Chicago Playbook for Chicago 13

As can be seen in this shadowy version of individuation, Roxie’s original naïveté represents the one, the conflict between Roxie and Velma represents the two, Billy and his trickster assistance at the trial in freeing the two murderesses represents the three, and the one as the fourth can be seen in their act, where they move as one, in unison, transformed into stars. Ambition and greed has overcome their mutual dislike. And after Velma and Roxie agree to work together, the name Chicago appears once again, this time on the Chicago Theater Marquee, and we are ready to see their act.

Hot Honey Rag

The finale is the first time Velma and Roxie appear on the stage together, side by side. They are wearing white and look to be the height of elegance in their Erte-inspired coats. They are introduced by the band leader as being a unique, one-of-a-kind act:

The Chicago theater is proud to announce a first. The first time anywhere there has been an act of this nature. Not only one little lady, but two! You’ve read about them in the papers and now here they are—Chicago’s own killer dillers, those scintillating sinners—Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly. (Kobel, 2003, p. 180)

Beginning with “Nowadays,” Roxie and Velma sing and dance in unison. Embracing their sordid and sensational pasts, they make fun of themselves, cavorting around the stage wearing gangster fedoras, carrying machine guns, shooting their way to stardom, and their names in lights.

Their cooperation is a new way of handling opposites, a coincida oppositorum. Their dreams have become a reality. We see flashes of the audience laughing, Billy and Mama are both there. Roxie and Velma are garbed in white at the end, suggesting possibly the albedo phase of alchemy and reflection. At the end, fittingly, as we, too, have come full circle on their journey, we are left to reflect on them and to see ourselves in the process.

Previously, when Roxie and Velma performed at the Onyx, they wore black, perhaps indicating unconsciousness and fusion or identification, versus individuation. After their performance at the Chicago Theater, Roxie and Velma accept the red roses and other red flowers that almost everyone in the audience offers them, and they cryptically thank the audience: “Believe me, we could never have done it without you.” We, the audience are complicit, guilty, as the red flowers suggest. We are guilty of celebrating these people and guilty as a society for all of our shadowy stuff: the legal system, the criminal justice system, the press, and the public, all are represented in the audience: Roxie and Velma could not have done it without them. And we are there too, the movie audience. This is a famous ploy used in musicals known as show musicals, where there is an actual audience in the movie being played to with which the theater audience can identify— explicitly inviting the movie audience into the movie.

Roxie's and Velma’s acceptance of the red flowers also suggests that they are taking responsibility for their own part in the drama. The press is shooting pictures, as flashbulbs pop, mirroring the girls’ shooting their names into lights.

This scene was shot in a real theatre, as opposed to the rest of the film, where all of the sets were constructed. The finale is an ultra theatrical number, and was staged to be almost grotesque, a freak show, “imagine Linda Tripp and Monica” the filmmakers tell us, which shows the “manic insanity and grotesque nature of fame: we couldn’t have done it without you, it's unsettling and thrilling, —we’re complicit in this tale” (Marshall, 2003b, DVD). In talking about Chicago, Marshall tells us: “it’s fun and it’s a great ride, but it has something important to say about our complicity in choosing our celebrities, the people we choose to celebrate” (Marshall, 2003c, p. 13).

In this way we see that play, as seen through this shadowy play, turned musical, turned movie, can give voice to the shadowy side of things without repressive or oppressive consequences like the court jesters of old could do. Satires like Chicago can be very valuable in holding up a mirror and allowing us to laugh at ourselves, as we consider their messages, instead of dismissing them outright or shooting the messenger. Satires allow us to consider what we otherwise would vociferously defend against. ∆RC[ch27]

Handelman (1973) explains that play comments on the social order. Play is not serious, thus it has a broad range in which to play, and is given much leeway, so to speak. Play has a wide berth and can act outrageously, precisely because it is not taken seriously. Play complements ritual and reflect upon the social order: “Play doubts the social order, while ritual integrates it” (Handelman, p. 189). Play questions the validity of the social order that ritual validates. Ritual is the most stable liminal domain, while play is the most plastic. Handelman notes that “play is amoral, not immoral, because it seeks rather to deny accepted values and norms than to deviate from them” (p. 189). The “play frame” i.e., the “it's only a joke,” “just in fun,” or “only play and therefore not serious,” attitude allows messages to be communicated freely without serious consequences, which in other contexts would not be permitted. The "play frame" makes it safe for us to be able to play. The “play frame” contains play, because play has potential to upset the established order, and so its potential destructive power is diminished or mitigated by being so contained.

After having played our way through the underworld of Chicago, and having seen the play of the psyche and the shadow side of play in Chicago's themes and songs, let us look at what this tricky tale can teach us, what lessons we can learn from this shadow play.

End of section, continue to Reflections on Chicago