Destabilising the victim/perpetrator binary in Sam Shepard's A Lie of the
Mind
Micia de Wet
1. Introduction
This paper explores the existing victim/perpetrator binary in scholarship on
Sam Shepard’s 1986 play text A Lie of the Mind with specific focus on the
play’s two protagonists, Beth and Jake. It uses René Girard’s notions of the
mimetics of desire, violence, victimisation, and scapegoating in order to
motivate why a binary divide of victims/perpetrators of violence may be
destabilised within a contemporary study of the text.1
René Girard’s (1923-2015) influence lies in his ability to draw parallels
between literature and religious texts, exploring how they influence the way
people understand and connect to the world (Adams & Girard 1993:9). 2 It is
this influence of his that continues here. This paper takes his notions to draw
parallels with dramatic texts, merging anthropological philosophy with
dramatic literature in order to find new ways of engaging, connecting and
understanding.
Key Concepts: mimetics of desire, violence, victimisation, scapegoating.
1
This paper stems from my Masters study which is currently still in process.
Girard is frequently criticized for his theological influence and addresses his critics in the journal
article Violence, Difference, Sacrifice: A Conversation with René Girard (Adams & Girard 1993:14).
Girard states that his strongest influence lies in avant-garde movements. His theories do not, contrary
to general assumption, stem from French Catholic belief systems. His readings of the Gospels
illuminate narrative motifs of violence from a literary perspective (Adams & Girard 1993:20-21).
Girard positions Christianity’s protective mechanism as a solution to the epidemic of violence (Girard
2013:354).
2
1
2. Sam Shepard (1943-)
Sam Shepard left his home in Illinois in 1963 to pursue a career in the
performing arts and escape his abusive father, whom he later confessed is a
creative stimulus for many of his male characters. Further, Shepard was
inspired by the 1960 American social revolution; he drew upon rock ’n’ roll
culture and sexual liberation (Bloom 2003:12-13). While A Lie of the Mind
(Shepard 1986) remains to date a lesser-celebrated work, it is popular in
academic scholarship for its depiction of violence, cultural ideologies and
identity (Bottoms 1998:16, Crum 1993:206 & Roudané 2002:5).
Out of all the characters in the play, Beth and Jake embody these depictions
most overtly; both as individuals and in their relationship. Beth and Jake are
often described as the sum of the respective male and female characters
within the text (Graham 1995:193). It is the violent event in their relationship
prior to the start of the text that spurs on the psychotic chaos within the
narrative (Mottram 1988:96). This event encourages vengeance and further
violence, which catapults all the characters into a consuming state of
subjective and objective violence.3 Violence becomes akin to a plague within
the text, forcing the characters to cure themselves of the violent epidemic that
has engulfed them all.
2.1. Overview of the text
The central themes in A Lie of the Mind (Shepard 1986) that are relevant to
this paper are: violence, the binary divide of victims/perpetrators,
identity, and the deterioration of gender as an institution.
3
Taken from Slavoj Žižek’s classifications of violence in his publication Violence: Six Sideways
Reflections (2008:9-14). Subjective violence is understood to be tangible in effect (i.e. violence against
the physical body). Objective violence is understood to manifest within behaviour and thought and is
symbolic or systematic (i.e. abusive language, systematic control, class oppression). Girard mainly
discusses subjective violence in The Violence and the Sacred (2013) but indirectly addresses objective
violence in discussions on sacrifice and the dangers of mob mentality.
2
The text is structured in three acts, each ensuing its own violent trajectory.
The narrative moves between Beth and Jake’s families in different parts in
Northern America, who are connected only through Beth and Jake’s marriage
(of which they care little for). The dramatic conflict is set in motion when Jake
telephones Frankie (his brother) to tell him that he has physically abused Beth
and believes her to be dead. Jake tells Frankie that his actions were spurred
on by his jealous belief that Beth was having a sexual affair with her co-actor
(Shepard 1986:10, 13). The second scene assures the reader that Beth is
alive, however, she sustained brain damage and is physically incapacitated
(Shepard 1986:10-12).
