Can't We Talk It Over in Bed?

A backyard sprinkler ... flower-headed fools jumping through a mist of crystal drops ... the constant buzz of giggling beneath a familiar tune, sung with pavlova-coated breath. Sound like an Australian childhood memory? Perhaps, but not quite. This was the final scene in the recent Belvoir St production of As You Like It, and was quite possibly the most enjoyable moment of theatrical magic I have experienced in a long time. Apart from being suitably impressed by the set -- a stage carpeted with real grass and fallen leaves, a working sprinkler and a brilliant midnight-blue tarpaulin sky filled with golden stars -- the cross-cultural consummation of desire between Rosalind (Deborah Mailman) and Orlando (Aaron Blabey), as they leapt through the sprinkler arm in arm, would surely have warmed even the hardest heart of a One Nation supporter. Yet perhaps it's all just wishful thinking, you know "dream on white boy, dream on black girl" as the INXS tune goes ... except that theatre companies around the country appear to be determined to make this dream a reality. On the stage at least. The following discussion is inspired by a current trend in contemporary Australian theatre of pro-active racial casting, and will focus specifically on two performances. The term 'desire' is in itself terribly slippery and the following banter positions the term in two quite different contexts. Firstly I look at desire in terms of a post-colonial concept of 'desire for the other' and how erotic desire in the performance text can problematise some tenets of post-colonial theory. Secondly, I look at the political desires of theatre companies who engage in this pro-diversity casting practise. Finally, I see these various desires intersecting with a larger community desire for reconciliation. In the space of one month on the east-coast of Australia there have been three productions by major theatre companies of Shakespearean texts in which indigenous actors have constituted at least half the cast: Romeo and Juliet produced by La Boîte and Kooemba Jdarra in Brisbane; As You Like It produced by Company B Belvoir; and Romeo and Juliet in Black and White produced by the Bell Shakespeare Company. My critical probe was left twitching by the observation of this shared element, spanning three different companies and in such a short period of time; I began to muse at what was fuelling this wonderful trend. I started to wonder about the implications of having 'racially marked' actors performing texts which have erotic desire as their central theme. The temptation to draw on the cultural currency of Benetton iconography, of black and white lips meeting in the perfect display of reciprocal desire is impossible to resist. Yet as Ebony and Ivory-esque as these productions may appear, one needs to consider whether this trend perpetuates an infatuation with a cultural 'other', thus maintaining the much touted, and arguably damaging, fetishistic approach to difference. Or alternatively, does this trend signal a genuine desire, a practical attempt at racial reconciliation? The following will discuss two of the three performances: Romeo and Juliet (La Boîte/Kooemba Jdarra) and As You Like It. Desire for the 'Cultural Other' or simply a yearning between lovers? A great deal of post-colonial theory refers to an intense desire for a cultural 'other'. Robert Young goes so far as to say that being "sick with desire for the other" is a condition which actually defines 'Englishness' (2). It would seem that in both As You Like It and Romeo and Juliet, being sick with desire for another is a core activity for the major characters. Does this mean, then, that casting the desiring couple with one black actor and one white actor in fact fits the model suggested by Young? Perhaps. Yet there is something different in the desires between Rosalind and Orlando and Romeo and Juliet. The condition Young outlines assumes a one-sided desire where the look at the other is through a one-way mirror. However, desire between these couples in question (Romeo/Juliet, Rosalind/Orlando) is evenly matched, the glass is most certainly two-way. Romeo is as infatuated with Juliet and she is with him, Rosalind is as mad about Orlando as he is about her. In fact for both plays to reach their climax it is absolutely crucial that desire between these couples does strike an equilibrium. For Rosalind and Orlando their equally overwhelming desires unite them forever in marriage; for Romeo and Juliet, their reciprocally insatiable desires leave them united forever in death. For both plot-lines to reach fruition, it is imperative that each side of the couple is as 'sick with desire' as their lover is. Certainly, a white Romeo spies on a black Juliet, but his gaze is ultimately returned. A white Orlando is lost in the eyes of a black Rosalind, but her eyes are wide open, similarly glazed with desire. The idea of being sick with desire for a cultural 'other' would thus seem to be made redundant by the mutual mirroring of desire in these cross-cultural performances. To be sick with desire for a cultural other also infers an even balance of 'other' and 'non-other'. Productions of Shakespearean plays often analysed in a post-colonial context like The Tempest or Othello, in which individual characters are set as 'other' against a "notional singularity" (Young 4), would certainly sustain an unequal balance of 'different' and 'normal'. Again though, there is something different about these two productions of As You Like It and Romeo and Juliet. As opposed to setting a single 'other' against many, both of these productions set up an indigenous family. I would suggest that by casting entire families with indigenous actors in these shows, the identity-forming structure suggested by Young is irrevocably confused; the 'notional singularity' is made redundant by the presence of more than one actor of colour on the stage. As opposed to setting a single 'other' as an object of desire to be fetishised by a majority of 'non-other', both of these