Psychopathia Sexualis

What secrets do we keep from our friends? Our lovers? Ourselves?

John Patrick Shanley’s Psychopathia Sexualis was first produced in 1996, and since then masculinity has been in crisis. Shanley heightens the predicament by creating a cartoonish villain in his therapist, Dr. Block. With his almost omniscient view of the play, Dr. Block is able to manipulate his patients into catharses that they feel they’ve induced themselves. But we, the audience, can actually see Arthur, Howard, and Lucille never needed Dr. Block at all. It serves as a lesson on vulnerability and the importance of open communication in marriage.

The title comes from an 1886 medical textbook of the same name. Famous for being the first to borrow the term bisexuality from botany, Psychopathia Sexualis (1886) detailed psychological case studies of sexual abnormalities. It is notable for its deviation from religious beliefs around sexuality and attempted to destigmatize those who engaged in non-traditional sex acts.

The “strawberry handkerchief” of Psychopathia Sexual (1996) is a pair of dirty, argyle socks. Like their Shakespearean predecessor, they become absurdly overburdened with meaning. But here the object doesn’t drive the protagonist toward destruction; everyone else’s attempts to possess it make them increasingly foolish. The socks become merely a comedic speedbump on the way to the altar and instead serve as a lesson on acceptance and vulnerability.

The socks are an unexplainably attractive force - a fetish. Originating from a 16th century Portuguese word for charm, fetish has come to mean any non-vanilla sexual act. But within that definition is still some compulsory quality which can lead fetishists into a shame spiral especially in cases of repression.

Since the 19th century society has made major progress in the acceptance of non-traditional sexualities, yet it wasn’t until 1980 that “paraphilia” was added to the DSM replacing “sexual deviation.” Furthermore it was only in 2013 that the DSM added a distinction clarifying paraphilia from paraphilic disorder. Today we understand Arthur’s prognosis would not require medical intervention.

By trying to cure his fetish while keeping it hidden, Arthur represents a self-improvement for which we all strive - a base sense of pride that propels us forward. The same motivation compels Howard to quit his job, whether it has a sexual undertone is open to the audience. However, it is only after everyone learns everyone’s secrets and everyone accepts them that all of our characters can proceed to the wedding altar.

No matter how much time we spend in introspection, sometimes you need an outside perspective to put it all in context. But who would you trust more: your friend or your therapist?

— Tara Pacheco & Alexander Katz