NORTHERN SNOW > SOUTHERN SNOW

THE MISSION: BUILD NEW AGENT, CONSISTING ENTIRELY OF FROZEN H2O

AGENTS: SECRET AGENTS KATFLAP AND JAMMY DODGER

TIME: EIGHTEEN HUNDRED HOURS

VISUAL AID: CAMERA BROKEN, OLD VISUALS USED TO PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF PREVIOUS WORK

ACTIONS: Sadly it must be reported that much snow was lost before the mission could take place due to a snowball fight. However, the agents struggled on despite the cold, cold snow. It has been observed that Agent Jammy Dodger has very much gained her father's tendency to complain about every little thing ("Auntie Kat... this snow doesn't work!" Come on now child. How hard is it to roll a snowball?). Agent Katflap was also observed muttering obscenities at the snow (thankfully out of the hearing of Agent Jammy Dodger) that the snow was particularly hard to roll.
At this point again the two agents descended into an altercation involving much throwing of snow. I would not recommend these agents for serious action.

Eventually the snow had been collated into three spheres, which were then stacked one atop of the other. After this there was a manic hunt for a necessary implement in their new agent, however, once found the carrot was place within the head to form the nasal passage of new agent. Adequate twigs were discovered and delicately placed to form limbs, and stones for visual and vocal purposes.
Also, the stones were rather superfluously placed to form buttons on none existent clothes. It is recommended that before the next snowfall these agents undergo basic accessorising training.
A hat and a scarf later the new agent is complete. Upon what appeared to be a fairly strenuous thought process, Agent Jammy Dodger named him 'Snow'. A hot chocolate later, with 'The Muppet Christmas Carol' playing on the new HD piece of televisual equipment within Agent Katflap's home, both agents fell into a slumber.

MISSION EVALUATION: Lots and lots of fun! =D

THIS IS NOT A PIPE

Last day of work today! Handed in all my essays, all my performances for this year have been performed, and my very last lecture is long gone. Woo!
In our last lecture we had to discuss the piece of theatre we had made and things that we had learnt and discovered about creating theatre that we had not previously known. The play we made was, well, not brilliant (though, admittedly, it's allowed to be a bit rubbish, only a first year!) and Dan was trying to describe how we wanted the piece to not be in your face, but rather to resonate, and this got me thinking.
I've been doing far too much thinking recently, for Christmas I shall allow my brain a day off, it never comes up with any good stuff anyway.

In my opinion (I'm aware that I'm not really educated enough to have an opinion to hold any weight, and that none of this will be original, but bear with me) there are basically three different types of theatre. There's theatre for escapism and entertainment, that's purely there to make you happy and therefore the happiness will last for as long as the show plus however long you can remember it/until someone spills coffee on you on the tube. There's theatre that is very much in your face and yelling at you 'THIS IS AN ISSUE! DO SOMETHING!' that again only lasts as long as you are in the experience. And then there's the theatre (which we were aiming for) that relies upon a sort of aftershock effect. This idea that, when watching the play, there's perhaps not as big a response as one would expect, but something about it just sticks. There's something about it that makes you think, perhaps something would be said or seen in life that relates to an image or a line in the play, and that sets you thinking, and only once that process has been set in motion do you fully appreciate the play and what was done and said. I think that that type of theatre often sticks with you for longer. Not that I'm saying any type is better or worse than the other, it's just what I think.

The best example I can think of to try and explain my aftershock theory is a painting by Rene Magritte of a pipe (a smoker's pipe, not a lead one in the study with Professor Plum) and underneath it written 'Ceci n'est pas une pipe', 'This is not a pipe'. I love this painting partially because it's not a painting you have to study, it's a little pocket painting that you can look at, not making much of an impact it must be said, remember and take away. It's not like a Dali piece which you spend ages peering at and studying and finding all the glorious intricacies of it, you just have to remember how it looks.
The first time I saw this painting I was only about fourteen and my first reaction was very much 'Of course it's a pipe, weirdo' and I never thought much of it afterwards. Until it was brought up in an episode of 'Boston Legal' where a girl who couldn't smile painted herself looking glum and captioned it 'The Smiling Girl' saying how Magritte had inspired it. I then thought of the painting, I saw it as something very different, now it was something hypocritical, it made hypocrites of the viewers as it tricked you into objecting when you didn't know the story.
The next time I had call to recollect this painting was during our a-level devised piece which was based on the stimulus of 'dreams'. This time when I thought of this pipe that is not a pipe I saw it as something of an hallucination, an 'is this a dagger I see before me' type image. And during this blog post thinking about the painting that I love I've realised that I now see it as a painting that keeps secrets. It knows something that we do not and we will never know (I ought point out that I've never seen or read anything by the artist talking about the painting, I don't want to).

