So. I've decided I'm going to keep this blog going as a way to keep myself on task in the next year or so.
Some updates:
I've completed a first draft of the play! (56 pages, two acts) Working title: "Stubble"
I'm organizing a reading with my university's GLBTQ organization, Spectrum, as the play deals with sexuality and gender so intimately. Hopefully that'll be happening in the next couple weeks...
This play has become my senior capstone project as a Theater arts major. Holy crap. This means I'll be writing an academic paper chronicling my research, my writing process and the reception to my readings on top of creating a more "final" draft. I'm also planning for this senior project to include a staged reading, so I can experience passing off the play to a director, to see my work from that perspective.
My advisor wants me to consider condensing the play into a strong one act to submit to the Fringe Festival. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I understand where he's coming from. The play gets fairly disjointed in the second act, and the Fringe Fest is a great way to get your work out into the world. BUT I was also planning on auditioning for the Great River Shakespeare Festival in Winona, so it's kind of like... if I decide to do Fringe, I can't do the GRSF, but if I do GRSF, I can't do Fringe.... GAH.
I've applied for an internship at the Playwright's Center in Minneapolis, so if that works out, I'll get some great experience and hopefully learn more about the process of getting one's work on stage.
I can't say I'm not a bit overwhelmed. There's a lot to do this year and a lot I'd like to do. I'm currently in a play (a musical, on top of that) and I've been dealing with a lot of intense work drama (like seriously, cops are involved) as well as trying to balance the other things I want to happen this year (i.e. Improv, starting a web series...). Oh, and then all my other classes, including my English senior capstone, for which I'm writing a large paper about depictions of Native American sexuality in the popular media. I'm also taking a sculpture class that I've already gotten stitches for... soooooo, lots going on.
Right now, I just have to focus on getting my own work done and getting enough sleep.
But for now, I am exhausted. And shall bed. After I watch more Arthur. Yes. The cartoon.
So, part of why this play is so important to me is that women now still deal with ideals of beauty and a constant barrage of advertising and expectations. Hell, I've been getting frustrated with myself over this summer as I lament my own body issues.
I worked for a program (girls in engineering, math and science) intended to help empower girls for about 5 years, from 8th grade to my senior year of high school. The program was meant to expose girls (mainly inner-city girls) to science and math in a way they hadn't been before - as a viable path for their future, rather than simply a hurdle to graduation.
One summer, part of the program was to show girls how advertisements are geared to influence their ideas of beauty. They were given the task to create a collage of what beauty was to them, using images from the internet, magazines, etc. Most of the girls came up with ads. Celebrities. Fashion. Models. They were also asked what they wanted to be when they grew up. The majority listed things like: Models, celebrities, singers, dancers, actors, and the ever-definitive "famous." Not that these career paths aren't possibilities, it was just staggering to see how many had attached themselves to this ideal. And this is coming from someone who still wants to be an actor (Stage actor, mind you. Loves me some Shakespeare.)
Through the course of the summer they were introduced to inspirational women, women from all walks of life (including a female scientist from NASA). By the end of the summer, they were asked to make new collages, and asked to say what they wanted to be when they grew up, yet again. This time, the beauty collages included athletes, scientists, teachers, mothers - the kind of things you hope to see. And yes, there were still girls who wanted to be models and singers (one who was convinced she was going to be the next Beyonce), but there were girls who wanted to go into microbiology, teaching, astrophysics, and a great many more subjects. It was such a wonderful moment. It wasn't about crushing the dreams of those wanting to into the "girly" fields, rather making everything an option for them. Surprisingly, a lot of girls don't see the sciences as an option. They're told from kindergarten that they can be anything and yet most of those girls didn't think so at the start of the summer.
However, one thing that was still a little strange about the program was the exercise portion. The girls were given a hip-hop class (taught by a genetics major, to show how they could do both science and art) and they boys had lacrosse. There were many girls over the course of my time with gems that asked why they couldn't play lacrosse and I couldn't answer them. I didn't choose the class, but it still seemed strange for a program intended to show girls their potential and break down the walls of gender expectation would put up such a big one. I don't know. I've never really understood it.
But the point is, these girls still had these ideas of beauty and femininity.
My own aunt was told she didn't need math in school because she's "a girl." She went back to school as an adult and excelled at calculus.
