Reflection 23/02/21: I decided to take this series of work as experimentation for Are You Watching? for Congruous. I felt they were boring and something was missing in these. I have realised projection is my medium that I work well with and with this experimentation of work I felt I couldn’t do much else with them.

I felt inspired after researching Rosler’s Semiotics of the Kitchen to turn making in the kitchen to see how it would impact the viewers. “Food offers a giant area in which the social overwhelms the biological” (Weinstock, Rosler, 1981, p 83). There’s many things going on like making breasts, women hands doing the making, a female body in charge, a kitchen setting as well as baking materials. Reflection 12/03/21: Possibly too much going on, I tried to projection and immediately thought it wasn’t successful – I didn’t enjoy it. This was a period of time where I wasn’t sure where to go next with my work so I was trialing different spaces/materials early prep for the Interim exhibition.


I was in amazement at Rosler’s Semiotics in the Kitchen, she put all her anger and emotion into her film without words, she did it with action/body language. “the transformation of the woman herself into a sign in a system of signs” (Weinstock, Rosler, 1981, p 85). – This is what I have been doing in my previous films, using hand language with squeezing/dropping to evoke emotion/discomfort.

Reflection 04/01/2021: Relations to Womanhouse, Breasts to Eggs – they slowly change over the walls from breasts to eggs, and in baking they start as a lump of icing and slowly become breasts – a desirable material in both life/cinema in a shared domestic setting – performative yet destructive.

I wanted to point to how women are even still expected to conform to these ideas by using pink baking materials, a stereotypical gendered colour for women. It’s the same with the stereotypes that are put on children when they’re born. It’s good that these stereotypes are now being mixed see below:

Reflection 15/04/21: I have continued the experimentation of icing, it works well in relation to sweet desirables and women as a delicate food contrasted with a male violently eating it – Sweet Tooth B&W, is more visually clear in reference to the male, as with Baking it’s clear there was still a lot of uncertainty.

I wanted to get across this fight against an old fashioned patriarchal role (a gendered system where men take the dominance role out of both genders) e.g. the male = breadwinner, provides for the family and the female = homemaker, looks after the house, food and children. See Baking below, I make the breasts using pink icing to refer back to Consuming 2 except at a new angle with this constant imagery of the breast presenting women like a sweet/treat by society/men. I wanted to create the scenario of a cook show without romanticising the old fashioned cook shows as they glorify the kitchen role. From the 70s “the newly emerging feminist movement wanted to get women out of the typing pools and away from the kitchen sinks and into the boardrooms of the land” (Boycott, 2017). – The female hands suggests new way for women? Reflection 23/02/21: The ‘desirable’/’consumption’ like material seems to be favourable in my work/always pops up – I think this a path to follow for my final degree project.


Reflection 10/05/21: Upon reflection from the formative assessment and deeper research of abjection, I think there was signs of abjection early on within my work, disturbance and control, especially in this Baking series. Ideas of baking and the body physical making these dessert like objects to consume sets this level of discomfort as food is “surrounded with a series of taboos” (Kristeva, 1980, p 75) and it seems to be accentuated when it comes to the female form and consumption.


See below Baking ‘To Roll’, I visualised the aggressive destruction of women destroying this gendered role of the kitchen/patriarchy and being the new wave of women who has control. Whatever “derives form your experience of the actions” (Weinstock, Rosler, 1981, p 85) you see within my films. Reflection 15/04/21: As said previously, it’s clear I was unsure where I wanted to go with this, I was dipping into all areas but it’s clear to see this was a stepping stone for where my practice is now. Being able to use elements of consumption without feeling the need to involve the kitchen space.

I decided to revisit and incorporate My Verblist, my take on Richard Serra’s Verblist. It would work really well here to explore the use of materials & manipulations. I chose ‘To Roll’ from My Verblist. There’s this idea where beauty is a “legitimate and necessary qualification for a women’s rise in power” (Koo, 2004,  p 302). This is also used within glamorising women in the kitchen, not only to appeal to men but also other women, so they feel they should follow. Through using ‘To Roll’, I took the rolling pin and used it with force, much like Rosler did within Semiotics of the Kitchen, at 4.50, see below, she rolled the air and got more aggressive when using the utensil. I followed this but decided to roll the icing.

I aim to take these further and project them back into the kitchen. Note: Project on kitchen appliances may suggest ideas/visuals of Martha Rosler’s Body Beautiful series e.g. Hot Meat. This is what I will be experimenting with and researching after Christmas. I will also be continue to expand and explore with more clay figures to work with body image and types.

Reflection 23/02/21: These works didn’t have much substance, they felt flat! But, there are many aspects I have used e.g. the kitchen space and the issues that come with Rosler’s work, but confrontationally glamourising it similarly to how the cinema does.


