Holli Garrido Julie D. Hicks 17 March 2012 Response 6 Guilty, or not Guilty?

Roam the city streets at night, catching only glimpses of a woman as she leaves or enters bars, motels, or rounds street corners in front of you. Where is she going, or better yet, what is she fleeing from? Thats the idea in Idan Levins exhibit appropriately named Woman on the Run on display at SECCA (South Eastern Center for Contemporary Art) in Winston-Salem, NC. Oddly tucked away at the end of a neighborhood, and outside the cobblestone walkways and large, ancient trees line the path into the museum. It is warm out and the people working at the desk are equally welcoming. Im a little surprised that I have never been here before, having grown up in Winston-Salem and been an avid arts enthusiast as long as I can remember. Of course the exhibit I am here to see is quite the opposite of a sunny day among the trees behind suburbia. The room is dark, partially due to the old age of the building and also to the mood the display is hoping to evoke from its visitors. The exhibit is made up of several mediums, including visual artwork, a life size construction of a city, video clips starring Tracey Snelling as the woman on the run, and photography of quintessential places or views of 1950s America. Inside one of the many auditoriums of the SECCA building there has been several street corners and a motel constructed in dim lighting, with the only source of light coming from inside the windows or from the

fluorescent street signs. Within the windows it alternates between film clips, still photographs, and 3-dimensional dioramas of some stage of the action. Walking throughout you really do feel like you are a night crawler in the 50s. At the time I went I was the only one in the exhibit, giving the mock city an abandoned and hushed feeling, since the only other form of movement was from the video clips playing from within windows or doors of certain buildings, all of the same woman. From start to finish there are a series of clips that fit together in some sort of sequence, enough so that you can assemble a storyline but not clear enough to develop a conclusion. The exhibit is designed to be open ended, giving the viewers a first-hand experience and leaving them to decide if the woman is guilty or innocent. The character has been accused of murdering her husband, however no concrete evidence has been found so as to convict her. One of the most striking elements of the story is the motel room where the woman in question chooses to stay. Unlike the other buildings, this one is an actual room that you can enter and explore, and eerily furnished to the point that I was hesitant to enter. Black and white television plays news clips, the suitcase containing her blonde wig and clothes lays open on the bed, black heels thrown in the corner, lace bra on the door knob. The lights from the street outside shine through the window, casting harsh orange lines over the bed, the carpet and ceiling are even spotted with what appears to be soot, and the wallpaper is tearing in places. Never before have I seen a more convincing set up, needless to say I was not keen on staying long, as I am still the only person in the exhibit. At the end of the block there was a small replica of the exact street I had just wandered, except this one was only about a foot high, as if the focus had been zoomed far out giving a distant view of the city. I marveled at this for a moment, both at the miniature details which Im sure were harder to create, and at the full path of the thing, to get more clues on where the woman could have ran

and what route she chose. This birds eye view allowed my mind to wander and consider other cities like this one, and the lifestyle of the past. Living in the 1940s and 50s, women were not in charge, they did not have any sort of power, and they certainly didnt have individual rights. Not until the 1960s did a revolution pick up, stirring issues and controversy, but even today women make less than men in job fields that are practically identical in skillset and work level. Back then what kinds of psychological pressures were put on women living in the city, in suburbia, anywhere really, that led them to make radical decisions. After being obedient for decades, what mental switch went off to spark a revolution, or in particular, cause the woman in the exhibit to flee her home and possibly commit murder? If she was guilty, perhaps it is because her husband was cruel or abusing, maybe he was cheating. However most cases stemmed from seemingly normal homes, the husband does not hurt or belittle his wife, yet she feels smothered, desperate, and even angry that she is viewed as so below her husband by just about all of society. Put enough pressure on someone and its no wonder they eventually make radical decisions. Before the womens rights movement there were no options for self-fulfillment or individual happiness, nothing short of running away or to some women, eliminating their husbands and therefore an obstacle in the way of their own achievement. Id like to think there were safe, legal ways for women to be happy and live their own lives, but I have heard many more stories in the opposite view, so it is hard to determine just how frantic the situation was. Of course, I had to try and figure out the story of this particular case, while it is entirely fictional I wanted to know, was she innocent or guilty? I walked the length of the room two or three times, starting from both ends just in case that offered a different perspective on the events.

Studying the clips and the order they went in I do not think she murdered anyone; it appears she simply escaped from a stressful, mentally destructive situation in the best way she could. The first clip shows her sitting on a bed, in her home I assume, going between crying into a scarf and drinking from a flask. She seems to be composing herself, getting ready to make a choice she knows will be life changing, something she cant undo. The next clip shows her in the bathroom, packing her clothes and dressing in a blonde wig as a disguise. The idea it seems is to escape the building unnoticed, undetected by her husband or anyone who might know her and try and interfere, perhaps even tell her man. The next sequence shows her getting a drink at the bar, complete with sunglasses, a head scarf, and the blonde wig so that put together, you can hardly see her face, let alone identify her. She simple gets her drink at the bar and leaves, and after that there are no clips, but the life size motel room is next on the street. Here we find the open suitcase and the disguise has been abandoned, so this must be her hideout. In the motel she is able to breathe, to relax even if only for a moment and compose herself for whatever comes next. I can only imagine she felt trapped, powerless, and a need to escape no matter the method of doing so. Assemble all of these clips together and nowhere do I see a scene where she could have killed anyone. She does not appear to have a weapon nor did she have the time to do anything with the body, and I cant imagine she would just leave it lying around. I can conclude that the motel room is her final stop, her hideout; why else would she ditch the disguise if the job was unfinished? More than the technicalities, the mental forces behind such rash decisions are fascinating. What leads someone to become so desperate that they leave all theyve ever known, to abandon the normalcy and hopefully create a better life for themselves. I have not led a particularly trying life, with no real difficulties that would push me to such extremes, so I can

only use my imagination. With a focus in criminology in my future, I really do hope to better understand these women, these people, who run away, potentially commit murder or acts of violence. What makes them tick, and what makes a humble housewife become a woman on the run.