by Zahara Slovenski
[ Alternate link: NYU STREAM ]
This is a clip of Olivia Rodrigo at Glastonbury in 2022, where she dedicated a performance of Lily Allen’s “Fuck You” to five members of the Supreme Court.
[Olivia Rodrigo: I’m devastated and terrified, and so many women and so many girls are going to die because of this.] (“Olivia Rodrigo & Lilly Allen dedicates” 00:00:18-00:00:29)
Twenty twenty-two marked the ending of Roe v. Wade, propelling reproductive rights into the spotlight of mainstream media, after years of underrepresentation (ABC News). 1
Abortions aren’t rare: Roughly one in four women in the United States will have one, yet in a study by Gretchen Sisson and Katrina Kimport “only 169 films released between 1913 to 2012 featured abortion as a major plot point” (Macabasco).
[Protestor holds sign reading “SERIOUSLY? I marched for this 40 years ago!”] (“Thousands Rally,” 00:00:44-00:00:50)
In the past few years, the media has depicted life in a dystopian, post-Roe world, where women have to travel to other states to get safe abortions or, once again, be forced to attempt the procedure on their own. This topic has been explored in a myriad of different ways, from satirical clown sketches to coming-of-age road trips to harrowing depictions of sterile clinics.
In a New York Times article, art critic Deborah Solomon notably discusses the idea of self-censorship in interviews with visual artists. When depicting abortion, artist Paula Rego does not depict “blood, gore or anything to sicken, because people don’t look at it then. And what you want to do is make people look” (Rego qtd. in Solomon). While some artists partake in self-censorship because of fear of expressing themselves, artists like Rego do so in order to maintain their effectiveness in sending a message to the viewers. Artists must tackle the spectrum between entertainment and reality, altering themselves for the sake of the viewer, which leads me to my main question: how palatable does a work of art need to be to incite change? Does making something hard to watch make it more impactful, or turn viewers away from your work?
Never Rarely Sometimes Always, is, to put it lightly, a difficult watch. After being denied an abortion at her local clinic, seventeen-year-old Autumn and her cousin travel to New York City on their own. The two girls, underage and with very little money to sustain them, are clearly in a precarious situation, and the film does not shy away from this. The girls’ experience is as emotionally draining for them as it is for us and the camera is never afraid to linger on an uncomfortable or graphic moment. The film shows us the emotional turmoil women and young girls have to go through to attain this integral piece of healthcare. While some viewers may be driven away, ultimately, Never Rarely Sometimes Always shows us the value in challenging viewers (“Almost Never”). It provides a painfully neo-realistic depiction of the difficulties of living in a post-Roe world.
This leads me to the entirely opposite end of the spectrum: comedy. Viewers are drawn to entertainment, so it makes sense that artists may try to use a work’s entertainment value to bring light to a controversial situation. Yet, it introduces a new conflict: how can we depict a controversy humorously without simplifying it? Unpregnant is, much like Never Rarely Sometimes Always, a film where two girls are forced to travel to get an abortion in another state, but the film falls flat due to its comedic center. Other than the fact that protagonist Veronica has to travel a long distance, her journey to get an abortion seems easy for her. I mean, she reschedules her appointment three times in the span of a day. This minimizes not only her personal struggles, but the people around her tell her so:
[Bailey: Let me know when you pencil in a time to talk about the fact that you used to be fun!] (Unpregnant 00:29:44-00:29:50) 2
The only time it succeeds is in absurdity. When girls get kidnapped by evangelists—yes, they get kidnapped by evangelists 3—it takes a very straightforward approach to pro-life groups:
[Veronica: That’s not true, I googled it! And frankly that’s a very problematic falsehood to be spreading!] (Unpregnant 01:02:16-01:02:22)
In moments like these, we are made aware of the fact we’re watching a piece of fiction. However, comedy ultimately hinders this piece of work when all nuance is sacrificed for the sake of humor. I spent two hours of my life watching this, only to walk away having learned nothing about the issue at heart. Entertainment value covers up the fact that there is nothing of substance in this piece of work, and it ultimately makes light of a very serious issue.
Comedy is often a crutch for palatability and is ultimately harmful in depicting controversy, both on an institutional and individual level. In Cecily Strong’s SNL skit entitled “Goober the Clown on Abortion,” Strong expresses her disdain for how women are forced to comment on personal issues while still garnering acceptance from the public:
[Goober the Clown: . . . but it’s a rough subject, so we’re gonna do fun clown stuff to make it more palatable! Whee!] (“Weekend Update” 00:00:48-00:00:54)
Strong shows how trivializing these issues through comedy is not only harmful for the work of art itself, but also harms the general public’s ability to discuss these issues in their true nature:
[Cecily Strong: I’m wearing a red nose, I know I look ridiculous. It’s just like, and this is what I have to do to say this, and I wish I didn’t have to do that.] (“Why Cecily Strong” 00:07:30-00:07:40)
So, is there any way to utilize comedy in a way that doesn’t trivialize the issue?
I think there is, and an insight into this lies in Obvious Child. We are given the portrait of Donna, a struggling comedian in her twenties who is just trying to get her life together. An unplanned pregnancy is really just another layer of misfortune she experiences. Donna notably has an entire life outside of her abortion, and it really only becomes a conflict halfway throughout the film. Most interestingly, comedy is achieved through the breaking of reality:
[Donna [inner monologue]: If you’ve just tuned in, you’re listening to The Donna’s Brain Show, and I’m the voice of the brain.] (Obvious Child 00:32:58-00:33:05)
There is a clear definition between comedic elements and the serious nature of the issue. Injecting comedy into elements of the experience rather than trying to force comedy into a serious issue is both entertaining and powerful, and ultimately shows us how art can be lighthearted without simplifying the nature of a controversial issue.
