Does Melchior rape Wendla in SPRING AWAKENING? — Page 2

**SPOILERS**

I thought it was a very big mistake to make the rape in SA ambiguous in any way in the transfer from off-bway to Broadway. A distinct theme in the play (and the musical as well - one of most interesting I feel) is how blossoming sexual energy in a repressed society is bottled up and redirected in unusual ways.

Melchior knows what sex is. He is a smart, if slightly rebellious young man, but he is always in control of himself. He knows that with his knowledge comes great responsibility.

But when Wendla asks him to strike her with the switch, we suddenly see the extent of his own personal emotional repression. He loses control - becomes masochistic, abusive, and enraged. But he is also empowered by it, and that is what leads him to rape Wendla - attaining his own sexual freedom through force and violence. It is part of his sexual awakening - to give in to the base desires of his blossoming sexuality.

Turning the rape into a psuedo-consensual act turns what is a potent analysis of the extremes of sexuality into a simple and boring love story. It also creates a number of problems with his character. There needs to be a justifiable explanation as to how Melchior, in all of his wisdom, would just go ahead and do the deed with Wendla without being wary of the consequences. The act, as currently portrayed, deprives Melchior of the intelligence that was key to his character up to that point. For the rest of Act II, he is turned in to a soppy, love stricken romantic, who is merely jazzed (if a little surprised) at the news of his impending fatherhood. There's a goldmine of thematic potential there that is never even touched.

Nonetheless, no matter what way you put it - it is still rape - simply because Melchior knows what he is doing, Wendla doesn't, and he seems pretty lucid while he is doing it. Returning it back to a moment of sexual agression (as it is in the original play) would both justify the event itself, and I don't feel it would turn Melchior into an unsympathetic character (as it also works out in the play).

We understand that, despite Melchior's intelligence, he is still a young man learning to battle the growth of his sexual desires in a repressive society, and any act of emotional rebellion (yes - including rape) is forgiveable considering the context of the play. He is still our hero, because he has never been, despite his hopes, in complete control of his life/world. It is his battle and journey to find his place in the world and within himself, and the rape is an important part of that.

Making it consensual just makes it boring, and I think really sabotages the second act.

Agreed, BBoy. Political correctness drowns yet another great work of art.

---

*SPOILERS on 2 counts, SA and CRASH*

I agree with 95% of what you said BBBoy.

I still think it's a great show though. But instead of omitting the rape, I would have loved to see them explore how Melchior deals with that even deeper in ACT 2.

I don't know why this analogy keeps coming up in my head, and it may be a bad one, but I keep thinking of the movie CRASH. You know how Matt Dillon's character, Officer John Ryan, saves the life of Thandie Newton's character, Christine Thayer, from the car accident a good while after he had molested her in front of her husband. Can you imagine how much less powerful that scene would have been without the molestation preceding it.

I keep thinking if Melchior had to carry his rape of Wendla with him into the discovery that she was now pregnant from it, and when he finally shows up to talk with her for the first time since this news only to find out that she and his baby are dead. Now THAT's riveting theatre. Just that ONE moment, could have made such a difference for everything that came after it.

---

I saw it in June. And don't remember specifics. I do remember that we talked about it and we were back and forth on the rape thing. Would take up too much space to type the whole conversation.

---

Mechoir does rape Wendla in the original play, but Wendla doesn't really know that she is being raped. I was under the impression that she kept saying "No!" because her mother told her that babies came from a man loving a woman. Wendla didn't want Mechoir to love her, not necessarily to have sex (she doesn't even know what sex is at this point). I haven't read the oringinal play in some time, so I could be wrong about this, but it's just what I remember.

When I said I agreed with muscle, I agreed about her wanting to do it but knowing it's wrong somehow. she feels love for melchior, and realizes thats where babies come from and it's taboo for her in that way.

She doesn't know babies come from sex, but she knows they come from love, as explained by her mother. So when she starts to fall in love with Melchior and is about to engage in this act that comes from her feelings of love, she is scared that she'll have a baby but is still confused.

jg4892 - That was part of the discussion that my friend and I had at the Atlantic. She wanted to do it but knew it was wrong. So it was not the physical pain of it, it was what was going through her mind and knowing it was wrong. We actually went round and round about it.

---

are those lyrics suppose to rhyme?

What was he doing on his knees anyway.

"I agree with muscle on that she said no at first just because she knew something about what they were doing was taboo, but she really wanted him..."

There's multiple layers to that "wanting." Just because a woman physically desires some sort of sexual satisfaction, it doesn't mean she's emotionally ready for it. Saying no wasn't just her knowing it was taboo and a "bad" thing to do, but it's an intense physical intimacy and saying "no" is also a resistance to THAT. If he had more knowledge about the act than she did, and he still tried to seduce her into doing it after her initial resistance, that's rape...regardless of what her hormones are telling her. At the very least, it's a SEVERE physical (and emotional) violation, and it's taking advantage of her BIG time.

Updated On: 3/24/07 at 12:38 AM

Wendla cannot give consent to something she does not understand.

Thinking that she wanted it, or that she asked for it...can be dangerous reasoning similar to what rapists say in court.

Updated On: 3/25/07 at 01:08 AM

**more SA spoilers**

That verse in Whispering always struck me as ambiguous-- I was never sure if she really meant it or if, by "And let that be my story", she was trying to convince herself that it was more romantic and perfect than it actually was, both for her sake and to justify the baby being conceived out of love.

I felt like, because they did deviate to make it into a love story in the second half, once she learned what sex was and the consequences and was happy about the baby, she may have had consensual sex with him going forward (ready or not). But that first time, by saying things like "down there?"-- she may have wanted to slowly start experimenting with him (even though he was still pressuring her just to undo her top), but she did not want to go as far with it as they did.

Either way, the creative team of the show has come out and said in the original play he rapes her and we felt we had to tone it down for the Broadway audience. Since we as the audience are supposed to feel sorry for hero Melchior at the end, it's harder to make him a likeable character if he's raped the girl he "loves" so much. It's hard to consider, because it can be viewed as they ended up romanticizing rape, but I think they just made it ambiguous enough for the audience to interpret it how they want to in whatever way makes them connect more with the story. If you want to feel like it's a star crossed love story, you can, and if you want to feel like it's a psychological look into the consequences of rape for two emotionally immature teenagers (ie is Wendla trying to deal with rape by tricking herself into believing it was consensual? is Melchior trying to convince himself it wasn't rape by insisting that he loves her?), you can. As proven by this thread, there are arguments for either interpretation.

---