B.A. (Hons.

) English – Semester VI Core Course

Paper XIII : Modern European Drama Study Material

Unit-4
(a) Dario Fo, Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay
(b) Franca Rame, ‘The Rape’

Edited by: Dr. Seema Suri

Department of English

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

University of Delhi
Paper XIII – Modern European Drama
Unit-4
(a) Dario Fo, Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay
(b) Franca Rame, ‘The Rape’

Edited by:
Dr. Seema Suri
School of Open Learning
University of Delhi
Delhi-110007

 
SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 Paper XIII – Modern European Drama
Unit-4

Contents
S. No. Title Pg. No.
(a) Dario Fo, Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay 01
1. About the Author 01
2. Learning Objectives 02
3. Historical Background 02
4. Summary: Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay 04
5. Analysis of the Play 07
6. Political Humour and Theatrical Tradition in Dario Fo’s Play 08
7. Conclusion 10
(b) Franca Rame, ‘The Rape’ 11
1. The Background 11
2. Critical Analysis 12

Prepared by:
Dr. Madhulika Nirmal

 
SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 Unit-4

(a) Dario Fo, Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay

(b) Franca Rame, ‘The Rape’
Dr. Madhulika Nirmal

(a) Dario Fo, Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay

1. About the Author
Dario Fo (1926-2016) was born in Varese, Italy. His father was a station master, an actor in
an amateur theory company, and also a socialist. His mother, Pina Rota, was a woman of
immense imagination, who published her autobiography in the 1970s. Dario’s grandfather,
while selling his produce across the countryside, proved to be an entertaining storyteller, who
engaged with his customers by sharing local news and stories. Dario accompanied his
grandfather on these occupational visits and learnt the art of effective narration. As a station
master, Dario’s father got transferred frequently and his family was compelled to move
along, and the child grew up listening to local narratives shared in taverns by tired glass-
blowers or fishermen. This oral tradition fascinated Dario and he was introduced to the
political satires as discussed amongst the common masses.
Post-war, he began his career in revue, which served as escapist entertainment favoured
by the politicians of the ruling Christian Democrat party. His extraordinary services to
comedy and mime set him apart. Additionally, he captured the radio with his monologues as
a Poor Little Thing (Poer Nano) who mingled stories from the Bible, preferring Cain to Abel,
the insufferable Prig.
Franca Rama, Fo’s wife, hailed from a family of actors and puppeteers. She was a
renowned actress whose family had been in the theatre business since the seventeenth-
century. They moved from town to town staging their performances but with the arrival of the
cinema, they adapted to the real theatre. The family was famous for their performances, using
props and staging comical and tragic stories. They chose themes that revolved around
socialist and anticlerical content, ranging from Shakespeare to Biblical texts to historical
novels. Franca’s father, Domenico Rame was a well-known socialist. The profits earned from
the performances were spent in bettering the lives of the common man; by building child care
facilities and supporting striking workers. In 1954, Dario married Franca and embarked on a
journey, where they together conveyed their leftist ideology and support for the oppressed
through a highly successful series of productions.
The play, Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! and the monologue ‘The Rape’ will be critically
analysed to understand their contribution to the modern western theatre. Can’t Pay? Won’t
Pay! reflects the social upheaval that prevailed in Milan, around 1974. The play deals with
working class concerns of unemployment, rights, and strikes; blaming those in power for the