However, this simplification still pervades in other forms. Returning to Sisson, “the majority of characters who have abortions are younger, whiter, and wealthier than their real-life counterparts” (Herold) 4. Even Never Rarely Sometimes Always panders to this idea. This is palatability in a different form: controversial issues are easier to stomach when they happen to conventionally attractive young women. We can’t fully explore the breadth of an issue if we do not represent the people who truly face it. If the media about abortion is about community and decreasing isolation, representation is inherent in giving people a place in the community.
In all of the films I’ve looked at, girlhood and community has been a clear throughline. No matter how difficult or entertaining each work of art or film was, viewers never forget the power of standing with someone in their time of need.
Yes, Never Rarely Sometimes Always made me cry—three times—but it made me appreciate the small intimate moments that much more. It shows us the power of art not simply for entertainment or aesthetic purposes, or even to highlight a political issue, but to capture the human experience and incite some empathy and understanding we didn’t have prior.
Now I’m supposed to discuss the future of abortion narratives and what they might look like as we head into a seemingly dystopian, post-Roe world—but this honestly feels disingenuous. Abortion is about a person’s right to choose what’s best for themselves, and only themselves. It’s an inherently private issue that has wrongfully made its way into the public domain, and I have no right to police or predict how people should or will tell their stories.
[Cecily Strong: Do you need to know that information? Why would I need to share that with anybody else? And calling any kind of, like, human equality ‘politics’ is also exhausting. That you’re like, ‘No, where the money gets spent on which road is politics.’ If I have a right to exist and, like, go to work or be a mother, and when, is not politics.] (“Why Cecily Strong” 00:08:03-00:08:20)
Ultimately, I just hope that future generations of artists approach the issue in ways that are true to them, and through this, we will fundamentally attain more perspectives and ideas. The more we talk and sing and paint and film, the more we might realize just how similar our struggles may be.
[Olivia Rodrigo and Lily Allen [singing]: Fuck you!/ Fuck you very very much/ ‘Cause we hate what you do/ And we hate your whole crew . . . ] (“Olivia Rodrigo & Lilly Allen | F***” 00:03:14-00:03:22)
[Goober: Honka honka!] (“Weekend Update” 00:02:16-00:02:17)
1 Editors’ note: The referenced study highlights a misrepresentation of the rates of different abortion outcomes.
2 Editor’s note: This is in reference to Veronica’s budgeting of time and money throughout the trip.
3 Editor’s note: The couple in question, Mark and Kate, are strongly suggested to be evangelical Christians, through anti-abortion propaganda posters in their home and on their camper van, whose front bears the face of an infant.
4 Editor’s note: Herold is referencing a 2020 article co-authored with Sisson (Herold and Sisson).
Works Cited
Herold, Stephanie, and Gretchen Sisson. “Abortion on American television: An update on recent portrayals, 2015-2019.” Contraception vol. 102, no. 6, 2020, pp. 421-423. PubMed. doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.012.
Herold, Steph. “Hollywood’s Role in Stigmatizing Abortion.” The American Prospect, 3 Aug. 2022, prospect.org/culture/hollywoods-role-in-stigmatizing-abortion.
Macabasco, Lisa Wong. “Movies With Abortion Scenes Are Becoming More Graphic — And More Vital.” Vanity Fair, 4 May 2022, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2022/05/abortion-movies-roe-v-wade-happening.
Never Rarely Sometimes Always. Directed by Eliza Hittman, performances by Talia Ryder, Théodore Pellerin, Ryan Eggold, and Sharon Van Etten. Focus Features, 2020.
“Never Rarely Sometimes Always.” Rotten Tomatoes, www.rottentomatoes.com/m/never_rarely_sometimes_always.
Obvious Child. Directed by Gillian Robespierre, performances by Jenny Slate, Jake Lacy, Gaby Hoffman. A24, 2014.
“Olivia Rodrigo & Lilly Allen dedicates “F- You” to the 5 members of the Supreme Court: ‘We hate you 🖕.’” YouTube, uploaded by ORSource, 25 June 2022, www.youtube.com/shorts/V-madmajyuc.
“Olivia Rodrigo & Lilly Allen | F*** You | Glastonbury 2022.” YouTube, uploaded by Ajay Ramtohul, 30 June 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPrWKBQfFUQ.
Sisson, Gretchen, and Katrina Kimport. “Telling stories about abortion: abortion-related plots in American film and television, 1916–2013.” Contraception, vol. 89, no. 5, May 2014, pp. 413-418, doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2013.12.015.
Solomon, Deborah. “After Decades of Silence, Art About Abortion (Cautiously) Enters the Establishment. The New York Times, 10 Sep. 2022, www.nytimes.com/2022/09/10/arts/design/art-abortion-whitney-javits-museums-galleries.html.
“Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade.” YouTube, uploaded by ABC News, 24 June 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=weRVOvLXvok&t=32s.
“Thousands rally for abortion rights across the US: ‘Half of America deprived of hope’.” YouTube, uploaded by Guardian News, 15 May 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIJB-hR0LBE.
Unpregnant. Directed by Rachel L. Goldernberg, performances by Hailey Lu Richardson, Barbie Ferreira. 2020.
“Weekend Update: Goober the Clown on Abortion – SNL.” Youtube, uploaded by Saturday Night Live, 7 Nov. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=exSZQICbSb8.
“Why Cecily Strong Dressed as a Clown for Her Shocking ‘SNL’ Abortion Sketch | Making A Scene.” YouTube, uploaded by Variety, 16 June 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=P75l12rWUEQ&t=629s.