THE ROMAN ACTOR

Response Paper: 

The Possession of Domitia

“Feminism” as an idea originated as the ideal that men and women were to be treated equally in all aspects of life. Slowly, over the last century, we've seen progress in certain areas in contrast to where we stood previously, but one of the last standing semblances of sexism that is yet to be eradicated is the way the world views women. Many people, consisting primarily of men, see the issue as women gaining the right to vote, to be employed, to be paid, to go to school, while women themselves continue to fight for the right to exit their homes safely, to be paid the same. This disparity only progressed during the 2010s and was made worse by arguments started by particular orange political figures. The fight, while still centering around equal rights, became more aggressive, and stances on the issue more polarized, allowing the real root causes to be dismissed by disagreeing parties. The fight was no longer to be seen as human, but further emphasis was put on dismantling the system holding women's rights back as a whole. Equal opportunities were never going to be possible with the same people preventing them from still being in power.

The narrative of the “angry woman” is one so popularized in the media that it became increasingly difficult for women's rights activists to be considered at all unless they conformed to patriarchal ideals of how women should express themselves. This behavior birthed a new way of expressing oneself in hopes of truly being seen. One of the best examples of this can be seen in Phoebe Waller-Briggs’ “Fleabag” in which a now very popular line was included in season one; “Women are born with pain built-in”

Films, T.V., and literature over recent years have embraced this side of the coined “Female Rage” archetype, allowing woman protagonists to be angry, vengeful, and strong, with the element of relatability assuming the position of ‘this is what it's like’. Examples can range from Gillian Flynn’s “Gone Girl”, Greta Gerwig’s “Lady Bird”, popularly Ti West’s “X”, and Philip Massinger’s “The Roman Actor”. What sets these pieces apart from previous literature is that these woman protagonists have their own agendas, unreliant on a particular narrative apart from the depth of their own characters. They’re all portrayed as calculated, maybe unhinged, but to those with experience in their shoes, none of their actions seem unwarranted, or nearly as twisted as some may interpret them. Domitia is no exception.

Domitia’s character is portrayed as cruel, a fitting wife for the powerful and strong-headed Domitian Caesar, un-woefully leaving her husband(s) for the next big thing. On a surface level, Domitia is not meant to be a good character, but, just like the previous examples, the context of her situation cannot be overlooked. Women in these times were depicted with personality, but never to be separated from a more powerful male counterpart. In Domitia’s introduction, she is solicited, and mentally and physically forced away from her husband at the time, Aelius Lamia, by Domitian’s ‘freedman’ for the sake of Domitian’s desire for her. Upon her departure from Aelius Lamia, her now ex-husband is killed by Domitian, thus leaving her with no choice but to take Domitian’s hand in marriage. What interests me about this play is that, despite being based on real events, and despite Domitia’s prominence as a main character throughout its story, Massinger chooses to portray her as not more but a wife to be passed, a pretty possession that, despite her vocality on her view of herself, gets brushed over. 

This theme continues throughout the narrative, with Domitia being portrayed as callus towards her first and second husband, quickly transitioning to her next “infatuation”. I raise the question of what Domitia actually wants. History Domitia’s lineage traces back to the first Roman Empire, Octavianus, a man associated with the siege of Egypt, Julias Caesar, and the rise of Rome as they knew it. I would venture that Domitia, similar to Domitian, would be much more interested in her assertion of power and prowess, thus making her decision to calmly accept Domitian seem more like a power move of her own than a heartless act towards her than her deceased spouse Aelias Lamia. Domitia had a plan to assert her character in history and simply had the misfortune of existing in a time that overlooked the power of (mortal) women. Her affection towards Paris towards the end of the text provides further evidence of this. Seeing the effort and power of his own in Paris’ stage presence, her desires shifted, most likely prompted by her pre-existing privilege in association with Domitian. Domitia choosing to act on her intrigue towards Paris was no different than Parthenius persuading her in the direction of Domitian. She had a plan for herself, desires separate from marriage or child-bearing as is assumed of women at the time.

Her final participation in the murder of Domitian cements her abuse as true. She accepted his marriage to progress her stance in history, not out of respect or kindness towards the Autocrat. Domitia is a symbol of feminism in a very raw form. Though misconstrued either by the context of the play’s publishing, or the lack of thought given to her own motivations, I do not believe she was ever cynical. She behaved in a way that suited her, only interpreted as angry or conniving through the lens of how a woman, a wife, or a mother, should act.