Peter Brook, interculturality and women

I am reading lately all these books on Brook, the famous English modernist director, and I am still puzzled by his idea of interculturality. Peter Brook’s well-known focus of intercultural theatre was dealing with East/West connections, mainly by using Asian performance elements and Indian or African narratives for his Paris-based theatre. The intercultural fantasy that he was involved with was very tricky. Gabrielle Griffin said it mildly: it “leaves intact a geopolitical imaginary that distinguishes, in a seemingly unproblematized way, between ‘them’ and ‘us’, between an ‘other’ and a ‘self’”. But on the other hand, what brings in, like in the case of Peter Brook's production of Mahabharatha, was emphasized by the actress Mallika Sarabhai which relates her acting experience in Mahabharatha to feminism:
"The turning point came with Peter Brook’s international version of the Mahabharatha where I played Draupadi. At that time a new wave of feminism was gripping the mind of the younger generation in the west. And for the first time young women were looking into feminist thought and ideology.[...] I had women of different backgrounds, black mamas from Harlem, sophisticated Sorbonne graduates, aboriginal women from the Australian outbacks—coming up to me and saying ‘why don’t we have role models like Draupadi today? She makes sense to us.’ One evening in the Paris Metro two slinkily dressed women came up to me and said, ‘we have stayed away from the feminist movement, things like “bra burning”. But today, after seeing your performance, we feel that is the kind of woman we want to be.’ I came out of the Mahabharata tour with a new perspective toward my art. I felt that if the role of one woman affected women across cultures then my advocacy and my performance had to marry."
Mahabharatha is even today probably one of the most contested Brook productions for his colonial appropriation and decontextualization of one of the most significant Indian texts. His official biographer, Michael Kustow, accused “the chorus of politically correct academics and cultural theorist attacking Brook” of demagogy, because they are not able to see the universalism of Brook’s mise-en-scene and his view on Mahabharata as one work that “carries echoes for all mankind” and is “of the greatness of the works of Shakespeare.” Even by this defense, I can clearly sense the Western standard to which the performance is referred to.
Another problematic episode in Peter Brook’s career as director is the way he depoliticized some powerful plays such as Caryl Churchill’s Far Away in a 2002 performance. David Hare, the British playwright, accused Brook of “draining plays of any specific meaning or context to a point where which became the same play – a universal hippie babbling which represents nothing but fright of commitment.” Brook responded by saying that he no longer believes in ”the value of debates, pamphlets, statements and pseudo-Brechtian speeches.” His theatrical direction for last decades is in search of something “more to life that the rational mind can grasp” with a strong influence of the spiritualist Gjurdieff’s ideas, a highly problematic approach in my opinion, by removing any social context and critical awareness for a “one-size-fits-all mysticism”. This is an important tool in maintaining and pushing a conservative view on theatre, by maintaining an oppressive idea of a forgotten tradition, none other that the colonialist privilege of a misogynist white male that conquers and exploits the feminized “oriental wisdom” (as Brook was talking on several times about his wife). In an Oedipian game, the non-Western culture becomes for Brook object of desire and exchange, a woman that can offer satisfaction as long as she becomes “maternal and domestic” (Brook talking again about his wife).

photo via flickr

Scenes from a Marriage (1973)

Director: Ingmar Bergman

After a couple years of trying, I managed to see the whole film. And I tried so many times…never managed to get over the first half. I feel a little bit proud of myself getting over this horror. As much as I love Bergman, I have to recognize that this is one of his most awful tries. Focusing all the drama on the universal white Swedish bourgeois family with no social network whatsoever, he manages to depict a gloomy world with no way out. Any outburst against the patriarchal matrix is repressed with fists and intellectual bullshit analysis. A feminist critique made by Liv Ulman’s character on her miserable condition finds no answer but pure violence. And the end is just sick: a return to the oppressive status quo, with a self-righteous husband and a submissive and dreamy wife, where past conflicts are seen as detached experience, a needed element for a “healthy” relationship. And all based on personal guilt and useless individual struggle, with no connection to an outside world that can face similar problems. I definitely not recommend this very long crap, especially if you are a Bergman enthusiast.

New musical for women only. Literally.

Jaweed Kaleema writes about a musical, Light for Greytowers, a film by an Orthodox Jewish group that is to be screened in Miami. Nothing outrageous so far, only that the so-called soul-stirring musical drama made by women and girls, for women and girls is really meant to be seen by women only.

The movie, which has an all-female, mostly Orthodox cast, was kicked out of the Jewish Film Festival in Jerusalem last fall when its producers asked that men be barred from screenings.

An Orthodox Jewish law called Kol Isha forbids men from listening to a woman sing. Rabbis disagree on whether it applies only to live performances, but Kol Nashama Performing Arts Conservatory, the Los Angeles group that produced the film, isn't taking chances. Gary Lund, Colony Theatre director, said he will comply with the group's request.

