I

I remember when my child got their first real haircut. It was at First Choice haircutters. Their first real haircut, because until then I had always cut their hair myself. I remember that they exclaimed, with an orange sucker protruding from their goofy – not quite toddler but not quite child (perhaps, only, because I was unwilling to accept that they were growing up too fast) – toothy smile, “Yeah! I’m not a girl anymore!” I remember refusing to wear dresses or skirts, grade one through grade six, especially on picture day, to my mother’s great dismay. I was assertive, comfortable and cool. I remember having a crush on the older girl in the next building, but also a crush on the boy in my class. Was that allowed? Back in those days, they didn’t say. I remember being told, by a guy a thought I liked in the tenth grade, that I would be more palatable, datable even, if…if… I could just be more normal. For three days I tried. For three days I failed. It was an exercise in futility, after all. There is no normal, is there? Only others dictating what is, and what is not, acceptable. As if they had a right to tell me who I should be, who I should not be. Regardless, they persist. I remember being homeless. Sixteen, on the Toronto streets. I was not alone. There were many of us; each with our own story, with our own history, our own trauma, own selves. One day I was told, “but you’re to pretty to be homeless,” as if my worth should be based solely on appearance. Who taught us to think that way? I remember being informed by my father that we were Metis. We had always been white; how could that be?  Was it somehow a lie if I (re)claimed this identity? Was I somehow a fake or experiencing intersectionality? I remember putting on a cowboy hat and using eyeliner to create facial hair. Hidden away in that bathroom, the reflection I saw in the mirror was powerful and sexy, and yes, he was me. I was a dead man for Halloween, at work, one year. “Don’t you mean a dead woman?” a co-worker asked. No, I was a dead man. Sometimes, I was also a man while holding my husbands hand, walking down the street. Sometimes, I am a man in bed too. But mostly, I am a woman. I remember a stranger accosting my friend for having too much body hair. It’s not natural! Not on a woman. In that moment, all three of us had body hair. Most post-pubescent people do. She had more than me, but so did he. I bet nobody ever told him his biology, his natural appearance, was too much. No, probably not. He is still allowed to be whole, to have hair. She (we) is not. I remember laughing at my child’s comment, stating, “you never were a girl.” Then again, maybe they were. Maybe the “rules” are too stringent. Maybe, like Schrodinger’s cat, we all are and we aren’t.

Bonus. Here is a song I love (including lyrics)! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE5YzRr9yPo

When I Was a Boy Dar Williams

I won’t forget when Peter Pan came to my house, took my hand
I said I was a boy
I’m glad he didn’t check
I learned to fly, I learned to fight
I lived a whole life in one night
We saved each other’s lives out on the pirate’s deck
And I remember that night
When I’m leaving a late night with some friends
And I hear somebody tell me it’s not safe, someone should help me
I need to find a nice man to walk me home
When I was a boy, I scared the pants off of my mom
Climbed what I could climb upon And I don’t know how I survived
I guess I knew the tricks that all boys knew
And you can walk me home, but I was a boy, tooI was a kid that you would like, just a small boy on her bike
Riding topless, yeah, I never cared who saw
My neighbor came outside to say, “get your shirt”
I said “no way, it’s the last time I’m not breaking any law”
And now I’m in a clothing store, and the sign says less is more
More that’s tight means more to see, more for them, not more for me
That can’t help me climb a tree in ten seconds flatWhen I was a boy, see that picture? that was me
Grass-stained shirt and dusty knees
And I know things have gotta change
They got pills to sell, they’ve got implants to put in, they’ve got implants to remove
But I am not forgetting
That I was a boy, tooAnd like the woods where I would creep, it’s a secret I can keep
Except when I’m tired, except when I’m being caught off guard
I’ve had a lonesome awful day, the conversation finds its way
To catching fire-flies out in the backyard
And I tell the man I’m with about the other life I lived
And I say now you’re top gun
I have lost and you have won
He says, “oh no, no, can’t you see?”
When I was a girl, my mom and I, we always talked
And I picked flowers everywhere that I walked
And I could always cry, now even when I’m alone I seldom do
And I have lost some kindness
But I was a girl, too
And you were just like me, and I was just like you

Artist statement: THE TALK

Dana Mandeville

A few years ago, while flipping through a magazine, I came across an article for parents about ‘the talk.’ The section devoted to body hair stated “your daughter might start to feel self-conscious about the hair on her legs as early as age 10.” Oh good, I thought, it’s about time we discuss with our children why they feel uncomfortable in their natural healthy bodies.   