On a more recent end, I went and saw The Avengers on the fourth of July with my parents and there was an advertisement before the film that spoke to this for me:
But the main reason I felt I needed to write this is because of a recent post on facebook:
REALLY?!
This frustrates me mainly because throughout all of my research there's this emphasis on how much PRESSURE was put on women to get married, or to be prepared for marriage. Women were encouraged to NOT pursue education and careers because they may turn men away from them. Or if they were in those fields, they were encouraged to use those avenues as ways to MEET men, and expected to drop out or quit as soon as they met their "groom."
I know this little post is supposed to be like: MAKE FRIENDS, LOL.
But to me, it's a big step backward for women. Not only is it saying that girls SHOULD be looking for their "groom" during their education, it's saying that they ARE. I hate the idea that girls are obsessing over marriage when they should be paying attention to their education. I'm not upset that people find their husband during their education - it's that this statement says that women SHOULD be thinking about marriage this early.
It doesn't help that this was accompanied with the statement: "College is the time to find your groom.... *giggle*"Again, it's furthering this pressure put on women to get married, that you should be married, or thinking about marriage by the time you reach college.
The word "find" also really bothers me. It's basically implying that the act of finding your life partner is an ACTIVE pursuit. That you should be diligently and actively trying to find this mate. It's also implying that it's the woman's task to do this (bridesmaids?), the man is allowed to be passive and let the woman "find" him, and hell, she's already "found" her bridesmaids! /sarcasm.
My entire play is about exposing that these expectations STILL EXIST.
AND EXPECTATIONS = BULLSHIT.
First off, in talking with my faculty collaborator, I've figured out that the play fits a more Brechtian style, a more presentational, episodic, epic style as opposed to a more Aristotelian structure. This means I can take advantage of certain aspects of the side show much more and capture a more... vaudevillian feel. That means more music, more dancing, more awesome. Woo!
This immediately opened up some new ideas for me.
For example, around this time, film was just starting to gain grounds in the field of entertainment, but not as we know it now. It was more of a side show act in itself, in the form of Nickelodeons. Yes, we all immediately associate that word with Spongebob and Hey Arnold, but back then, it meant a side show display where one (along with a few other people) could watch a short silent film. More often than not, there would be a musician or singer who would accompany the film, which was more a series of pictures than a film, and the film would illustrate the song.
What's interesting is that many opponents of the circus and the side show felt that film would overtake them as forms of entertainment, and they were right. We only started having fully fledged movie theaters because the nickelodeons couldn't hold the large audiences.
ANYWAY. I'll be utilizing the nickelodeon in the play. In one scene in particular (Lola being sold into the circus as a child), a singer will come forward and sing, while in the background, behind a screen, a shadow "play" will take place.
A nickelodeon in Toronto. See? It cost a nickel, thus, NICKEL-odeon.
Another idea that's come forward is the use of BURLESQUE (more as we know it today, back then burlesque basically meant any type of show, usually comedy). I feel like it walks hand in hand with the side show, as it reveals and hides the taboo.
And yet another idea is the change in fashions around this time and how I can use them to show the ever changing expectations placed upon women. Lola is trying to be the ideal woman, a "normal" woman, and as such she's taking cues from the women around her. What I want to do is use the side show as a way of showing the ridiculousness of women's fashion. The scene would be set up like a side show, but instead of freaks, it would be women in different fashions of the time (hobble skirts, Gibson girl, etc. preferably exaggerated). Unlike the freak show, where the normal people look at the freaks, in this case the women on display are the norm and if you don't look like them, you're the freak, even though you're in the majority. I feel like this is how fashion works a lot of the time. There are only one or two women who fit the ideal PERFECTLY (and only with the aide of corsets, photoshop, etc) but we're all expected to be them. Lola is even more confused because she's not even one of the normal women, she's even further removed - striving to be normal AND perfect, when even that idea is constantly changing.
The caption on this reads: "The Hobble Skirt. What's that? It's the Speed-Limit Skirt!"
Some classic "Gibson Girl" illustrations
The corsets caused an "S" shaped figure, and a kind of pigeon chest. People were seriously screwing themselves up...