I like to think I can keep track of my mental maturity with how I see this painting. But it does sort of link with the point that I was trying to make, if not in a very rambly and long winded way, sorry. I'm not sure who will still be reading this far (I'm not sure who will actually be reading this at all). I also realise how incredibly geeky I sound discussing my opinion on art... sorry.
I tried to defend my non-geekiness and somehow managed to share the fact that I am in possession of a chess board where all the pieces are shots glasses, so that when you capture a piece you down the shot. It's great! Possibly some of the finest chess I have ever played.

ALSO...

Sorry, two posts in such a short time is quite ridiculous, but I feel the need to say
I really miss Shakespeare!! None of the work we've done thus far is Shakespeare, and I'm really sad. It's just because when I went walking yesterday (I have a tendency to stage plays in my head as I walk) I started directing a version of 'Macbeth' and got really enthusiastic about it, and realised just how much I missed working with that William bloke. (I realise loads of people hate Shakespeare, but I read (and SAW them! SAW!!! They're plays! You're supposed to watch them! They make so much more sense when read aloud, honest!) it before I was old enough to be cynical, and genuinely love the good plays (not the shit ones he wrote, and he wrote some) and read them of my own volition instead of having a bored teacher talk at a bored class.)

..... I should get to work now. Essays to write.

£400! ='( [OK WELL, £385, BUT WHATEVER....]

So, just got back from auditioning for '4.48 Psychosis' (which I love! Genuinely! It's awesome! However she only wants two people (preferably men) so yeah... not gonna be in that play am I? )= Shucks). Anyhow, Keith Johnstone! Keith Johnstone is a theatre bloke, who wrote a theatre book (these past two posts are very studenty aren't they? Ooh, Howard would be proud!) called 'Impro', which I read, and is AWESOME!.

Essentially there are four points Johnstone makes (at least, there are four main things that I got from the book. I'm assuming someone cleverer would spot more interesting stuff than myself, but hey ho). They are: 1) School and education are a destructive process. 2) Status games are everywhere. 3) Everyone is scared that they are a little bit insane. 4) Everyone is a little bit insane.

It's a really, really good book, (Can't emphasise this enough!) and Johnstone is now my new favourite theatre practitioner bloke. Basically, I was hooked the moment he started talking about how much he hated school and how the school system was generally bad. He writes about how once he was reading a poem and started crying. He wrote that "If I had cried at school the teacher would have been horrified. I realised my school had been teaching me not to respond". He writes how a young girl was in the garden with her nurse, the nurse pointed out a flower and said how beautiful it was. The girl says that all the flowers were equally beautiful but the nurse insisted that hers was more so. "Actually, it is insane to insist that one flower is more beautiful in a whole garden of flowers, but adults are expected to warp the perceptions of children in this way.
I hated school, and was therefore a horrible student. I didn't do essays, I skived off lessons, I hated quite a few of my teachers and quite a few of my teachers hated me. If I didn't see the point in doing something I didn't do it. I don't blame my teachers, of course I don't. It was my fault I didn't do the work. It was my fault I didn't try harder. I have never revised for an exam in my life, because I never felt the need to. One of the reasons I chose the university that I'm at (as much as I do love it, and it's a very good course, and nearly two hundred miles away from home (always a boon)) is that it had the lowest grade boundaries to get in. "then you should have revised!!" I can imagine many a thought process going. If only I'd've worked harder I'd be cleverer. But I didn't want to. It was all so dull, and I am so average that nobody ever bothered. I was a horrible student, but because my grades were neither good enough or bad enough to warrant special attention I got away with all kinds of hell. And that was my mentality toward education. And here's a bloke who's written a book saying 'I hated it to. And it wasn't my fault, in my opinion, the school is the one that got it wrong'. Right on!!
(I have never used that phrase before, I never intend to use it again.)
Uni is weird because I spent so much of my time in school kicking against convention, that to get here where everything I hated about school doesn't exist, was bizarre. I don't quite know what to do with myself if I'm not rebelling against something, I spent so much of school doing things begrudgingly that it is very much out of my comfort zone to be allowed to be enthusiastic without danger of earning a 'nerd' status. The fact that this book then goes on to say "Let go!", "Have fun!", "Everybody's mental, enjoy it! Use it!" means that I love it. (And am very much of the opinion that this should be compulsory reading for any future teacher! (Not that I am a future teacher! Don't panic! Good god could you imagine? I'd be worse than Mr.Doctor.Robot))

