Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
WHEN CHRISTINA REIHILL visits London – about three or four times a year – she sees how different her life now is from when she lived there decades ago.
Back then, she had the quintessential high-octane 1980s London life. She worked for Vogue (her step-mother owned half of the Irish magazine Image), and she had access to all the good parties and interesting people.
But the drug and alcohol use that was part of her life over there became too much. By 30, she was addicted to cocaine. The death of her step-brother Hugo in the early 1990s triggered another descent for her. She eventually had to go through addiction treatment.
When Reihill speaks to TheJournal.ie, she’s on one of those infrequent trips to London. ”I had a ball until it ended,” she says of the heady time there. ”I can only tolerate it for max three days. No wonder I drank and drugged.”
Since that time, Reihill has studied psychotherapy and spent a lot of time working on her own writing and art. She told her own recovery story with the work Listen, and now she’s taking another, more unusual, approach to exploring what she went through.
The life of Dorothy Parker
In Wit’s End, her new installation which opens at Smock Alley Theatre on Monday, Reihill is telling the story of Dorothy Parker, the erudite American author who died an alcoholic at the age of 73, but re-writing the ending somewhat.
They obviously never met, but Parker – who had a seat the famed Algonquin round table – has had a major effect on Reihill’s life.
Both she and Parker lost their mothers at a young age; went to finishing schools; came from privileged backgrounds; and wanted to be writers. This meant that they had to go against what was expected of them as young women in their respective social sets.
Parker was an incredible funny and witty writer, and very sharp of tongue. She grew up in New York, wrote for Vanity Fair and the New Yorker, and penned volumes of poetry and fiction. No doubt you’ve read some of her famed one-liners:
Men seldom make passes at girls who wear glasses.
You can lead a horticulture, but you can’t make her drink.
The two most beautiful words in the English language are ‘cheque enclosed’
One more drink and I’ll be under the host.
Parker’s life was filled with tragic events. She despised her stepmother, who her father married two years after her mother’s death. She accused her father of abuse. Later in life, after her divorce she became pregnant by playwright Charles MacArthur and had an abortion. She later experienced depression and attempted suicide.
But though the story of Parker can get lost in the mire of tragedy, she was also a fascinating and strong-minded woman at a time when that was not always easy.
In the 1930s and 1940s, she became involved in civil rights and civil liberties issues, reporting on subjects for the Communist magazine The New Masses. She was also chair of the Joint Anti-Fascist Rescue Committee. Due to this type of work, the FBI compiled a 1,000-page dossier on her.
‘I put on the mask’
Reihill credits Parker with helping bring her to recovery. “It’s a combination of moments, profound moments – where you can no longer lie to yourself. One of them was reading Dorothy Parker and the hell she had been in at the end of her life.”
Parker realised she was alienated, unwell, and alone, emotions that Reihill felt also.
“I in my own way was the same at 32. I came back to Dublin on the way to divorce, no job, unemployable, and suicidal. I had a choice: I could get up again and I started working for Irish Tatler magazine. I put on the mask, put on the fashion gear and I went out. And I went out and I thought ‘you are a fraud’. You are just a complete mask; you are just hollow inside.”
Reihill was tangled, desperate and confused.
“You really don’t believe that there’s a way back from all the shit you created, all the damage. And you know you’re also still wounded behind the childhood history,” she says. For her, that was the death of her mother, something she now feels at peace with.
Reihill also shared some of Parker’s gift for devil-may-care one-liners, which could be cutting for those they landed on.
“You didn’t care whether someone was destroyed in the comment as long as it was a funny comment. But you grow a conscious when you come into sobriety. When I came into treatment one of the things they said was my issue was reckless honesty.”
Remember her in all her defiance
In death, Dorothy Parker was able to create more controversy – her cremated remains were left in a filing cabinet due to a rift created posthumously with her literary agent Lillian Hellman.
Hellman was furious that Parker left her copyright to Martin Luther King, and not to her. The ashes were later interred in a memorial garden in Baltimore by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
“This installation is remembering Parker in all her defiance – she lived till the age of 73 – and had five suicide attempts. She had a fantastic defiance which I had too in my drinking – just fuck you all,” says Reihill.
“This installation says she rises from the ashes to give her response to Hellman for insulting her. For me the greatest revenge that any individual can wreak on another is be well. This is Parker getting well to meet her heart’s desire to sit and write the book she started writing and never finished.”
Getting clean helped Reihill to follow her own desire to write. “You can’t write properly when you’re fucked up with alcohol and drugs,” she says.