However, one of the biggest leaps forward for me has been the realization that there are four Lolas throughout the course of the play:
Lola as a prop in the sideshow
Lola lying to be a "normal" woman
Lola lying to be a "normal" man
LOLA.
I haven't decided if she'll GET to number four or not, but it's an incredibly interesting prospect.
Other than that, I've come up with a preliminary plot structure, including all of these breakthroughs. I haven't figured out the ending yet, but that'll come with time.
Again, please share your thoughts, comments and questions. I'd love to hear what you think!
New scene to share. It's still not exactly how I want it, but it's getting there.
This scene would be placed after Walter (the male lead) takes Lola to the sideshow. She's heartbroken that he frequents the freak show, somewhere she feels the most pain, and now she's determined to rid herself of her past forever and seeks out someone to help.
Dermatology was cemented as a science around this time, and women were suddenly expected to remove their "superfluous" hair, which unfortunately began to mean any excess, even one stray hair.
I had major problems this week. Had a family weekend, so that time got a little away from me. Then I got sick, which hindered things. Once I was feeling better, I realized how much time I'd lost and freaked out, which isn't good. When I freak out, I freak out HARD. It's not a pretty picture. I've recovered (from both the sick and freakin'), but through the course of this week realized I hadn't contacted my collaborative professor. Oops. I'm terrible. And embarrassed. And terrible.
SO. Promises to myself for the rest of the summer: -Keep on top of things. Seriously. Keep in contact with people. -Normal sleep schedule? Yes. It's a good thing.
So, other things. I've actually had some breakthroughs this week. My male lead character, Walter, has been more fully formed in my head. He's more of a sociopath than I expected him to be, but he makes a lot of sense to me (not the way he thinks, but the character itself). He's controlling and obsessive and lacks certain emotional capacities. When Lola meets him, he's charming. She falls for him, and being the first "normal" man that's given her attention, she attaches almost immediately without realizing that he's not right for her, or really anyone for that matter. He's almost freakish in the way he acts. And on top of that, he's obsessed with the freak show (and just so happens to have met and seduced an ex-freak). It truly is an abusive relationship.
I have a timeline of Lola's life and I've written a couple scenes, at least in draft form, and I'm rather pleased with the results.
Here's the first scene, if you're interested: Act 1, Scene 1
Some other things I've figured out are some of the play structure bits. I've got the beginning of Act II figured out (it's gonna be heartbreaking...) but right now it's the in between moments that are getting me. What ties it all together, how does she get from that idea to that idea? GAH.
Other than that, I've started reading more plays, two in particular that are centered around the freak show.
VENUS by Suzan Lori-Parks
For those who don’t know, “Venus” follows a woman from
Africa, called the “Venus Hottentot”, who is carted away to England to be
displayed as a “freak” because of her large posterior, and her “otherness.”
It’s almost surreal in the way it’s played out, with choruses representing
various groups, repetition and singing.
Overall, I found it to be a very interesting show. I was a
little confused by it at first, given the way dialect was portrayed and the
jumping around of dialog and characters. I ended up having to watch a clip of a
production to fully understand what was going on in the first few scenes. This
one was helpful, I also LOVED how they showed her "deformity":
I really enjoyed the simplicity of the piece though, the way
people talked didn’t feel overly… sentimental, or extravagant. And it didn’t
feel preachy, which is something I’ve been dealing with in going back through
my writing. I’ve always had a problem with TELLING rather than showing,
basically spelling out my moral rather than letting it be. This play has a way
of doing just that… letting it be. And letting it be a story.
I also really liked the experimental nature of the show; it
feels very… vaudevillian, which is appropriate.
THE ELEPHANT MAN by Bernard Pomerance
So. The Elephant Man. I don’t know how I felt about this
show. I’m aware it’s won a bunch of awards, I just felt like it moved so
quickly it was hard to attach to any of the characters. I got really mixed up
about who was who for the longest time. I really wish I could see it performed,
because I just wasn’t really won over by it. It was really interesting to see
it in comparison to Venus though, it’s about the exact opposite of Venus,
episodic and with grandiose speeches, cemented in an era…
I feel like I want to find a place between these two shows,
the styles, I mean. Something between
experimental and formulaic. Something both familiar and otherworldly.
All that said, things will be better this week. I know it.
