Joan Dawson

In the Next Room or The Vibrator Play (8/29/2010)

annette — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:00:00 +0000

Washington, D.C.

“Please turn off anything that beeps, buzzes, or vibrates.” And with that comic admonishment to the audience, Pulitzer Prize-nominated writer Sarah Ruhl’s play about the advent of vibrators began.

The setting is Dr. Givings home, where his living room is located next to, and within earshot of, the “surgical theater.” Here, Dr. Givings (played by Eric Hissom) treats hysteria, a “medical ailment” dating back to about 300 BC, when Hippocrates thought women’s madness stemmed from their womb. Meanwhile, back on stage, the good doctor’s wife (Katie deBuys) wonders why patients come in with symptoms of anxiety and leave, only anxious to come back again—and soon.

Above the noise of “oh-ooh-oooh,” Dr. Givings himself groans about the bygone days of manual stimulation: “It was like a child’s game–trying to rub the head and the stomache at the same time.” Why, the procedure could take up to an hour! With the electric massager, “paroxyms” can be had within three to five minutes time and, if they don’t, um, come, Dr. Givings hands the tedious task over to his competent assistant Annie (played by Sarah Marshall).

While patients such as Mrs. Daldry (Kimberly Gilbert) and a male patient named Leo Irving (Cody Nickell) make it clear their emotional needs are not being met–Mrs. Daldry cannot have children and Mr. Irving cannot find the passionate love that his creative soul desires—the doctor steadfastly believes their symptoms can be treated with the latest technology of the day, the electromechanical vibrator for her and the anal dialater for him.

So the new device makes patients happier—so happy that Mrs. Givings breaks into the room and tries it out herself for her own hysteria–feeling unfulfilled in her marriage and inadequate in nourishing her newborn—but, alas it’s not fixing the problems.

Aside from having unmet emotional needs, women’s sexuality is still not recognized and even feared, as the men highlight in their joke about a friend that thought women looked like marble statues you see in a museum—and then ran like a mad man from his wife when he saw she had beastly hair “down there.” Only the wet nurse Elizabeth (played by Jessica Frances Dukes) hired to feed Dr. and Mrs. Givings’ baby, understands the connection between the vibrator and sexual pleasure. Otherwise, the technological wonder is thought to produce a confusing mixture of pain and pleasure. So confusing it brings them back daily to figure out if they like it or not!

Behavior like this and many other comedic opportunities make director Aaron Posner’s In the Next Room a humorous, but not insensitively so, play about the history behind the medical use of vibrators. It subtly and sometimes not-so-subtly highlights the utter lack of knowledge and understanding of women’s physical bodies, sexual desires, and emotional needs. It beautifully portrays women’s roles, relationships, and subordination to men during Victorian times and reminds us that even today, we still grapple with some of these issues. However, the play about vibrators will make an historical imprint itself—made many years after we laughed about the link between masturbation and mental illness in men-and will stimulate discussion of female sexuality for years to come.

Written by: Joan Dawson, September 22nd 2010

2010 Wall Calendar: Anne Taintor

admin — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:50:00 +0000

By Anne Taintor

Chronicle Books

“She was one cocktail away from proving his mother right” is the text accompanying a modestly dressed, yet sexily posed, 1950s woman that adorns the cover of the 2010 Wall Calendar by Anne Taintor. Why is it that these satirical sentences bring a smile to our faces? Why does it give us such pleasure to poke fun at these Leave it to Beaver prototypes? Whatever the analysis, it works. It’s downright funny, as is Taintor’s calendar.

When you open up to January, two “perfect” housewives are looking at a ham that is fresh from the oven. “Ta-daa! Now let’s have a cocktail...” reads the caption. I can just imagine my college roommate, now a few decades later, saying the same thing. Although I’m not sure she’d wait until the ham finished baking.

The Women’s History Month scene is hysterical: “If by ‘happy’ you mean 'trapped with no means of escape' then yes, I’m happy.” I suppose considering marriage a trap is women's equivalent of men calling their wives a ball and chain. Marriage, of course, isn’t the trap it used to be, but there are some who would like to wind back time to when it was—perish the thought!

Turning the pages of the calendar, I am most amused at the jokes centered on drinking (“Why do dishes when you can do daiquiris?"), and I decided to take a look at Taintor’s web site. The tag line—“Making smart people smile since 1985”—greets me on her home page. Wow, in a split second I’m feeling like a smart woman who laughs at drinking, domesticity, and dumbness.

