El Macho: How the Women of Teatro Luna Became Men
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
fourteen El Macho: How the Women of Teatro Luna Became Men Paloma Martínez-Cruz & Liza Ann Acosta ma·cho adj having or showing characteristics conventionally regarded as typically male, especially physical strength and courage, aggressiveness, and lack of emotional response n a male who displays conventionally typical masculine characteristics1 If we accept Schechner’s claim that performance is “twice behaved behavior,” we must then ask, what is the force of that repetition?2 Peggy Phelan, The Ends of Performance The play Machos, created and performed by Teatro Luna, Chicago’s all- Latina theatre company, illuminates the project of el macho. Accept- ing performance as “twice behaved behavior,” Machos interrogates the echoes of patriarchal conventions by dramatizing the boundaries of normative masculinity. The force compelling repetition of el macho’s gestures, vocabulary, and drives is immediate and all-encompassing: minutes into the play, the cast, donning contemporary urban Latino drag, tells us, “I learned it from my dad.” Socialization of the macho be- gins at birth and is reinforced at every juncture with pressures from peer groups, by mass communication, and by intimate relations and strangers alike. To relinquish any aspect of the performance of machismo is to be 283 284 · Paloma Martínez-Cruz & Liza Ann Acosta deemed less than a man. Our paper on Teatro Luna’s staged iteration of this high-stakes repertoire submits that the company’s performance of gender is a political act that ultimately awakens audience members to their own complicity in the construal of machismo: the revelation that gender is a ritual, rather than a biological imperative, implies that we are each an officiant laying down the liturgy of el macho. As an anti-oppres- sion theater project, the ultimate aim of Machos is to denaturalize the binary construct of woman/man that habilitates patriarchal hegemony and to activate new social engagement with gender and sexuality as a dynamic continuum, a process of becoming, rather than a state of being. Teatro Luna Teatro Luna was founded in January, 2000, when Tanya Saracho (born in Los Mochis, México) met Coya Paz (born in Perú, raised in Ecuador, and of Russian-Peruvian-US parentage) and convinced her to form an exclusively female and collaborative theater ensemble. With such an ensemble, they hoped to establish a safe space in which Latina women could transmit their stories, express problems unique to their heritage, and actively respond to discrimination. Saracho explains that she was weary of the roles offered to her as an actress—inevitably, those of maids and prostitutes—while Paz was disillusioned by the lack of opportunities for Latinas in Chicago’s commercial theater. Since then, Teatro Luna has dedicated itself to expressing the challenges, triumphs, and prospects of an international Latina community as well as to providing opportunities for Latina artists to write, perform, direct, and market their own work. The same year of the formation of Teatro Luna in 2000, Maria Teresa Marrero, in her article titled “Out of the Fringe? Out of the Closet: La- tina/Latino Theater and Performance in the 1990’s” expressed a kindred sentiment: a felt need to create a space for the representation of complex identities beyond the limited categories imposed by male- and white- centered national paradigms. Marrero points out that Latino theater in the United States evolved from a medium focused primarily on the problems of political and national inclusion to one in which issues of sexuality and gender come out of the closet.3 In his edited volume José Can You See? Latinos On and Off Broadway, Alberto Sandoval Sánchez submits that Latino theater at the turn of the century held inclusivity and El Macho·285 cultural resistance as maximum production values, rather than the en- tertainment impact of aesthetic principles. He adds that, “Consequently, US Latinas have had before them a double task: to deconstruct the Anglo and Latin American representations of gender and to create a space for self-representation and US Latina experience.”4 Saracho and Paz define their theater as feminist, collective, com- munal, autobiographical, and testimonial. The works of Teatro Luna frequently employ a collage form or, as Saracho puts it, “un proceso Frankenstein,” that succeeds in integrating the diverse personal histo- ries of ensemble members. To date, they have premiered six ensemble built shows: Generic Latina (2001), Déjame Contarte (2001), The Ma- ria Chronicles (2003), S-E-X-Oh! (2006), Lunáticas (2007), and Machos (2007). Additionally, Teatro Luna has produced two shows of solo plays by various Chicago writers, Sólo Latinas (2005) and Solo Tú (2008), as well as the single authored plays Kita y Fernanda (2002), Quitamitos (2006), and Jarred (2008). When Machos was still in the early stages of development, Paz ex- plained in an interview for Meridians: Feminism, Race and Transnation- alisms that with this show they wanted to critique gender but “we also don’t want to