Mar 28, 2017
Frankie and I have had a blast making this show! We would like to make a special mention to Nicola Shaugyhnessy for the continuous support all the way through. We hope we can be like you one day!
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Ukraine
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from South Africa
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Kazakhstan
seen from United States
seen from United States
Frankie and I have had a blast making this show! We would like to make a special mention to Nicola Shaugyhnessy for the continuous support all the way through. We hope we can be like you one day!
Day of our performance! We have had so much making this performance, we can't wait to share our vaginas with you! 🎭
Bibligraphy
Aston. E (1995) An Introduction to Feminism Theatre Routledge
Gale. M, B and Gardner. V (2004) Auto/biography and Identity Women, Theatre and Performance Manchester University Press
Heddon. D (2008) Autobiography and Performance Palgrave Macmillan
Irigaray. L (1977) This Sex which is not One Edition de Minuit
Marks. E and de Courtivron. I (1980) New French Feminisms: An Anthology
Schneider. R (1997) The Explicit Body in Performance Routledge
Wolf. N (2012) Vagina: A New Biography
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/03/3d-clitoris/518991/?utm_source=atlfb
Week 9 and 10 (21 and 22)
Ok, so it is two weeks to go! Frankie and I feeling like we have got a performance now. We just need to make the ending! How exciting!
Frankie and I had been reading Naomi Wolf, Vagina: A New Biography, we therefore decided to write a scene to communicate the findings we had learnt, how all women are wired differently, so sexual stimulation feels different for all women.[1] In order to make this fun, and not appear like a lecture, Frankie and I improvised a ‘vaginal screening’ where Frankie looked in my vagina with a torch. We played with pulling wool out of my pants to label our vulva’s that were laid out on the floor. One thing that we did not think of, which I really wish we did: wool burns. Having it pulled out of your pants does not feel nice, the wool and skin contact, especially sensitive parts, really hurts! Yes, it burnt my lip. My labia majora. As I lay in the middle of Jarman 1 squealing with pain, Frankie was trying to think of other things to pull out that would not burn my sweet mini. Then I suggested to try out ribbon, as this was thicker and would not burn. We tried the ribbon, and thank god my labia majora was fine. This pulling out of the vagina, again, related back to Scheemann’s Interior Scroll and was engaging to watch. To cover my vagina, we used an emoji pillow to add to the comic effect.
Frankie and I had been using this element of ‘tease’ to suggest that we were going to show our vulva’s, we felt for the ending we somehow had to come back to that. This teasing had been used as transitions through the scenes, and we felt like it worked in a way to introduce something new.
One night, whilst watching Moonlight, (amazing film by the way), Frankie and I were eating pizza, gossiping about how awful our tutors are. (Not really, we were eating pizza and watching Moonlight though) The topic of the Oscars came up and how it all went wrong when they gave out the wrong envelope, and the wrong film was announced etc…. What if this could be our ending? What if we go to reveal our vulva’s and someone stops us because it was the ‘wrong’ envelop. Frankie and I discussed how this could be done and the next day tried it out!
We used golden envelops to make a clear reference to the Oscars, and as we were going to use audience participation in earlier parts of the piece, what if we gave the ‘wrong’ envelope to an audience member upon arrival. The ‘wrong’ envelope would say for us to show our vulva’s, we wanted to make this as rude as possible to go with the rest of the show, therefore, we wrote ‘Get your cunts out.’ As the boys had become part of our show, we decided that one of them could announce the wrong envelope. This could make the audience think that we really were going to show them our vulva’s, and hopefully give them a slight panic. Just as it looks like we are about to pull our pants down, one of the boys would call out that the wrong envelope was given, and that would end our show.
We thought this ending was relevant to today, and almost like a big reveal of our vulva’s that we had been suggesting we would show throughout the show.
We have a full show! There’s a week to go! It is just the case of polishing the performance, and making sure everything is up to scratch!
