Author Archives: Kirsty Jakins

Feederism: What it means to be a female.

Posted on by

Having looked into the concept of the audience picking out foods for us to try, we began to think about the idea of having no control. This then sparked a few thoughts about ‘feederism’. It seems this sexual fetish is all about one person having control over another, as you can see in the video below.

Within the sexual fetish it is often ‘the man preparing food and caring for the woman’ (Richardson, 2010, p.113.), but is this really care? As an all-female group it seems we all strive to look a certain way, and the idea of putting on weight would completely take away how confident we feel about ourselves sexually. Therefore, for our performance we began to question whether it would make sense for us to be dressed provocatively, or whether we should be dressed as ourselves as personally we would not find anything sexual about the experience at all. Also, during a day our bodies will not realistically show much change so instead it would be more testing how we handle loss of control over something so personal.

The idea of being fed and having no control for us seems daunting and not knowing what has been put into the calorific meals that have been created. If for our performance we decide last minute who will become the ‘feeders’ and who will be fed, this will ensure even more loss of control and test ourselves. We are looking at having the three chosen feeders to cook calorific meals the night before. The entire process will be filmed so audiences will be able to see what has been put into the food that the other group members will be consuming. If the film is silent and the people being fed have their back to the projection, they will yet again be giving complete control to their feeder.

‘Digital media is wonderful because it can be endlessly duplicated and/or presented without fear of the tiniest change or degradation. But, it is this very quality that is antithetical to the fluid and ever changing nature of live performance’ (Carder and Beardon, 2004)

With our piece, however, the idea of changing performance will only be strengthened. As time goes on and more food is consumed, the film showing what has been put into the food will become more grotesque for audiences as they can see how the quantity is affecting the gainers. Time is another crucial element with this piece. How far do you take it? We have been considering either keeping the feeding process going until all the food has been demolished, or continuing the experiment until the person can literally consume no more. If this is the case it may make for a more interesting piece as depending on who randomly gets chosen to be fed, different reactions and different amounts of consumption will occur. It seems this experiment will be more about pushing ourselves and testing our own limits. The feeders will have to deal with potentially pushing someone else too far, where as those being fed will have to push past personal boundaries of how they feel about their bodies and how much they can consume. In the video below we began to practise giving up control with a few foods we enjoy. As our experiments continue, we will slowly build up the intensity of giving over control.

Works Cited

Carver, G. and Beardon, C. (2005) New Visions in Performance: The Impact of Digital Technologies. Lisse: Tayler and Francis e-Library.

Richardson, N. (2010) Transgressive Bodies: Representations in Film and Popular Culture. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Is text irrelevant?

Posted on by

This week we carried on looking at text and improvisation of performers, including one of Proto-type theatre’s pieces where a script is written and a certain amount of performers are chosen. The performers have no idea what has been written for them and anyone can say any line if they feel the time is right. We decided to emanate the original piece with three unsuspecting performers of our own. I will place below the last two minutes of the performance.

The piece proved to reveal more about the performers themselves, rather than the text which to an extent became irrelevant. Anything could have been written, but what was more interesting to focus on became the performers and how they both reacted to what they were saying and how they presented it. There were so many possibilities, and sometimes the most interesting moments were when it became silence. The anticipation of who would next say a line somehow became more intriguing than when confidence grew and the speech was quick-paced. As an experiment this put the performers as the art, which is what we are currently looking into doing with our feeding piece.

To jigsaw or to eat?

Posted on by

‘Workshop is the active research phase of the performance process. Some artists use workshops to explore processes that will be useful in rehearsals and in making performances’ (Schechner, 2004, p233)

After meeting to discuss ideas for our future performance which we had been inspired for after viewing a range of practitioners, two in particular stood out we decided to look into. The first idea was to try and complete a simple task, in this case a jigsaw puzzle. However, make it more difficult by hindering ourselves through taking away complete use of our hands. This would help us experiment and present to our audience a standard challenge, however, it would become more challenging for us because we would lose the power to use our hands. To start off the experiment we decided to first try and complete a standard 1000 piece puzzle.

1383817_10152038481832915_667238247_n

                         (Completing a jigsaw, Taken by Kirsty Jakins 29.10.13)

Within about half an hour we realised even with the use of our hands the puzzle was difficult enough and would be a long process. Seeing how frustrated we all became with the use of our hands and communication, we decided not to pursue this idea any further as we were unsure how to make it more aesthetically pleasing and what performance could be formed from it.

Within the same week, our next experiment was to do with the idea of eating. With such a broad subject we initially came up with the prospect of trying to eat things we in particular don’t like or find difficult to stomach. To look into this idea, we toyed with the element of using the audience to feed us. Then they could give us whatever they chose and if it made us ill they would have to carry on watching and deal with their actions. Therefore, for our first experiment we each brought one food we disliked and one we liked to a table. Two ‘audience’ members who had no idea of our likes and dislikes then picked foods from the table to feed us with. They started by giving us all the same thing, which was sardines. The reactions were diverse, some people disliked the taste but others struggled to actually put it in their mouths. This reemphasised both how variant people’s taste buds are and how the psychological side of actually being able to place something you think you will dislike into your mouth affects everyone differently. These were both idea’s we wanted to look into.