Jake returns to his mother and sister to regroup but begins to emotionally and
mentally unravel, causing further distress. He sends Frankie to go and find
Beth. In an attempt to understand himself, Jake begins to unravel his past
wherein violence became part of his family’s everyday life. Jake discovers that
he was complicit in his father’s death. He remains disconnected from his
remaining family members. (Shepard 1986:30-34). Beth heals at home
amongst her own dysfunctional family unit who do not appear to be caring for
her well being. When Frankie comes to find her, Baylor (Beth’s father)
mistakes him for a poacher and shoots him in the leg. Frankie is then held
hostage in their home, where Beth tries to substitute him for Jake, causing
them to strike up an unlikely and further dysfunctional bond (Shepard
1986:36-37, 54-58).
When Frankie fails to return, Jake sets off to locate both him and Beth. Mike
(Beth’s brother) finds Jake first and physically beats him; leaving him in the
exact state Jake left Beth in (Shepard 1986:82-83). Mike drags Jake back to
Beth and displays wild behaviour, forcing Jake to show remorse (Shepard
1986:90-92). The couple is then confronted by one another for the first time in
the text. Jake resolves to leave Beth in order to give her a chance to be loved
the way she needs to be - without the constant threat and presence of
violence (Shepard 1986:92-93). Beth decides to stay with Frankie, who
actually wants to hand her back over to Jake (Shepard 1986:94).
3
Existing research positions Jake as a perpetrator of violence and Beth as his
female victim. However, a Girardian perspective on victimisation and
scapegoating destabilises this binary divide by unpacking the similarities
between victims and perpetrators and their role within a system at large.4 The
presence of sexual desire and its connection to violence in A Lie of the Mind
is now discussed as central to this destabilisation.
3. Mimetic desire: the presence of sexual desire and violence in A Lie of
the Mind
The violence within A Lie of the Mind is stimulated by sexual desire. Sexual
desire must therefore be contextualised as mimetic within the play text in
order to motivate the destabilisation of the victim/perpetrator binary. Mimesis
is the process of human imitation that leads to shared behavioural patterns,
which almost always results in violence (Girard 2010:x).
As mentioned in section 2.1. of this paper, Jake believes that Beth was having
a sexual affair with her co-actor, which sends him into a jealous rage
(Shepard 1986:13). Girard (1994:343) posits that sexual desire is mimetic,
and is therefore intrinsically linked to violence. Girard’s notion of mimetic
desire addresses how people desire the same objects and the violent
potential this has (Girard 1994:288).
Desire is necessary for self-development and individualisation, but desire for
the same object cause individuals to imitate one another and ultimately desire
what another desires (Humbert 2013:254). Similar desires in a community
setting encourage feelings of belonging, but simultaneously pose a threat to
individuality (Telotte 1983:44-46). In the pursuit of a desire there is always a
triadic interaction between a subject (the person who desires), an object (what
is desired) and a rival (the person in between what is desired and obtaining it).
Conflict arises due to a two-person pursuit of a singular desire (Girard
4
While the presence of gender violence is acknowledged, this paper offers a different reading on the
relationship between Beth and Jake by using Girardian discourse to engage with the presence of
violence within the original play text. It must also be made clear that this paper in no way encourages
or makes light of gender violence.
4
2013:163).
In context of A Lie of the Mind, Jake is the subject, who desires Beth (the
object) and believes he is opposed by Beth’s co-actor, the rival. While Jake is
already married to Beth, her behaviour while working with the co-actor causes
Jake to believe he is still in competition for Beth as the object, and therefore
positions the co-actor as a rival himself.
Girard further suggests that what the subject desires is only desired because
it is desirable to the rival (Girard 2013:163): the desire of the rival shapes the
desire of the subject (Girard 2013:192). Desire thus exists through
association. This association exposes a lack of individuality between a subject
and rival and results in violence (Girard 2013:56). The rival in this context may
also be understood as the model, while the subject may be understood as the
disciple (Girard 2013:192). Jake fears that the desire that exists between Beth
and her co-actor is sexual, and because he cannot model himself after the coactor, he acts out in a violent rage, which stimulates further violence (Shepard
1986).5
Violence is self-propagating; it does not begin and end with a single act
(Girard 2013:28, 53). This is what makes violence mimetic (Girard 1994:300).6
Girard (2013:31) describes the mimetic nature of violence with a plague
metaphor: violence is similar to illness, and must be given the same
quarantine course of treatment. It is this understanding of violence that
encourages societies that are not western or liberal to advocate violence as
“sacred”, as something that cannot be understood and must be left to run its
5
Mimetic desire is considered by Girard to be the origin of all violence (2013:167). Religious societies
often find it more politically functional to speak of desire than admit to a deeply rooted problem of
violence. Thus many religious systems suppress desires or forbid them. This system works on a basis
of fear and moral retribution and failed when religion implemented violence to stop the violence it tried
to prevent (Girard 2013:167).