While Reihill feels that she and Parker have much in common, she also feels sad that Parker never did do what she set out to do (be a critically acclaimed serious writer) and instead was consumed by alcoholism.
Wit’s End (the name a nod, in part, to what a great wit Parker was) helps to reimagine what could have been for Parker, with Reihill re-writing some of Parker’s work.
In turn, it is supposed to prompt the visitor into examining their own life.
The installation, says Reihill, is “an experience”.
I am stimulating all the senses – there’s something that meets your eyes, your ears, nose, feet, everything. So that when you step into it you get taken almost, I want you taken and then allowed to let the work impress on you and imprint on you in whatever way you want.
‘I didn’t want another self-help book’
The installation is also inspired by Reihill’s book SoulBurgers, which she spent 10 years writing. She describes it as an “odyssey in verse”, which explores how she felt when dealing with her alcoholism.
“When I came into recovery and hit rock bottom I said don’t want another self-help book,” she recalls.
It’s not a book that will sell in droves (Reihill says that it is “not very sexy”) but it’s a book she felt was necessary.
“I did all the sexy in London – I worked at Vogue, glossy magazines, I did the vodka, I did the cocaine,” she says. But she didn’t want the book to be all about that.
What I wanted to know is how do you describe, how do you articulate, despair in a way that is palatable, that actually meets someone when you are in the despair… and ultimately to know that you are not alone.
It’s life’s “profound moments” that she hopes people will be driven to explore when they visit Wit’s End.
“These are the poignant moments in our lives where suddenly the world changes for us and you go Jesus, was I on the right road all the time? Is this the person I want to be married to? Is this the job I want to be doing?”
“My installation is prompting you to ask yourself that question, it’s an invitation – it’s not a slap across the face.”
Reflecting on how life has changed since becoming sober, Reihill says it has made her happier than she has been before.
“I know who I am and I know who I’m not… and I am as close as I could be. I have never been so content, I have never felt freer to be the person I left behind.”
Her emotions no longer dulled, she’s embracing what the world has for her. “I want to understand what does it mean to hold the experience of grief in a really empathic way but I also want to know the absolute heights of what joy is,” she says.
Though she can’t change how things went for Dorothy Parker, with her new installation she’s imagining a new life for the writer – and will hopefully introduce her work to new fans along the way.
Wit’s End opens at Smock Alley Theatre in Dublin on Monday 13 March.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Cue the “that would never happen here, he’d get a promotion” mob…
@dangermouse: Well they are similar, though not the same. This appears to be a child molester whereas the guy Norris was defending it was consensual sex with someone just below the age of consent.
@Ryan Carroll: What about Gerry Adams?
@Ryan Carroll: It can’t be consensual sex ‘just below the age of consent’. Isn’t that the point?
@Ryan Carroll: So you’re saying that sex with a child who’s “just below” the age of consent is OK then? How far under the age of consent is a good cut off point? Do you always choose to obey your own interpretation of the law?
@Ryan Carroll: So, you’re saying it’s not rape if it’s only a little bit underage? Or is it only a little bit of rape..? Or does it get bigger for each year below the age of consent. You confuse me.
You do understand the notion of *consent* I hope? It’s either there or it’s not.
@Ryan Carroll: so that makes it rape.
@Malachi: Yes, it’s still a crime because you are not mature enough to consent.
But since there is a moral difference between sleeping with a 15/16 year old who is legally unable to consent but they do it willingly and it’s legal in many countries, and all out raping a 12 year old child. The law recognizes that moral difference and gives a 100 times harsher punishment for the latter, giving a possible life term because the latter also means the persons a pedophile which we know is not something you can “cure”, and that 66% re-offend. So there is a moral and legal difference between the two all be it that they are both illegal so it’s not really a like with like comparison of that guy to this guy. This guy is far worse.
@Dr Richard DeWitt: I personally don’t think someone who did not recognize the existence of the Irish state, is a closet Marxist who used to envy the soviet union, cuba and north korea, should be Tainiste but that’s up to the voters.
As for him defending murder and demanding cop killers even the provos had disowned be released from prison. that disqualified him from the job IMO but apparently he has constituents who disagree, and a lot of people born in the 90s from my generation who don’t remember the troubles don’t realize what he is.
@Dr Richard DeWitt: No Dr, I didn’t say that, don’t put words in my mouth I’m quite capable of speaking for myself.
@Ryan Carroll: if your explaining your losing..in this case your losing big .. your an apologist for kiddie fiddlers.