As you can see in their flyer for Miami, it is only for women. Robin Garbose, the director, needed rabbinical approval and a grant from the Jewish Community Foundation to make the movie. She thinks it will be well received by conservative Christian and Muslim mothers and daughters, who also "value modesty".

Compared to "The Color Purple," with its cast of strong black Southern women determined to live by their own rules, this musical sounds for me like another twisted patriarchal exclusion of women that celebrate their exclusion. The director explains:

"The power of the woman's voice is incredible," Garbose said. "Only when the Messiah comes will the men get to hear the women sing. I would like that to happen today, so I can get a good distribution deal."

I can hear the men singing in this movie also, without even seeing it.

learning some misogyny in English

Misogyny starts early. No wonder my male friends can't explain how words and attitudes are popping out of them. They use the ultimate excuse and argument: "this is how I was socialized." And sometimes I found myself using words or phrases that are so unthought. And they stand for so much bullshit. Yesterday I thought a lot about how we use dirty language and what all these colorful and funny expressions actually mean: homophobia, mysoginy, racism, classism, hate. Of course, the solution is not to completely delete all these words and language associations from your vocabulary but to think more about them when using. And if possible subvert them and play around their first problematic meaning. I know it takes a lot of work but that can also be fun, you can do it playfully. Because using what you learn in primary school as something impossible to change means hell. If you look at this "innocent" drawing from a children's book you might get the bigger picture. And fuck, I don't want to live in that patriarchal world. Or to make any kid believe that this is how this world functions.

thanks Bogdan for the image!

Gender roles coming with gendered grammer in French

I found a grammer book for kids from the 1970s with some very telling images. How else can children learn gender in French than through patriarchal gender roles? And they will remember them both: patriarchy and French. Thank you school for facilitating a sexist welcome into the French symbolic order.

Is Cosmo self-destructive? Not quite

in this Cosmopolitan article (that i couldn't finish reading), Michelle Stacey asks some weird questions for Cosmo:

Why are so many young women making their breasts public property? And who really ends up getting the best end of this deal — the girls who say all this flaunting makes them feel empowered and free or the men ogling them?

Maybe because they take all the goody goody Cosmo list of tips for real? but as this article on The Pursuit of Harpyness shows a valid feminist claim can fit a post-feminist discourse like Cosmo's by detouring it for a good old patriarchal usage.

backlash in US academia: no funds for queer theory classes

Republican Georgia state Representatives Charlice Byrd and Calvin Hill started a well-mediatized campaign to cut funds for professors who teach college-level courses on queer theory, reproduction, and sexuality. Hill, the Republican vice chairman of the House Appropriations Committee in Georgia, said he alerted his constituents about some faculty whose research interests he considered questionable in hopes that they would voice any complaints to the state Board of Regents. He argued that in a time of budget cuts universities should not offer classes that do not help students get jobs.

“Do you know that your tax dollars are being used at our state universities to pay professors to teach your children classes like ‘Male Prostitution’ and ‘Queer Theory’? Yes, even in tight economic times like we are facing today, our Board of Regents is wasting your tax dollars to teach these totally unnecessary and ridiculous classes.” Hill says his only goal is to tell taxpayers how their dollars are being spent, and encourage them to contact the regents if they have concerns. Of course, the economic crisis is a good moment to promote some conservative discourses and to return to some good-old retun to „seriousness and sobriety” in terms of knowldge production. “I would assume someone that has those credentials can teach something else that is more worthwhile,” he said. What is that exactly? Charlice Byrd explains: "This is not considered higher education," Byrd said. "If legislators are going to dole out the dollars, we should have a say-so in where they go." Hill continues "Our job is to educate our people in sciences, business, math," and of course, professors aren't going to meet those needs "by teaching a class in queer theory."

The most quoted response is this: "Certainly the mission of higher education is to broaden the field of knowledge and research," said spokesman John Millsaps. "That covers a lot of topics. Some may be considered to some as controversial, but to others it could be considered needed." And another spokeperson ads: "Teaching courses in criminal justice, for example, does not mean that our students are being prepared to become criminals. Quite the opposite," said Jones. "Legitimate research and teaching are central to the development of relevant and effective policy."

Hill is quite radical in his obssession with queer theory courses: “Now that we need to cut the state budget, I think I know where we can eliminate a few highly paid professors and get rid of these classes.”

In most of the articles that I've read on the subject, it is shown that there are no classes titled “male prostitution” in Georgia, according to university officials. What the republicans found is a sociology professor at Georgia State University who is listed in a media guide as an expert on the subject of male prostitution. The professor in question, Kirk Elifson, studies risk factors involved in the spread of HIV/AIDS, among other public health issues. As for courses on queer theory, there is at least one offered at the University of Georgia, according to a Board of Regents spokesman.

