<\/a>Stephen Sondheim\u2019s \u201cFollies,\u201d first produced on Broadway in 1971, and not seen much since, still has relevance–especially in the era of HIllary Clinton’s run for President. I saw a wonderful revival of this very clever show last night at the St. Louis Repertory Theatre, and\u00a0 it got me thinking about what it says about the human experience–particularly that of women. .<\/p>\n

The story line of \u201cFollies\u201d is built around a reunion of the aging actors and dancers who appeared in a Ziefield-Follies-like stage revue from the early 1900s through mid-century. They get together in the theatre where they once performed, which is about to be torn down and replaced with a parking lot. The now middle-aged [and beyond] players reminisce, recreate some of their favorite numbers, and ponder the life choices they\u2019ve made. Their younger selves shadow them as memories, reminding them of how they once saw themselves and their futures.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s mostly about the women: the compromises they made, the pain they endured, the relationships they stuck with, even when they knew they were being betrayed [and, in some cases doing the betraying themselves]. And, of course, the word \u201cfollies\u201d refers both to the genre of those old-time stage shows and to the follies of the characters\u2019 lives.<\/p>\n

The \u201cboys\u201d were the hangers-on in this story. They weren\u2019t performers in the show, or even stagehands. They were stage-door Johnnies, waiting to take the girls on the town after the shows\u2014in a role reversal from what we usually see. They see the \u201cBeautiful Girls\u201d celebrated in one of the show\u2019s songs as trophies to be attained\u2014not relationships to be nurtured. The show focuses on two marriages that emerged from those stage-door romances.<\/p>\n

The “boys” seem successful and happy, at first. But they slowly reveal their disappointments–mostly in themselves, and the remorse they feel for some of their ill-advised choices.<\/p>\n

But it’s the “girls'” revelations that really get to you. They gave up their career ambitions for the kind of husband-centered marriage that was expected. They waited at home for their often unfaithful husbands to return. They put off having children until it was too late. They tolerated their husbands\u2019 neglect and basked in their fame and successes.<\/p>\n

So, what does all of this have to do with Hillary Clinton? [Yes, I tend to politicize everything.] The obvious connection is, of course, the way things have changed for many women. I think a lot of the mostly older people\u2014especially the women\u2014in the audience saw some of their own lives up there on stage. There were a lot of women for a lot of years who didn\u2019t have career ambitions beyond marriage and motherhood [a noble profession, in my opinion, by the way]. But there were many who wished for other things, too. \u00a0Some started adulthood accepting traditional expectations and grew, in later years, to seek opportunities for the public accomplishments and earning power previously reserved for men.<\/p>\n

Hillary Clinton\u2019s experience has been a hybrid of the two worlds, and in my view, she has navigated her way extremely well. [Younger women who are not aware of her early years as an activist and her long track record of advocating for women and children should read up a bit, or watch CNN\u2019s documentary, \u201cThe Essential Hillary Clinton.<\/a>]<\/p>\n

One of the characters in \u201cFollies\u201d recounts her life through a song called \u201cI\u2019m Still Here.\u201d With altered lyrics, it could be Hillary\u2019s anthem\u2014as well as that of many other women.<\/p>\n