Obsessed with being fat and being bad

A few months ago I was lucky enough to be cast for an advert, Foxy Bingo. The casting asked for women over 25 and above a size 16. So I went along and filmed the advert, everyone was nice, it was great, hard work and quite boring as there was a lot of waiting around, but a good experience none-the-less.

I knew they wanted me to film what is called an ident, one of those little "sponsored by" snippets they put on before an advert. So the day of the ident filming I happen to see the script in the pocket of the director, and feel a jolt of shock and hurt when I see that my bit is entitled "One Fat Lady."

Disclaimer: Everyone on that advert was lovely to me, friendly, professional,  even complimentary at times. The actual advert, which says "Meet Sue, she's one fat lady who is flirty thirty, she doesn't have droopy draws" (most of this is lost on me but I assume its bingo speak), is pleasant in tone and context and isn't insulting in any way. I am using this as an illustrative starting point to this blog, just to be clear, I don't feel any insult was made to fat people by the advert or anyone involved with it. I would highly recommend the production team and everyone I worked with on this shoot. 

So... One Fat Lady. You may be wondering why this was a surprise. After all, its bingo, Two Fat Ladies etc. The casting asked for, in so many words, fat ladies. And at a size 18, I am a fat lady. But it shocked me because I just don't think of myself like that. Its not that I feel slim, I know I am not.  I don't particularly like being big, mainly cos I am frequently told how rubbish it is to be fat. But it was a shock to me because being fat is not an important or defining part of how I think about myself. Mostly. That's why it was a shock, to realise that FAT is one of the primary ways that these people had seen me and did see me.

And why was it hurtful? Because being fat is bad, apparently. I am not saying it is an intrinsically bad or unattractive thing, I know how socially defined these things are, 200 years ago I would have been the super hottie. Its not even "because its unhealthy" as some people claim when they are fat-bashing. It CAN be unhealthy, and after a point it undeniably is,  but I know many big ladies who are fit and beautiful and robust and active and free of health conditions, and many slimmer people who aren't.

But the fact of the matter is, society says FAT IS BAD. It says that if you are fat, you are (ironically) less, if you are fat, you should be ashamed. And if you are a woman and are fat, you certainly should see this as THE DEFINING FEATURE OF YOUR LIFE AND YOUR IDENTITY! FATTTTT! We only need to look at magazines and adverts and TV characters and book characters to see that.

Plus, subsequent roles I have been offered have all been based on size. Plus-size model etc, something for the Sun about BMI. I even went to M&S to measure as a fitting model and she said to me "you are going to hate me for this, but you measure size 20 on top in our measurements. You are going to hate me for this. Why? Because my self-esteem should take a hit cos M&S lady measures me as bigger than I thought? Sure. Because my size is the most important thing about who I am.

Where did this weird fat-obsession slash hatred come from? I get not wanting to be fat, its not fashionable and it restricts what clothes fit you. But why be so derogatory about it? Why is fat more than just your body? Why is fat what you are worth as a person?

There has been a backlash, which, although the motive behind it is great, seems to have got a bit lost. All this "real women" stuff, the attitude that its ok to be mean about thin women. The attitude that you should love your body if you are unhealthily fat. Typically, we have screwed this whole thing up. Here is why:

• The idea isnt to boost fat by putting down thin, like the picture below unintentionally does, that's just doing the same thing in reverse.
• Unless you are a robot, anyone who has a gender identity as a woman is a real woman.
• Emphasizing how cool plus-size is, is nice, but it also reinforces it as something different to the "norm". 
• You should not be happy to let yourself be unhealthily fat (or thin, or anything else). If you are, you should try and do something about it.
• However, being unhealthily anything IS NOT a reason to be seen as a lesser human being and subjected to daily abuse and digs. 

And yes, in media and modelling, its all about image, I know this, and this is what the focus is on. I have opinions about that too, but will leave those for now.

So- I really do feel that we are overly concerned with image and particularly with being fat, if you are fat.

I am intelligent, overly-sensitive, thoughtful, a writer, a cider-lover. I'm a redhead, a performer, an ex goth-metaller.  I love animals, I hail from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and I used to be obsessed with the Power-rangers. I'm a daughter, a sister, a friend, a fiancé  I have an underactive thyroid and have suffered from depression on and off since age 21.  Right now I am watching Jeremy Kyle, dying for the loo and waiting for some dude to fix the boiler.

And I happen to be fat.

Its not big and its not important.