Another area of cutting up the budget is environmental studies. In Alaska, at least one lawmaker has voiced a general objection to environmentalist faculty views at the University of Alaska. Fairclough, an Eagle River Republican, used a committee meeting last week to complain to Mark Hamilton, the university’s president, about soft faculty support for oil and mining industries in the state.

“If I ask university staff, the people who are educating our future leaders, if they support the Chukchi Sea development, the Red Dog Mine or the Pebble Mine or any type of industry along those lines, a stereotypical response is they are in opposition,” Fairclough said.

Carl Shepro, who heads a union that represents faculty members in Alaska, said Fairclough speaks about lawmakers looking for targets in tight budget times: “As long as you have legislators in other states that are making similar kinds of comments, it may be that it encourages or supports people in the Alaska Legislature. It’s kind of a shift in political culture, if you will.”

The academic backlash is US just started: in relation to the economic crisis, the bigger concern from conservatives is that public universities do not present ‘all viewpoints.’ Hill, who was present but did not question the experts from Georgia State University, said “We’re not backing off.” Byrd said there will be a hearing on the issue next week in the Senate Higher Education Committee. Hill and Byrd will continue to look for university courses that are a questionable use of taxpayer money, Hill said.

“Those are the ones we first found,” he said of the sex- and gender-related experts and courses the two legislators criticized.

Keep your eyes open, the storm just started in US. How are things in Europe?

reaction to Hate Crime Law

This is amazing stuff: Christians are letting everyone know what the game is all about. Here is what Christian Anti-defamation Commission asks in order to sign an import petition:
“Within moments of Barack Hussein Obama, the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, being sworn in as the President of the United States, the White House's website was updated. It showed that President Obama is strongly in favor of hate crimes legislation and will work to see it passed. Hate Crimes will silence Christians and keep them from fulfilling their duty to God to proclaim the truth! On his White House website Obama shows that he is determined to pass the most pro-homosexual, free-speech destroying legislation ever to come before Congress, including expanded hate crime laws, and legal "support for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender) community." The only reason that we do not already have Federal Hate Crime Law is because of President George W. Bush's veto. President Obama has pledged to sign Hate Crime Legislation if it reaches his desk. We must stop the legislation before President Obama can sign it!”
and it continues: “If passed, Anti-Christian agencies will be funded by the government to the tune of $10 Million dollars specifically to teach things contrary to traditional Christian beliefs. Hate Crime Laws have already been enacted in many states like Pennsylvania. There they have resulted in the arrest of peaceful Christians, one who was a grandmother, for simply exercising their 1st Amendment right to speak the truth about homosexuality in the public square.”

And so on and so on. I am still amazed by their bluntness, their naïveté, their nonchalance and also their pure evilness. To say it out loud that Christian truth is hate crime sounds to me more like an insult. Apparently not for these Christians. The right to speak the truth does not include the right to spread violence first of all and to say that hate speech is a traditional Christian belief is simply cute. I know it is.

Marie Stopes’ Legacy

Fotie Photenhauer wrote a cooking book called “Natural Harvest - A Collection of Semen-Based Recipes”. In its presentation you can get some “true facts”: Semen is not only nutritious, but it also has a wonderful texture and amazing cooking properties. Like fine wine and cheeses, the taste of semen is complex and dynamic. Semen is inexpensive to produce and is commonly available in many, if not most, homes and restaurants. Despite all of these positive qualities, semen remains neglected as a food. This book hopes to change that. Once you overcome any initial hesitation, you will be surprised to learn how wonderful semen is in the kitchen. Semen is an exciting ingredient that can give every dish you make an interesting twist.

What it might sound funny, wacky or just a disgusting joke has some damn serious discourse behind: this is where Marie Stopes comes on stage. She was a famous Scottish eugenicist, campaigner for women's rights, reproductive rights and she basically invented the field of family planning. The huge and respected family planning organization that bears her name, Marie Stopes International, works in 38 countries across the world - ranging from the UK, Bolivia, and the Philippines through to Pakistan, Kenya and Papua New Guinea. Acording to their website, Marie Stopes International is the UK's leading provider of sexual and reproductive healthcare services. Our nationwide network of sexual health clinics see over 100,000 men and women each year who come to us for information, advice and professional care, they say.

Stopes was a hectic campaigner for the implementation of policies inspired by eugenics. In her Radiant Motherhood (1920) she called for the “sterilisation of those totally unfit for parenthood (to) be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory." Stopes even cut her son Harry out of her will after he married a near-sighted woman - Mary Eyre Wallis. Stopes considered that her prospective grandchildren might inherit the affliction.