So I did a presentation of my project yesterday. You can see the full presentation here.
Yeah. I don't think it went as well as I wanted it to.
I met with my faculty collaborator the morning before, which I thought went well, primarily because he understands how my frantic, creative, scatterbrain works. I can talk about what I'm excited about and it makes sense to him. Somehow. And I suppose that's why I'm incredibly comfortable talking like an insane over-caffeinated person in front of him.
Presenting in front of a room of people who don't necessarily get that about me? TERRIFYING. Which is a bit sad, given that I can jump up in front of a room of strangers and recite Shakespeare, or even do an improv bit, but I can't get up and talk about the play that I'm incredibly passionate about without sweating like a fool/mixing up what I want to say/sounding like an idiot? GAH. Frustration.
Anyway.
There were a ton of interesting questions directed at me, particularly about gender and sexuality. Marcella in particular pointed out that it seemed like I was centered on heteronormality, given that Lola is with a man when she's a woman, and then with a woman when she's a "man." And it was a bit of a shock to me, because I never saw it that way. I saw it more as her discovering her sexuality while experimenting in how she can present herself, seeing that the feelings she's had are real, and she feels she can finally express them because she's dressed as a man, not because she feels she is a man. It's complicated. Does that make any sense?
Another question was about whether or not I believed that it's possible to get away from the gender binary, given that Lola tries to be a "woman," then gives up and decides to be a "man," rather than attempting to be herself, someone without definition. And what I'm really trying to do is expose how impossible it is to actually fit these molds, but how desperate we are, and how pressured we are, to do just that. I don't believe that there is any way to define gender. I just think that our world loves definitions and hates ambiguity.
Reading through my comment sheets was interesting too. A lot of people wanted to know more about my methodology, (which is hard, given that this is a creative project) and about some of the more scientific aspects, like what genetic factors went into the conditions and the psychology behind it. I found out that a member of my group has a sister with a mild case of hypertricosis, which blew my mind and immediately made me nervous that I was going to offend her in some way, but I guess that's always a risk when taking on a genetic condition.
Also, I talk fast, but I knew that.
And the most surprising thing is that apparently I'm intimidating? Total shocker.
But everyone seems excited to hear what I have to say, a lot of people were wondering why I didn't include scenes or quotes in my presentation. But there's really not enough to share at this point.... I'll have some ready for my next presentation, no question.
BUT the plan for this weekend (Besides taking my sister out for her birthday and seeing Brave. Woo Pixar!) is to do a lot of freewriting. I want to solidify Lola as a character. I've found a ton of character writing exercises that I hope to use, as well as working on some specific scenes that I know I want to use. You'll see it all in a later post!
I'll finish this post off with a couple new sources of inspiration. Babe Bean and Mary Walker. Both amazing cross-dressing and transgender women.
Babe Bean. Transgender adventurer, writer and nurse. Fought in the Philippine war as a man. Was accused of being spy in WWI. Was a sensation and a controversial figure all through his life.
Mary Walker. First woman to serve as a surgeon in the military (before her, women could only be nurses). Only woman ever to receive a Medal of Honor. Was arrested several times for impersonating a man. Spoke out for women's rights and against women's restrictive clothing. LOVE HER.
That's all for now! I'm off to buy presents for my sis!
Please share your thoughts and questions! I would greatly appreciate it. :)
Oh Julia Pastrana. Her story is so heart-wrenching.
She was billed as the "Missing Link" and the "Ugliest Woman in the World."
Her manager, Theodore Lent, toured her all around the world, got nervous that she'd find a better job and proposed marriage. She was quoted as saying: "He loves me for my own sake."
Which of course, he didn't.
She became pregnant and prayed that the child wouldn't look like her.
Of course, it did.
The baby boy passed away a few days after its birth. Julia followed not long after.
Then Lent had the bodies mummified and toured with their bodies for long after their death, until he went insane.
The box they were displayed in.
Their embalmed bodies
The bodies continued to tour until 1990, at which point they'd been stolen by vandals, eaten by mice and generally torn apart.
She was an intelligent woman and a skilled dancer with a beautiful singing voice who suffered immensely.
Shaun Prendergast actually already wrote a play about her, The True History of the Tragic Life and triumphant Death of Julia Pastrana, the Ugliest Woman in the World, which was performed in the dark. Unfortunately, I can't find any copies anywhere.