6
Girard (2013:1) uses the institution of human sacrifice to introduce his theories on violence,
victimisation and scapegoating. Ancient religious institutions used human sacrifice as a control
mechanism against violence; a single person was put to death in order to protect an entire community
from the spread of violence. Sacrifice was not classified as violent because it was accepted that if
someone was sacrificed, it was not the same as criminal murder. The idea that sacrifice is / was not the
same as criminal murder is a misconception that aided sacrifice’s functionality. However, it could no
longer sustain itself as moral systems became liberal and inclusive (Girard 2013:7).
5
course (Girard 2013:16-17).
4. Violence as a driving force within the text
As aforementioned, the narrative is set in motion by Jake’s jealous violent
rage wherein he physically beats Beth, leaving her in a state of
psychophysical incapacitation. This spurs on an act of vengeance, where in
the final act of the play, Jake is physically beat into the same state by Mike
(Beth’s brother). Girard (2013:53) acknowledges the perpetual nature of
violence that is further stimulated by acts of vengeance, which is why it is
often vengeance that is seen as the fundamental threat in violent situations
(Girard 2013:18). Vengeance perpetuates a cycle of violence wherein there is
no distinction between the primary act of violence and the violence that
follows the initial act. This highlights the irony of vengeance: it perpetuates
exactly that which it aimed to put an initial end to (Girard 2013:15-16).
To quell the cyclical nature of violence and vengeance, modern civilisations
have turned to judiciary systems to control violence’s plague-like nature,
which holds power due to a collective belief in law and control (Girard
2013:16). 7 In circumstances where judiciary control has no hold, such as the
fictional world created by Shepard in A Lie of the Mind, Girard (2013:16-17)
states that violence is controlled by acts of violent sacrifice and scapegoating
mechanisms, which inevitably requires the use of a victim.
5. Beth’s position as a victim and Jake as a perpetrator of violence
According to Girard (2013:4), violence has no chance of being eradicated; it
must therefore find a victim to exert itself upon in order prevent greater violent
outbursts that erupt over because they can no longer be suppressed. A victim
therefore acts as an impermanent cure for violence (Girard 2013:8). Victims
7
While judiciary systems are accepted as a legal form of controlling and quelling violent epidemics, it
must be noted that in principle, it functions on similar principles to sacrificial rituals. Judiciary systems
are not guaranteed to always decipher correctly between guilt and innocence, and often uphold
prejudices that do not serve blind justice (Girard 2013:26). A convicted felon is often a victim and
scapegoat, as this paper aims to make clearer through the literary example of A Lie of the Mind.
6
are not selected based on them being deserving of violence; they are chosen
based on their difference from the community as a whole and the general
acceptance that they are apart from the collective. Victims are selected from
minority groups either within or outside of the community (Girard 2013:12).
Stephen Bottoms (1998:17-18) and Carla McDonough (1995:76) argue for an
indisputable victim/perpetrator binary divide between Beth and Jake. By
analysing victimisation as unpacked by Girard (2013:13, 107), Beth’s victim
status is partly motivated by his criterion: she has a physical difference (she is
not male) and functions within a patriarchal framework that overtly oppresses
women. Jake is therefore by contrast the male perpetrator of violence who
exercises his violent urges. McDonough states that Jake cannot be
sympathised with because of the extreme violent nature he portrays
throughout the text.
However, Girard does not strictly classify women as ideal victims. Beth is
what Girard calls a “quasi-sacred victim” (2013:160) because she is both
desired and disdained by Jake (Bottoms 1998:232). Beth also does not depict
a conventional portrayal of victimhood. She seeks Jake’s company for the
majority of the narrative because she understands him to be the embodiment
of love, which she knows is missing from her. Jake’s absence becomes more
detrimental to Beth than the physical abuse she sustained.