1
rising cost of living. “The Rape” is a monologue by Franca Rame, in which she narrates her
own rape in minute detail, highlighting how a woman’s body becomes a site for political
discourse and power.
Dario Fo uses comedy to question and highlight the corruption, power play, and vices in
society. In 1951, Fo made his first theatrical presentation through “Poor Little Thing,” a
series of satirical monologues. As the content of most of his plays, such as A Finger in the
Eyes (1953) and Fit to be Tied Up (1954), were anti-establishment, Fo’s plays constantly
faced censorship issues. Issues like the plight of the common man, price rise, heavy taxes,
unemployment, and the protest of the factory workers coloured most of Fo’s theatrical
productions.
In 1997, Dario was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature, which was not well received
amongst his contemporaries who thought that Fo’s works were bland mimicry and lacked
literary merit, deserving of a Nobel Prize. Dario responded to the uproar by turning his
acceptance speech into a spectacular performance. Calling himself a “jester” at the outset, he
highlights how his plays were banned for years together and reflects on the need to support
theatre. He concludes that a theatre which is capable of making the audience laugh should be
preserved well, since it then becomes the theatre of human reason.
2. Learning Objectives
This study material will help students analyse Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay by introducing them to
the;
- historical and political background to the play;
- modern European theatre; and
- a critical appreciation of the characters and themes in the play.
This study material also includes a detailed discussion of Franca Rame’s monologue, “The
Rape.”
Track Your Progress
1. What were some of the early influences on Fo’s work?
2. Describe Dario Fo and Franca Rame, in terms of their contribution to theatre.
3. Historical Background
In 1969, factory workers initiated a series of strikes and complete shut downs in the industrial
centres of Italy. This is famously known as ‘Hot Autumn.’ Better working conditions, along
with respectable wages was the agenda of the said movement. After the 1969 working-class
militancy, many companies were forced to pay increased wages to the workers. This
working-class rebellion also encouraged the common man to break laws for their benefit. For
example, during those years, most of the bourgeoise population stopped paying rent. The
workers started reducing production in the factories and some also started vandalising the

2
produce. This was known as ‘autoriduzione’ (self-reduction). This movement almost
collapsed the entire functioning of the system and, not only the factory workers, the higher
management also weakened. For example, the managing director of the famous FIAT
temporarily shifted to Switzerland after failing to control his dilapidating factories.
The rebellion resulted in a forty hours per week schedule for the workers, better wages,
official noticeboards in the factories, and the right to information. One of the most important
effects was the formation of unions amongst the working-class. By 1973, most of their
demands were met but the rebellion against the employers and unions continued, to slash
bureaucracy in the system.
However, in late 1973, the decision of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting
countries (OPEC) to increase oil prices by 70 per cent, thwacked Italy. Italy had zero
indigenous energy resources and thus oil constituted 75 per cent of the country’s requirement.
As a result, Italy witnessed inflation which became a problem for all its citizens, especially
after the ‘Hot Autumn.’ Throughout the 1970s, Italy had the highest rate of inflation in the
West. Rationing certain food items and energy became crucial. Eventually, food and
petroleum goods became very expensive and, as a result, factory workers moved out of the
factories. Amidst inflation, political crises increased, with the opportunist Republican party
resigning from the coalition government. Within a year, wholesale prices rocketed, along
with the growth of the ‘black economy’ due to industrial shifts.
Thus, the self-reduction movement of consumers started as contrary to that of the
workers. And, this is also the central idea behind the play Can’t Pay! Won’t Pay. A very early
record of the rebellion is best noted by the historian Paul Ginsborg:
In August 1974 groups of workers at FIAT Rivalta refused to pay the 25–50 per
cent increases demanded by the private bus companies which took them to work.
Instead, they offered to pay at the old season ticket rate. The local metalworkers’
union quickly organised the protest and elected ‘bus delegates’ who collected the
season-ticket money at the old rate and sent it to the bus companies. The example
of the FIAT workers was then taken up throughout Turin and Piedmont.
‘Autoreduction’ also spread from transport to electricity. The local electricians’
unions organised the paying of bills at the old tariff (some 50 per cent of the
new), and promised that no one would have their supply cut off for taking such
action. As a result, an estimated 150,000 electricity bills were ‘auto-reduced’ in
Piedmont. During the winter of 1974–75 the movement spread rapidly to other
cities of the Centre and North; telephone charges were also brought under attack.
(359)
The maintenance of living standards became a concern as supermarkets emptied. The
cost of Italian staple food, pasta, increased by 50 per cent and other necessary consumable
commodities too became unaffordable for the common man. Despite the 1969 rebellion and