A band, aptly named Ass Ponys, wrote a song about her as well:
As did the artist John Kaada:
Something I've found throughout all of my research, is that most bearded women were incredibly unlucky in childbirth. Either they didn't have children, or their children died soon after their birth. And more often than not, the child looked like its mother, hairy and possibly deformed.
Julia Pastrana's story, the exploitation and power that Lent put upon her, as well as her anguish in trying to do something innately feminine – giving birth – is something both beautiful and tragic.
This, of course, gave me an idea for the play, possibly the climax.
I already wanted to include a male character, a love interest of some sort, someone who would slowly reveal his sexism and prejudice throughout the play - playing off of Lola's desperation for love, while showing her that she is more than that, more than him - but I suppose my other ideas never seemed like enough.
My idea is to have Lola become pregnant. She's already fallen for this man, and given herself entirely to the idea of a new, normal life, but then finds herself terrified that the child will look like her - especially since the man has never seen her with a beard, and has no idea of the "risk" he's taken in being with her. She feels like she's tricking him, which of course, leads to more inner turmoil on her part.
When she gives birth, the child, of course, looks like her. She is heartbroken and conflicted, looking down at a child just like her. Then, the child dies and she's further conflicted. Should she be crushed, or relieved?
However, this leads to further heartbreak as the man suggests that they sell the child's body to the circus.
BAM. End of Act I.
Both of my parents think I'm treading on eggshells by even considering this as part of the plot. My dad in particular is afraid of the play becoming about the baby rather than about gender and sexuality, but I would argue that there is nothing more extreme in terms of gender than birth. That's where, supposedly, our sexes and genders are chosen. It's the product of sexuality. And there's something intrinsically powerful about the whole process, creating life. It's also something we're still struggling with now - who is in control in terms of birth? Is it the woman, or the man? Or both?
Any thoughts from my readers? Is it too extreme?
Another person I've become even more excited about is JENNIFER MILLER.
She is seriously gorgeous.
Present day bearded woman. She's a writer, entertainer, professor, juggler, fire eater, activist, feminist, awesome lady. She performs with the Circus Amok in New York (which I WISH I could go see). She's an all around fascinating woman who has spoken out about gender and other topics of social justice.
"I was raised in the energetic, intellectual fervor of second-wave
feminism, so I was surrounded by peers who were making me reflect on
what it meant to be afraid of what other people were thinking. I was
encouraged to be strong in the face of that."
"I tend to teach in areas that involve making theatre that involves the
world around us. I tend to direct more politically oriented work or work
that might have to do with some kind of social justice. We’re exploring
ways to explain what’s happening in the world today."
"In Circus Amok and in the teaching work I do, we try to support the
labor and creative, intellectual and artistic work of women in any way
we can."
I'm going to try to get in contact with her.I want to pick her brain.
I love the dress. And the lady. Oh goodness. Be my friend, Jennifer Miller, pretty please?
As I expressed in my last post, Jane Barnell is fantastic and has become an endless source of inspiration.
Jane Barnell was known as Madame Olga, Lady Olga and a number of other stage names.
She was born in 1871 and had a full beard by age two. Her mother thought she was bewitched and tried to have her exercised (more or less). Then, when her father was out of town on business, her mother GAVE HER AWAY TO THE CIRCUS. AT AGE FOUR. She was quoted in a New Yorker article in 1940 saying: "I never been able to find out if Mamma got any money for me or just gave me away to get rid of me....She hated me, I know that." The circus moved to Germany, where she got sick with typhoid fever, so they ABANDONED her and her father somehow tracked her down. This is all before she was ten years old. Then her father gave her to her Native-American grandmother (did I mention she was part Native American?) where she worked on a farm until she decided she wanted to be a nurse and started SHAVING. Yes indeed. When the money didn't end up being enough, she joined the circus again at age 21.
Her on families:
"Every family of a freak I ever heard of was the same. I've known families that lived off a freak's earnings but wouldn't be seen with him."
She had four husbands(!!!!)
They had two children, both of which died at infancy. Then her husband died. "After that, I never got any more pleasure out of circus life. I had to make a living, so I kept on. It's been root, hog, or die. When I got sick of one outfit, I moved on to another. Circuses are all the same – dull as dishwater."
