The promotional poster. Via Rattlestick Playwrights Theater.
So, I went to see a play this weekend: That Pretty Pretty; or The Rape Play, by Sheila Callaghan, currently playing at Rattlestick Playwrights Theater. With a title like that, you can expect some button-pushing, and the play did not disappoint on that front.
I don’t want to give it away, because if you’re in the New York area, I would encourage you to see it (it runs through March 15), because in addition to being funny and grotesque and worrisome, it’s explicitly about issues of concern to feminists: the representation of women in popular culture–movies, television, and of course, plays–and how that can mean “raunch” culture; food, weight, and body issues (an aerobicizing Jane Fonda appears frequently as a coach to the other characters), competition betweeen women for male approval, and the intersection of race/ethnicity, religion, and disability with gender oppression.
Yeah, that’s a lot to handle, but all of these issues circle arounnd power and control: who is allowed control over a given individual’s body, who controls the images that are produced and distributed in the contemporary US, how control can be–and is–enforced on both personal and national levels, in silence and peace, in “fun” cultural products and representations, as well as with threats and outright violence. The thing I liked best about it (other than I left with a lot to think about) is how, by placing all of these types and methods of oppression together, without trying to explicitly link them, causally, Callaghan demonstrates that they are really all of a piece (and for those of you just tuning in, that piece would be The Patriarchy).
It’s not merely an intellectual exercise, either. While it deals with some Big Issues, its non-traditional structure and often pointedly non-realistic acting kept it from being lecture-y. In the moment, the production was completely engaging, if not always instantly transparent (there is quite a bit of meta-theatrical stuff going on throughout). I found the acting quite strong, and the entire cast, while more than game for all the ridiculous, silly, and/or offensive stuff the play required of them (Lisa Joyce as Agnes particularly stood out), they never lacked the brains or heart necessary to make the material “land.” This isn’t an unqualified rave; there were a very few moments that didn’t work as well for me, or which seemed slightly dated, but these were minor flaws, and the questions the play raises–but never answers–more than make up for them.
All this to say: go see it. In light of the book discussion we had last week, I would urge you (and I’m sure Callaghan would too, even if it weren’t her own work) to support cultural products made by women. While that’s no guarantee of quality–or even feminist values–it does make a difference. By supporting women’s work with our money, time, and attention, whether that work manifests itself as a book, a movie, a play, a lecture, or a material good of whatever kind (Pilgrim Soul would cry “Etsy!”), we’re saying that women’s voices, thoughts, perspectives, experiences, abilities, labor, et cetera, matter.
If you’ve seen the play, I’d love to hear your thoughts on it. If you haven’t, well, what are you waiting for? In either case, you can leave comments and links to your recent favorite woman-made products below.
In response to the last sentence:
I saw “Wendy and Lucy” this weekend. Was it depressing? Yes. (Sarah.of.a…. maybe save this one for another time.) Did I listen to Elliott Smith for a while afterward? Yep. BUT… was it a well-crafted, well-written movie with a female protagonist, female writer/director, and absolutely nothing in it about finding a man/having a baby/otherwise obeying the patriarchy? Hell, yes.
Refreshing, really. Glad I saw it.
I wish I was living in New York, or could afford the time to go there. “That Pretty Pretty” sounds like it’d be up my alley: recently I’ve been complaining to anyone who’d listen about how male dominated theater is, and how feminist issues aren’t seen as being that important in drama (and literature in general). Even though I love drama and theater going, it is incredibly sad that there are so few plays by women being produced.
Though I’ve lived in two cities with decent theater (Providence and Philadelphia), I’ve only seen one play actually written by a woman. It was Paula Vogel’s “How I Learned to Drive,” and it was put on by a community college. Vogel claims to be a feminist, but yikes. That play (I read it, too, so it wasn’t just the particular production) seemed very rape apologist to me.
Ploratrix, I think Callaghan owes a lot to Vogel (and I mean that in a very good way). HILtD is a troublesome play, which is one reason why I love it, and why I love to teach it. I’ve gotten a lot of comments like yours from students, who can’t see a pedophile as anything other than a straight-up-monster, and so dislike the play/Vogel for trying to humanize him. Not only are pedophiles human, (turning them into monsters doesn’t do anything to help us understand how the trope of predation threads through so much of sexuality, esp. as delineated in the play), but the “truth” of the relationship between Peck and Li’l Bit is about more than just sexual abuse. I would definitely recommend PV’s other works, too, to see or to read.
I don’t necessarily dislike Vogel for humanizing a pedophile (as you noted, pedophiles are… well, humans), but I suppose that aspect is a little troublesome to me.
I wasn’t fond of the play after seeing it and some of my initial impressions have remained the same over time, but once I read “How I Learned to Drive” and some critiques of it out of Bedford’s Introduction to Drama for a class, my dislike for the play (and more so for PV) was pretty much cemented. But that dislike is problematic – the anthology included an unsettling (to me, anyway) analysis in it that incorporated quotes from Vogel about how in HILtD she’s questioning the “victim” culture of the US and viewed Li’l Bit’s character as a phoenix rising from the ashes (when the character in her adult life is an alcoholic, seems somewhat suicidal, etc.), and I think my judgment of the play has been compromised by Vogel’s statements. I’m aware that’s not terribly fair, because she could have been taken out of context, and also because authorial intent shouldn’t paint over the actual content of a piece.
And if nothing else, HILtD is important because it highlights the unnerving truth that child molesters and rapists are not only often people we know, but also sympathetic and all too human figures. Despite my feelings regarding HILtD, I am definitely pleased to see the play being taught!
Sorry for the rambling comment. Anyway, when I get some time, I shall check out some other PV.
I’m so happy this play is getting such a good response. I saw a reading of it in the Bay Area about a year ago and found it extremely thought-provoking and groundbreaking (particularly since Callaghan is also responding to the multitude of male playwrights writing about females – from the obvious misogynists to the guys who are being “sympathetic.”) I highly recommend people in New York go to see it – I wish I could be there myself. Sheila Callaghan is one of my female heroes…