3
its success, recession was a certainty. Unemployment rose to newer heights and electricity cut
offs became mandatory, even as the temperature dipped to zero.
Track your Progress
1. Comment on the social and political changes that resulted from the ‘Hot Autumn.’
2. What is ‘autoriduzione’? How did it affect the common man?
4. Summary: Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay
The play highlights the problems of job redundancies and economic crises amongst the
middle-class population of Milan, Italy. The play opens the with a group of protesting
working-class women at a grocery store, who are raising their voices against the price rise of
basic commodities. As a result, all the housewives loot the local store.
Act One
In the opening scene, we are introduced to a working-class woman, Antonia, who is
struggling very hard to survive amidst the price rise. Antonia is seen carrying bag loads of
food and her friend, Margherita enquires about the same. Antonia then narrates how
disgruntled shoppers, after learning about the sudden hike in commodity prices, decided to
pay whatever they felt like paying or else leave without paying anything at all.
While the shoppers were busy collecting the goods, the police came and all the women
left with arms full of groceries. While Antonia is basking in the glory of the looted and
unpaid collection, Margherita reminds her of Giovanni, her communist husband. To save
herself from Giovanni’s wrath and the possible havoc, Antonia hides some of the looted food
under Margherita’s coat. When Giovanni enters and notices Margherita’s sudden ‘weight
gain,’ Antonia covers up by lying that Margherita is pregnant. Surprised, Giovanni questions
the sudden pregnancy and wonders why Luigi, Margherita’s husband, has not told him about
her condition. We learn that Giovanni and Luigi work in the same factory. Antonia tells him
that Luigi is not aware, since she stopped taking birth control pills, following the Pope’s
advice to Catholics.
While looting the superstore, everyone picked up things that were not really needed. For
example, when Antonia leaves to visit Margherita, the famished Giovanni is left with a tin of
cat food. As a fact, they don’t have a cat. This a humorous but sad comment on the
degradation of the poor workers; forced to eat food meant for rich people’s pets. Antonia
leaves to ask Margherita for food and the police come to search all the houses in the area for
the looted goods. A Sergeant narrates the entire incident at the supermarket to Giovanni and
he expresses his rage and resentment at the unfortunate event. To Giovanni’s surprise, the
sergeant expresses his sympathies with the women;
Don’t make me laugh. We’ve been hearing this for 30 years. Reforms. No mate.
If people want change, they’ll have to do it themselves. They’ll have to melt the
shackles of capitalism and the iron fist of oppression with the boiling blood of
Karl Marx. (Fo 16)
4
Giovanni is upset by the Sergeant’s implied criticism of the Communist Party, calling him a
“died-in-the-wool, raving, steeped-in-Marxism out-and-out red copper!” (17) Both the ladies
come back and are interrogated by an Inspector, who has come regarding the incident that has
taken place. To save themselves from the uncomfortable questions, Margherita feigns labor.
The inspector offers to call an ambulance to help Margherita reach the nearby hospital,
thereby complicating the situation further. With no choice, Antonia and Margherita leave in
the ambulance. Giovanni is yet again left alone in the house.
Luigi enters, searching for his wife and Giovanni wants to know why he’s not at work.
Luigi tells him that he and some other workers held up the trains, to protest against the thirty
per cent hike in season tickets. Giovanni expresses his disapproval of such “wild-man
guerrilla tactics,” whereas Luigi believes that it’s no use waiting for either the government or
the trade unions to do anything for the common man (Fo 30). Eventually, Giovanni tells him
about Margherita’s pregnancy. Luigi is stunned and they set out in search of their wives.
Track your Progress
1. Why do the women loot the grocery store?
2. Comment on the contrasting political views of Giovanni and the Sergeant who visits
his home.
3. Comment on the farcical elements in the play.
Act Two
To finally put an end to the fiasco, Antonia decides to hide the looted food items in a nearby
shed that belongs to her father-in-law. She gathers the items and stuffs them in her coat,
creating an illusion of a pregnant woman. On the other hand, while looking for their wives
Luigi and Giovanni stumble upon bags of sugar, flour, and rice which fall off a lorry, that has
‘caustic soda’ written on the outside. The Sergeant (who earlier visited Giovanni’s apartment)
appears and informs them that it is all part of a racket and all such sacks are taken across the
border, where they’ll get better prices in other European countries. Even if he files a report,
nothing will happen. Giovanni and Luigi are shocked at these revelations about the collusion
of the industrialists, the border police, and other authorities. Luigi thinks that these sacks are
rightfully theirs. Giovanni still feels that it should be left to the trade unions to address their
problems. Luigi reminds him that it is because the trade unions are not doing anything that
the women resorted to such desperate measures;
Luigi: Who organized the women today? Not the unions. The women rioted
because they can’t take any more. See these hands? They want what’s theirs.
But your union leaders and your precious part tie them behind our backs. (44)
At this point Luigi informs him that they have been laid off, as the management is
shifting production to a place where labour is cheaper. This changes Giovanni’s attitude and
he agrees to keep the sacks. The Inspector appears but they manage to run away with a couple
of sacks, riding a stolen bicycle. Outside Giovanni’s apartment, they see the Inspector waiting