While I love the retro images paired with witty captions, I have to point out that the calendar isn’t very functional. The size allotted for the days of the month is small, and it doesn’t allow much room to write notes, like I usually do. The fonts for the days and holidays are also very small. While it’s a large wall calendar with full size images, the calendar itself has a lot of white space that could have been better utilized. That said, I expect a full year of laughs to compensate for this shortcoming, a problem which could easily be solved by pairing it with Anne Taintor's 2010 Engagement Calendar.

Written by: Joan Dawson, November 5th 2009

Street Art San Francisco: Mission Muralismo

admin — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:02:00 +0000

Edited by Annice Jacoby

Abrams Publisher

I have to admit: laziness compelled me to review this book. It is, after all, a book on murals, containing over 500 illustrations. How difficult could that be? Plus, I spent one month in 2002 as an intern at the Women’s Building in San Francisco’s Mission District. The Women’s Building is aglow with a brightly colored mural of women, hovering powerfully over the sidewalks. I had also gone on the Precipita Eyes mural tour. I had some sense of what to expect then. I had no idea, however, that I would devour Street Art San Francisco: Mission Muralismo, text and all, from the first page to the last.

I had another misconception about this book: What could possibly be the feminist angle in a book on murals? I was pleasantly surprised, then, to find some feminist perspectives weaved, albeit in small amounts, throughout the book. For example, some of the women painted murals to teach children where food came from, and this contrasted with the male-centered murals dominating the District. The book also shared stories of how women got taunted for climbing scaffolding and how the artists of the Maestrapeace on the Women’s Building painted without any safety equipment, due to financial constraints.

However, the main gist of the book is the rebellious yet incredibly expressive quality of graffiti, pop art, cartoons, stencils and murals. Despite police harassment of graffiti artists, corporate control of billboards and wall space, and capitalism in the art world, the artists of the Mission District stand firm, fight back even, in their own distinctive ways. They fight back against issues such as imperialism, ignorance, capitalism, racism, sexism, etc. The residents also deal with issues of an unjust criminal justice system, immigration issues and gentrification through their public art. Drawing and painting offered an expressive outlet with far-reaching effects like community building, an alternative to violence and an opportunity to raise awareness—in their own voices.

The book is 304 pages, which covers over three decades of street art. It’s written by over twenty activists and artists, including a foreword by Carlos Santana, who grew up in the District. I came away from reading this book with a renewed interest in public art and a better appreciation for graffiti artists. I bet this book will pleasantly surprise readers, especially those interested in the mix of art and social justice issues.

Written by: Joan Dawson, November 4th 2009

Women, Violence, and the Media Readings in Feminist Criminology

admin — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:11:00 +0000

Edited by Drew Humphries

Northeastern University Press

At times, much like a good teacher, this book had my full attention. At other times, I nodded off. When I was three-quarters the way through, I began to wonder why it sounded like one of my old college text books. When I finished the 279 pages and went back to the preface, which I had long forgotten, I learned why: it was written for college students. That explained it. Had I not had to review it, I might have put it back on the shelf with those other books from a decade or so ago.

It’s not to say Women, Violence, and the Media: Readings in Feminist Criminology was uninteresting. It seeks to describe how women and violence are framed in fictional and non-fictional accounts, which interests me a great deal. The editor, Drew Humphries, professor in the department of sociology, anthropology and criminal justice at Rutgers University, pretty much achieves her aims. It’s just that like most people, I’d prefer to read about TV shows I watch. So, for example, I would enjoy reading an analysis of Dateline or even America’s Most Wanted. Do they serve to enlighten or to frighten? Do they show more cases of male violence than female violence, or is it in proportion to actual crime rates? This would interest me. Instead, there are chapters about Law and Order and Prime Suspect, shows that are popular, but that I don’t personally watch.

Even though I don’t have cable, I did find it interesting that Lifetime does well at depicting crime. It can broaden our understanding of crime because it shows subsequent victimization (like when a rape victim goes to a hospital and faces judgemental behavior by medical staff), which other programs often fail to include. They also have a balanced creative team. Oxygen and Women’s Entertainment actually have more males than females directing, producing and writing. Sounds like false advertising to me!