Thanks to Feminist Philosophers I got the connection Semen-Based Recipes – Marie Stopes. Apparently Stopes was also campaigning for the healthy ingestion of semen. She was explaining how crucial it is for a woman’s sexual health. If you are a woman and you don’t get enough semen in your body from your male partner you are exposed to some extreme risks: your sex will run wild, you might become a lesbian or you might masturbate excessively. Marie says: Can anything be done? Of course, self-stimulus, or masturbation, is extremely common… Masturbation is always unsatisfactory… Another practical solution which some deprived women find is in Lesbian love with their own sex…

The scientific explanations and solutions come with rigor: …homosexual excitement does not really meet their need for the physiological fact (I have never yet seen it clearly stated anywhere, but it is of the greatest importance in a consideration of this problem) is that… a woman’s need and hunger for nourishment in sex union is a true physiological hunger to be satisfied by the supplying of the actual molecular substances lacked by her system… the chemical molecules produced by the glandular systems of the male…It has been found possible to prepare some at least of the very molecular compounds really nourishing to the woman’s system, and which she lacks and requires.

Her solution is the next step to our starting point, the semen in food: artificial semen in capsule form.
And one last thing: in 1999, Marie Stopes came first in the Guardian's "Women of the Millennium" poll.

Extremely scarry! Romanian values

European Values Survey from 2008 came out with some interesting data concerning Romanian values:

86% of Romanians think that religion is very important, this time more than Polish people. These values are higher outside Europe only in Iraq, Morocco, Indonesia or Rwanda. The religious element goes hand in hand with a wild capitalist individualist framework, last European values for voluntary work. A sort of metaphysical determinism fits the framework with a focus on a higher entity that decides, there are no social viable connections, each for its own, God can help me first, then the others, but it’s not my business anyway. A sociologist comments it in this article (only in Romanian), as a sort of social autism: a majority sociological syndrome designed for survival.

6% of the 1.488 interviewees consider politics important, while 74% consider it unimportant at all. These numbers go hand in hand with the 73% of desires for a strong leader, one that is not concerned with elections or the Parliament. “Only” 20% are convinced that a military regime means a better life for them. All these numbers are higher than any other European country can give.

16% Romanians trust people, much lower than in other European countries

75% are against abortion

63% are against divorce

91% think that homosexuality is not right

Family is seen as highly important by most of the interviewees in contrast to friendship. Actually, only in the Netherlands friends are more important than family but Romanians have one of the worst opinions on friendship in Europe and that makes me think… Why shouldn't we start changing thinks from here? Support Friendship! Subvert Romanian patriarchy, make a friend today!

Pedar (1996)

director: Majid Majidi

Yesterday morning we watched an Iranian movie, Father (Pedar), directed by Majid Majidi in 1996. Looking around on the net afterwards I was surprised to only find positive and extremely praising reviews, since my experience of the movie was quite the opposite. The story is set in contemporary (I guess) Iran, and the overtly Oedipal plot revolves around 14-year old Mehrollah who goes away to work in order to support his widowed mother and three sisters, only to find her hastily remarried to the local policeman upon his return. Unwilling to accept the new man in his mother’s life as a father, in fact, unwilling to accept a man other than himself in his mother’s life, he unrelentlessly goes about harassing her and the new husband, with male ego outbursts that the director seems to admire as heroic, but that end up being pretty annoying for the spectator who does not have much investment in patriarchy. The storyline doesn`t have much else going for itself, it`s a back and forth between the policeman and Mehrollah`s masculinities, climaxing with the boy managing to steal the policeman`s gun (his gun, get it?) and making a run for it. In the end, quite predictably, the two are brought together by their constant chase and the cheesy ending suggests that Mehrollah will finally be able to accept the policeman as a father figure.
Now, this movie could have been done in a way that is actually meaningful and interesting, given that the theme offers a lot of room for giving depth to the characters and their circumstances. However this movie is made from a normative male perspective, anchoring itself in its biases and conditions uncritically, and presenting them to us as if they were universal values we should understand and sympathize with. Why should I be moved by a deeply patriarchal story in which the crisis is triggered by the absence of the father (an absent presence metaphorically, and literally in the photo that the boy is sporting around) and is solved by finding another male to fill in this position? The character of the mother is completely subdued, she is given very few articulate lines (her token appearances are marked by gasps, cries and tears), and seems to exist only as a pretext for more male existential angst . To be fair, the mother is not presented without a certain degree of condescending compassion, but her gestures and feelings are not conferred with the heroic, tragic dimension that her sons` are. For whom, of course, the challenge is even greater now that she is married to the representative of a very phallic institution, the police, that requires Mehrollah to bring out the big guns of his alpha male kit. In the end, it seems to me that this is movie is a game of whose dick is bigger, an obsession that is apparently not restricted to Western patriarchy.

Boys and their plastic toys

Say no to GUNS! the whole imaginary argument is such a hoax. give them a pink truck or a barbie doll and their imagination will trully explode :)

an article from BBC News, Toy weapons 'help boys to learn'