5
for them and they go back to Luigi’s house. There, Luigi discovers that he’s left the keys to
his house on Giovanni’s kitchen table. Suddenly, an Undertaker arrives to deliver a coffin to
Luigi’s neighbour, but the family’s not at home. Giovanni offers to keep it for them and they
plan to use the coffin to hide their sacks. Giovanni hides in the coffin, along with the sacks
and with the Undertaker’s help, the coffin is delivered to Giovanni’s apartment.
The Inspector revisits Antonia’s house to intimidate the ladies into admitting their role in
the loot. The inspector is suspicious to notice that now Antonia too is pregnant. However, she
cooks up an elaborate story about some St. Eulalia, a patron saint of fertility. She says that
women go about with fake stomachs to celebrate the miracle of St. Eulalia’s pregnancy at the
age of sixty. For good effect, she warns the Inspector not to insist on seeing their stomachs, as
the saint’s curse will make him blind. As a perfectly timed ploy, the lights go off the moment
the state trooper begins interrogating the women. The power cut is the result of Antonia’s
inability to pay the electricity bills for the month. The cunning Antonia flips the situation to
her advantage and convinces the policeman that he’s turned blind. While pretending to help
him leave, Antonia hits the policeman who falls down unconscious. To revive him, she uses
oxygen from Giovanni’s welding equipment and pumps the gas through his mouth; only to
realize that she has mistakenly used hydrogen instead, thus bloating his belly. The Inspector
is then stuffed into an almirah so that the returning husbands can be tackled.
Giovanni and Luigi return home and quickly hide the sacks under the sofa and the coffin
in the wardrobe, where the Inspector has been hidden. They are taken aback to find a
pregnant Antonia and not-so-pregnant Margherita in a perplexed condition. After a series of
questions, lies, and arguments, Antonia confesses her part in the loot that took place that
morning. She is agitated;
Let him kill me. I’ll just sit here and let him whack my brains out. I’m tired of
this shitty life. I’m tired of all the running around trying to scratch a living out of
nothing with no help at all . . . Our kids are chucked on the scrapheap, a whole
generation of them without the hope of getting a job. The right laying waste and
who’s standing up to them? Him and his party. Like a dead haddock. . . (67)
But contrary to Antonia’s expectation, the communist Giovanni sympathises and understands
Antonia’s plight after the day’s events. The play ends with all the four characters panicking
when the unconscious policeman regains his senses and comes out of the cupboard. Giovanni
exclaims to the audience, “I am not running anymore. We’ll face the bastards,” introducing
humour at the moment of desperation and disillusionment (Fo 70).
Track your Progress
1. Comment on Antonia’s outburst.
2. Dario Fo paints a picture of a desperate and compromised ‘common man.’
Substantiate this statement with examples from the play.
3. Compare Giovanni’s political views with those of Luigi.