Linking back to the title, I googled Keith Johnstone, as I am a part on the DotCom generation, and discovered that he has a website. He's still wandering the globe giving workshops, 'Great!' thought I. He's in London once in 2010, 'Wow' the voice in my head exclaimed, 'I'm in London in 2010'. He will take all variety of people in his workshops, not just professional actors or really old or really young, in fact, the more variety the better! 'This means' said the voice, 'that I could potentially be in a workshop run by Keith Johnstone! This is awesome'. And it only [Pause! Mock the use of the word 'only'] costs £385. The voice in my head said sad, sad things.

Hence this sad, sad smiley = :'[

...GOOD...WEIRD...WEIRDER!

Saw some plays today (not uncommon for a drama student one would hope (Actually! I'm going to have to stop saying 'one' because everybody takes the piss!!! I'm sorry if my idiolect involves the correct use of personal pronouns! Bullies!)). We saw the level 3 folk move about a lot. That's quite a fair summary methinks. The plays were 'Numbers' (Good), 'We do it to ourselves' (Weird), and 'Cache' (Weirder!!). I'll be honest, this post is mostly going to be about 'Numbers' because I liked it most.

Also, slight interruption, I realise nobody reads this, but I'm posting more often!! Dude!! Be impressed!

'Numbers' essentially focused on the question 'How many people have you slept with'? It went over how some experiences (They replaced words like 'hold' and 'chest' with numbers, and I was so thinking of worse things than 'hold' when she was saying it!) were routine, the casual fuck that means nothing. They also had recordings of people discussing sexual encounters (real people, one of the voices was recognised. A girl talking about a time 'when [she] was still straight' and spent the night with a girl. There were a handful of sidewards glances and mouthing of 'Now way!' (Also, another digression, I'm right in thinking that 'Dyke' is no longer considered a PC term, because a surprising amount of people are using it! Including a lecturer!! The conversation went: "She could be a lesbian?" / "That's a question, is she a dyke?")). And then, the big thing, was your list. Your numbers.

It's that conversation. And the judgements that come with it. It's how many are you comparing me to? How special is this? It genuinely got me thinking (an evening of sex related plays and this was my thought process! My mind is so not a dirty as many would make it out to be!) because many people start this conversation with their drainpipes with a sentence similar to the following "It doesn't make any difference, I just want to know".
Bollocks! Of course it makes a difference. Perhaps not a massive difference, I would hope not a massive difference, but it does, no matter how much you mayn't want it to. Or is this just me? It's either more than you expect, or less than you expect. There's time before any relationship when you don't know them. They have an existence and creation and memories and heartaches and, as much as we care to imagine otherwise, love that we can never know. We can never be a part of it and there is a whole era of happiness that you know you did not cause. And the second you have that conversation, all of that time that you knew of, but didn't care to acknowledge, all becomes real. It becomes fact and unavoidable and true. It changes things.

