Author Archives: Kirsty Jakins

It’s all over.

Posted on by

After becoming a ‘gainer’ for the piece I can safely say it was one of the most difficult tasks I have ever completed. Not only was the quantity hard to deal with, but the mixture of food and having no control over what you were being given was certainly challenging. One member was sick, which we pre-empted and the feeding element was mentally challenging for those involved. This fetish is certainly complicated psychologically and something we will never fully be able to understand.

‘Before strictly human relations are established, certain relations have already been determined. They are taken from whatever nature may offer as supports, supports that are arranged in themes of opposition. Nature provides – I must use the word – signifiers, and these signifiers organise human relations’ (Lacan, 1977)

We formed relations as ‘feeders’ and ‘gainers’; however it was not a pleasurable bond. It was something we had to endure. We managed to last 1hr 40 minutes with the piece, and it seems we tested more than just the feeder/gainer relationship. We also tested ourselves physically and mentally, the sense of control and the audience.

photo (3)

                          (‘The Set and Film’ Taken by: Kirsty Jakins 11.12.13)

Works Cited

Lacan, J. (1977) The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. London: The Hogarth Press Ltd.

Primary Nights 1-2-1: Rebecca Gamble

Posted on by

Keeping up to date with current news in the area, it came to my attention that Rebecca Gamble was putting on a piece as part of Primary Nights: 1-2-1 which was a series of one to one performances at hatch in Nottingham. Below is a description of the piece:

‘You are invited to encounter a 1-2-1 gastronomic performance that plays with notions of host and guest. Choose your instrument at the door. You are invited to either feed or eat. The encounter ends on the sounding of the bell’ (Hatch Nottingham, 2013)

This reminded me of an earlier idea we had which involved the audience feeding us. This piece on the other hand is one on one and left the audience member to their own devices when it came to decision making. Although we moved away from this idea, it still plays with the element of intimacy and ‘host and guest’. Two people’s relationship with food and the idea of what is appropriate when it comes to someone feeding another person.

I contacted Rebecca Gamble via her website hoping to find out more information on her piece and why she chose to explore the host and guest relationship, as we are exploring the feeder/gainer relationship.

email 3

(Click to enlarge the image and read the email to Rebecca Gamble. Taken by: Kirsty Jakins 4.12.13)

It also got me thinking about whether these two relationships are similar in anyway and if so how? In our piece we are exploring control, whereas Gamble seems to be looking at intimacy and pushing the audience. We too are pushing the audience but in a completely different way. They are as much involved by having to view what the feeder will put the gainer through. In Gamble’s piece the audience could feed her as a host, which is breaking what is the norm. We are also breaking a norm with feeding as you normally feed yourself and can control what enters your body. Here complete control is given to the feeder. These relationships will be discovered tomorrow when we discover out roles in the straw drawing process.

Works Cited

Hatch Nottingham (2013) Primary Nights 1-2-1. [online] Available at: http://www.hatchnottingham.org.uk/?p=3055 [Accessed: 4.12.13].

Experimenting and Finalising Details

Posted on by

After planning everything out it was now time to test our ideas in front of an actual audience. Having never done anything like this before we were interested to see how, as the gainers our bodies would react. The gainers were sat down and as I was wearing the more sexual outfit, I was also handcuffed to my seat giving over even more control to my feeder. We then decided to place the audience in a square. We as the gainers were facing them as one side of the square, then they filled the other sides. This ensured everyone could see all angles of the process.                                                           unnamed2

To test what outfits worked best together we decided the feeders would change gainers after a period of time, so all possibilities could be looked at. However, in the actual experiment this will not be the case as a bond will need to be formed between feeder and gainer. My first feeder was more sceptical about how far to push the boundaries. I often found I had to lean my head in rather than feel forced to eat or drink what was in front of me. Personally, I felt as I was giving over complete control some force was needed. As the feeders changed, I found the task more difficult. My third feeder for example put together some interesting food combinations I found hard to stomach. By the end of the process the sickly food almost became too much to handle and that was after only ten minutes of consumption. It seemed the audience reacted well to our own reactions. Some food dripped down and gagging also began as the experiment went on, which when doing a durational piece is sure to happen with this project.

When the experiment ended the audience reacted well to the varied gainer outfits. They liked the fact we were all in different outfits, yet they were all black. However, for the feeder it seemed the best outfit was the server. So, for our final piece we will dress the feeders as waiters, which will be interesting as a waiter wouldn’t normally push the boundary of feeding a consumer. We have also decided everyone will be handcuffed, as those who weren’t often moved their hands without thinking about it. Through all being handcuffed, you will literally be forced to eat and give over complete control.

          (Above: ‘The Set’ and Below: ‘The Gainers’ Taken by Kirsty Jakins:22.11.13)

‘Rituals are more than structures and functions, they are also among the most powerful experiences life has to offer’ (Schechner,2004 ,p70)

After finalising most details within the work in progress, we began to realise how difficult the durational task will be. For the audience it can be seen as a ritual, with the feeder going back and forth and holding the fork to the gainers mouth. It will also be a powerful experience depending on who is chosen for each role. Whatever way it turns out the experiment will be completely different. Some feeders will be more forceful, others more forgiving. Some gainers will be able to stomach more, others may be sick after twenty minutes. It seems this last minute decision will completely change the experiment, and will make the final piece an interesting watch.

Works Cited

Schechner, R. (2004) Performance Studies: An Introduction. London:Routledge.

Who draws the short straw? Work in Progress.

Posted on by

We met as a group to discuss finalisations for our work in progress performance on the 21.11.13. The first thing we want to test with an audience is what we should be wearing. We decided each feeder and gainer will wear something different for us to see what works most effectively. Secondly, we needed to decide on the high calorie foods we will be bringing in. For our work in progress we chose a few foods known for being treats so we can get the most out of the experiment. Having already planned our set up i.e. where the table of food will be presented and audience sat, it was now time to discover who would be a feeder and who would be a gainer. We wanted to leave this decision until as late as possible, so chose the afternoon before. Below, I will place a video of the straw drawing process where we discovered our fate.

After establishing the roles we will take tomorrow and planning our experiment, hopefully now with an audience to test we can discover what elements to our performance will work most effectively.