1-1 with Jane 11/12/20, we discussed the way I wanted to to experiment more with placement projection and see how the setting adapted the portrayal of the film. See initial notes below:

We spoke of different environments to place the projections in. Lockdown and Light – a project created by Jane my tutor during lockdown to engage with artists through social media. Below are examples that caught my attention by Sara Heywood, these films encouraged me to experiment.

Sara Heywood, Lockdown and Light, 2020.


After seeing Heywood’s projections I wanted to experiment. I used the shower, the sink and the bath. NOTE: I didn’t want to think of any theories/concepts while I experimented. I wanted to focus on the exploration of material and setting and how it could be perceived and interpreted. – This was very beneficial.

Water has been active in my work within The Haze of Social Media series, it worked very well when trying to explore distortion and illusion. I wanted to return to this perception to see what it could add to my projections. See above, in Only Touch With CLEAN Hands projection in shower. There was something intimate and voyeuristic about this presentation as the bathroom is a place where you wash and cleanse yourself, nude – it adds to this visual that you shouldn’t be looking – this was also a comment made from my group crit 20/11/20. Peers felt mesmerised by Only Touch With CLEAN Hands and as though they were waiting for something else to happen. Hand sanitiser = only touch a women with clean hands, shower accentuate this.

Does the use of cinematic screen in an unusual and intimate place, such as the bathroom, convey more possible sexual objectification towards women like Mulvey explores?

Reflection 15/01/21: Recently I have learnt that within films  especially Reese Witherspoon’s films and views, pools and water are used to sexualised women e.g. Elle Woods in Legally Blonde is sprawled out in a bikini in an inflatable suggests it feeds the male gaze. There’s these expectations that come with this social place as “the pool is a pressure cooker of social expectations for women: to diet, shop, shave, tweezer, sculpt and tone” (Hess, 2019), it’s interesting to see in these works that the use of water does everything but explore these issues cinema does. Does it challenge these expectations.

Reviewing this, Psycho comes to mind, the aggressive gripping of the breasts reflects the famous scene of the male watching the women in the shower intensely before he kills her, the darkness surrounding the projection and the voyeurism, becomes sinister. Would a slowed down film like Douglas Gordons 24 hour Psycho appear more disturbing? I moved to the bath to experiment with running water/ripples to give the films a realistic identity, they brought the dropping to life. My Verblist – making the ‘to drop’ more impactful as the dropping breasts are confused with the splashes of water.

There was a hair left on the shower wall, it was sitting on the nipple of the projected breast. It gives the imagery of normalisation that women have hair on their body, it almost challenges the stereotypical women where we are all seen to be shaven to begin to be ‘idealised’.


See still below, Just a Ripple, the use of water added natural manipulation which I enjoyed this when I used water orbs within The Haze of Social Media, I liked that the image wasn’t edited but the perception of the camera was. The ripples from the water exaggerates the imagery of the sculpture, suggesting a more realistic image of women – reminds me of Jenny Saville, embracing the natural form.

It’s as though the colour pink from the image has leaked into the bath when creating the reflection. It also dispersed this pink tint of the shadows of the bathroom, see still below.

Reflection 28/01/21: I used the leak of colour in Are You Watching? across the breast sculptures and the environment as way to create a tunnel vision for the audience.

Reflection 29/02/21: I also used this explosion of pink for my Lockdown and Light 2021 submission. I used the projection & water ripples to emphasise the body and the portrayal of women in the cinema, the glamorisation of the figure.


See below, in Where is the Breast?, this photograph was when I was focused on the shadow of sculptures. They appeared like sweets – a comment Susan had made. The image below reminded me of ‘Where is Wally’, I placed a clay breast in the water to play with this illusion of what is real and what isn’t which I really liked.

Reflection 19/03/21: ‘sweets’ a comment that appears in a lot of my feedback – women as desirable edibles. I chose to continue this feedback throughout my current practice of To Bite and Sweet Tooth B&W currently in relation to seduction of the female form through the male gaze.

Reflection 19/03/21: Image below feel editorial/bright bold like a set up for magazine, does this effect the way the images are then seen? Use of body etc.

I used the sink as the projection immediately gave the idea that there are more breasts present than the 5 sculptures placed in the sink. Relate to CUBED. The image above looks like busy wallpaper and the imagery that something is growing around the sink – weird? It dominates the space.

NOTE: Should I project in the kitchen to see how this domination would come across differently with it being in a gender specific domestic setting, to involve myself in the projections, similar to Heywood. To try projecting in the kitchen – different surfaces e.g. oven, worktop, hob etc. May encourage ideas of gendered roles in the kitchen/the ‘idealised’ housewife?