Correction just checked it’s up to 15 years for 15-17, 15 if you are in a position of power (teacher, coach etc) and life for anyone under 15.
@MaryLoonyMcDonald: No Mary I’m explaining the law as it stands…I didn’t apologize for anyone:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2006/act/15/enacted/en/html
Read It.
The law is split into two separate sections for two separate scenarios, and the reason is that one crime is worse than the other. Simple facts.
@Ryan Carroll: Fair, but it’s not ‘sleeping with a 15/16 year old’ and ‘raping a 12 year old child’.
Both are rape, no legal consent is given in either case. A moral distinction? Sure – but you’ve created a semantic distinction there that doesn’t exist.
@Dr Richard DeWitt: Norris’s position was fairly clear, and I reckon he still supports it. He wants to be able to champion pedastry between the ages of 12 and 17 as part of education, similar to the practice carried out in upper class boarding schools. His support for Nawi only enhanced the view that this was not just an academic discussion, but one he supported in practice.
@Ryan Carroll: haha how can you have consensual sex with someone who is below the age of consent?? Bizarre contradiction.
@Malachi: ah the auld moral relativism rears its ugly head in debate.
@Malachi: Incidentally when that 2006 law was going through there was a giant loophole in it nobody noticed and who pointed it out? Norris.
There was a defense of “honest mistake” put in but there was no requirement in the defense clause for it to be formed on a reasonable grounds. So for example, if a person is in a nightclub and it’s reasonable to assume people were 18 because Ids were cheked at the door a jury can consider that, but if they just claim, with no basis, that they looked older or something that could be disregarded. He spotted that and it was added in.
Yes both are rape. It’s not a semantic distinction at all, there is a big difference between sleeping with a 16 year old who used a fake passport to get into a night club and raping a child, that is so obvious to anyone with any common sense. You might let the first one walk if you were on a jury, depending on the circumstances, but you’d throw the book at the latter and never want them to see the outside of a cell again. If it was a semantic distinction the law would not be split in two for two scenarios, it would have the same penalty for anything with anyone under 17.
@Johnny Gunn: Actual consent, not legal consent, there is a difference between the two.
@Martin Flood: the thing is.. Its his father, not him. He didn’t ask for the pardon..
@Dell: They’re talking about Norris and someones father here Dell, Adams asked for (and got) a commuted sentence for two cop killers who the GFA didn’t apply to, and the provos had disowned, and another SF TD was all smiles and hugs with them as they got out of prison. Adams got re-elected, so did Ferris, for getting cop killers out of jail.
@Ryan Carroll: but normal people would not tolerate Adams in a position of power (apart from up in the basket case statelet, where they are forced to). Benedictsson was forced out by the other party, not his own, for not condemning his father. In SF, it’s actually a virtue to have something abhorrent in your cupboard, and will never be thrown out internally. If Adams was in a normal coalition party and anyone of the transgressions he supported over the years came out, it would be brought down immediately.
@Martin Flood: it took months to get rid of a corrupt garda commissioner….you can see where the apathy and mistrust in this country comes from…
@Malachi: Ah cop on. Lots of teenagers under the age of consent have consensual sex.
I can’t see how the PM is responsible for the sins of his father.
You can’t choose family. If a family member of mine robbed a bank should I lose my job?
@Theunpopularpopulist: no…but if he raped someone you’d be on shaky ground considering the current goings on.
@Theunpopularpopulist: he’s not responsible for the sins of his father, the point is he knew for over 2 months his father was giving character references to a convicted child rapist and kept it from his party and both coalition partners
@liam: no he shouldn’t have to. He has absolutely no control over what his father does and doesn’t condone his actions/views.
By your logic if anyone in your family has a criminal conviction you would have to notify your employer or else lose your job or both.
@Theunpopularpopulist: exactly. It makes no sense that the PM is being held responsible and I don’t blame him for not wanting to share details like that which he had no control over.
@Theunpopularpopulist: That is not what caused it. I understand that there is a lot of context to the situation and this article doesn’t touch on it properly, so I’ll try to explain it a bit.
Basically, the problem lies in that the identity of the man who made the letter had been kept a secret by the ministry of justice for a while without any legal reason. That is to say, they kept it confidential even when there is no law saying they are supposed to. The ministry of justice kept this up until an oversight went over the whole thing and concluded that, yes, they were going way beyond the law to keep the information from the public, at this point they caved and revealed it to be Bjarni’s father.