6
5. Analysis of the Play
Dario Fo’s play depicts a period of inflation, recession, and unemployment through a group
of working-class housewives living in Milan, around 1974. The women refuse to pay the
hiked prices of the everyday commodities and choose to rather pay nothing at all. The play
can be seen as a working-class response to claim the benefits promised in 1969.
The farce enacted in the play includes all the traditional ingredients, like women feigning
pregnancy, well-timed entrances of characters, bodies flying out of cupboards, husbands
unaware of their parenthood etc. The play demonstrates how the housewives understand
circumstances better, while the young factory workers rebel without any political direction.
Luigi represents the militancy of these factory workers. Both the women are quick witted and
have some perspective regarding their political and social situation as compared to their slow
and politically fearful better halves.
Antonia represents all the housewives who benefitted from the ‘Hot Autumn’ revolution.
However, the better wages and comfortable working hours rendered to the working class
were getting affected because of steep inflation. Above all, the increase in unemployment and
rationing compelled many Antonias to join the supermarket protest. Antonia’s character is
that of an irritated housewife whose husband fails to see the ills of society and is governed by
his communist ideology. Her son is a grown-up man and has left home, but hasn’t been able
to find a job. She constantly complains about the lack of food and gas, and her inability to
pay electricity bills with the meagre amount that reaches their house. Therefore, throughout
the play, she is least regretful of her action of looting the supermarket, along with the other
housewives. It is the hunger and the depression of living in an unjust society that determines
Antonia’s actions.
The communist Giovanni seems to be the actual political target of the play. His belief in
an equal society, with better order and democracy is questioned in the play; by Antonia, his
friend Luigi, and the Sergeant. Most of the dramatic tension and humour is created by
Antonia, who constantly tries to curtain the illegal loot from her communist and law-abiding
partner. These housewives are the drivers of the play and their actions and reactions compel
Giovanni to re-examine his ideas. Act One portrays Giovanni as an absolute communist. He
detests the unfortunate looting at the supermarket, defending the ideas of equality and
justness. He can be seen as a naïve communist who fails to understand the real motives and
defends the state. For example, in Act Two, when Luigi, the Sergeant, and Giovanni look at
the sacks of sugar, rice, and flour that have fallen from the lorry, Giovanni is surprised as the
lorry is marked ‘caustic soda.’ The simpleton Giovanni is unable to understand that society
has slumped into a state of black marketing and rationing. Giovanni represents a large
population that blindly trusts in the state, without realising the harm and the injustice that
they are perpetuating, in the name of an equal society.
Towards the end, he is politically transformed and ends up supporting the looting at the
supermarket;

