She described it as “extraordinary” how much her first few months in charge of the theatre have upset critics.
The director also said some of the language people use to describe her is “blood boiling” – revealing that one senior arts figure continually refers to her as “naughty”.
8 comments:
I think with in the last year I have become so much more self aware of the words I use when describing others, and hearing what words others use to describe people, especially the difference when talking about a woman or a man. I completely agree with Emma Rice when she says that no one calls a man 'loud and opinionated'. In a professional setting and giving and honest review, those words would not be used to describe a man, but yet Rice is. I don't want to speak on whether it was warranted or not, because I was not their to experience the way Rice works, or anything, and the article does not throughly cover it. However, the word choice is so specific and just another blatant way that women are put down in the professional industry. Among my peers I have found myself having conversations with people, where we end up describing someones actions as 'looking for attention' and its always about women, not men. Saying a man did something for attention its a little odd, the norm would be to defend them almost by saying they are an outgoing person, always on, have a strong personality, but not in the way women are described. I think its something that needs to change, and with what conversations have been happening among the women in my class, it needs to start with us, we have to hold ourself accountable and not let others get away with it.
I feel like I’ve read an article about this woman before, but I’m not entirely sure it was the same person, regardless; this is a classic case of women-in-power. I feel like the unfamiliarity surrounding the concept of women in power is what causes people to use these topically inappropriate adjectives. The Globe is a hugely famous theatre, and I’m sure anything they produce could be considered “loud” and “opinionated” and how could these productions not be? It’s theatre, and in theatre, there aren’t many fluff pieces. These adjectives are definitely in a more negative connotation than any I’ve heard used around companies when male directors have been the topic, or even mentioned in the theatrical structure. I applaud Emma Rice’s ability to take these issues to light without becoming embittered and rude in her responses. When fighting something like this, especially the higher up who describes her as “naughty” it’s beyond easy to become dark and brooding and upset.
I can’t even begin to imagine how difficult it must be to run such a historically relevant and prolific theater in the first place, let alone as a woman, who has to work so much harder to be trusted and seen as legitimate. I’ve heard about a lot of lots of other women in positions of criticism deleting their social medias/ not reading reviews purely to avoid the ugly sexist language that is so commonly used against them. The idea of “loud and opinionated” (unladylike) women vs “docile and quiet” (ladylike) women is so incredibly antiquated, yet it’s still so prevalent in everyday society. Men and women alike continue to be surprised when a woman or girl speaks up for herself, or shouts, or has an opinion, or argues, or shows her own point of view on something. Young girls are encouraged to not step on anybody’s toes, while boys are encouraged to be strong and state their opinions as facts. This creates a harmful dichotomy that makes it so women’s voices are hardly heard over those of men, in almost every industry and social situation. As the writer says, theater is meant to be loud and unabashed; why don’t we expect women to be those things as well?
This story is just so unbelievable that things like this are still going on to this extent in the theater world. With years of experience in the theater industry, Emma Rice must be such a wise director who's not only seen a whole lot of artistic challenges for the company but also a large share of multiple decades filled with sexism as well. It's a shame to think that people will still dare to make comments and remarks like these as soon as they see a woman in a high position. This reminds me of a discussion we had in our Foundations of Drama course just today. We were discussing the play School of Wives by Moliere and it's incredibly relevant to this. In the play, Arnolphe (our main antagonist) is so afraid of being seen as weak that he decides to fabricate his own faithful and ignorant wife by not teaching her anything. This extremely selfish, sexist behavior seems to relate to the men posing questions towards Rice. Now, as soon as Rice begins to speak up against the sexist behavior, the man is confused, shocked that such a thing could even happen. I respect Rice's neutral responses that don't create a heated situation but instead make people think about the sexist words they use to describe her.
This is infuriating, especially in light of her "stepping down" or dismissal from the Globe in the last couple weeks. I remembered reading somewhere about her seeking to achieve that 50/50 split, and in light of her departure the Globe appears to be undercutting her attempts at gender parity. I also remember reading about how much the Globe was lauded for its selection of a woman to fill the role of artistic director. It is as though the Globe used her to assuage culturally "hot button" fears. I wonder how the board of the Globe would have handled a male artistic director that made the same choices. Would there have been more leniency? A cursory glance at both the executive team Emma Rice served alongside shows that of the six executive members, she was the sole female. Hopefully the Globe retains some of her hopes and goals, even though they did not keep her.
This is an infuriating instance of a woman in power who does not receive the same treatment because she is a woman and not a man, and it is particularly grating in light of her "stepping down/dismissal" that came less than a week later. I have been referred to as many things "cold, detached, manipulative" are just among the few and when I think back to the activities that led to those terms, I know that a man would never have been called those things. Then you flip the coin and you get called terms of endearment like "sweetheart, baby, doll, etc", all of which diminish the respect you receive in a room when you are in a position of authority. These instances that the article forces me to recall was not even me in a position of authority but rather lower on the totem poll trying to start my career. I think that Rice is correct when she says that you have to grow a thick skin, and while that is frustrating too because the artistic world is hard enough to break into, why are we making it harder on each other to succeed?
The Loud Woman’s Lament
Once upon a time
I put hands to my face
I accepted compliments
With a shrug instead of grace
Friends and family told me
To smile and give my thanks
For DNA had gifted me
Something so many chase
One day I decided
Maybe they were right
I stood up taller
Big and bold
Believed the blinding light
Now I tell them thank you
Now I say
“I know.”
And now they laugh
Say I’m naïve
And call me their new foe
My pride is a precursor
To some grand fall from grace
And the louder I cry
The louder I wail
The thicker the walls I face
How am I to balance
What I am and
What they want
The answer is
Don’t give a shit
And never be undone
No wonder women whisper
While men and martyrs rage
I’d rather die
Let history lie
Than let them write my page
While it seems that her departure from the theatre was mainly due to a direction that simply wasn't compatible with some of the more tradition members, the criticism o this woman after her departure has been anything but a simple acknowledgment of creative differences. While browsing articles to comment on this week, so many of them were on this topic, but I kept wanting to comment more on the way people were criticising this woman than what the article was actually saying, so I'm so glad I found this one. When anyone leaves a position, unless it is due to extreme error on their part and not just differences of opinion, I feel that they should be treated with respect as an artist with a different perspective than what those who hired him or her originally expected them to have. I know some of her ideas were very radical, creating the 50/50 gender split with Shakespeare is not an easy task, so it is a little confusing as to how they did not see how she was going to work before and when the hired her. I'm glad she decided to speak out against this criticism and confront those who are making unjustified and unnecessary comments about her or her gender instead of her work, because that is how the critic atmosphere of theatre will change for the better.
Post a Comment