Reflection 20/02/21: This is the image I chose to use for the Congruous exhibition because I loved the way it covered the kitchen space. I followed through with these thoughts and it worked even better in the kitchen – better relationship to sculpture, space and meaning of domestic roles & objectification. Projected on the wall almost displays the breasts to be viewed.


Maggi Hambling was mentioned during a tutorial with Jane 11/12/20 in relation to my sculptures of US from level 5 and CUBED. Hambling is a Feminist artist, she created a sculpture for Mary Wollstonecraft a British Feminist, who was a write and a philosopher, an advocate for women’s equality rights from as early as the 1700s to honour her.

Maggi Hambling, A Sculpture for Mary Wollstonecraft, 2020.

Her piece, A Sculpture for Mary Wollstonecraft, see above, caused a large stir and controversy towards its viewers questioning why does she need to be nude. People believed it was inappropriate for a public sculpture and “sparked a furious reaction” (Thorpe, 2020) Instead of a clothed sculpture, “she produced an abstract sculpture which features a small, naked silver woman” (Thorpe, 2020) who was attractive and toned – an idealised women, like how Mulvey explored the cinema screen to “glamorise” women for their looks. Is confusing what Hambling is glamorising/celebrating women for?

The nude female form on display suggested to campaigners that sexual objectification of the body was present and wasn’t respected, see below, they covered up the sculpture with a text shirt, leaving the head of the sculpture out in the open.

Maggi Hambling, A Sculpture for Mary Wollstonecraft, 2020.

It is true that “many influential men who are memorialised with clothed statues in London” (Thorpe, 2020) and no men are displayed naked how Hambling has displayed Wollstonecraft. I am torn between what I think. Men weren’t congratulated with a sculpture of themselves naked so why should a women? Is there a time and a place for a nude sculpture? And was this one?


Wollstonecraft supported equality rights for women, in her book, “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman”, she spoke of how “women are told from their infancy, and taught by their mothers’ example, that a little knowledge of human weakness (properly called ‘cunning’), softness of temperament, outward obedience, and scrupulous attention to a puerile kind of propriety, will obtain for them the protection of man; and if they are also beautiful, that’s all they need for at least twenty years.” (Wollstonecraft, 2010 , p 13).

Wollstonecraft acknowledged how women were brought up to fulfil this role for their husband and how beauty helps keeps a husband and responded “how grossly they insult us!” (Wollstonecraft, 2010, p 13). Hambling wanted to honour Wollstonecraft theories and to remind the public of them how far women have come and still must go, but I am unsure if she has. Has she conflicted with Wollstonecraft writings?

Hambling argued “she’s everywoman and clothes would have restricted her. Statues in historic costume look like they belong to history because of their clothes. It’s crucial that she is ‘now’” (Dex, 2020) After reading this I appreciated the nude female sculpture’s presentation for the now but I feel that those who won’t take the time to research and know, will be offended and would an art gallery been more suitable? Or would it have lead to the same reaction? OR is she also trying to normalise the female form and reduce this sexualisation of the body by placing it in a visible place for everyone?

Reflection 19/03/21: These too were issues I was fighting with while creating my clay figures, even now creating icing breasts in film being consumed like To Bite – where could I display this?


In response to Hambling’s, I wanted to create a sculpture with a head, this was a comment from Susan to see how the sculptures changes with a head. I hadn’t wanted to but after my research I was intrigued to try it on a more natural looking female form, unlike Hambling’s use of a ‘toned attractive women’.

See above, I didn’t change my original opinion, I felt it gave the sculpture too much personality. It also did remind me even more of fertility symbol sculptures which is something I have decided I don’t want to pursue but must be acknowledged that there’s different interpretations, audiences and presentation. I still want people to see the array of body shapes and sizes, that have no face – feels more connected to the issues I am exploring.


Martha Rosler was a name from my group crit 24/11/20, to explore the male gaze, effects upon women and the “oppressive women’s roles” (MoMa, 2020) of the kitchen further.

Reflection 19/03/21: Rosler’s performance piece within the kitchen inspired me to use the kitchen space for Are You Watching? group exhibition for Congruous which played well to my outcome.

I’m currently interested in performance based work, Semiotics of the Kitchen above is a 6 minute feminist performance film. Rosler first shows herself putting on an apron in the kitchen, very serious with intent for viewers to watch and listen. Rosler parodies the popularised tv cooking show, Julia Child from the 60s and acts as a stance against it as they also glamourise the housewife role, to indulge women to follow that path. She isn’t against the food, but instead where women are shown how to be the ‘perfect’ house wife.