The article then directed parents (presumably mothers) to show their daughters how to properly “shave using vertical strokes up to her knee.” It went on to mention that “avoiding nicks and cuts is important for a teen, so use a razor like…” Wait a minute! This ‘article’ was not about body positivity and healthy communication, it was a nothing more than an ad.  

Alas, this ad reminded me of a different promotional piecepublished over eighty-two years ago, which stated “one of the things that distinguish woman from man is the lack of hair on her face, forearm, and legs…. Whatever the reason, it is an assured fact that both men and women are proud of the difference. The body hair of the male denotes strength and manliness. The smooth, fair skin of the female denotes gentility and womanly charm.”

True, the modern ad is not explicit in its binary categorization of gendered bodies, but it doesn’t have to be. Today, the hairless female body is the hegemonic norm; hairlessness is ideology; it’s expected.

We comply to this ideology by hating our own body hair. Even when we don’t hate it, many of us still conform because, as Foucault suggested, in “contemporary society we behave as if we are under a scrutinizing panoptic gaze… we internalize the rules and norms of society because we imagine ourselves to be always under a watchful eye.” We fear that if we don’t police ourselves, others will do it for us and when we do decide to deviate, we often find that our fears were justified. Instead of dissecting the damaging discourses around body hair and gender norms (by talking openly about them), sadly, we even police our children by showing them how to shave. 

In order to reflects society’s unquestioning acceptance of normalized gender performances around body hair and our inability or unwillingness to discuss it, I remain silent during THE TALK. In order to demonstrate the elevated status of the female body that conforms to expected body hair norms, I perform atop a pure white plinth during THE TALK. In order to call out the absurdity of body hair not being compatible with being female, I perform a mundane ritual in the most ridiculous and time consuming way possible in THE TALK. In order to demonstrate the needless psychological turmoil societal expectations around body hair can inflict upon us, I display the damage like a badge on my back during THE TALK. 

Our female bodies, our flesh, is the “material on which societal structures and values are imprinted.”  In Visible and the Invisible, Merleau-Ponty investigates “the bond between flesh and idea.” In order disrupt current ideas around body hair, I use my body as a medium because, according to Heinrich, the presentation of (and the audience’s perception of) flesh has a unique ability to dissolve the semiotic distinction between performer and recipient. With that, I invite you to experience THE TALKfor yourself.  

“The truth about stories is, that’s all we are.” – Thomas King

While reading Lucy’s blog, the part that initially stood out to me was “… society has many preconceived notions about dressing as the opposite sex and how it is seen as “odd.” Thus, the audience could become distracted by the fact that he is dressed as a female and they could potentially lose track of the story that is being told.”

I am going to apply the above analogy to ideas in Leaders article. Society has many preconceived notions about what a woman should and should not do with her body. Deviations from expected norms, such as getting tattooed, are seen as “odd.” Faced with “non-conforming” bodies which defy hegemonic gender norms, some members of society experience a sense of disequilibrium, becomes defensive and attempt to police other peoples’ bodies. As Leader states, “Women [with tattoos]

will be judged, shamed, and insulted by their choices far more harshly than even the most heavily tattooed man (179).”  

The tramp stamp cartoon in Leader’s article highlighted the idea that society looses “track of the story that is being told” when they perceive reality to be at odds with their preconceived notions of how it should be.

The above cartoon shows three tattoos, one a design, and two representing the implied meaning of the ink in an explicitly gendered binary division. The negative views of females and tattoos are not as clear cut though, as Leader points out “gender stereotype perpetuated by men to shame women for their sexuality could be so pervasive as to trouble a mother over her daughter’s choice (180). It shows that women are also troubled/consumed by these ingrained (hegemonic) ideas.  The cartoon also indicates that a tattoos connotative meaning (the social, cultural, historical meanings, ideology and value systems of a society) often usurps its specific meanings. This cartoon implies that the hegemonic masculine understanding of women with tattoos is the most prevalent (indicated by large uppercase letters and three exclamation marks on the “tattoo” on the right).  In her article, Leader goes on to ponder how these hegemonic ideologies might lead women to become ashamed of the body art that once might have once empowered them.