She does not suggest that Jake requires forgiveness, nor does she ever
demonstrate a feeling of being wronged. She also does not depend on
rehabilitation provided by others, exemplified in the first act’s fourth scene,
where she aggressively refuses help from her brother and cries out for Jake to
come back (Shepard 1986:20). While this may all be understood as common
results of abuse, Beth’s altered state of mind and the oracle-like nature she
displays provides a counter-argument to this understanding. Her agency and
clarity of thought amidst her psychophysical deterioration dismisses a clear
classification of victimhood.
7
Jake travels between the present and past in order to make sense of what he
did to Beth. Beth is consumed by the present, her only surviving memory of
the past is Jake and the love they shared, but he is now separated from her.
In the final scene Jake presents himself to Beth with the same psychophysical
injuries she has. This causes him to understand truths surrounding their
relationship and his behaviour. He professes undying love for Beth and tells
her to stay with Frankie who cannot harm her (Shepard 1986:93).
Jane Ann Crum (1993:201) does not support the view that Beth is a victim of
gender violence in the play text. Crum states that while the nature of the
violence is indisputably linked to notions of identity (and by association,
gender), it cannot be ignored that Beth exists in what Crum calls “another
realm” (1993:201). In this psychosocial realm, Beth forms an identity apart
from patriarchal language. Crum (1993:207) therefore posits that analyses of
Beth cannot be conducted by using patriarchal language and its by-products
(such as framing the couple in a binary divide). Since Jake enters the same
realm as Beth at the end of the play text, it is only logical that he should then
be approached apart from a patriarchal language as well.
A destabilisation of the victim/perpetrator binary is further complimented by
the dissolution of gender as an institution within A Lie of the Mind. Beth’s
character knits between masculinity and femininity, becoming thoroughly
androgynous, notably through actions and costume (Bottoms 1998:234). Beth
permeates qualities traditionally associated with masculinity, such as
assertiveness and agency, and is described as having “male in her” by her
mother (Shepard 1986:77). Crum (1993:197) argues that Beth’s actions and
dialogue exposes the dominant patriarchal framework as oppressive and
destructive.
Similarly, after Jakes jealous rage, he displays qualities that are traditionally
associated with being feminine, such as vulnerability and an open display of
non-violent emotions (Bottoms 1998:16, 18). Jake portrays masculinity that is
interlaced with anxieties. He continuously tries to make sense of masculinity
and then sheds it when he cannot. He moves between outbursts and state of
8
complete calm. His emotional outbursts are fuelled by his desire to rid himself
of sexual feelings for Beth, to make sense of his reality, and to leave his
family connection behind (Shepard 1986:46-54). A Lie of the Mind succeeds
in showing both masculine and feminine oppression (Crum 1993:197).
As previously stated, A Lie of the Mind concerns itself with identity (both in
construction and deterioration). Thus, the presence of violence may have
more to do with individuation and individualisation than gender specifically.
The desire and search for an identity and its construction evokes violence due
to the mimetic nature of both violence and desire. In order to obtain an
individual identity, differences must be defined between the self who seeks
this identity and another. In differentiating there is the potential for
discrimination, which encourages destructive and prejudiced thinking (Flusser
2003:16-27).
Girard (2013:286-287) argues that individual identity is sustainable once and
only if an individual accepts that blame cannot be assigned to any institution
outside of the self and therefore understands the mimetic nature of desire and
violence. This recognition of agency and accountability in the self is
imperative in order to move away from the violence and binary classifications
that often further mystify and fuel violence. According to Girard (2013:168),
“…there is always a tyrant and always an oppressed, but the roles alternate”.
Individuals cannot be classified as purely guilty or innocent. The more these
labels are unpacked, the more indistinguishable they become (Girard
2013:167). An alternation in roles between a victim and perpetrator is
inevitable within people and within all relationships, for no one person is the
sum of something purely positive or negative (Girard 2013:169).
Overall, A Lie of the Mind does not concern itself with a conventional portrayal
of victimhood or morality. Beth and Jake’s personal trajectory demonstrate
that neither those deemed victims nor perpetrators survive in systems of
binary classification when it comes to physical violence. This is demonstrated
through the way Shepard highlights social and intimate deterioration within the
text (Roudané 2002:3-5). In A Lie of the Mind, Beth and Jake exemplify “the
9
inescapable
bond
between…‘demonically
attached’
lovers”
(Graham
1995:209). Their bond is left damaged but it cannot be destroyed; and Beth
and Jake end the play off as characters that were never able to actualise the
identities they sought after. The concept of scapegoating and its connection to
the binary divide between victims/perpetrators of violence must now be
unpacked in order to further motivate the destabilisation of this binary as
argued for in this paper.
