The Clyde Fitch Report: I didn’t used to think of myself as a feminist playwright. A feminist, yes. I have never thought of it as the “other ‘F’ word” or shied away from the label.
But a “feminist playwright”? No. That title belongs to eminent writers like Caryl Churchill or Penelope Skinner, who I admire from afar. That’s not me. I’m just a writer who happens to also care about gender equality.
5 comments:
I love this concept of a sisterhood. Just after winning her Emmy last weekend, Amy Schumer was asked how much of her success she owed to the help of other women. Her answer was something like, I don't owe just my career to women, I owe my whole life to them. Similarly, a group of women was asked recently what their favorite thing about being a woman was. The majority answer was along the lines of "the bond that I share with other women". I think we are finally entering a time in the progression of equality where the bond that women share is enough to help each other in the professional world. The word feminist has such a negative connotation, when really all it means, is equal rights for all genders. So when we ask ourselves, if we are feminist, play right or not, the only question we need to ask ourselves is if we believe in equal rights. If you do, congrats, you're a part of the sisterhood.
I really hate that feminism has become a scary word that creates tension whenever it is spoken. Feminism should be nothing more than believing in equal rights and acting on that belief in the real world. I thought it was interesting that this woman didn't consider herself a feminist playwright, just a playwright who happened to care about gender equality and included those themes in her plays, along with strong female characters. But that is all that should define a feminist playwright, because feminism is not some scary, complicated concept that it has been twisted into. It is simple. It is respect and equality between all genders and it is also supporting other women, because too often women are in competition with each other. Too often women have seen in movies and television that there is only room for one strong female in a group of men, the token female character, the Black Widow if you will. SO they push down other women to get to the top. Well, I have news for you, there is room for just as many women as men at the top, and we will get there faster by helping each other instead of fighting our way up there. It's time to become part of the sisterhood.
I think the idea of putting labels in front of what kind of playwright someone is is interesting. It reminds me of how Allison Bechdel identified herself as a “lesbian cartoonist” in her book, because a lot of her graphic novels centered around those issues, and she was featured in many lesbian magazines. It’s interesting how, as artists, we tend to associate our art with our identity. I would hope that more and more playwrights are identifying as feminists, because I, as a woman in theater, want more feminist and female- empowering content in theater in general. I think that if there are feminist playwrights out there who do write plays solely to purport their feminist views, that’s awesome, but I think that if people get that image when they see “feminist playwright”, they have the wrong idea. I love what the writer of the article says about “shifting her focus,” that, as a playwright, she has a small percentage of power over what happens in theater; she can write more female roles, more stronger female roles, and better represent women in theater in general. I admire people like her who are working to push boundaries in theater, even in subtle ways.
I kind of love this article. On the one hand, she is well to focus on The Ziegfield Club as a fantastic group that deserves more attention. The more important focus, however, is that we continue to move closer to an educated description of what it means to be a feminist. What is also important to note is that it does not mean that the play has to be about 'feminism' for it to be feminist. Rather, that in writing new work we need be intentional about female protagonists, and the way that the gender binary is being portrayed, and whether or not female characters are being written as well-rounded as the male characters. The fact of the matter is that we need to make gender equality the basis, such that the future of new work in our life (and reimagined old work) is one founded on equality of people of all gender identities. I have had many an argument over portraying things 'as they would be'. This does not hold up when it is considered that we are image makers, and that our audience will reflect our work. This is a greater responsibility than most consider to theatre makers, and we need be aware of it as we continue to make work.
We are an industry of artists and as such, we have a responsibility to our audiences. We have a responsibility to write plays about women, to workshop plays about disabled people, to produce plays about people of color, etc... and to encourage other theater-makers to write/create for the world they want to see, not the one we have right now. I think that Jack makes an excellent point: excluding minorities because we should portray the world we live in is cowardice. These people exist, you just don't hear about them because they are not talked about. Give diversity a voice, and you'll be surprised to see just how many of these people there are, ready to tell their story. We HAVE to write plays about women, and about ALL women too. That's women of color, disabled women, transgender women, old women, masculine women. Because if it makes a difference for just one person, one little girl in the audience, then we have honored our responsibility as artists and storytellers. No story told onstage is ever true to the world we live in, that's the very nature of theater. Let's take advantage of the freedom that the stage grants us, and trust our audiences to follow us on the way to a more colorful, inclusive place.
Post a Comment