(Food Roulette, Taken by Lauren Watson: 29.10.13)

FoodWe discovered that each of us dislike foods that most people eat every day without taking a second thought, such as bananas or milk. If audiences were to feed the group member who disliked one of these foods, but not know they find it hard to stomach it may make for an interesting piece. However, after more discussion and thinking about what a large topic the idea of food and eating is, we decided to further look into other elements to do with food and the rituals of eating. We also need to decide whether we want to push ourselves as individuals in this task, or test the relationship we as humans have with food and eating rituals. Or even how to show if food is for pleasure or fuel. These are a few thoughts we will be looking in to in our next few experiments.

Works Cited

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

Just stare.

Posted on by

Marina Abramovic’s pieces have been found to:

‘put the audience in a deeply disturbing and agonising position that invalidated both the established conventions of theatrical performance and generally human responsiveness to a given situation.’ (Fischer-Lichte, 2008, p12)

Upon viewing some interviews with Abramovic, I started to think about how being motionless can make you as the performer vulnerable towards the audience and give them a greater connection to the piece itself. After looking at her piece The artist is present

where she would sit and stare at people for a certain length of time, it is clear that even though she is seated throughout the entire process she is present and completely focused on the person sitting opposite. It seems the performer can do work with just the power of their mind, allowing the audience to develop their own interpretation of something which is more minimalistic. To test this theory, within our lecture we were told to sit opposite someone and look at them for ten minutes (the amount of time each person was allocated in Marina’s performance). For me, my mind was relatively blank within this time. I just sat in the same position and held the gaze of the person sitting opposite me. Once the time was up we were then told to remain in our seats and carry on the experiment for another hour and a half. After the initial shock which had no time to sink in, I remained seated in my initial position and continued to look. Personally, I tried to stay completely still and not let my gaze leave the person opposite. I felt quite selfish throughout the next hour or so, because rather than focusing on the person opposite me it seemed I was running over a to do list within my head.

I had an opportunity to really look at someone and instead I was thinking about things that would affect me personally in the future. It could have been the fact that we were in a room where a group of us were all performing the same task. Although the task seems very straight forward, the results of everyone’s personal reactions were extraordinary. My partner for example began to fall asleep within the task which was in complete contrast to how I had tackled it myself. This idea of doing something that seems a minimalistic task can actually produce more interesting results when it comes to viewing it. This is because if there are no rules each person will tackle what seems a simple experiment completely differently. Looking into invalidating conventions with what is seen as the norm will also be interesting when it comes to producing more experiments in weeks to come.

Works Cited

Fischer-Lichte, E. (2008) The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. London: Routledge.

What is performance?

Posted on by

In business, sports and sex, ”to perform” is to do something up to a standard – to succeed, to excel. In the arts, ”to perform” is to put on a show, a play, a dance, a concert. In everyday life, ”to perform” is to show off, to go to extremes, to underline an action for those who are watching. (Schechner, 2013, p28)

After reading the second chapter from Performance Studies, we as a group began to question what constitutes a performance. Each performance is different even when it comes down to a daily routine. The text read that a performance exists as an action, and a performer in ordinary life performs said action. Even sex can be viewed as a performance as you are trying to be perceived as the best you can be in front of another person. Performances ultimately exist as actions and interactions within daily routine and relationships. Most naturalistic performances take inspiration from daily life and routine, which can ultimately be more entertaining to view. This could also deem why reality television shows are so popular because we are genuinely intrigued by other people’s lives.

I found particularly interesting the question of why basketball is deemed a sport and ballet art. They both have a competitive element to them as they involve different levels of competition.  However, ballet is competing to perfect certain technique and achieve a role, whereas basketball is mainly about scoring points. Yet they both can be deemed as artistic in their own way and are both performing. What may seem to please one audience, will not please another.

When it comes to Melati Suryodarmo’s piece which I will attach below, she moves standing in butter with a pair of heels on. She is a normal woman trying to compete an impossible task further pushed by the fact she doesn’t have the typical physique of a dancer. Here, she is discovering how much her body can endure. There is nothing more to the performance other than a woman knowing the rough outcome of the piece, but going ahead and tackling the task anyway. She does not give up and continues to commit to the performance which has a constant sense of danger about it, taken to the next level with the use of tribal music.

Melati Suryodarmo “Exergie – Butter Dance” from Kunstbanken Hedmark Kunstsenter on Vimeo.

After viewing this piece as well as a few others, I began to question how we as performers can experiment throughout our process to create a performance that is either aesthetically pleasing, or something audiences won’t be used to seeing as ‘art’. Is it more interesting to perform a piece where you are striving to complete an impossible task, or something more simplistic where the audience can allow themselves to think and just view.

Works Cited

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

 (2012) Melati Suryodarmo “Exergie – Butter Dance. Accessed: 27.10.13.