7
 Sneer you may. But I have fell in. All those people today milling about the
streets with groceries up their jumpers are looking for a bit of leadership, that’s
what . . . well, we’re going to have to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps, and
roll our sleeves up and get weaving up to our elbows otherwise someone will
nick the carpet out from under our feet and we’ll be up the spout without a
paddle. (69)
The play is very different from its predecessors in terms of technique and plot. The
rebellion at the supermarket is the only collective action while most of the events take place
indoors, confined within the four walls of Giovanni’s apartment. The looting of the
superstore and other events are reported by the characters. Fo was criticised for being an old-
style comedian, to which he fittingly responded:
I had never abandoned farce. In Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! we have above all
followed the method of verifying the text with an audience of workers and local
people. We performed it in front of them and this obliged us to ‘correct’ certain
characters because they made some observations about them, as well as changing
the entire finale. (Valentini 159)
Track your Progress
1. Comment on Giovanni’s political transformation in the play.
2. Comment on the housewives who rule the play. Would you agree that
Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay is a feminist play?
3. Identify some of the farcical elements in the play.
6. Political Humour and Theatrical Tradition in Dario Fo’s Play
The play deals with the social and political concerns through humour. Even Italian cinema
and media started viewing these concerns through the lens of satire. The rebellion of 1968
made political cartoons important. Before the upheaval, the media was a guarded and a
censored territory. However, post 1968, graphics and cartoons became a lighter mode to
voice disagreement; both political and social. Most of these cartoonists were leftists and
chose fulltime engagement with the national dailies and magazines. Thus, Can’t Pay? Won’t
Pay! fits aptly in this change that was brimming in Italy and Fo too, chose humour to voice
his ideas. His belief in the importance of humour and jest to reflect is evident in his Nobel
Prize acceptance speech. He calls himself a ‘jester of the Middle Ages, scourging authority
and upholding the dignity of the downtrodden.’
Dario Fo’s plays are highly influenced by the fifteenth century Italian theatrical tradition
of Commedia dell’arte featuring an unsatiable hunger as that of the Harlequin. As Ron
Jenkins notes:
Hunger is a recurring theme in the comedies of Dario Fo. His characters are not
just hungry for food. They are hungry for dignity, hungry for justice, and hungry
for love. The protagonists of Can’t Pay! Won’t Pay! are driven by their
8
 collective hungers to break free from the constraints in which their poverty has
confined them. (159)
The play questions the laws that govern the ‘free market,’ as the plot unfolds. Many
farcical elements such as the Inspector convinced that he’s ‘pregnant’ or olives falling out of
Margherita’s stomach become metaphors for emancipation. Through the use of absolute
chaos and humour, Fo portrays newer ways of understanding the political and social
imbalances in society. The absurd world of Antonia and Margherita represents hunger in its
most naked form. As a fact, after the play’s premiere in 1974, many working-class women
were arrested for “liberating” groceries and everyday commodities from a supermarket, in a
fashion similar to that depicted in the play. Dario Fo was held responsible for encouraging
this unfortunate event, while the judge disagreed with the view that writers reflect the social
and the political space they inhabit. Thus, the reality has transformed into its own mockery.
The influence of French farce can easily be spotted in Fo’s plays. The physical comedy
in the play can sometimes be missed in a reading of the play. Beginning with women stuffing
their bags with the loot in their bellies, Margherita faking labour pains, Giovanni and Luigi
stuffing a coffin with sugar sacks, and a supposedly dead Inspector hidden in the cupboard;
the play uses this kind of humour to make serious comments on inflation and exploitation.
Fo’s theatre is a political commentary that is provocative and hilarious. Interestingly, Fo
connects the farce with his theatrical brilliance so smoothly that each episode tends to support
and enhance the next one.
The stage directions of Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! indicate that only one actor will play the
roles of the Sergeant, the Inspector, the Old Man, and the Undertaker. This dramatic device
was, perhaps, inspired by one-man shows performed by the giullari, or medieval street
performers in market squares – where all the parts were performed by one actor. Fo has used
this technique in another popular work of his, Mister Buffo. Dario Fo, due to his subversive
political and social ideology, was constantly monitored by the state. Therefore, the play
captures the continuous involvement of the state troopers through various characters. Also,
the play criticises the inability of the state apparatus to think through the conditions of the
poor working class. The incident where the Sergeant picks up the sugar sacks, parallels the
looting episode that began this fiasco. The characters of the Undertaker and the Old Man are
purposely introduced during points of confusion in the play. The Undertaker brings a coffin
meant for a neighbour to Giovanni which acts as a store to hide the loot. Similarly, the Old
Man returns with the things that Antonia had cunningly placed in his garage. Thus, this
dramatic device allows all the characters to stay connected while keeping the main theme,
here, the looted things, in the centre.
Vaudeville, the theatrical tradition of using interspersed songs in a comic situation, is
adopted in Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! On two occasions, Margherita and Antonia break into
song, when least expected. As mentioned in the earlier sections, storytelling was a significant
part of Fo’s childhood. However, the talented Fo was influenced by a 15th century actor
named Angelo Beolco, famously remembered as Ruzzante. His “Theatre of Situation”