I would also have loved to read more about victim blaming, but it was only touched upon. I am always shocked and disheartened by news accounts on interpersonal violence and the comments that are sure to follow them. The editor says that victim blaming gives men “an edge in the court of public opinion and frequently in criminal court as well.” I never thought of it that way, but it makes sense. In chapter one (“Words That Wound”), the writers say that victims get more support when their behavior follows gender norms (example: wives like Lacy Peterson), and that made sense, too.

The chapter that compared mass rapes in Yugoslavia to those in Rwanda was interesting. The authors quote a researcher who says women are viewed as “victimized women rather than as persecuted citizens.” They analyzed how the media framed the situations in both countries, noted the different terms and emotionally-charged words that were used and how human rights organizations even responded differently to both countries.

Another chapter focuses on mass murder in domestic context. Working in the field of domestic violence myself, the information on this issue confirmed what I had already knew about it (and then wondered, do reporters ever read books like these?), particularly in regard to the media reporting on “nice guys” that inexplicably “snap.”

Once I got through the book, I enjoyed going back over the highlighted parts, which succinctly provided me with information. Since the book has a lot of material to wade through, I would encourage reading this book for a college course, as intended. All in all, I give it a B-.

Written by: Joan Dawson, June 26th 2009

Chicago: The Musical (4/1/2009)

admin — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 16:36:00 +0000

National Theatre

Washington, DC, USA

A few years ago, I took my two twenty-something nieces to see the Oscar-winning movie Chicago and was aghast at the plot. I thought, to borrow their words, “OMG!” Surely, my nieces would tell my family their “radical” aunt took them to see a movie where women imprisoned for killing men belt out, “He had it coming!” while doing the fiery Cell Block Tango. But as the story unfolded, it became clear to me that this movie was not about gender as much as it was about corruption and greed. Relieved, I sat back and enjoyed the Hollywood production.

Being a fan of the movie and soundtrack, I was delighted to review the musical when it came to Washington, DC. Now, DC is known for its history, not its theatre district, so it should come as no surprise that Chicago is only running for a limited engagement of two weeks at National Theatre, America’s oldest playhouse (operating since 1835). Congress gets a longer vacation time that that.

But onto another city: Chicago. It’s the 1920s. It’s the Jazz Age. The time for razzle-dazzle decadence and, some would say, moral decline. Roxy Hart is imprisoned for killing the lover who tried to walk out on her. Her naive husband refuses to take the rap once he learns the guy sold them their furniture… at a discount.

Chicago is actually based on a true story about two women Beulah Annan (Roxie) and Belva Gaertner (Velma), who were both charged with murder in 1924. Annan, at just 23 years old, was accused of killing an intruder in April of 1924. Desperate to get off, she feigned pregnancy and received sympathy from the media, the public, and apparently, the jury. She was found innocent. Gaertner was accused of shooting her husband in May of 1924 and also managed to avoid conviction. The two slick lawyers that worked these cases form the character Billy Flynn.

The stories of jazz age women being hauled off to jail for murder provided sensational headlines. One Chicago Tribune reporter (Mary Sunshine) turned her stories into a comedy called Chicago. Its timeless theme would lend itself to the big screen three times: in 1928, in 1942 with Ginger Rogers, and in 2002 with Renee Zellweger.

The theatre version, which began in 1996, has little need for props. It was the orchestra that sat on the stage, interacting with the cast at times in hysterical vaudevillian manner (Said to the conductor: "Is that all you do, just stand there and wriggle that stick? You know, if you played an instrument, they’d give you a chair.") Indeed, the stage as well as the costumes were minimal in keeping with history. The performers took precedence and created selfless or selfish, slick or naive, sweet or deceptive (or both) characters right before your eyes.

For sure, John O’Hurley’s performance as Billy Flynn exceeded the audience’s expectations of the man that plays Seinfeld’s Mr. Peterman. His delivery and timing were impeccable. Also providing exceptional performances were Charlotte d’Amboise as Roxie and Terra C. MacLeod as Velma. Both portrayed women seeking not only freedom, but also fame upon their release—as if freedom were not enough! And, Carol Woods gives a stellar performance in her role as Matron “Mama” Morton, one of the many characters exploiting the “justice” system.

Justice may not have been delivered in Chicago-the-city but a wonderful and often outrageous portrayal of history is bestowed to audiences in Chicago-the-performance. The cast received a much-deserved standing ovation. “They had it coming,” after all.

Written by: Joan Dawson, April 4th 2009