Acknowledgement is the First Step

It appears that there is a strong belief among many in the theatre community that theatre is largely exempt from the prejudices (racial and gender inequity) that plague the rest of the world.  Having engaged in and read several discussions online that touched on this subject, I have been dismayed by the wall of resistance erected against acknowledging what statistics and reputable studies make clear.  This defensive wall is invariably erected along racial and gender lines.  

When I talk about inequity, I am not blaming the random/curious/dedicated male reader.  At any time in a discussion, a listener has a choice to identify himself/herself as a supportive ally.  I appreciate supportive allies.  It's hard for any movement to succeed without them.  When I make a post on facebook about female playwrights receiving the highest awards for writing this year, and male friends in theatre "like" the post, I feel particular appreciation to those members.  It has a healing effect.  Those men appear to be applauding women and rooting for them to succeed (so it appears to me).  They become allies, and part of a developing solution.

It is always a shock to me in discussions on inequity how readily some human beings will deny the experience of others.  Whether a discussion on race or gender, one sees this happen all the time.  There is a huge resistance to believing that our own group may be in some way responsible for oppressing another group, for these revelations invariably lead to questioning one's own behavior, and how our behavior, perhaps inadvertent (learned or habitual, unconsciously entitled, even simply self-absorbed) plays into the issue at hand.  These feelings are a call to become part of the solution.  I believe that if we push aside the inner voice with a defensive posture, we make the wrong choice.  Our resistant attitude appears to hide the whisper:  "It's never happened to me, so how do I know it really happens?"  Well, that's the point, isn't it?

Theatre is a slippery beast in many ways.  It wears the mask of permissive liberality, can give true voice to change, while in practice limiting and constraining the majority of it's artists.  It's a VERY small pie.  

There are number of reputable studies on the challenges which clearly face women playwrights in getting produced. There is debate about exactly what the causes may be. Emily Glassberg-Sands conducted a key study regarding this the findings of which contributed to sparking this important debate.  

 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/theater/24play.html?_r=0 

The fact the women artistic directors' choices appeared to be most prejudicial against female writing is painful but important. Two reasons for this have been suggested as women being harder on women when it comes to female characters and how we are portrayed. And a certain sensitivity (or internalized sexism) these women may feel from their own position.

It has been suggested that perhaps women's work isn't good enough and doesn't stand up to men's and this is why it isn't being produced in equal measure.  That women just need to write better plays! It's hard to know how to respond to such an assumption.  Stella Duffy who writes for The Guardian points to remedies for our issue of under-production. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/12/women-theatre-stand-up-inequality

The disparity between the success of female novelists and female playwrights would suggest that there are some key aspects that make theater different from book writing.  Historically, female actors and playwrights have had a very hard time. My study suggests that the body of the woman or even man on the stage (speaking with the voice of the female playwright) is particularly 'problematic' for society.   A novelists words enter and stimulate the private imagination of the reader, whereas a playwright's text emerges from the body of the player.  Words are given physical voice and presence.  The watching audience is implicated in this act:  the watcher being watched.

One way to trace this is to go back to Charles II's removal of the ban of women on stage, and why there had been a ban for so long.  Knowing what a sensualist Charles was may frame this choice in our minds.   Women of the stage were immediately viewed in the light of prostitutes.  The word actress and the word prostitute were at least euphemistically synonymous for most of our history.  

When women entered the stage, they took the jobs of male actors who had trained since boyhood to portray women.  In a reversal, these male actors were now banned from playing women.  The film Stage Beauty eloquently expresses the plight of one such male actor...  I think there is an indelible connection between the history of women actors and women playwrights and their issues 

(more on this history and it's connection to today to be shared in later posts)

Getting back to now, studies on both sides of the Atlantic show that 40% of playwrights are women and approximately 17%-19% of plays produced of both living and dead playwrights in Britain and America are by women. This is what needs redress. Furthermore, in blind submissions about 40% of plays chosen will be by women - so it's not a matter of talent or quality. Most establishments don't do blind submissions.   (I have entered two recently that were. Perhaps this is changing.  If so it's an exciting shift).  

Socially, women still do most of the raising of children. We still need "a room of our own" to write. Men have more support in the family to do their work while women are split many ways and often therefore come into their own later in life. I think there need to be more contests geared at older playwrights for this reason. Particularly if the contest is geared to women - having it be women under 30 doesn't make much sense in our population as we need the leg up later in life.

I think women have been shocked by these studies. I would ask that any male playwrights who may have a tendency to take a defensive posture on this put it aside and find out what women in theatre experience...read studies and listen before dismissing this out of hand.  I am interested to find male actors more supportive with regard to these issues.  They have seen what goes on from the shop floor and experienced their own very particular brand of powerlessness, perhaps...?

We all have a preconceived notion at some point that theater is a more equal setting. After a fairly long career my experience has shown me that it is in fact a bastion of inequality... 

(though a wonderful dramatic and hilarious place to share deep human connection all at the same time...)

And so ends my introduction to a blog that is dedicated to delving deeper into the historical causes of these issues, sideways into our current social climate, and narrowly, into my practical personal experience in theatre, the poignant side by side with the humorous.  More to come!  

What has been your most surprising or shocking discovery about the theatre to date?  From  your own experience or that of others?