She married a balloonist who was killed. She never knew how, she just knew he was killed.
"That one treated me shamefully... If he was in a bottle, I wouldn't pull out the stopper to give him air. I taken out a divorce from him the year before I and Mr. O'Boyle (#4) got married."
Mr. O'Boyle, an ex-clown and circus "talker", was obsessed with the circus and loved it.
She also had a cat, a large white Persian cat, whom she loved. "To an animal, if you're bearded, it don't make no difference."
She was incredibly famous and toured all over the place. She was invited to lavish parties, where she went dressed in beautiful clothes. "...I guess I was a curiosity to them. Some of them sure were a curiosity to me. I been around peculiar people most of my life, but I never saw no woman like them before."
She starred in the movie Freaks in 1932, starring as, you guessed it, the bearded woman. SHE HATED IT. She thought it was "an insult to all freaks." She never worked in Hollywood again.
Browning, the director of the film, and some of the cast – most of which were real "freaks." Jane Barnell is on the right.
In the film, she was married to the skeleton man, and gave birth to a girl with a beard.
She was very outspoken, a supposed socialist, and demanded her due wages. She actually once slapped a manager who suggested she dye her beard blue, so he could bill her as "Bluebeard."
She hated doctors: "When they get their hands on a monsterosity (that's how she pronounced it) the medical profession is too snoopy,"
She wasn't without her own prejudices, and separated freaks into three categories:
Born freaks, like herself (aristocrats of the sideshow world)
Made freaks (tattooed people, sword swallowers, snake charmers, and glass eaters)
Two-timers (normal people who obtain sideshow engagements because of past glory or notoriety, e.g. reformed criminals, old movie stars, retired athletes.)
She seems to have been a very sad and angry woman. No obituary was ever found for her.
An old boss of hers once said: "She's the only real, old-fashioned bearded lady left in the country. Most bearded ladies are men. Even when they're women, they look like men. Lady Olga is a woman and she looks like a woman."
"When I get the blues, I feel like an outcast from society. I used to
think when I got old my feelings wouldn't get hurt, but I was wrong. I
got a tougher hide than I once had, but it ain't tough enough."
"No matter how nice a name was put on me, I would still have a beard."
"If the truth was known, we're all freaks together."
What, you might be asking, are you going to use all this for? Well, when I started reading about her, I began to realize how perfect her story is and I had a breakthrough. I'm going to include interviews with various "freaks" throughout the play, as well as draw upon her for inspiration in Lola's life.
Jane Barnell kept her beard, Lola did not. It's an interesting counterpoint that I hope to use thoroughly. And she has such an incredible VOICE. Her language, her accent (which was described as a slight southern drawl, mixed with slang and tendencies of circus talkers), her ideas, the way she presented herself... it's all so fascinating. She's both strong and broken at the same time.
And she's one of about ten women I want to write about. AH!
Hello all!
This blog is my place to chronicle my progress and feelings this summer as I complete the first draft of my first full-length play through Hamline University's Collaborative-Research program.
So. How to begin. The play is about a young bearded woman who makes the choice to shave her beard and reenter society as a "normal" person. She finds herself moving from one cage to another, from the literal cage where she was looked on as an oddity to a metaphorical cage where she's looked upon under society's conceptions and expectations of gender and beauty.
I've been doing a heck of a lot of research, which is both exciting and boring. Exciting when I find something worthwhile (Jane Barnell is my hero, I'll write about her later), boring when it seems to do NOTHING for me and I spent valuable time reading.
I currently have a GIANT sheet of paper on my wall to write on and stick ideas to as I create the plot of the play.
Lots o' post-its
It's rather large
Right now it's a matter of mapping things out, making sure I have the characters and their voices before I throw them into the world I've created.
I'm also trying to decide how much I want to base this play in reality. Yes, the research has been a great deal of help, but the world of the sideshow is so... otherworldly, that it feels like part of it should delve into the surreal and fantastical. I want to draw upon real things, but find where they break apart.
I'm also struggling with how serious I want this play to be. I've always explained the idea as "dark comedy," but I'm having a bit trouble finding the comedy. Which I suppose will come with time.
.JPG)
.JPG)