When running it to our pieces, they suggested we perform with more confidence! (We did not know all the lines at this point) and embrace any mistakes! Franks and I are feeling confident, and whatever happens, we have loved making this show! (Apart from the vagina burning incident)
[1] Wolf. N (2012) Vagina: A New Biography
In the name of art 🎭
Week 7 and 8 (19 & 20)
One concern that Frankie and I had throughout the rehearsal process, was whether the show was too self-indulgent and narcissistic, which is a risk with autobiographical performance. Frankie and I also had the believe that if this thought came to the audience, the show would not be successful. Frankie and I thought comedy could be useful as a distancing tool. However, Frankie and I did not want to play the performance as ‘funny,’ like Uta Hagen says in Respect for Acting, ‘do not play or try to be funny,’ (Hagen, 1973:57) as in most cases it won’t! Therefore, Frankie and I thought we could use, shall we say, a secure way, to distance ourselves from the audience. Our tutor suggested that we explore the possibility of our vagina’s talking: the sound of them and what they would say. When Frankie and I tried this using our own voices, we did not feel it added much to the piece, in fact it seemed more like we were trying to fill time. Frankie and I had the discussion how body and mind are placed in separate categories, what if our vagina’s were not our voices? Who’s voices could they be? What if they were two male voices? What would that comment on? Men making choices for female bodies, which seemed very relevant today… TRUMP
I wrote a scene for Jordan and Tom, (our tech boys), to record playing the voice of our vagina’s. The scene appeared light-hearted and funny, however, it also contributed to a dark message: men being the voice of women’s bodies. When performing this to the class, some of our peers found it funny, others found it slightly disturbing. This was a risk Frankie and were willing to take, Frankie and I did not think it mattered if it was disturbing, as the message behind it was, and we felt this contributed to overall message: the need for vagina ‘space.’ On the other hand, it would also be used as a distancing tool, to take away any risk of being self-indulgent. When our peers watched it, firstly, Frankie and I lay back with our sweet vulva’s on show. The class suggested they wanted to see more than just us lay back; they found themselves drift away from the image and only listen to recording. Therefore, to make it clear who’s voice was who, and to sustain audience engagement, Frankie and I decided to move the sweets when it was our vagina talking. This added to the comedic value and sustained engagement with the audience. Also, this added an element of puppetry, but a very unusual kind of puppetry, not your everyday Sooty and Sweep kind…
This part including the boys, triggered Frankie and I to think about how they could become part of the piece further. They were to be in charge of our tech, and for us to become aware of them would add to the DIY aesthetic tone of the piece. This would also indicate a strong reasoning for them becoming the voices of our vagina’s. It would another fun and comedic layer.
Catherine Elwes, in 1979, performed Menstruation, where she stood in a glass box, wearing white so her menstruation blood showed up clearly. As Frankie and I had been using intertextuality to grasp a firm understanding of feminist performance, we felt Elwes performance was perfect for our idea of involving menstruation. Frankie and I discussed how periods are viewed, and people’s general disgust for them. What if we could take it further? Show something a lot more disgusting then a bit of blood… We decided a great substance for this was ketchup, it smells pretty bad when you cover your body in it, and when it dries, it crusts… trust me, it’s not pleasant. Period blood any day. Like Elwes, Frankie and I decided to wear white, to make sure it showed up properly. We then proceeded to squirt the ketchup down ourselves, on our inner thighs, to make a clear reference to period blood. The placing of this scene was important, as once it was on us, it would not come off till the end of the show. Therefore, we decided to place it in the middle of the show, the staining of our skin would represent the practicalities of periods, and the ketchup would leave a lovely, lingering smell for the audience…. You’re welcome.
See pictures In the name of Art to see Frankie and I have fun running around in the School of Arts building in our underwear… it was a weekend, not to worry.
From running our material, Frankie and I began to suggest different ideas of what to add next. Frankie thought of a possible ‘My Vagina is’ game, where we would improvise different words to represent our vagina’s. However, we found this simply not engaging enough, it was fun for Frankie and I in the rehearsal room, but would not be fun for an outsider to watch, unless we involved them some way. After speaking to our tutor, she suggested a new scene of a different tone, in order to vary the pace. In our vagina timeline, Frankie mentions a moment of sexual assault, our tutor expressed how this part of the timeline was the only time when it was not fun anymore. Frankie and I had made the decision that we wanted our timeline to be fun and exciting. Therefore, we decided to take this out, and develop it into its own scene. The subject of sexual assault, would allow us to change the emotional ‘affect’ and vary the tone. Frankie decided to write a monologue of what had happened, in order to break this up, I took on the voices of other people involved. This allowed us to set the scene clearly, and create a varied pace in the piece, to sustain audience engagement.
Week 5 and 6 (17 and 18)
As Frankie and I decided to write our own scenes, I decided to mind-map ideas of what I wanted to include. Female sexuality and arousal interested me, I wanted to explore how it is seen as inappropriate for women to talk about sexual desires. From my research I came across This Sex Which is not One, by a French Feminist, Luce Irigaray. Irigaray explores Freud’s perception of female desire, something that he admitted to know very little about, and in order to find answers one ‘would have to dig very deep to discover beneath the traces of this civilisation.’ (Irigaray, 1977:25) I wanted to challenge this argument, I agree that there has not been enough research on female sexuality and arousal, but I wanted to create a scene in attempt to normalise ‘dirty’ sexual thoughts. Rebecca Schneider argues in The Explicit Body in Performance, that ‘female sexuality is conceived as inherently animalistic, primitive, and perverse.’ (Schneider, 1997:29) I also wanted to play on this idea by presenting something sexual that would be perceived this way in a normalised fashion.
