Recommendation: Reading Keely & Du is highly recommended after reading this blog. It is short and can be read in an hour.
Jane Martin, the author of Keely & Du is actually a group of men writing plays under this pseudo-name.
For a quick plot overview click here.
How much control should one human hold over another? At the root, Keely and Du would appear to have more to do with the argument over Pro-Choice and Pro-Life, but it goes so much deeper than that. There is a danger when people decide their opinion and morals are so universal that striping the rights of another free-thinking individual is not only acceptable but necessary. Fear is spread through the persecution of thoughts and beliefs and Keely and Du personifies this idea and how the independent mind will prosper under excruciating circumstances.
Yet there is an undeniable presence of the abortion fight within this play. The question posed it if this is a fair argument representing both sides equally. What must be argued is what the definition of equal is? Should it be based on the equal number of pros and cons for both sides? Or rather should it be the accurate portrayal of the reality of both sides? It can easily be agreed that neither side is showing the ideal situation of their case and are dealing with extremes that are more probable than most people can imagine. The religious anti-abortionist stance, which Du is a member of, is detestable in their methods of horrific propaganda to win sympathy for their cause but which rarely addresses the science and reality of the situations they fight against.
Du is what can be considered the undetermined moderate position. Although she is on the side of the pro-life division, her personal dedication to the cause is more muddled. Her sympathy lies with the unborn child, but she never comes out and says, as Walter does, that she would choose the child over the mother’s life in a second. As she becomes more acquainted with her ward, Du shows less than rigid behavior towards the unborn fetus. She allows Keely to drink multiple beers and never force feeds her despite the damaging effects of lacking nutrition from the mother.
Keely, although representing the pro-choice sector, never lets us know if she has always been pro-choice. She is not a fighter for the cause or vehement towards women’s rights. What has put her in this place is a gray-rape (a rape occurring between individuals who know each other well). These types of situations are the ones that are dividing lines between people within both camps. When, if ever, should abortion be accepted? When the woman’s life is in danger? Or in the case of rape?
Walter and his group are clearly on the extreme no abortion side. No matter what the circumstances, be it danger to the mother or not, is justifiable for having an abortion. So powerful are his beliefs that he is willing to lock a pregnant woman in an unfinished, dank basement, sentence her to permanent bed rest and handcuff her to the post of a metal slab. He is in complete disregard of the mother’s health and this is negatively affecting the very thing he wants so desperately to save.
Is it fair? It certainly shows the propaganda used by Pro-Lifers in the form of pamphlets and lectures. But what about the Pro-Choice side of things? Sure, Keely eventually achieves her abortion, but never is their argument presented. The play shows the grim reality that abortions will happen no matter what achievements the Lifers obtain and the negative impact an overzealous fight for pro-life can leave. The main trouble with Keely is that she is shown to be affected by the propaganda. She is disturbed by it and fights against being forced to see and listen even if it does not leave enough of a scar to prevent her from aborting when she is given the chance. The very last scene further seems to lean towards the pro-lie because it is not of a woman who knows she made the right choice, it is a depressed woman who is either ridden with guilt or feels she was wrong in her choice. To be truly equal the side of the woman who did what she felt was right should have been shown and the victim would be more knowledgeable of the pro-choice side, although most women when they first consider abortion are not aware of the facts. For an equal fight, this play is not where to go. Although the reader may feel for Keely’s situation, in the end the pro-choice argument is not in equal weight and little facts from that side are presented.
Personally, I detest Walter and his people. They have no concern for actual human life and personal freedom as they claim. They are fervent for an ideal and will risk an innocent rape victim’s life to achieve what they want so dearly. He is unforgiving in his lectures and values nothing but his cause. Du is a on a different side of the same coin. She cares for Keely and the child, yet her actions to help one are detrimental to the other. She is just as corrupt as Walter, but because of her sympathy her oversights lead to Keely’s very dangerous abortion. Personally, I have the most feeling for Keely. If I were in her position I would have done exactly as she did. The only portion I feel I would differ is her reaction to the propaganda. Since I am very much against these often over-exaggerating means of convincing easily swayed people my reaction would have been more unforgiving rather than the more pained reaction Keely showed.
No one has the right to take away rights from anyone else. That is the basis of democracy and so many people in America have forgotten this. Just because one person is morally against something does not make the feeling universal. What is right for one may be wrong for another. People need to learn to live their lives the way they feel is best and afford others the same right.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