Now, it being his father wasn’t too much of a problem, though the connection does hurt him a bit, but then the minister of justice revealed that she had in fact told Bjarni the information all the way back in July. That along with the facts that it was Benedik his father AND that the minister of justice is also in the Independance Party paints thia whole thing as an atempt to make Bjarni look less bad by keeping the information from public eye
Added to this is the fact that the Bright Future didn’t really have the best relations with the Independence Party to begin with. But was the only party that managed to form a coalation with them during the months after the snap election of trying to form a government, as the Independence party wouldn’t partner with the Progressive party after the scandal and it and the Restoration party (accidentally misnamed as tge Independence party in the article, though it is basically an offshot of the IP). After they partnered with them they have really gotten the worst of the trade and have been kinda left out of the whole thing, not really helping withbthe trust. Now they find out that Bjarni and a part of the government (of which they are apart of) had hid from them this information and it became the straw that broke the camels back (in their own words), and they therefore quit the coalition based on what they called a serious breach of trust.
Now Bjarni isn’t really in any legal trouble for hidding his fathers involvement (though this added to his involvement in the Panama scandal cannot be good for his public image) and there isn’t anything blaming him in a way that he has to pay for, being still the head of his party and a member of parliament (so he isn’t really “responsible for the sins of his father”). But with BF having left the coalition the government no longer has its majority (of one seat) and is now in minority. This makes it automatically defunct and it is therefore collapsed.
Now we are here, seeing what happens next with this situation we have on our hands.
@Þórir Pétur Pétursson: Thanks for the explanation. Good luck.
Wow total censorship, multiple fact based comments removed!
@Johnny Gunn: Have you been consulting with your experts again? “Experts agree” does not count as fact based… :/
@Patrick Kearns: why is the journal protecting pedophiles sympathisers??
@Johnny Gunn: more comments deleted!! The struggle is real bro. How do you overcome such hardship?
Thankfully Sinn Fein are made of sterner stuff.
This is what Brass Eye was trying to warm us about in the 90′s. They’ll be firing pediatricians and oenophiles next…
Iceland was a land of ice for bondholders unlike our gombeen bullied nation. Anglo Irish cost us 32 billion into a black hole but let’s all condemn the homeless over needing a pittance.
Damn PC nazi snowflakes silencing more opinions they don’t like!
@DaisyChainsaw: his father made the opinion not him.
If your family member does something wrong. Should you lose your job?
@DaisyChainsaw: Don’t try to make that comparison. There is a big difference between advocating political action be taken, to give a rapist with a condition we know cannot be cured a pardon, and giving an opinion on a rape case.
One is about action being taken the other is just talking. Besides this does not make sense either, if it had been the PM or a politician calling for a pardon for someone (unless they thought they werre really innocent or something) who had raped a child anyone would call for their job, but their father? Tha’ts just stupid.
@Theunpopularpopulist: I’m not a believer but I remember this from religion class “The Lord is slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, forgiving iniquity and transgression, but he will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, to the third and the fourth generation.’ Sad but I think it happens that you might not lose your job but your career might go belly up for some “ unknown” reason. Life is not actually fair at all.
@DaisyChainsaw: But surely the kids parents are in someway to blame for putting them in danger in the first place. That’s the argument. (I doubt even this lot would blame the kid although they’re so twisted they actually might).
@Ryan Carroll: it’s not a condition that can’t be cured..its just criminal. Your an apologist for these criminal child abusers.
Re: Eugene Green:
This is part of a piece from the ‘Voice of the Faithful’ web site. There is another article from a Donegal News Paper which I can’t find.
‘There was uproar from victims when it emerged that former parishioners had collected €50,000 for Greene. Voices of the Faithful, a support group, said the scale of donations to Greene indicated a “most serious state of denial of the most horrific crimes in Donegal”.
@Andi Black: All faiths and ideologies are at it, the migrant support group self righteous ass group working in France told one of their staff not to report a rape as it would show the migrants in a bad light.
I.e. bring their ideology into disrepute.
This is after scandal in catholic church, after the scandal in Rotheram.
It’s not like the migrant group can say “well we didn’t know.what we were doing”
It’s all a bit catholic church, really! Context: https://twitter.com/AndriErlingsson/status/908491738888724480
@Martin Flood: well, they would be right in saying he would get a promotion here in this country, wouldn’t they?
what’s the point of your comment?
What a strange place Iceland is, restore honour, Bizzare stuff
It is not what you know but whom?
have your say