Character vs Reality

I have been thinking about how we create a burlesque person for promotional purposes. We all do it, to an extent. We have the performance name, the costumes, the makeup. Not many of us look and act the same slobbing round the house, or with our mates from school, as we do at an industry event. Creating the persona is usual in performing arts, and useful. But how far does it go? It is just a glammed up version of ourselves, of "Jane Blogs" or is it a whole fictional character?

What I am NOT talking about:

• I am not talking about the whole "personal/professional blur" on facebook profiles and the like, that is a different blog.
• I dont mean lying about your experience or qualifications.

I am talking about creating a character. There are degrees of this. Examples from the comedy world:

Most extreme: creating a crazy character and pretending it is the reality, or at least never showing anything otherwise. Examples- Harry Hill, and that annoying new comedian whose name I cant remember with bad teeth and thick glasses. 

Less extreme: creating a crazy character but letting everyone know it is just a character. Examples: Ali G, The Pub Landlord.

How extreme? More common though is a sort of blend between reality and larger than life persona, never admitting it is a persona but we all know its there. Think Russell Brand, Milton Jones, Jimmy Carr, and pretty much every celebrity.

Lilly Allen once said on twitter "Lilly Allen doesnt exist, she is a fictional character". Marilyn Monroe came to hate the persona, came to hate the name Marilyn, felt it was divorced from herself as Norma Jean.

But so often there is that odd blur with reality. Dont get me started on things like TOWIE and Made in Chelsea!

So where does burlesque fit? Most of us have degrees of persona, some of us branded more heavily than others. Where should it stop (should it stop at all?)? Should we create persona like "Silk von Rouge was born on a desert island, daughter of a sultan" etc? Ie totally fictional? And if we create this character, do we have to explicitly let it be known that this is what we are doing, or can we go all the way and appear to BE the character, all the time? Do we accept it as a given that this is what we are all doing, and that you are not interacting with a real person at a gig but a character? Or a mixture of the two?

Whatever the answer (if indeed there is one), the whole thing is quite tiring. I freely admit to slobbing around in scappy cardigans in front of this laptop, Glorian being firmly on hold til showtime.

What makes a signature act & do we really want one?

Hello folks! Now I am no longer using my facebook profile, I decided to create a blog for all the wibblings I would previously post on there. 

Lately I have been thinking about signature acts. I often see people declaring new acts as "signature" and this makes me wonder. I always thought of a signature act as one that becomes, rather than is declared as such. Something you create that really takes off in terms of popularity, that audience and peers come to associate with you more than any other act. As such, you could not necessarily predict which act that was going to be, right? It is often surprising which acts work better than other acts. But that is one way of thinking about it-does anyone else have a different idea of what a signature act is and how to get one?

A while back I was speaking with a lovely performer who, quite early on, created a brilliant act which, years later, persists in being the one she is known for and booked for, her best act. She expressed to me a worry that nothing she did was ever going to be as good or better than that act. I hadn't thought of it like that before.   And then I thought of a few other performers who have that "one act", the one they are known for and get booked for, the best one. It got me thinking:

- Is it better to have that one amazing act that takes you places, but never to match it again? Or is it better to have a consistent standard, but that might not take you to headline or to the top shows? Is a signature act a temporary blessing and a long term curse?

Of course, the ideal would for all your acts to be that top standard, and some people manage headline level each time, but even they have some acts that would be seen as more prominent than others.

Its not just burlesque either. What if you get an amazing, perfect job, that ends? What if you write one best seller or become a one-hit wonder? Do one out of this world film, like Elijah Wood? Or to use the Dr Who example- would you like to be his assistant for one insane and amazing year, but then spend the rest of your life sort of regretful that you were no longer with him, finding normal life a bit lacking,  like Sarah Jane or Rose did? 

We are all always trying to create bigger, better acts. And you cant really predict which one is going to take everyone by storm. So in some way this is all moot, if it happens, it happens. But if you get that one big act and you tour it until you have done all the shows you can do, where do you go from there? 

Or perhaps this is a negative turn of thought. Perhaps it is amazing if you get that one act, and if it can happen once, it can happen again! Basically I am wondering about this now because I dont think my ability as a performer will allow me to match the impact of the giant trampoline. The trampoline makes the trampoline act, not the Glorian on it! So now I have to think how I am going to up my game in my next acts, so they aren't a let down after the bouncing!

Here's to hoping for inspiration and luck to strike twice!