9
comprised class conflicts or any circumstances that draws a character’s behaviour. In the
play, the backgrounds of Antonia, Margherita, Luigi, and Giovanni remain unknown to the
readers, and their reactions during the events of the play arise from the situations they
encounter. The stage production of the play shows Giovanni talking directly to the audience,
which again is a technique influenced by Ruzzante.
Track your Progress
1. Comment on the use and influence of French theatrical techniques in Fo’s play.
2. Comment on the reception of Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! and its impact on the audience.
3. How are humour and hunger depicted in the play?
7. Conclusion
The staging of the play resulted in an outbreak of similar events throughout the country. In
one of the loots, leaflets from a Maoist group were found with the following message, “The
goods we took were already ours, just as everything else is ours because we have produced it
through our exploitation . . . Let’s get organised in working-class areas – rip up the gas,
electricity, and phone bills. Tear up the rent book. Don’t pay for public transport anymore!
Let’s take all we need, let’s reappropriate our lives!” While Fo had no connections to the
Maoist group, the right-winged dailies accused him as a leader willing to instigate civil
disobedience amongst the distressed masses. Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! on a larger scale,
highlights the much serious after effects of inflation and unemployment. As rightly observed:
With workers being laid off and not being able to struggle within the workplace,
for what reason are they going to go on strike when they’re already at home?
Strikes are an important process of growth, to gauge your strength and to go
outside and leaflet, speak to people, get them to understand workers’ dramatic
situation. But some people within the trade union movement only understand
strikes as being a group of people picketing in order to damage the bosses.
(Bedani 204)
Dario Fo wrote and stood for the struggling working-class population. He witnessed the ‘Hot
Autumn’ as well as the ‘self-reduction’ rebellion. He closely observed the rise of the working
class after their demands were met; as a result of successful strikes and industrial shut downs.
He also witnessed the testing times of inflation, where the poor were rendered jobless due to
the uncontrollable price hikes and how the basics like crude oil and food became
unaffordable. Likewise, Franca Rame too, contributed to the betterment of the common man
through her engagement as an activist and an artist. Both Fo and Rame knew that theatre was
a powerful tool which, if used wisely, could result in social and political changes.
With the Fo couple’s continuous engagement with the common man, severe downturns
were inevitable. Towards the late 1970s, both Dario and Franca started working on the
themes of women’s oppression as contrary to their concerns of ‘collective’ issues of the
working class.

10
 They were more than a writer and an actress. Not only through their farce and political
satires, the duo maintained their presence in industrial disputes and helped detainees gain
access to money and families. They were silenced through many agencies and ‘The Rape’
documents a horrific attempt to crush dissent; Franca Rame herself narrating her rape.

(b) Franca Rame, ‘The Rape’

1. The Background
On 9th March, 1973 Franca Rame was attacked, kidnapped, razored, burnt with cigarettes and
raped by a group of men in Milan, in a moving van. This unfortunate event was recorded as
The Rape, in 1978 in the form of a monologue. Prior to this, Franca never admitted that the
attack involved rape. It becomes important to ponder over the kind of political ideology
Franca followed that resulted in such a ‘punishment?’
The earlier middle-class period of Dario Fo and Franca Rame’s theatre gave way to a
political theatre, where the classical structure of the theatre got altered with a new found
political identity. To reach the working and the middle-class masses, the Fo couple started
performing in factories, cinemas and other public places. Usually, the plays comprised two
acts while the third act or ‘terzo atto’ was reserved to discuss the political and social issues of
the times amongst the company and the audience. The commitment towards the common man
went beyond theatre, as Franca revived the ‘Red Aid’ association. This association helped
transfer money and letters to political detainees and their families, fighting against
oppressions that took place in the name of detainments and interrogations and the sorry
conditions of the prisons and asylums.
In 1972, the ‘Red Aid’ agreed to support the accused of violent terrorism. Franca, though
far from the political choice regarding terrorism, however continued serving the detainee. Joe
Farrell in Franca Rame. A Woman on Stage (2000) effectively captures Franca’s selflessness
in serving the detainee. He says that Rame campaigned for the human rights, irrespective of
the crimes committed by men. Farrell further highlights Rame’s understanding about the
wrongdoings of the prisoners while stating that each individual deserves to be treated
respectfully.
Franca’s association with the ‘Red Aid’ made her both, the most liked and hated woman
in Italy. This, perhaps, resulted in her rape in 1973. The heinous crime was organised by the
agents of the Italian state to stop the growth and support of the left-wing, particularly to the
terrorists. The state initiated an investigation against the Fo couple for their possible ties and
involvement with terrorism. Interestingly, the Italian magistrate, Guido Viola, who carried
out the inquiry regarding the ties to terrorism, was also selected to investigate Franca’s rape
which was ousted without any charges.
Before the publication of ‘The Rape,’ Franca never spoke of the fact that the assault was
sexual in nature. The attack and the assault led to several demonstrations in the city.

