Modernity and Frustrations, aka RANT

GAH.

Okay, minor rant time.

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.

Jesus.

Rant over.

Discoveries and Breakthroughs

 So. I've figured out a LOT this week.

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.

Two topical articles  from the time: "The Hobble" Is The Latest Freak In Woman's Fashions (Love the use of the word "freak") Queen Mary's War On Hobble Skirts Hard To Win(the Queen actually attempted to ban the skirt because women couldn't curtsy in it)

 

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:

1. Lola as a prop in the sideshow
2. Lola lying to be a "normal" woman
3. Lola lying to be a "normal" man
4. 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!

Dermatologist

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. 

Dermatologist

Bad Week.

Hello all. It's been a while.
So.


Things.


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.