Another point the play brought up was this question of how much numbers really matter. Does a high number make you a slut, or a low number frigid? There's an episode of 'Will and Grace' (Love 'Will and Grace'!!!!!) where they make lists of how many people they've slept with and Grace's number is higher than that of her boyfriend's. However, they then make another list of how many times they've had sex, rather than with how many people (I admire their memory skillage) and the boyfriend's number was substantially higher than Grace's, even though she'd slept with more. I think at one point Karen has a line "Well, it means that people enjoy sex with him more and you less" because they stick around longer with him. This may seem like a slight digression, but it's a valid point well made. Of how much importance are the numbers. "Too fucking important" we are informed within the performance.

I liked this play, unlike a lot of physical theatre shizz (especially student physical theatre shizz) it made sense. The concept and story (I use the term 'story' very loosely) were not only clear, but very clever. Also, the people in it were very good! I could never imagine being that healthy! The thought alone fills me with dread.... maybe I shall consume some Doritos to stave off the nightmares of exercise.

So yeah..... sex.


EDIT: One of my all time favourite quotes, a genuine question of a friend of mine:

"So, lesbian sex, fill me in!"

AND YOU ARE BETTER BECAUSE???

Now, I'm not particularly subtle about this in my life, but I LOVE Doctor Who! On facebook my religion is listed as Whovian. I have loved it for as long as I can remember and continue to love it still, and am getting increasingly fed up of having to defend myself.
I was listening to 'Moths Ate My Doctor Who Scarf' today, which is a brilliant,


Sorry, slight intermission there. Fire drill, the guys then locked me out of my room, and the security dude (most useless person I've encountered thus far) just looked at me with a blank expression and asked what I wanted him to do about it. Which is a fair point I suppose, after all, he could have thought that I was asking for a tent and sleeping bags to brave the bitter cold. Or even a lot of rope and a grapple hook to scale the walls of Old House and fall in through the window!

So... back to Doctor Who. 'Moths Ate My Doctor Who Scarf' is by Tony Hadoke and is basically him saying how much he loves it and why (with a few satirical swipes thrown in for good measure), and it's really awesome listening. It opens with:
"I was born to be a Doctor Who fan. I wasn't a strapping youth, I wasn't born with a macho gene, I wasn't born with the confidence gene... I needed a hero." He spoke of how the Doctor was always there when he needed him, that his mother would soften the blow of bad news by presenting him with a new Doctor Who novel, and that the Doctor was the one role model he could count on. He spoke of how he got bullied and how his tormentors said he must be gay to like Doctor Who
"Yes, I must be gay to watch a man save often scantily clad attractive young women from monsters, whereas [his bully] watched 22 handsome and sweaty men run around a pitch in shorts, hugging and kissing each other in celebration."

Genius! I suppose I really love this show as I'm listening to it days after having to defend my own admiration for this glorious, anarchic, witty, and (in David Tennant's case) incredibly good looking hero of mine. My conversation was something along the lines of them saying it's childish, and why do I like it, do I know all the stupid little trivial things like all the actors who have played the Doctor, and is this why I'm still single? And then me saying, well what TV do you watch? He was a corrie fan. And why does he watch it? Because it's interesting. And does he know the names of the actors who play the characters? Does he know the characters' histories and story lines? He did. So why is his escapism any more valid than mine? Why is it acceptable to be wrapped up in the lives of teenage mums and an unnaturally high crime rate, and not in the adventures of a Time Lord? The only difference between the two is that one is sci-fi and famous for its fan base, the other is a soap.

The actors to have played the Doctor (that count) are William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, Peter Davidson, Colin Baker, Sylvester McCoy, Paul McGann, Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant and soon to be Matt Smith. I'm not ashamed of this knowledge, I'm proud of it. Doctor Who is my escapism because it's fabulous escapism. It's complex, it's imaginative, it's scary and exiting, it's intricate and carries on well beyond the tv show, it's human, and most of all, it's fun. At the hearts (hearts! Geddit??) of it all there is this one, slightly awkward genius who doesn't quite fit in anywhere, who just has a laugh.
My first memory of being scared of Doctor Who was in 'The Two Doctors' by Robert Holmes, one of the greatest writers ever(!). In this sequence that genuinely had me behind the couch the Doctor (Colin Baker) had been stabbed by Shockeye of the Quanzine Grid, who was an Androgum. The Doctor had run away, but had fallen and left some blood on the step, Chessene, of the Franzine Grid, who was a Androgum TA (Technically Augmented) by Dastari (a super genius, also anagram of A TARDIS) so that she would no longer have the cannibalistic tendencies of an Androgum became the scariest character in the universe (I hadn't met Davros yet, and she is way scarier than the Master). Knowing that somewhere the Doctor was being chased around a field by a mad alien with a sword, I saw Chessene spot the blood on the steps, fall to the ground, sniff it, scrape it onto her hand.... and then lick it.
To this day one of the creepiest/scariest things I have ever seen on TV. I was seven years old when Doctor Who entered my living room, and I have been hooked since. (Though I kind of got my Doctors in the wrong order, I was reliant upon the schedule of repeats UKTV Gold had.)

