Tortured Eves: Contemporary Monologues for Women
November Coffey
Review by Alyce Wilson

In her foreward, November Coffey lays out her purposes: "to provide you with attention demanding monologues that tell a full story" and "to show the stark reality of the basic theory that every action is reaction in emotional terms, something we can all relate to."

Judged on her criteria, Tortured Eves falls short.

While her goal is to tell a full story, many of these monologues fail to do so. Without the character analysis that accompanies each monologue, readers (or in fact, an audience) would be left in the dark about crucial details, such as the reason why one particular woman appears to be torturing a victim. Only in the analysis do you discover her victim is also her stalker.

In her quest for stark emotional reality, Coffey also fails. These monologues opt for showboating and hair pulling rather than true emotional intensity. For example, an insane asylum inmate descends into predictable word salad, used as a shorthand for her madness.

In her striving for emotional truths, Coffey's women make stark categorical statements that few women (or men, for that matter) would ever make, even to themselves. A woman confronting her abuser, for example, says, "Aw, Tony, of course I love you, but when you hit me, it hurts." Who would talk that way?

Or this heavy-handed line from a mercy killer's monologue: "Would I do it again? No, but the hindsight is nothing more than a cruel reminder and I do not know what is in store for my soul."

Although there are a few successes -- notably those told from the point of view of adolescents -- these dialogues read like an outsider's interpretation. They don't sound authentic to the voices of women in these circumstances.

Instead of focusing on her lofty goals, Coffey should have let her characters speak for themselves.