At first, I read Leader’s article in disbelief. I thought the taboo of tattoos was a thing of the past. Off the top of my head, I know very few women who don’t have a tattoo. Of my own 8, while only one was inked by a woman, six were designed by women. I even briefly assumed this article was old, and was shocked to discover it’s from 2016 (the Kickstarter should have tipped me off, and the date on the cartoon).

Now… how to ties these ideas together???

In Lucy’s review of Niles’ article she wrote “I do believe that any sex [anyone] should be able to perform a male or female in a performance, but over exaggerating how a male/female acts takes away from the performance/meaning.” While I respect her right to an opinion (informed through personal experience as stated in her blog), I couldn’t help but wonder (thanks Carrie Bradshaw) where the idea that there are “over exaggerated” ways to play male/female comes from. In her article, Leader quotes sociologist Victoria Pitts who states “that there is no universal standard of the body or of feminist subjectivity against which we can measure the actual practices of lived bodies (184).” Pitts is indicating that gender essentialism is not real. There is no right way to be in relation to gender/bodies.

How can someone be certain that an “other” is “exaggerating,” perverting, subverting or embracing the story or (new) meaning? I suppose it requires a willingness to routinely take a step back, reflect, question, investigate, deconstruct, and analyze (rinse/repeat).  

Going back to me and the article, I thought no, this can’t still be true, impressions/meanings of tattoos aren’t still gender dependant. Stuck in my own perceived (or naïvely assumed) reality, I hadn’t bothered to follow my “rinse/repeat” rule. I hadn’t checked/acknowledged my own biases. Seeing what appeared like a personal bias in Lucy’s blog reminded me that I should remember to reflect on my worldview before assuming it is the same for everyone.

Lucy’s blog said that the audience “could potentially lose track of the story that is being told.” However, stories don’t have a fixed meaning and in her blog, Lucy goes on to sate “the way that Busch performs has created a new way of viewing theatre/drag and it has opened up the minds of many individuals, thus he created a positive change.” This highlighted the fact that stories (or performative scripts) can be, should be, and are constantly (re)interpreted based on our personal history, experiences and new learning. Recently, at the Valley Fest closing dinner artist Carrielynn Victor spoke about the importance of stories in our lives and our ability/right to interpret them to in order to (re)discover (new) meaning (Victor, a Sto: lo person, was speaking in referencing to Sxwoxwiyam). Leader speaks along a similar line when she says, “tattoo narratives presumably tell a story from the past, but have a unique presentness to them. They do not record a frozen moment in history, but a continual process of becoming in relation to recounting and re-animating the energies present in the ink (190).”

Dear Dana,

What’s up? You’re 16 years old, and it’s 1998 (but you already know that, don’t you?). Only two more years until Y2K! Has panic ensued over the impending collapse of all computer systems yet? That is why I’m writing to you, it is imperative that you take shelter, I repeat, TAKE SHELTER on New Years Eve. DO NOT go to the Toronto harbour fire works show, especially not half in the bag with your buddies. DO NOT party like it’s 1999; your life depends on this advice… Just kidding! Y2K was a blast, have fun!

So you are probably wondering who the heck I am, and why am I “talking all crazy” like, right? I’m you silly, and we still have a twisted sense of humour, although I am often more tactful (than I was in the past) than you are in the present. Aloha form the future. It’s 2019 here and everything is awesome… Kidding again! On an individual level, we don’t have much to complain about, but the world… try not to give in to apathy and despair. Keep fighting the good fight, may Hopepunk prevail in your heart and your actions. Don’t second guess yourself; be you, be loud and proud, but drop your family a line a little more often, Mom will accept collect calls for years to come.