Reflection 26/05/21: Rosler’s piece upon reflection carries a similar approach to the representation of women/how women are portrayed on the cinema/tv screen, like Valie Export addresses. Action Pants: Genital Panic explores the realism of women and their bodies with an aggressive tone with a gun, the same way Rosler uses aggression and the manipulation of kitchen tools in Semiotics of the Kitchen. The same way I use the male mouth in To Bite B&W Repeat as a destructive tool to show the destruction of the female form under male control/consumption.


She takes takes kitchen utensils in alphabetical order, A – Z, to both destroy and challenge this glamorisation of women in the kitchen. With each use of kitchen utensil, she grows quicker/harder to visualise the frustration Rosler has for this expectation of women. By doing this Rosler, a woman, becomes the “sign of the system” (MoMa, 2020) and a language of frustration in the kitchen. However, between the use of each tool, she slows down, and becomes very delicate when picking up the next tool but then becomes violent again.

Reflection 15/04/21: I have carried this violence from Rosler’s Semiotics in the Kitchen into Sweet Tooth B&W as I feel visually, the violence, is most effective in relation to the male form through the female gaze for all viewers to see/understand.

Rosler intended the video to challenge the recognised system of everyday kitchen meanings and “shows that the structures of power, domination, and submission and their ideological ramifications have to be detected and analysed not only within the economic, social, and political realms but also within the system of language and signs itself that constitutes the order of the Symbolic” (Eiblmayr, 1982). “The transformation of the woman herself into a sign in a system of signs” (Weinstock, Rosler, 1981, p 85), as well as reassessing the women’s role in the kitchen?

Reflection 22/01/21: This pushed me to becomes more interactive with my films: including my body/hands within the frame showcasing movement in Baking which wasn’t as successful as I hoped but was a good source of experimentation in relation to Rosler.


The camera observes Rosler movements/punctuating gestures and I wonder if it suggests there’s this relation to the use of the camera being the watching eye, giving access into the kitchen through a female POV. Exploring emotions and gestures of rage/frustration towards the ideals of a perfect housewife isn’t as perfect as Julia Child suggests?? Builds/destroy the breasts within my work, in a kitchen setting could be a response to Rosler’s film and women’s expectations. There is also a lot of contrasted with eye contact with the camera as well as the viewer, making her visual message as direct as she can – something quite sinister about this video. This idea of the sinister act was also mentioned within my film Only Touch With CLEAN Hands.

Reflection 11/04/21: The relation to sinister visual and using the camera as a watching eye is where I am at with Sweet Box, using the camera to be the audiences’ eye since they can’t physically be in the space.

Knife at 3.13 – Rosler looks at the viewer with quite a lot of rage and begins to dagger the knife in the air but then gently places it down onto the table, see above. When showing how the tools work, she gets quicker and then during an action, I noticed she throws her hand away as though she is disregarding/throwing away the domestic role of women that comes with this tool – many impactful movements. Especially with ‘tenderiser’ at 5.21 she says the name so delicately but then contrasts this by slamming it into the table. Towards the end “she is not personifying another utensil but the letter itself: U, V, W, X, Y, Z become written by her body, which in turn means that her body becomes written by them” (Eiblmayr, 1982), as though women are consumed by this role and eventually conform. She finishes her video with a shrug as if she is unapologetic and questioning if society/expectations will change.

Reflection 22/12/20: “Experience of the action” (Weinstock, Rosler, 1981, p 86) she doesn’t use text in her films, so it becomes all about action. This film has similar confrontation that is present in Hot Meat. Or is the film more direct and angrier?

“In the series Body Beautiful, or Beauty Knows No Pain, made between 1965 and 1972, Rosler deconstructs representations of women in mass circulation magazines” (Tate, 2015). Rosler created Cold Meat I, Cold Meat II, Hot Meat and Damp Meat, she visualises “placing the commodified female flesh within the arena of food preparation and consumption” (Tate, 2015).  She uses popular culture images from magazines and playboy to collage the idealised female body onto an oven, suggesting how women are expected to both be the ‘idealised’ as well as filling the domesticated role of the kitchen and as housewife.

  • She objects the domesticated roles of the kitchen within her collages and reinvents this use of anger in Semiotics of the Kitchen, as though she is trying a new angle of attention.


I want to use this assertiveness in film and felt motivated by the research with ideas of filming I drew/written up some ideas with moving into the kitchen. I have a lot of thoughts to bring within my work for the domestic setting/environment to see how it impacts the film further.

15/04/21: There’s been this graduation of the kitchen/consumption/violence becoming more obvious within my practice over time.

Reflection 03/03/21: I already had thoughts of being in the kitchen space because of my 1-1 with Newson 26/10/20, and naturally continued this aspect for Congruous. It worked really well in relation to the change of environment, it added to appearance of the sculptures, meaning and the distortion of the projection in the space.