Lysistrata: The Battle of the Sexes, Politics and the Triumph of Comedy

By Mariam Ismail and Farida Ayoub
Follow @mariam_ismail1
Follow @faridaayoub1997

Women in art have often been depicted as objects of desire, but in Lysistrata, a modern adaptation of Aristophanes’s original 411 BC Greek comedy, the Athenian women learn to capitalize on their sexual empowerment.

Maybe that’s a bittersweet reality to acknowledge some 2430 years later as women continue to struggle against a patriarchal machine more hellbent on war than human endeavor.

An Erotic Politics 

Performed at AUC’s Malak Gabr Theater from March 21 to 27, the stage was set for Lysistrata, a sharp-tongued maverick who brings together Greek women in attempt to end the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta by denying men what they desire most: sex.

Director Jillian Campana and his crew should be commended for bringing the essence of Greek theater – decorated with armless statues and beige-colored Greek structures – into the heart if Cairo.

This helps captivate the audience as around 10 women on stage all converse together, with Lysistrata (played astutely by Ragia Rageh), the ringmaster of the show, standing on top of the bleachers of a colosseum.

At first, the women whimper and whine at the thought of denying themselves the long awaited pleasure they receive from their husbands.

Their reactions were exaggerated; from moaning and groaning to yelling out in dismay.

The women, clad in strikingly colorful costumes and adorned in bold orange and purple makeup, moved together as one, running about the stage in cliques, always moving, gasping and scheming.

Once they agree to put their plan in action, they begin to motivate one another through sexual puns.

Some weaken and try to escape to see their husbands who had come back home for a few days, but Lysistrata, the storyline’s chastity belt, manages to keep them strong.

The climax and defining moment of the play is when the women stand up to the town’s treasurer.

“Stand aside woman. Behave!” shouted the treasurer to Lysistrata after she fought verbally against his gender-biased speech.

The play unravels as a celebration of female strength and the role of women in political life, directly a parallel to 2018.

In their refusal to bend and instead taking matters into their own hands, the diligence and will-power of women who put their minds, and bodies, together, is prominent throughout the play.

Another moment that struck a chord is when the women and a few semi-crippled men face off as the play nears it ends; the former accuse the latter of pouring their money into weapons and wars, claiming that if the roles were reversed, women would put food on the table and educate their children; involuntarily reinforcing stereotypical gender roles.

Eventually, the women come face to face with their husbands who do not try to hide their desires, shown by the phallic image of a sword that stands upright near their belts.

With a few hair flips and touches, the women have the men wrapped around their fingertips, convincing them to end the war.

RECLAIMING THE CITY 

In a talk preceding the stage run, Marina Marren discussed comedy and Politics, and state violence in Aristophanes’s play.

She used Lysistrata to push the idea that serious political engagement requires sensitivity to comedy.

“Ignorance is the adverse side of knowledge, there is nothing harmful at being laughed at as long as the shame that one feels does not lead to blind anger but to questions,” Marren said.

“If comedy that is well received reveals to us both a vulnerable and the dangerous aspects of being human and thereby welcomes us to a serious study of ourselves then it is fine and a good thing,” Marren added.

In the play, Lysistrata suggests two approaches to end the war: The first, as mentioned, is refraining from sex to coerce the men to put down their arms.

The second is weaving.

Weaving, Marren says, is a metaphor for disentangling the tyrannical organization of the state through the political prowess of the city’s women.

The subversive actions of these women who refuse to receive their husbands and carry out basic domestic tasks, like weaving, represents their rejection of the sexual division of labor – transforming their non-action into an act of resistance.

When probed by the state’s commissioner how the women propose to resolve the international conflict, Lysistrata compares the city to a fleece of wool, outlining that through the processes of “beating,” “carding,” and then “spinning” it, individual strands cohere into a united body.

However, this possibility is dismissed by the town leaders who simply relegate it to “women’s work”, unable to see the deeper implications of the metaphor.