Now let’s get down to the nitty gritty, shall we? You love science. Remember our fascination with cryogenic freezing and the possibly that we could bring people back form the dead, at a future date? That hasn’t happened yet, but they are still working on it. We love the Nature of Things with David Suzuki, Star Trek, The Outer Limits, and The Twilight Zone, don’t we? I don’t want to give away too much, but some day you will study science and then history (I’m as surprised as you are). However, eventually, your dream will come true and you will go to art school. In all likelihood this letter completely destroys my experiential timeline, so don’t for a second think that your future is destiny, you have free will, enjoy.

Perhaps I will receive a letter from you some day and realizes my reality was a figment of your imagination. Kind of like the time we were five or six and woke up from a nap – the Cosby Show was on – and it was as if that moment was the first of our existence, as if we had materialized fully formed out of the nothingness that we had inhabited before and that we will eventually return to. What’s really strange is that the feeling of disequilibrium was so real, so concrete, that it had to be true, yet we have memories which predate that time in our life. Consciousness is a crazy thing to behold, isn’t it? I think therefore I am. Wait, what if I think, but I am not, or at least not as I thought I was. The Matrix (it’s a movie) hasn’t come out yet, but as I recall, regardless of the fact that we are physically there in the theater, we aren’t really there. Our brains and bodies are one, but it turns out they can and often do experience/exist separate from one another.  I’ll let you meditate on that for the next 21 years.  

See you, wouldn’t wanna be you! Oh wait, I am.

Yours truly,

You. Ha, Ha, Ha (LOL isn’t a thing yet).

In this letter I talked to myself about Cartesian dualism, mimesis (the idea that our mind creates our reality) and the uncanny (the word was mentioned once as the name of an exhibit Stelarc participated in at the V.A.G in 2002), because how strange or mysterious, especially in an unsettling way, would it be to actually get a letter from your future self?

Beyond the Cyborg: Performance, Attunement and Autonomous Computation by

Marco Donnarumma and Flesh as Communication – Body Art and Body Theory by Falk Heinrich  

Heinrich’s article “traces the significance of flesh seen as materiality, performance, and concept.” To do this he cites Marina Abramovic’s (re)performances of five canonical “body art” pieces as a physical observable example in order to highlight his argument, “flesh’ in performance art is presented as absolute presence, but flesh can only be perceived through a reflective bearing.” Heinrich bases his investigation on communication theory (art theory). Specifically using anthropologist, Alfred Gell’s, terminology, which dictates that “art processes are not simple content transmissions from sender and receiver, but are often cumulative processes with reciprocal interferences.” Communication is interdependent. It is facilitated through a process whereby each participant (and process: artist, recipient, index, prototype) simultaneously enacts active and passive roles. In this essay, the understanding/experience of ‘flesh’, as object, in body art performance becomes a shared experience, one that would not exist without each other.

Before I begin to apply communication theory to Donnarumma’s Beyond the Cyborg, I want to mention that they both utilize ideas put forth by Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Heinrich notes that Merleau-Ponty emphasized the status of “intersubjectivity as the foundational practice of communication, where world and idea depend on each other,” and also considered “the bond between flesh and idea, and the internal armature which [it] manifests and which it conceals.”

Donnarumma also utilizes concepts premised on Merleau-Ponty ideas, including corporeality: the physiological, phenomenological and cultural basis of embodied practices, and the idea put forward that players and instruments are not just a person doing, rather they are dependent on each other at the affective (relating to, arising from, or influencing feelings or emotions) level. Both authors cite Merleau-Ponty because he frames the human experience, not as an individual one, but one explicitly connected to, or a part of, that which is normally considered “other.”

Donnarumma’s article uses his own experience with human and machine performance in Corpus Nil as empirical subject and argues “that human and technological actors can unite into an ecology of physiological, experiential, psychological and technical components; a form of hybrid corporeality where experience, psyche, materiality and technics are always in tension against each other.” He also argues “the incorporation of technology is not a fixed condition of the physical body but a complex ongoing process involving, at once, physiology, psyche, cognition and unconscious.” 

Donnarumma’s use of the word ecology her is interesting. Ecology is the study of how organisms interact with each other and their environment. It includes both biotic and abiotic agents engaged in dynamic (characterized by constant change, activity, or progress) exchanges that result in reciprocal effects to all. Ecology is a complex communication process.

