This quarter, thus far.

This quarter will be one of massive production and reading. My proposal is written, accepted and turned in and now the focus has turned to the work. I'm taking two classes to support my research, Feminist Theory and American Women from 1865-Today. Both are extremely engaging. I'll be posting writings and ideas I gather from both classes, as well as updating my blog with work in progress videos.

Exhibit one: The first topic we tackled in Feminist Theory was perhaps that most controversial. What does the word Feminist currently mean and what are it's social implications.

Here is what I wrote as a response to the readings.


The three readings all call into question this illusive and diverse word “feminism;” what it is, who participates within it, whose voices launch and clarify ideas, what the people look like, physically I mean and who it doesn’t look like, and last but never least, what the political agenda is. In essence, who are feminists and what are fighting for?

¬It seems like with every hot topic, we begin by grappling with the definition of the word, for shouldn’t this lead us to some sort of clarity on the direction and intention of the movement? But as the article “Lift and Separate” by Ariel Levy states, politics and feminism have somehow become distanced from each other, leaving a wicked shell that people shy away from. People say “we aren’t feminists” because the word seems, now more then ever, to attach itself to a look and an attitude rather then to politics and activism.

In the seventies, women were vocal. They were active. They rallied. They let their hair grow long on all areas of their body. They went “au natural.” In the eighties working outside the home out of desire instead of necessity became the badge of free women, right along with shoulder pads and by the nineties, women could “have it all” including a healthy sex life. Now, women are running for president; one claiming to be “traditional” and the other claiming a hard façade that would get the job done. Who was more of a feminist? Well, obviously that depends on your definition and your politics.

So has feminism become something like a religion? A doctrine that people are free to pick and choose from, simultaneously denounce and subscribe to? Something to dress up for? Something to talk about in hushed tones, not appropriate for formal dinners parties because no one believes the same thing anyway? Is feminism something that we all believe exists on some level but we aren’t so sure how we fit into it? Is it necessary to say it loud and proud if the zealots are out there doing all the shouting for us? How do we negotiate something that we don’t fully understand? And how do we participate in it while not believing everything the movement has to offer?

Hopscotch Sketches

Hopscotch Sketch from Whitney Warne on Vimeo.

Hopscotch Sketch from Whitney Warne on Vimeo.

Hopscotch: A game of awkward mobility. A game of singular ambition and choices to be made. A maze the only goes forward, unless you get stuck on the sides. An uncomfortable jump between spaces. A negotiation of the next move to be made.

These are video sketches for an evolving idea. My appearance in the video is for stand-in purposes only. I am not costumed or groomed, in fact, I'm straight out of bed on a Sunday morning.

Things that are working for me: The awkwardness of the movement. The grid-like space in a suburban setting. Still working with it, complicating the narrative a bit.

Chalk and Wanting

I'm reaching a ways back now, to the beginning of the school year. This is one of the first things I did when I arrived in Rochester this fall. My work is still focused on expectations of the modern female and the struggling between full-fulling those expectations, or turning away from them. Their is still a sense of complacency in this image. I've written the statement in chalk, which washes away at the first sign of weather. The idea of the thank you note, or being grateful, of doing what your mother trained you to do, is very present in this image. For better or for worse, we are trained to be something/someone. Behaviors become ingrained. And while we may consciously turn away from that person or puppet, instincts and agency are often at war.

Jen Denike

Thanks to Graham Walzer for this artist reference and finally inspiring me to get back to blogging. This photograph is a document of an infinite pirouette, performed by a LA ballerina and directed by the artist.The idea of turning in an infinite circle, perfect and flawless but untouchable, was something I played with last year in my tutu stop-motion video (never fully realized).

Press Release about this piece.
The gallery the represent both her and Kate Gilmore.

Brief Interviews with Hideous Men

The creators of Brief Interviews with Hideous Men might have had good intentions (John Krasinski aka Jim from The Office could never have bad intentions, unless it's toward dear Dwight) but the final and resounding taste of this film was overwhelmingly sour, like that experimental spice mix on your chicken that gave you horrible indigestion for days afterwards. Not. Pleasant.

While the running dialogue of the two young men (the British accent was a high point for me) does something to highlight the questions facing modern women and men's relationship with women, the rest of the unintelligible plot does nothing to actually examine real life consequences of these questions. Unless you count proposing that rape has positive consequences, such realizing you are a "real thing." This seems like an egregious statement for even the most "glass half full" rapist or bro-man trying to pick an "easy" girl up in bar.

I am not in a position to put down anyone's brand or belief of feminism, but it is my opinion that this film has nothing to do with that topic. In fact, the only remotely feminist character in the book barely said a word. Instead she sat piously back, judging the opinions of the men around her, wimpering like a kicked puppy. Her "research" to find out how gender equality has affected men is valid and reminds me of questions I've been dealing with as of late, but her follow through is not genuine. Feminism has affected men in other arenas outside the bedroom, all of which were ignored by her line of questioning. In fact, in the interviewer's intimate relationship, she appears happy only when she's in bed with her former lover, who cheated on her, or maybe didn't. This small detail is lost in Krasinski's sappy, true to TV character dialogue. So I think it's easy and logical to deduce that this movie once again devalues and sexualizes women from a man's perspective. Making it no more progressive that the "cutting edge" ads developed by the fictional but all to real creative directors of Mad Men.

This movie has obviously gotten under my skin. My next step is to read the book written by David Foster Wallace, before I dismiss him as completely as I've dismissed this movie.

What did you think? I need perspective?

Stills from the Jump Rope Video

Working Artist Statement

This work is about the performance of “The Good Girl.” It talks about how she is fabricated, how she operates, how she presents herself, who she’s trying to impress, and the exhaustion of the falsified experience.

“The Good Girl” is not a specific person or set of actions, for it shows up differently in whoever is pulling the strings. For some, it could be a conservative way of dressing that supposedly keeps people from looking at the sexualized body beneath. For other’s it’s a fake smile, put on to keep people from asking the hard questions. It can take the form of perfectionism, with every duck neatly in row to escape an avalanche of critical reactions. Rather then rebelling, “The Good Girl” puts on a performance. Rather then giving up, she puts on more layers.

Nancy Friday discusses the formation of The Good Girl at length in her book The Power of Beauty.

“I believe we all, men and women, give up far more the necessary to fit the ridged standards of adolescence. The biggest mistake I’ve made in life, the roads not taken and opportunities not seized, I am sure, today, might have been avoided if only I’d been able to take into adolescence the girl I’d been prior to it. Reining her in, forcing her to obey the restricting rules by which girls had to live made me acutely self-conscious, overly cautious, unsure of myself, second-guessing everything for the rest of my life. And angry, don’t leave out anger at abandoning myself, teeth-grinding anger that I dutifully swallowed and ‘forgot.’”


In my work, the protagonist takes on the forms of the ballerina and the princess, both of whom are a repository for cultural stigmas on womanhood, filled with expectations of perfectionism, beauty, meekness and grace. Inherent in their job description is a necessity to keep their audience at bay while simultaneously creating a longing for their status and beauty.

I embody both of these characters in order to express my need to be one of them, identifying with the artifice that creates a wide gate around them. In reality, my stage becomes the hallway and the kitchen, the shopping mall and the restaurant. My act is a reveal that shows nothing more than what other people need me to be. The finale shows the princess in a pink dress, breathing heavily, exhausted and humanized, but ready to jump again tomorrow.