11
Historically, rape has always been used as a weapon against women. Women’s bodies have
been used to send out strong messages of humiliation and defeat to the other sex, while at the
same time, causing anger, shock and immense pain. Franca’s choice to not make her rape
public defeated the purpose of her rapists. Socially, she was seen as a woman who defeated a
group of politically charged men. While, on a more personal ground, the act was unspeakable
and she did not want Dario to sacrifice his political beliefs and activities to ensure her safety
in the future.
2. Critical Analysis
The opening lines of the monologue present the confusion that the actress must have gone
through during the assault. Her mind registers the romantic music in the background. The
constant movement between her surroundings and her feelings, creates the effect of a close-
up. The victim’s narration is like a stream of consciousness, while she unravels the confusion
to locate herself in the van, to the men’s knees shifting as they position her.
Voicelessness and lack of proper words forms the major theme of the monologue. The
woman is talking in her mind, questioning and answering to make sense of the world
spiralling around her. She is aware that the men are about to do something and she speculates
their intentions. Another man positions himself between her legs and it becomes apparent that
she is going to be raped. She then narrates her feelings at that exact moment which comprise
fear, logic, situation, location, and pain. The assault is described in disturbingly graphic
detail.
The half-formed sentences and incomplete feelings enhance the pain for the readers as
they rely on their imagination to decipher the act. The insignificant details of the monologue
highlight the appalling truth of Franca’s powerlessness. When the first man penetrates her,
her feelings are exposed. She feels ‘sick,’ her heart ready to ‘explode,’ ‘chaos in her head’
and she turns into a ‘stone.’ By the time the third man is mentioned, the sentences have
increasingly turned shorter. Finally, the words make their way through the victim’s mouth:
“I’m dying . . . I’m having a heart attack.” The attackers manage to extinguish the last
cigarette on her neck before hurriedly dressing her back and throwing her out of the van.
The confused tone of the beginning returns, as she attempts to recollect herself and her
surroundings. The slow pace conveys that the victim has spent a very long time to ponder
over the event and its implication. She’s aware that the police and the doctors would demand
that she revisit the unfortunate event again and again. Therefore, she postpones her visit to
the police station and leave things for the following morning. Franca remains silent, like
innumerable victims before her. The burn marks and razor cuts on Franca’s body are visible
warnings and reminders; which the neo-fascists leave on her body to remind her of her
‘mistakes’ and the impending punishment, lest she forgets.
It was only in 1987, fourteen years after the actual rape, during one of her performances,
that Franca Rame made the news of her rape public. Due to the passage of time and her
public image, the stigma of a defiled identity, was not a concern now. The activist Rame, in

12
the light of the sensitivity of the situation and gravity of the incident, requested for harsher
laws on sexual violence.
Check your Progress
1. Rapes and sexual attacks are often used as political weapons. Comment with respect
to The Rape.
2. Write a short note on Franca Rame’s political ideology and social activism.
3. Comment on the narrative technique of the monologue.
Works Cited
Bedani, Gino. Politics and Ideology in the Italian Worker’s Movement. Oxford: Berg., 1995.
Behan, Tom. Dario Fo: Revolutionary Theatre. London: Pluto, 2000.
Farrell, Joseph. Dario Fo and Franca Rame: Harlequins of the Revolution. London:
Methuen, 2001.
Fo, Dario. Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! (1978) Translated, Lino Pertile. Delhi: Worldview, 2022.
Ginsborg, Paul. A History of Contemporary Italy: Society and Politics, 1943-1988. New
York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2003.
Jenkins, Ron. “The Comedy of Hunger.” In We Won’t Pay! We Won’t Pay! and Other Plays.
The Collected Plays of Dario Fo. Vol. 1. Ed. Franca Rame. Trans. Ron Jenkins. New
York: Theatre Communications Group, 2001.
Mitchell, Tony. Dario Fo: People’s Court Jester. London: Methuen, 1986.
Valentini, C. The Plays of Dario Fo. Milan: Feltrinelli, 1997.

13