I think another idea that might be useful in unpacking the arguments behind Beyond the Cyborg, in relation to communication theory is Reciprocal Determinism. According to, originator of social cognitive theory, Albert Bandura, “a person’s behavior is both influenced by and influences a person’s personal factors and the environment. Bandura suggests that a person’s behavior can be conditioned through the operant conditioning (use of consequences like reward and punishment); he also believes that a person’s behavior can impact the environment. So it is not just that you are influenced by your environment, but that you also influence the environment around you–each impacts the other.”

Artist Statement: A Closet Full                                                                                                       Dana Mandeville

Historically, the self-portrait was a used by artists to advertise their expertise and attract clientele, but self-representations also serve as a tool for artistic expression, self-insight and personal growth, a means to perpetuate ones own personal mythologies. Sounds intriguing? Want to learn how?

What’s in a name? Everything. Modern, avant-garde, glamourous, or quirky even: step one, find a name saturated with meaning. A name indicates identity, in the sense of identity, with oneself. Step two, narrate yourself, your self-identity. Remember to edit, emulate, and manipulate, but above all, be unique. The tyranny of alterity, your gift to others, is to be “other.” A word of caution, however, don’t forget, to materialize iconic subjectivities, to embody collective visual narratives. Paradoxically, to be “other” is to conform (shh… that’s a secret, don’t tell).  Step three, know your clothes. Fashion is a language, a way in which others understand you, know you, the colloquial you, the you consumed by the rhetoric and distinct jargon of the fashion industry, the whimsical you, the stylish, sophisticated, and knowledgeable you. Fashion and dress augment, construct, identity. Know your clothes, so that others might know the real you, and that you might even come to know yourself. Over the course of a lifetime, it is estimated the typical person will now take (and share) over 25000 selfies. So… this next tip will prove invaluable: step four, learn to pose. Your body will accost you; malleable, fixed, an unruly entity, it won’t make up its mind, but you can, and you should. Remember our little secret, thematize your body – in appropriate existing facets of femininity and fashionability. Photographer and psychoanalytic cyberpsychologist John Suler, states that “self-portraits

[selfies]

are a highly effective method of revealing oneself in cyberspace while attempting to control that projected self-awareness.” Take control; strike a pose! By following these four simple steps, one will learn how easy it is to engage in the dynamic process of self-creation, to engage in the perpetual performance of self. If you are lucky, gradually, a new narrative will be written, distinctions between your factual, lived and experienced self will blur into a fashionable persona, a new identity, both self and selfless. If you are lucky, A Closet Full will consume you.

Woman

We are not born, rather, we become  

Our flesh, the material on which societal structures and values imprinted

In order to conform, our bodies must perform

Objects of observation, our flesh remains recursive in motion

The material on which societal structures and values imprinted, our flesh

Judged accordingly, to body features, body size, behavior

Our bodies remain recursive in motion, objects of observation

To a script written by others, we perform, our bodies  

Judged accordingly, to body features, body size, behavior

Denied the right to be at ease, in our own bodies

We perform, to a script written by others

Damaging body ideals, causing distaste, disgust, anxiety 

In our own bodies, our own flesh, we are denied the right to be at ease

Not tied to a specific body, instead an embodiment of the prototypical

Damaging body ideals cause distaste, disgust, anxiety 

A desire for a fully phantasmatic transfiguration, a remaking of the body

An embodiment of the prototypical, flesh not tied to a specific body, instead

Explicitly and implicitly, to-be-looked-at, our “real” fleshy bodies provoke

A remaking of the body, a desire for a fully phantasmatic transfiguration

Our bodies, naturally, must be mutilated to produce the ideal

To-be-looked-at, explicitly and implicitly, our “real” fleshy bodies

In order to perform, our flesh, must conform  

Naturally, our bodies must be mutilated to reproduce the ideal

We are not born, rather, we become –

This pantoum was written using the words/themes of bodies, flesh, and societal influence on identity. The three articles I used used were Performing Identity: Dawn French and the Funny Fat Female Body by Anne Hole, Stranger than fiction: Fan identity in Cosplay by Nicolle Lamerichs and Flesh as Communication — Body Art and Body Theory by Falk Heinrich. It is also a response to the question – what does it mean to be who I am?

