Sexual Politics and Counterculture in Hal Ashby’s Shampoo
5 Questions With is a recurring feature where we sit down with a special guest to get their unique perspective. In this installment we talk with Erica Rubine, Adjunct Professor of English and American Studies at Rider University and WPRB DJ “Esoterica,” ahead of her discussion for Shampoo (Presented as part of our Prof Picks series — Playing at the Princeton Garden Theatre Thursday, May 9th at 7:30pm).
Why did you choose Shampoo to present as a Prof Pick?
I chose Shampoo because of its sexual frankness and its surprisingly empowered portrayal of women, as well as the fascinating background of a span of three days surrounding the 1968 election night. The temporal placement is important because Ashby (and Beatty, who some say was the real director on this film) uses irony to look critically at the swiftly changing times of the late 60s and the false hope we invested in our leaders (read: Nixon). Also, it is interesting to look at Shampoo in the context of the post-second wave of feminism and especially how Julie Christie, Goldie Hawn and Lee Grant elevate the quality of the way questions of “sexual liberation” are tackled. How do we see Shampoo after #metoo? Who is George Roundy? Does he hold the power here or is he the one being manipulated?
What do you find most interesting about Ashby in general as a director?
Ashby, like Norman Jewison, his mentor and great friend, is one of my favorite directors because of his commitment to social justice, and the fact that he wants to delve deeply into human relationships. Ashby had won the editing Oscar for Jewison’s In the Heat of the Night, and proceeded directly from there to The Landlord, which was his directorial debut. Both of these films tackle racism in America. In Harold and Maude and Coming Home, we see genuine friendships develop where the acting doesn’t feel like acting. There is a lot of irony in Harold and Maude, but there is an emergent growth in both Harold (in Harold and Maude) and Sally (in Coming Home) that demonstrates a depth and a desire to tackle the big issues, not only on a micro level — that of the characters in the film — but also on a macro level: How do we react to unconventional relationships? To women gaining self-awareness, and changing? How do we as Americans deal with the fallout from Vietnam?. Ashby is a hopeless romantic yet a skilled editor who seemed to truly to listen to the women in his films. When you think about all the plum roles he created for women in his films, from Felicia in Shampoo (for which she won an Oscar) to Maude in Harold and Maude to Eve in Being There, to Sally in Coming Home, Ashby was committed to honestly portraying women.
In addition to teaching at Rider, you are a DJ on WPRB. How do you see music functioning in Shampoo?
Ashby is famous for culling great soundtracks and scores from musical geniuses, from Al Kooper (in The Landlord) to Cat Stevens in Harold and Maude. Folks often say that Shampoo was Warren Beatty’s film, and Beatty did not approve of many of Ashby’s musical choices for the film, so what you have here is Paul Simon’s skeletal score; one can even call it an anti-score, about three minutes of non-verbal singing and music that gets threaded throughout the film. It is nice and haunting, and adds a melancholy tone to the film, but overall, not deliberately sculpted to heighten the emotion of the film as Kooper’s and Steven’s did in the films I just mentioned. But what is interesting is the sense of irony in “Yesterday” playing in muzak form in the background at the Republican gathering on election night, among the kooky inspirational speeches that draw a critical eye to “national pride” and the superficial verbiage that can accompany political rhetoric. The juxtaposition of the conservative election night party and the hippie party Jack Warden is bumbling around in with Jimi Hendrix and Jefferson Airplane playing adds to the ironic weight of the changing times and the idea that Nixon is over and there an undeniable cultural shift. Ultimately, as far as the music goes, we have to bear in mind that Columbia had budgetary constraints and Beatty had a heavy hand here, so although Ashby loved music, he was not as in control.
What do you find compelling about this film’s casting?
All I can say is, thank God for Julie Christie, Lee Grant (who won the Oscar) and Goldie Hawn. Each emerges as strong and each offers a unique take on sex. This film is supposed to be a sex farce, but these actresses give it a more compelling depth. I also like Beatty’s affable playboy, George. Goldie Hawn says that Beatty looked pained during the entire film, but his awkwardness and his sincere and dopey hairdresser makes his antics almost sad.
How has Ashby influenced directors who came after him?
I just showed Amy Scott’s 2018 documentary, Hal, in my class. Everyone from Alexander Payne to Judd Apatow to David O. Russell to Lisa Cholodenko and Allison Anders are interviewed in the film. Of these directors, I can see Ashby’s influence especially in Sideways and Silver Linings Playbook, which use humor to explore existential crises and mental health. I show Wes Anderson’s Rushmore in my class as well as I see obvious Ashby influences there. Both Harold and Max, the main protagonists of Harold and Maude and Rushmore are struggling to find themselves, with Harold truly being a “poor little rich kid” and Max aspiring to be and then realizing is is happier being who he is rather than pretending to be a surgeon’s son.
Shampoo is presented as part of our Prof Picks series, and plays at the Princeton Garden Theatre on Thursday, May 9th at 7:30pm. For more information on our upcoming Prof Picks screenings, view our lineup Here.
