
Baxter Magolda, M. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student
Development, 49, 269-284.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s Ways of
knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F., Patton, L., & Renn, K. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Edition). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Love & Guthrie (1999). Women's ways of knowing. New Directions for Student
Services (88). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Red Om Productions (Producer), & Newell, M. (Director). (2003). Mona Lisa smile. [Motion
picture]. United States: Revolution Studios and Columbia Pictures.