demonize Latino men.”5 Paz explains that, as an artist with a background in Latina drag performance, she had long been consider- ing the idea for Machos, which was originally conceived as a way to peer into men’s intimate and honest thoughts and emotions about Latina women. The idea was pitched to the National Association of Performing Arts Presenters Ensemble Creation in 2005, which then awarded them a supporting grant to create the show in collaboration with the Guadalupe Cultural Arts Center in San Antonio. In 2006, Teatro Luna visited San Antonio to conduct interviews and workshops with a group of eighteen men. By January of 2007, they had developed a series of monologues based on the interviews, and they traveled back to San Antonio to pres- ent their staging of these edited interviews. It was at the conclusion of this trip that Teatro Luna arrived at the idea of developing a full piece for production as an ensemble, adding more interviews and workshops with men to ask questions and engage in candid conversation. The topics Teatro Luna members discussed with their male respondents included views on relationships, masculinity, gay and straight sexuality and their feelings about their mothers, sports, penis size, and how to use a urinal. 286 · Paloma Martínez-Cruz & Liza Ann Acosta Intensive development workshops began in June 2007, and the show finally premiered in November 2007. The ensemble members have been lauded for their ability to adopt masculine speech, body language, and vocal mannerisms. To perform Machos, they did not stop at clothing and facial hair but also wore strap- ons in order to more fully inhabit the stage as men. The show was met with enthusiastic reviews and impassioned responses from both audi- ences and critics. In an interview about the trajectory of her company, Saracho says that Machos has “been our mega hit,” with performances selling out at Chicago Dramatists and again when the show moved to the suburb of Berwyn.6 In June of 2008, Machos took home two Non-Equity Jeff Awards for Best Ensemble and for Best New Work. An anti-oppression project, Teatro Luna most frequently develops plays as an ensemble, integrating the voices of community members and interviews at various stages in their writing process to bring untold or undervalued stories to the fore. With Machos, the pastiche of mono- logues and short scenes constitutes a theatrical experience in which the performers articulate confessions about the ossification of maleness in the real lives of their respondents. This process effectively transforms the audience into the men’s confessors. However, the specific desires and fears of men are not judged on stage by antagonists of the male world order. As with Agusto Boal’s “Theatre of the Oppressed,” the activity of imagining the outcome is placed squarely in the hands of the audience.7 The monologue form increases the weight of audience responsibility, as the viewer becomes the unseen interlocutor, the social force that con- siders the acts of the confessants and decides how to respond. Absolu- tion? Condemnation? Indifference? Penance? Now that the actions of the menfolk are weighed in the balance, how do we find them? Teatro Luna exposes the project’s perceivers (repertoire company, audience, readers) to a spectrum of choices. Why Becoming a Macho Is a Latina’s Job The word macho comes from the Latin wordmas (male). Its derivative masculus was shortened to mâle by the French and was borrowed as “male” by the English in the fourteenth century. On the Iberian Penin- sula, masculus gradually became “macho,” which then entered English El Macho·287 language in the 1920s through Mexican Spanish. In the United States, it was primarily reserved to describe maleness in Latin American or His- panic contexts, such as the bullfighter’s arena. Eventually, it was picked up to describe the film heroes and football stars who demonstrated the most celebrated masculine characteristics of strength, endurance, and the pairing of aggression and stoicism. The contemporary US macho exploded onto the mainstream in the 1970s from the lips of both gay men and feminists. The Village People’s boisterous 1978 party hit “Macho Man” celebrated the erotic ideal of disco’s gay fan base: Macho, macho man / I’ve got to be, a macho man / Macho, macho man / I’ve got to be a macho! In the women’s movement, the word became synonymous with male chauvinism. A quote from G. Gordon Liddy, a conservative voice in American media, laments the macho’s semantic evolution in a 1980 interview with Playboy. Macho was originally a perfectly respectable Spanish term for a manly man, a designation I’d feel personally comfortable with, but in recent years it’s been expropriated as a code word by the women’s liberation movement and twisted into a pejorative Archie Bunkerish caricature of the loutish, leering male who believes that the only natural position for women in this world is horizontal.8 This nostalgia for the bygone neutrality of the term “macho” is fitting in Playboy, a publication that was created to provide men symbolic con- trol over the images of supine and submissive women.