Lamerichs’ article offers a barebones description, as noted by Henry Bial, that performance is anything that involves “a performer (someone doing something) and a spectator (someone observing).” While all performances share this truism, those analysed in the three previous texts (performance art, DBT drag and cosplay) can be compared and understood under a more indepth perspective.    

In Stranger than Fiction: Fan Identity in Cosplay, Nicolla Lamerichs concludes, “it is through interaction with stories that we can imagine and perform ourselves.” This assertion is applicable to their own thesis – by associating and embodying themselves with (performing as) fictional characters, cosplay fans construct their own identity. Similarly, in Drag Kinging and the Transformation of Gender Identities, Eve Shapiro asserts that “the process of participating in [specific] drag communities, [such as DBT], may function as… a site of identity transformation” among performers.

According to both authors, one of the key elements that facilitates identity (re)construction for members is the “opportunity for enactment (OE)” that participation within their specific community provides. Lamerichs describes cosplay as a platform for “subjects to experiment with who they can be.” Shapiro, who devoted a whole section in their article to OE, stated that the most important function DBT provided members “a place to try on, practice, and enact different genders.” Like cosplay, DBT was a place to experiment with identity.

Lamerichs and Shapiro’s essays both examine performers who expand, adapt, and sometimes subvert, fictional narratives and characters (in games, film, books, etc.) and societal gender scripts. Both texts respond to the issue of identity (re)construction and how it can be facilitated through the practice of performing stories. However, my task was to identify an issue to which all of previous texts respond to and I have yet to address Falk Heinrich’s essay, Flesh as Communication — Body Art and Body Theory.

Heinrich’s text provides my direction with a challenge. Although, loosley, it relates to the others because it analyzes a specific type of performance (performance art -PA), some of the language Heinrich uses seems to indicate that it should not be understood as story.  Examples of the repudiation of story in relation to PA includes Heinrich’s description of it as a “concrete palpable world, a world not made up of metaphors…” Metaphors are often associated with prose and poetry, both modes of storytelling. To imagine space where they do not exist, might lead one to conclude that the same space is devoid of story. Additionally, PA is often viewed as presenting  “an authentic, non-referential event.” This too implies that PA is devoid of story, as stories are narrative; a “discourse form used… for retelling past episodes, whether recalled or imagined;”(1) the implication being that stories reference something, while PA only references itself.   

I’m going to take a different stance, that PA (ex. Abramovic’s (re)anacments) does tell a kind of story.  This assertion is partially based on language used in Henrich’s essay; in it performances are described as both “documentaries exposing what is already done (in section 3: Communication as differentiating observer positions)” and as script (section 7: performer suspension). Storytelling is an integral part of documentary, and scripts are a means of disseminating and performing story. Even if PA only references itself, it still retels (the idea or the original).

In Heinrich’s thesis the performer’s “fleshness can only flourish as a staged presence in a theoretical movement that both audience and performer execute or, more accurately, in a ‘theoretical’ intake of each other’s different observer positions.” This is closely related to the ways that performers in in the other two articles purportedly discover their identity, by experiencing themselves as “other.” Similarly, in PA, both audience and performer come to understanding by viewing/experiencing it as [each] other.  

   
Ok, so maybe connecting three articles, via story and identity work, wasn’t the most obvious choice, but it made sense to me, and I stand by my convictions. Engaging with seemingly disparate topics is integral to learning. As  Belle Beth Cooper states in their blog, “connections fuel creativity” and “being able to make connections between ideas and knowledge we hold in our memories can help us to think more creatively and produce higher quality work.” (2)

1. Kristin Nelson, “Narrative and Referential Activity,” from http://www.thereferentialprocess.org/theory/narrative-and-referential-activity
2. Belle Beth Cooper, “The Secret to Creativity, Intelligence and Scientific Thinking: Being Able to Make Connections,” January 22, 2014. https://blog.bufferapp.com/connections-in-the-brain-understanding-creativity-and-intelligenceconnections