Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Who Are These Sexist Arbiters of Culture?

I was unable to access the comments section under this article posted (Cult)ure Magazine. So, I have decided to publish my comments here. The article I am responding to can be found here.

I'm afraid I find the point of this article to be rather arbitrary and I am wondering on what the conclusions about popularity and gender are based. Who are these arbiters of culture? It seems the author's conclusions are based solely on perception as opposed to any actual analysis of gender and cultural trends.

Clearly, I have a different filter of experience because I remember when "Da Vinci Code" came out and how the critics laughed during the premiere of the film at Cannes. The book, and particularly the film, were panned by most and I certainly don't remember that happening along gender lines.

If you want to talk gender issues; how about the fact that there was a huge backlash against "Da Vinci Code" for being a "radical feminist" text, celebrating ideas of the 'sacred feminine' and 'goddess worship'. Women, such as this Christian feminist saw the controversy surrounding the book/film as an opportunity to discuss the history of women and Christianity.

If you want to talk about sexism and its effect on popular culture, then it is far more interesting to examine actual content and reflect on what about it creates mass appeal (or, the desire to admit appeal, which seems to be the focus here).

"Twilight" is fascinating because while I agree it is targeted towards women, the narrative contains a classic escape fantasy for both genders. For women, it is to indulge their inherent selfish desires and for men, it is to ignore their baser instincts and strive to be, well, better men.

There actually seems to be interesting conversations happening on both sides when it comes to "Twilight": on the one hand it seems to reinforce stereotypical gender roles and this can both attract and repel (some women argue it is offensive the men get to do all the good ass kicking). On the other, there are discussions about the gender bending in "Twilight" - I think this centres around the film - Robert Pattinson, some would argue, is not your typical male heart throb.

All of this to say, I think the cultural landscape is a little more colourful and a little less simplistic than what this article presents.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Haunted on Halloween

I like being scared. In a previous post, I talked about how I most enjoy that which moves me; and let's face it, scary stories can provoke the most visceral of responses.

Halloween night for me this year was indeed a spooky night. Thanks to some wonderful friends of mine I was able to see a show in Montreal called "Haunted". Written and directed by Paul Van Dyck, "Haunted" is the alleged true story of Esther Cox, who, in 1878 was the victim of a poltergeist. The Great Amherst Mystery, it is called, and apparently its one of the most famous and most documented accounts of a poltergeist occurrence in Canada.

Esther was a 19 year old girl who, after suffering an incident of attempted rape, began to see and hear some very strange things. It started with a voice, that would whisper her name, and then it was rapping or banging noises that would vary in volume and could last for hours. Sometimes lit matches would appear out of nowhere and fall on the floor. Things happened to her physically as well; apparently one time her body began to swell up and then deflated just as suddenly.

There were witnesses to these events; Esther Cox lived with her sister and her sister's husband, and although these occurrences started in their home, weird things were eventually happening when she would leave the house. Most famously, the knocking sounds once interrupted a Baptist church service and didn't stop until an embarrassed Miss Cox left the building.

What caused this haunting? We have no way of knowing, but there are a few interesting theories. One is that Esther was either orchestrating these events, or imagining them, because of the trauma she had experienced. Another is that the man who assaulted her, Bob MacNeal, was possessed by some kind of demon spirit, that was then passed on to Esther.

Van Dyck's play is told from the perspective of Walter Hubble, an actor who actually travelled to Amherst in June of 1879 to convince Esther to take her 'talents' on tour. Believing she was a master illusionist, he thought the two of them could make a lot of money by doing a lecture circuit. Crowds however, were skeptical, and at one such 'lecture' when Esther couldn't produce evidence of the ghost on command, the crowd turned on her and all-out riot drove her to return to her sister's. Hubble went on to collect evidence of the poltergeist, which he later published in a book called "The Haunted House". This book reportedly includes an affidavit signed by several Amherst citizens who witnessed the hauntings.

Walter Hubble was played by the very compelling Paul Van Dyck. He is clearly a very talented guy and although I am having trouble finding information on his company, Rabbit in a Hat Productions, I would certainly see something of his if I had the chance again. The story Van Dyck created is based on available facts, and has the necessary elements of a scary show, but also has well established characters and a sense of humour. In one of the funniest kind of 'meta' moments near the end of the play, Van Dyck as Hubble laments the fact there is no satisfying conclusion to this story, which is wink to the audience about the difficulty of ending the play.

In the actual story, the hauntings did stop eventually but again there is no known reason why; one theory is that Esther visited a Mic Mac Medicine Man and that he exorcised whatever demons she possessed. Catherine Berube played Esther Cox in this production and I have to say she really stood out; such an amazing energy on stage. She aptly portrayed a young woman who was at once brave and headstrong, but also a victim of terrifying and tragic circumstances.

What really made this evening was the setting. The St.James United Church right in downtown Montreal is old and creaky and has lots of levels and entrances; the perfect place for a scary story. The designers for this show did an excellent job of working within the space: lighting designer Jody Burkholder was able to focus in on the action, leaving much of the surroundings in deliciously spooky darkness. Helen Rainbird's costume design helped put the audience in the 1870s. The computer animation (Jeremy Eliosoff) and sound design (Jesse Ash) made the hauntings both real and spectacular. But what really brought it all together for me was the live music provided by fiddler Daniel Giverin and cellist Trevor Smith.

During the show, I admit to jumping in my seat several times, as well as biting my nails and grabbing my date's leg as if for safety. This was a perfect show to see on Halloween night and it was complimented nicely by the spooky wind, dark clouds, and almost full moon courtesy of Mother Nature.