Director  Pablo Larrain’s ‘Spencer’ is not merely a biographical tale on the life of the people’s princess, it is a surrealist psychological thriller. We experience the life of a woman who can no longer bear the suffocation of having eager, piercing eyes scrutinize your every move. Larrain has clearly tried to establish an authentic royal family biopic rather than focusing on the drama surrounding the monarchy. He has successfully managed to create a film that focuses on the torment and troubles that being held to such high expectations had on an individual in this position.

Diana has been known as someone who did not act like a typical royal and she is portrayed like this in the film – she doesn’t wait for royal guards,  drives herself around, swears, purposely goes against the dress code and just wants to “eat fast food and watch Les Mis.” She is real. The film takes place in Sandringham in 1991 during the Christmas period. With the combination of Diana’s marriage crumbling and the Christmas period being marked by intense protocol and tradition, Diana finds herself frustrated at the heightened scrutiny of a world that seems to be against her, causing her eating disorder to worsen and we see her become on the edge of a mental breakdown.

Atmosphere and expression are integral parts of creating the image of augmenting isolation and agony felt by Diana and rather than a heavy script, we are presented with an abundance of anxious glances, wandering eyes and fearful looks. One scene where the family sits at the dinner table is particularly full of these apprehensive glances, paired with the powerful silence that fills the room. The sense of claustrophobia and distress felt by Diana is shifted onto the viewer and it is impossible not to feel uncomfortably tense and anxious for her. Following this, Diana slips into a hallucination, as she frantically fiddles with the pearls around her neck – the pearls which Charles has also given to his mistress – she sees the ghost of Anne Boleyn sitting across from her. The film parallels the lives of Princess Diana and Anne Boleyn, both monarchs tormented by their position in failing marriages, as well as the fear Diana has for the fate of her future reaching a similar melodramatic end to that of Anne Boleyn.

“There’s no hope for me, not with them” says Diana solemnly as she looks at herself in the mirror. For Diana, it was not a matter of, eventually growing accustomed to the royal lifestyle, she is too detached and too hyper-aware of how much she has to transform herself into the impossible image of the perfect princess to ever become one of them. She does not want to try and fit in, instead she yearns for a return to the past where things were different. When the present and future seem so full of sorrow, it is difficult to not be consumed by the blissful nostalgias of the past. In a scene where Diana escapes to her childhood home that has been boarded up and abandoned, a montage ensues of her dancing – this is one of the few times in the film where freedom and individuality are exuded rather than claustrophobia and conformity.

Kristen Stewart does a great job at presenting a sensitive, on edge Diana. She is especially good at playing her expressions and body language. Pablo Larrain has created a beautiful yet miserable tale of a weekend in the life of a tortured and repressed princess.

Spencer is available to watch in cinemas from November 5^th. Book tickets to watch it at the ICA here: https://www.ica.art/films/spencer

Reviewed by Lian Lakhope. Lian is a MA Global Media and Communications student at SOAS and a volunteer writer for Abundant Art. Lian has written for a number of different publications, mostly about music, culture and film and she is enthusiastic about expressing her passion for creating art and media.

Tate Britain is currently hosting the exhibition “Hogarth and Europe”, which skillfully displays the works of the famous British painter, whilst offering an insight into the vibrant historical context of Europe in the XVIII century. The paintings act as a window into society at that time, in which flaws are drastically exaggerated through caricature and mockery. The artist takes the role of a witty and cynical observer. Often represented in the background of his paintings, he judges what he sees without ever being moralistic, offering a cheeky perspective on the ridicules made on society.

The exhibition immerses the audience in its historical context by showcasing the works of many other emblematic artists of the time, in addition to briefly focusing on four main cities that fostered culture and art at the time: Paris, Venice, Amsterdam, and of course London. Europe was experiencing a period of economic growth and deep social change, which contributed to the creation of new creative freedoms in art. Drunkenness, sex and all sorts of immoralities were depicted without filters and were used to mock the nobility, mirroring an age where the social hierarchies were crumbling. However, the main focus of mockery, especially in Hogarth’s painting, was the ever-growing bourgeoise, that he considered materialistic, greedy and hypocritical.

Contrary to what one might think, Hogarth’s depictions of London life weren’t considered controversial and were instead widely popular. The grotesque scenes he represented were warmly welcomed by audiences who considered them as a source of amusement. Hogarth was especially appreciated for his insightful and satirical worldview that avoided controversy by never calling for change or revolution. On the contrary, the artist was a strong supporter of the government and even became a painter for the King.

This form of art, stripped of everything that had made it sacred and untouchable up until that point, was given a brand new function: make the audiences laugh and also see the depravities of their society. This process of desacralisation of art, although making art more accessible and emancipated from the strict rules of Baroque and Classicism of the previous century, loses a little of its symbolical aspect. The paintings are sometimes closer to caricatures that you would find in a journal rather than what you would initially expect from art. The expansion of Romanticism in the following century comes almost as an answer to this satirical social art, as it represented a more internal and psychological search in an otherwise materialistic world.