Frankie and I were in a coffee shop one day talking about ideas, and I noticed an attractive coffee barrister. Frankie and I were also talking about films and media which present ‘romantic’ meetings between girls and boys in idealistic and dramatic forms. Frankie and I were poking fun of how these portrayals are so far away from real life and truth, yet we still fantasise about these moments. The research and conversation, then influenced me to write a scene of a fantasied meetings in a coffee shop, however, I wanted the language to fit in with the idealised films and media portrayals. I wrote the scene for Frankie to narrate, whilst I acted the scene, first of all we found that if I played the part naturally, it did not work with the breaking of the scene. Therefore, I tried the part using melodramatic movements whilst Frankie narrated, this worked as it denoted a parody of the idealised, unrealistic, romantic scenarios.
I wanted this scene to question the expectation to be ‘lady-like’ and why women should not have ‘dirty’ sexual desires. I wanted to gain a reaction from the audience, therefore, I decided that an audience member would take on the part of the coffee barrister. A prop of a moustache will be used, where I will remove it from my pants, I felt this set the scene of ‘things a lady shouldn’t do.’ What I say to the audience member is crude, ‘I want to feel your moustache scratch my cunt.’ This is juxtaposed with the narration to suggest a romantic and idealised scene. I wanted this emphasised with light, soft, romantic music throughout the narration, which will end after I have said the final line. This will break the scene and reveal ‘dirty’ thoughts that women have too.
The visual image when we built our vulva’s at the beginning was strong, Frankie and I thought about the possibility of this becoming a motif throughout the show. Our vulva’s at the beginning represented ourselves in the present. Frankie and I looked back at our timelines and understood, because of our ages, we had a lot to say about our childhood/adolescence. Frankie and I had the conversation where we believe we are too young to tackle a lot of feminist issues, for example, we do not have children, are not married and are still at university. As this piece was about us, we wanted to focus on what female oppression is to us, as 22 and 24 year old women. Therefore, we thought about moments in our adolescence, discovering our vulva’s and realising the lack of education we had about the female body.
Frankie and I have been influenced by the feminist performance artist, Bobby Baker, her use of food in the kitchen represents women’s undervalued role in society. Therefore, Frankie and I thought what if we could build our vulva’s with food, as we wanted this moment to portray our adolescence, we wanted a food that could perhaps portray an element of innocence and naivety. We thought of the idea of sweets, as this has childhood connotations. Please see video below to see us building vulva’s out of sweets for the first time!
Frankie and I also found the image of this very striking, therefore whilst building the sweet vulva’s, we wanted to communicate a clear message, this message for this particular scene would be how there is not enough sex education and girls are not told enough about their bodies. Frankie and I thought of moments when we were young of times this occurred, I thought of a time when I was a teenager and a friend and I looked at our vulva’s properly for the first time, and my friend showing me which part was the clitoris. Frankie remembered when she was given a diagram to label the vulva in a science lesson, however, she was told the correct terms, rather the teacher informed them they could label it with whatever slang words they liked.
Frankie and I became conscious of the fact that this image would be very small, and even audience sat in the front row may struggle to view the whole image. This also made us think about the fact we were building our vulva’s on the floor, and how the audience would be able to see this. Frankie and I were influenced by DIY aesthetics. Mainly influenced by Brecht, contemporary performance, such as Sh!t Theatre and Lostwatch, often use DIY aesthetics as part of their performance. To solve the issue of sight lines, and to add another dynamic of the piece, Frankie and thought was if we used live feed. The main reason for this would be for the audience to see the smaller images, such as the sweet vulva’s. We played around with a handheld camera, and we found this worked with our timelines too, the camera was able to zoom in on the timelines, so the images were seen clearly. For the vulva’s which were being built on the floor, we found the handheld camera did not add much as it could not get the correct angle to reveal the vulva’s clearly and properly. Therefore, we played with having two camera’s, one birds eye, and one handheld. This live feed solved our issues of sight lines, and would enable all audience members to view everything clearly. The handheld camera being in view for the audience to see, added to the dynamic of the DIY aesthetic approach. Additionally, we found the camera’s added another dynamic: two females bodies onstage with camera’s focusing on them, along with the male cameraman, contributed to the broader reality of female bodies onstage being commodified.
From the exercise previously done with the improvisation, Frankie and I found that the use of props were a fun and clear way to distinguish different people and characters. Frankie and I thought we could merge these stories together, in the way that Frankie would take on the part of my friend, and I would take on the part of the boy sat next to Frankie in her science lesson. We found the best way to do this, in order to merge the stories together, was to use the same prop. However, we wanted to make it very clear that this particular prop did not represent the same person. We tried using a cap, Frankie wore it properly to portray my friend, then she took it off to introduce her story, to show she was back to being Frankie. I wore the hat backwards to clearly show I was a different person, we found this merged our stories together and still portrayed the same strong message.
Finding our personas