For a few days now, the hashtag #MeTooTheatre has been voicing the violence suffered by women in the performing arts sector. The testimonies on social networks were followed by a forum signed by personalities and a gathering
scheduled for Saturday October 16.
In 2006 and 2009, Reine Prat opened the discussion on this subject in two resounding reports highlighting the problems of discrimination and the imbalances suffered by women in the performing arts world. Former Inspector General of the Ministry of Culture, Reine Prat released on October 14 a book entitled Blow up the ceiling! Precise feminist for the use of the world of culture and come back for 20 minutes on the need for radical changes to be made against sexism in culture.
Under the hashtag #MeTooTheatre, we rediscover the violence and attacks suffered by young women in the theater world. Were you surprised by these testimonials?
We can be surprised that these cases are coming out now, that things take so long to be taken into account when everyone knew and that there were already, in 2016 and in 2019, demonstrations denouncing these acts. There is an omerta on these matters. In my reports at the time of their writing – in 2006 and 2009 – I do not remember having had any such testimony, I did not mention such acts. Today it begins to be said, this is what is new. In my book, I make extensive reference to this coming out of silence.
It is also astonishing to discover dangerous uses there, far from respect for people, progressivism and avant-gardism with which culture is often adorned, isn’t it?
This world makes people believe, with words like “creator”, “artist”, “genius” that it is exceptional, that it is the bearer of freedom and change, while it is extremely conservative. The language reflects it well: the establishments which train these artists are “conservatories”. I appeal to free the imaginations!
This is what you offer in your book Blow up the ceiling! ?
My book is not a program for the cultural policy of a next government. He points to problems. It offers avenues for reflection to invent other organizational methods. It seems that my reports, beyond awareness, have done some people good, they have probably contributed to a number of speeches, maybe to new artistic acts.
It is a complete reorganization of the system that must be considered for the performing arts. We are in a pyramid system. There are more than 6,000 theater companies, including 600 under contract, 38 national drama centers. There are five national theaters all run by men. There is therefore a problem of space for competition. We must undoubtedly work differently, horizontally, more in the collective, to have other perspectives on the artistic.
“These are professions where the body is involved, except that the bodies that some want to play are really brought into play. “
How to protect people against gender-based and sexual violence in performing arts?
It seems extremely important to me that the #MeToo movement is finally taken into account specifically by people in the theater. These are professions where the body is involved, except that the bodies that some want to play are really brought into play. It is no longer acceptable. In the methods proposed to protect the people who need to be protected, there is the establishment of reference persons, as they already exist in the field of cinema, in particular in film crews. But that won’t do everything. The people directly concerned – those who teach, those who run establishments, technical and administrative staff, artists and students – must all start thinking differently. Many do. Do not despair.
The subject is also knowing what stories you want to tell. Alice Zeniter writes: “A good story is the story of a guy doing something”. Still today ! No doubt it is time to invent other stories.
How to build safe and inclusive spaces in this environment?
The ministry asked all arts education institutions to draw up a charter for equality, which was done with varying degrees of intelligence and eagerness. The charter for equality of the CNSAD (National Conservatory of Dramatic Art) has two very important points: on the one hand, anyone who wants to take the entrance exam can register as a woman, man or other ; on the other hand, the concept of employment is definitively abolished. Employment in the theater designates categories of roles to which correspond particular bodies, ages, shapes and paces. It’s very codified. Being fat prevents being recruited as a young first, being a black man from playing a father, if the role is not described as such. This is true for classical theater but also implicitly in contemporary theater. The abolition of this notion of employment should allow everyone to play all roles. It is essential to produce other imaginaries. It turns out that the CNSAD is directed by Claire Lasne-Darcueil, director, particularly sensitive to questions of discrimination. That she has this concern is arguably more decisive than the fact that she is a woman. We can nevertheless rejoice that the most prestigious theater education establishment in France is finally (for the first time!) Headed by a woman. The same goes for the National Conservatory of Music and Dance of Paris directed by Émilie Delorme, who is equally committed to equality and against discrimination.
Do we need more women in these leadership positions for things to change?
Just because a woman runs a theater doesn’t mean it will be any different from a man. But appointing only women until achieving parity in management positions would be a sign that we have understood that there is a problem. This is the system that must be changed: establishing parity between women and men, ensuring a real presence, everywhere, of racialized people, as well as people stigmatized as “non-standard” is quite simply to achieve, in the sector of culture, to balances more in line with the state of the population, as popular cultures do much better.
Can political will help change dysfunctional behaviors and structures?
Of course, but this political will currently does not exist. We display a certain number of measures which, of course, are essential but which do not change anything as long as the individuals in a position of responsibility do not change in their heads. Civil servants are putting in place innovative tools, which will remain ineffective as long as the government does not have the will to make real structural changes. And how would he have this will when sitting in the Council of Ministers of people prosecuted for acts of harassment and others agree to sit alongside them?