productions cast almost equal numbers of indigenous and non-indigenous actors. Political desires: to be seen or not to be seen, that is the question. Having noted some of the theoretical and performative implications of desire in these two productions, I will turn now to the question of political desires and the desire for racial reconciliation. How does the political desire of a theatre company who might cast a show in this way intersect with desire in the text itself? In her introduction to Erotic Politics, Susan Zimmerman asks, "what is the relationship between politics and desire [?]" (1). The most important part of her response for my purposes here is that "the inter-subjective realm of desire connects to the public, political domain" (1). As noted above, the theatre performance itself embodies this connection through its very public display of a character's personal desires. However, the public display of the theatre company's political desire in these productions is also worth discussion. La Boîte/Kooemba Jdarra and Company B Belvoir differ in their public articulation of the politics behind the casting decision. In a statement which reinforces the desire to create a symbiotic link between politics and text, La Boîte director Sue Rider says, "as they [the Montagues and Capulets] reach towards the first tentative expression of true reconciliation, we know this is not the end. It is just the beginning" (Rider, Romeo and Juliet Programme). In keeping with the collaborative effort between the two companies, it is noteworthy also that the Chair of Kooemba Jdarra, Glenis Charlton, offers on the same page of the programme a brief statement including that "our hope is that the themes of prejudice, misunderstanding and the need for reconciliation within the play strike a resonant chord with today's audience". The desire of both companies to publicly announce their political aims was part and parcel of the production, a mirror for reconciliation in the text itself. In contrast to the publicly clear political desires of La Boîte and Kooemba Jdarra, Neil Armfield makes no reference whatsoever to race or reconciliation in his "Director's Note". However, the impact of such casting, regardless of whether it is publicly articulated by the company, does not pass by unobserved. In his review for The Australian of As You Like It, John McCallum notes that "the father, the exiled Duke, is played by another Aboriginal actor, Bob Maza, which gives the play's theme of reconciliation a contemporary focus. There is a multiplication of sexual as well as racial complications" (12). Indeed extra-textual discussions, those conversations which take place in newspaper reviews, in the foyer at intermission, over inner-city coffee tables, in kitchens, offices and on share-house verandahs are critical sites of cultural negotiation. That McCallum makes public the political implications of such casting in relation to the text is significant. Although the political desire of Company B Belvoir may have been made consciously ambiguous, the desire by the public to interpret the casting decision in relation to current political climates is inevitable. As is the disclaimer for most discussions which merely touch on a subject of much greater magnitude, this brief essay has overlooked a number of crucial elements which demand further investigation. Of special importance is how gender might impact upon desire in this context; both Rosalind and Juliet are played by indigenous actors (although the situation is reversed in the Bell Shakespeare Company's Romeo and Juliet in Black and White). Also, the question of funding bodies and their desire to fund projects which address race-based issues should necessarily be considered in any discussion which conjoins political and textual desires. Instead I will finish by reminding the reader of the visual beauty of a mixed cast, of the image of a distinguished Aboriginal Bob Maza jumping the backyard sprinkler, of how our desires for racial reconciliation can be realised in a moment of theatrical magic. Productions such as those discussed here are progressive and instrumental elements in the journey towards reconciliation. Furthermore, the conversations these plays provoke about race in Australia are absolutely essential in counteracting the racist sentiments appearing all too often in our national and local public arena. Performances As You Like It. By William Shakespeare. Performed at Belvoir St Theatre, Sydney. Produced by Company B Belvoir. Featuring Deborah Mailman, Aaron Blabey, Jacek Koman and Bob Maza. Romeo and Juliet. By William Shakespeare. Performed at La Boîte Theatre, Brisbane. Produced by La Boîte and Kooemba Jdarra. Featuring Maria Tusa, Christopher Morris, Roxanne McDonald and Damien Garvey. McCallum, John. Rev. of As You Like It, by William Shakespeare. Company B Belvoir. Belvoir Street Theatre, Sydney. The Australian 8 May 1999: 12.Rider, Sue. "Director's Note." Romeo and Juliet Programme. Brisbane: La Boite Theatre, 1999.Young, Robert J.C. Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture and Race. London: Routledge, 1995.Zimmerman, Susan, ed. Introduction. Erotic Politics: Desire on the Renaissance Stage. New York: Routledge, 1992. 1-11.Citation reference for this article MLA style: Melissa Western. "Can't We Talk It Over in Bed?: Desiring Reconciliation in Recent Australian Theatre Productions of As You Like It and Romeo and Juliet." M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 2.5 (1999). [your date of access] . Chicago style: Melissa Western, "Can't We Talk It Over in Bed?: Desiring Reconciliation in Recent Australian Theatre Productions of As You Like It and Romeo and Juliet," M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 2, no. 5 (1999), ([your date of access]). APA style: Melissa Western. (1999) Can't we talk it over in bed?: desiring reconciliation in recent Australian theatre productions of As You Like It and Romeo and Juliet. M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 2(5). ([your date of access]).