6. Beth and Jake as literary scapegoats
Girard (2013:90) states that any community touched by violence searches for
an appropriate scapegoat to cure the community of the destruction violence
causes. Girard (2013:81) proposes that victims are actually scapegoats for a
community’s inability to take responsibility for violent impulses. For
scapegoating to be effective, both the community and the victim must
perpetuate the illusion of guilt (Girard 2013:119). If this illusion is broken, the
community faces the possibility of exposing itself to mimetic conflict (Girard
2010:xiv).
Beth becomes Jake’s scapegoat, on whom he exerts violence; violence that
stems from his inability to form an individual identity and frustration towards
his personal past, which was fragmented by a violent relationship with his
father and mother. He believes her to be guilty of adultery, but the new
psychosocial state of mind she inhabits after the abuse does not allow for a
conventional understanding of innocence or guilt, thus, she cannot perpetuate
the illusion.
The victim as a scapegoat evokes the idea of substitution: one subject
embodies the violent urges that everyone feels towards one another within the
community (Girard 2013:111). And just as a victim is chosen, a perpetrator
arises as an executioner, freeing the collective from contamination of
violence. The perpetrator then moves responsibility of the victim’s fate onto
themselves. A perpetrator is therefore just as much a victim and scapegoat as
the selected victim. Perpetrators are societies’ scapegoats for the ills they do
10
not perform for fear of moral retribution or legal consequence (Girard
2013:183). Here, Jake offers himself as a perpetrator, committing the first act
of violence. However, this does not quell the violence; it only spurs on further
violence, which means that Beth’s substitution and sacrifice was essentially
ineffective and did not function as it should have.
Selecting scapegoats necessitates a denial of accountability and responsibility
from the collective. Facing violence and taking responsibility for it threatens to
destroy individual identity. To openly acknowledge that there cannot be one
single guilty party that quells violent impulses threatens the collective’s
understanding and conception of self (Girard 2013:93). Vilém Flusser
(2003:16-17) supports Girard’s conflation of victim and perpetrator under the
notion of scapegoating by arguing that a need for individual identity drives the
scapegoating mechanism (2003:17). As mentioned earlier, the need to
identify oneself as different to and from others is ironic, since desires are
marked by similarities in a model-disciple dynamic (Telotte 1983:44-46).
If perpetrators of violence are understood as scapegoats, it would be
counterproductive to search for a further party to hold liable; that is, to blame
the collective and make ‘them’ into scapegoats instead.8 Blame must not be
assigned to society or socio-historic ideologies, for this perpetuates further
victimisation and shifts responsibility again. Therefore, Jake’s violent past
cannot be blamed for his actions towards Beth. Liberation from the
victim/perpetrator binary is only achievably by consciously understanding the
scapegoating mechanism and how guilt and innocence are interchangeable
concepts (Girard 1994:286-287).
Laura Graham (1995:305) notes how Beth serves as a dramatic literary
scapegoat by being framed as a victim and an example within gender
violence. Beth becomes a scapegoat because she serves as Jake’s object on
8
Each and every individual must accept that they are the participants within these institutions and
systems, and until they actively take responsibility for their part, nothing can be done (Girard
1994:286-287).
11
which he purges himself of his violent desire. 9 Jake is the perpetrator of
violence and therefore understood as the scapegoat for all male aggression
within the play, embodying negative masculine traits until he too becomes a
victim of Mike’s violent outburst. Victims and perpetrators of violence are both
scapegoats within a specific system that encourages the rejection of
responsibility and accountability of violence. Thus, Beth and Jake should not
be framed in the victim/perpetrator binary if a thorough understanding of
violence as framed by Girard is to be implemented.
7. Conclusion
This paper explored the existing victim/perpetrator binary between Beth and
Jake in Sam Shepard’s 1986 play text A Lie of the Mind in order to destabilise
it. This was motivated by using an understanding of violence, victimisation
and scapegoating provided by René Girard. Existing scholarship surrounding
the text that frame both Beth and Jake within this binary was considered in
light of the argument surrounding the presence of gender violence within the
play text. The clear deterioration of gender as an institution that Shepard
provides within the text motivates a move away from a strict classification of
gender violence.