The Doctor became my best friend and my role model. I was an odd, introvert and lonesome youth (I'm and odd, introvert and lonesome adult.... I say adult, don't mistake grown up with maturity), I hated school and the bureaucracy and hierarchy of it (though I wasn't quite that eloquent until well into my double digits) and here was a character that I sort of empathised with. I know that I'm not a genius and that I'm not going to change the world. I know that I'm never going to step into a blue box with a strange madman and see things far beyond my own tiny imagination (any innuendo you found in that sentence was your own dirty mind, not mine!). However I am allowed, however often I feel like it, to snuggle up with a some hot chocolate in my Doctor Who mug, put on my Dalek slippers, take a yoghurt out of my TARDIS fridge, pack away my Doctor Who Monsters jigsaw and Space Travels book (with a pop-up TARDIS!!!), and watch this character on tv. I can watch him fight Morbius, or the Slitheen. I can see Bok explode in all his paper mache glory, or Adric go boom in Earthshock. I'm allowed to do that, and enjoy that just as much as you want to watch Jedward.

My escapism is just as good as yours, if not better. I'd rather die trying to stick something down a Sontaran's probic vent (innuendo belongs to you) than waiting for the X Factor to cast my vote.

100 DAYS!

The 100 days challenge starts today!! Do something once a day for a hundred days in order to achieve whatever.... (I'll avoid going into PR).

I best get started then! May update later with my failed attempts.

[Drawing a picture a day..... lol]

REALLY? REALLY?

Now, I never thought that I would ever feel anything toward Katie Price (or Jordon, depending on how many times you've seen her topless). I mean, she's a sort of none entity, I neither loved her (although I'm astonished that people say "She's my hero!"... SHE'S your hero! Really? O_o), hated her, nor, til recently, pitied her; but watching "I'm a celebrity get me out of here!" I'm beginning to. A) If you're team Andre, surely you wouldn't be watching her, B) there have got to be better things to do with your time/money than torment her, C) she is most definitely not the person that most deserves to be hated in there, and D) really after Dec felt the necessity to tell her to 'shake everything' when she was covered in bugs, all the good jokes have gone! (Although, if you know any good Jordon jokes (I use 'Jordon' merely for the alliteration) do feel free to share.)

I know that she's now left, and to be fair, I don't blame her, and I realise that she can be quite an irritating none entity. But come on! How many trials can you make her do? =/ It got tired.




Sorry, I got distracted half way through typing this and have now entirely lost my train of thought and have run out of things to say....

Toodles.

OH DEAR.

I'm a bit terrible at blogging aren't I? Sorry. I would type more, except I live an ridiculously dull and tedious existence. If there were anything interesting to blog about I would.
Well, since my last post I've started uni in London, which is ok, [They're all normal down here!!! It's bizarre! I can't quite cope with sane people!!] dong 'Drama and Theatre Arts', not 'Drama and Theatre Studies' like most other universities. no, no, no, this sounds far more pretentious. Gotta love it.

Also, if you care [whoever it is that reads this *waves to stalker*] in may 2010 I shall be running from my uni 'digs' (as it were) to my own front door. 190 miles over one week (I hope). So, find my other blog (Yeah, I have two! Only since starting uni have I realised just what I dweeb I truly am) lost-her-mind.blogspot.com, and give me money.

BEST.LETTER.EVER!

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted fan,
Jim