On a compositional level, the paintings are extremely rich in information, characters and actions. Every painting will take you through moments of thorough observation, as each character has its own narrative dominated by chaos and dynamism. This sort of storytelling holds a sort of theatrical aspect typical to Hogarth, which is strongly reinforced by its caricatural and comedic overtone that could belong to the Commedia dell’Arte.

The exhibition repeatedly warns its audience of the political incorrectness of the paintings, almost as if anticipating some sort of scandal. There are indeed many depictions of assault, sexual misconduct and racist and xenophobic caricatures that the wall texts keep warning you about, incase Hogarth’s provocative humour offends even today’s audiences. Though this is something that I feel the artist would probably be extremely proud of.

More than an artist, Hogarth was an anthropologist, and today his exaggerated depictions of XVIII society are key to understanding that fervent time in history. Get your tickets at https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/exhibition/hogarth-and-europe.

Reviewed by Céline Galletti- Celine is a volunteer writer for Abundant Art. Originally from France and Italy, she follows her passion for writing and art by studying Comparative Literature at UCL, London. As an international student living in London, she is determined to fully experience and understand the city’s vibrant arts scene, and be a part of its creative storm.

Conversations about the realities of climate change can often be debilitating and unnerving. In ‘Can I Live?’ actor and activist Fehinti Balogun manages to make this conversation both emphatic, vibrant and energising, whilst still maintaining the potency and seriousness that issues surrounding the ticking time bomb of climate change ensue. Fehinti Balogun’s ‘Can I Live?’ is an informative piece about climate change from an intersectional point of view as well as an exploration of climate activism and the disproportionate number of black voices within the movement. It is told through afrobeat and hip-hop songs bustling with passion, emotive rhythmic spoken words and immersive performances.

‘Can I Live?’ is a very personal yet political story, the personal side combined with the political allows us to feel Balogun’s burning passion and power for the causes he is fighting for. Beginning in the comfort of his mother’s home Balogun reflects on his activism in relation to his family life; the path of an actor and environmental activist is not one which was carved for him growing up in a Nigerian household where his father pushed the motto “stay out of trouble, do your work and keep your head down” – he notes that staying out of trouble and keeping your head down are qualities that certainly do not mix well with activism. Additionally, he stresses the helplessness he felt whilst trapped inside the confinements of his mother’s home during the pandemic, unable to partake in the direct action that is fundamental to activism.

Balogun’s mother’s home is revealed to be the set of the Barbican theatre. We are plunged into a theatrical, surrealist performance where the extremities of global warming, climate genocide, the links between class and climate as well as the synonymy of climate change and colonialism are all exposed to us through Balogun’s zealous presentation. It is easy to feel detached from climate issues but Balogun does an extremely good job at both putting perspective (thus humanising them) and making this discourse around these issues compelling whilst stressing their gravity -“The more the emissions, the hotter it gets.” Balogun vigorously sings about the impact of greenhouse gasses on global warming, one of the facts that made it easier to internally imagine the impacts of global warming was the comparison between a 1.5 degree temperature rise of the planet is synonymous with the body reaching insanely feverish temperatures. Furthermore, Balogun centres much of his focus on Africa, particularly West Africa as a Nigerian man, this is where a large portion of his emotional attachment resides.

The visualisation of 1.5 degrees temperature increase causing a 6-month extension in drought season for West Africa and 3 degrees causing the drought season to last 2 years puts into viewpoint how alarming these issues really are – the extension of these seasons means crops cannot be grown for longer periods of time, starvation ensues and people die. This is just a glimpse of the sinister reality of climate genocide Balogun brings to light – it will give you chills.

“Why does nobody look like me?” is one of the core questions asked by Balogun in the play. The population of climate change activism circles is disproportionally white and Balogun has found himself uncomfortably aware of this throughout partaking in climate activism. This is something I’ve asked myself too – whilst we hear the necessary and powerful voices of those like Greta Thunberg, it is also important for voices like those of Vanessa Nakate and other black or POC voices to be at the forefront of the climate discourse. The perspective of a young black man is an important voice needed within the climate movement. An important conclusion he draws about the lack of POC within the climate movement is about necessity – survival is at the core of the lives of many POC, trying to put food on the table, looking after family at home and abroad, and in the words of Balogun’s mother in the play ‘waiting for home office papers.’ When these things are at the centre of your world it understandably becomes difficult to insert yourself into something like the climate movement.

Balogun’s rallying cries about the state of our planet come at an important time in climate change conversation as nations gather to discuss climate at COP26. Within the desperation and pleading sense of urgency of his words, he does stress that there is hope. Only 3.5% of the population is all that is needed for a successful political movement – climate change is not individual responsibility like we are often told, it is collective responsibility. Balogun stresses that we need to be angry and frustrated, we need to have our collective voice heard to enact change.