Moreover, by unpacking and understanding the scapegoating mechanism, a
destabilisation of the victim/perpetrator binary is contextualised and further
motivated. Shepard’s unique and intricate portrayal of both these characters
and the relationship they sustain surpasses a binary divide, and instead
opens up further questions on the construction of identity within mimetic
behaviour, and if this could possibly become a pursuit that does not
necessitate violence.
Sources Consulted
9
In a conversation with his brother Frankie, it is discovered that Jake physically abused a goat when
the goat stepped on his feet. Frankie believes Beth to be innocent of what she is accused of and tells
Jake, “You always lost your temper and blamed it on somebody else” (Shepard 1986:16). The incident
with Beth and the goat brings to light Girard’s (2013:111) discussion on the transference of
accountability; by making Beth guilty, Jake is able to cleanse himself of his violent purges without
taking responsibility for the source of these purges. But Beth’s innocence of what she has been accused
of is never confirmed, she is only assumed to be innocent.
12
Adams, R. & Girard, R. 1993. Violence, Difference, Sacrifice: A Conversation
with René Girard. Religion & Literature (25)2, Summer: 9-33.
Andrade, G. 2012. René Girard (1923 - ). [O]. Available:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/girard/
Accessed 25 January 2015.
Bigsby, C. 2000. Introduction, in American Theatre. Volume III. Post World
War II to the 1990s edited by C Bigsby and D. B. Wilmeth: Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press: 1-20.
Bigsby, C. & Wilmeth, D. B. (ed). 2000. American Theatre. Volume III. Post
World War II to the 1990s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bloom, H. 2003. Sam Shepard. Pennsylvania: Chelsea House Publishers.
Bottoms, S. J. 1998. The Theatre of Sam Shepard. States of Crisis.
Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press.
Crum, J., A. 1993. ‘I Smash the Tools of my Captivity’: The Feminine in Sam
Shepard’s A Lie of the Mind, in Rereading Shepard: Contemporary Critical
Essays on the Plays of Sam Shepard, edited by L Wilcox. London: St Martins
Press: 196-214.
Flusser, V. 2003. The Freedom of the Migrant. Objections to Nationalism.
Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Girard, R. 1994. Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World. California:
Stanford University Press.
Girard, R. 2010. Battling to the End. Conversations with Benoît Chantre.
Michigan: Michigan State University Press.
Girard, R. 2013. Violence and the Sacred. London: Bloomsbury.
Graham, L. J. 1995. Sam Shepard. Theme, Image and the Director. New
York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Humbert, D. 2013. Re-Visiting the Double: A Girardian Reading of Alfred
Hitckhock’s Rpoe and Strangers on a Train. Contagion: Journal of Violence,
Mimesis, and Culture (20): 253-261.
Imitatio. 2015. A Very Brief Introduction. [O]. Available:
http://www.imitatio.org/mimetic-theory/a-very-brief-introduction.html
Accessed 25 January 2015.
King, K. (ed). 1988. Sam Shepard: A Casebook. New York: Garland
Publishing.
13
McDonough, C., J. 1995. The Politics of Stage Space: Women and Male
Identity in Sam Shepard’s Family Plays. Journal of Dramatic Theory and
Criticism. Spring [O]. Available:
https://journals.ku.edu/index.php/jdtc/article/viewFile/1929/1892
Accessed 20 October 2015.
Mottram, R. 1988. Exhaustion of the American Soul: Sam Shepard’s A lie of
the mind, in Sam Shepard: A Casebook, edited by K King. New York: Garland
Publishing: 95-206.
Roudané, M. (ed). 2002. The Cambridge Companion to Sam Shepard.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shepard, S. 1986. A Lie of the Mind. New York: Dramatists Play Service Inc.
Telotte, J.P. 1983. Human Artifice and the Science Fiction Film. Film
Quarterly (36)3: 44-51.
Wilcox, L. (ed). 1993. Rereading Shepard: Contemporary Critical Essays on
the Plays of Sam Shepard. London: St Martins Press.
Žižek, S. 2008. Violence: Six Sideways Reflections. New York: Picador.
14