‘Can I Live?’ was directed by Daniel Bailey and in collaboration with the theatre company Complicite. It was filmed on the Barbican’s stage during the lockdown and is currently completing an online tour. Watch it here: https://www.barbican.org.uk/whats-on/2021/event/complicite-fehinti-balogun-can-i-live

Reviewed by Lian Lakhope. Lian is a MA Global Media and Communications student at SOAS and a volunteer writer for Abundant Art. Lian has written for a number of different publications, mostly about music, culture and film and she is enthusiastic about expressing her passion for creating art and media.

Sebastião Salgado, the award-winning Brazilian photographer, launches his captivating photography exhibition of the natural, breath-taking beauty and diversity which lies within the Amazon rainforest. Captured across seven years, the exhibition explores the fascinating intricacies of nature, which are slowly beginning to disappear as we witness the destruction of the rainforest.

The exhibit presents 200 black-and-white photographs displaying the dramatic landscapes of the Amazon’s winding rivers, powerful waterfalls, and immense jungle, which certainly do not fail to amaze the eye. We are shown stunning portraits of the indigenous natives who have inhabited the rainforest for centuries, as we explore their homes.

At a crucial stage in the fight against climate change, Salgado’s exhibition puts into perspective the importance of protecting the Amazon rainforest for the future of our planet. Every year, tens of thousands of farms expand their area, eating away at the immense forest, which is having severe impacts on global climate change. If we continue like this, we will reach a ‘tipping point’, where the damage to the Earth will become irreversible. Salgado shows us many of the unique natural features of the Amazon, such as ‘Sleeping Beauty Mountains’ and ‘Flying Rivers’, which we must protect before it is too late.

Salgado also draws our attention to the fact that climate change is damaging and destroying the home of an estimated 370,000 natives, divided into 188 groups, and speaking around 150 languages. Through a series of images and videos, we are shown the incredible diversity within the Amazon. Each indigenous tribe has its own unique history, culture and traditions which they have upheld due to the impenetrability of the rainforest. It is fascinating to see the ways in which they distinguish themselves, from face and body painting, piercings, and the plants which they wear. Many of the tribes live in almost complete isolation, utilising the resources in the rainforest in magnificent ways. During one film, a woman from the Xingu tribe expressed how climate change is noticeably threatening their way of life as resources are being destroyed.

Amazônia is a powerful, moving exhibition that beautifully captures the extraordinary nature of the rainforest and its inhabitants. With climate change becoming an extremely important contemporary issue, the exhibition reminds us why it is so urgent for us to act now. I would highly recommend this exhibition to everyone, as it explores the importance of the Amazon, for all of our futures, as well as the unequaled power and beauty of the rainforest.

To book your tickets, click here: https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/see-and-do/amazonia

Chaman Yanomami en rituel avant la montee vers le Pico da Neblina, Etat d’Amazonas, Bresil, 2014 © Sebastiao Salgado / nppictures

Reviewed by Ridha Sheikh – Ridha is a volunteer writer for Abundant Art. She is a recent History and Politics graduate from Queen Mary – University of London. Ridha is excited to explore and share her strong passion for London’s art scene.

On April 15^th 1919, a historic garden in India, Jallianwala Bagh, was subjected to a horrific, barbaric massacre wounding and killing hundreds of people who peacefully gathered to protest against the arrest of pro-Indian independence leaders Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlew and Dr. Satya Pal. Sadar Udham Singh, who survived the massacre, has carried the weight of the devastation, sorrow and anguish of this catastrophe throughout the years and embarks on a personal quest of revenge and retribution for the atrocities imposed upon the Indian people. Director Shoojit Sircar’s ‘Sardar Udham’ is a gripping take on the life of freedom fighter and revolutionary, Sadar Udham Singh. The biographical film spans across a timeline of Singh’s life presented in a style that jumps across periods of his life in a non-chronological style. The film shows Singh growing up in an orphanage and working in a textile mill as a young 20-year-old to his days as part of the Indian independence movement, on the run from authorities. We are then exposed to Singh’s assassination of Michael O’Dwyer – who was behind the massacre that haunted Singh’s being, right from the day the traumatic massacre occurred.

The cinematography and performances of the film greatly complement one another. A particularly visually stunning, yet also eerie scene, sees Singh trudging through a snowy winter landscape, completely isolated and alone. This birds-eye view shot emphasises the greatness of his solitude in this vast space. This shot feels like a representation of Singh’s journey for justice for those killed on April 15^th, as despite very little companionship and help, Singh is mostly a lone fighter. Throughout the film, Vicky Kaushal displays a fantastic performance of Singh as an individual consumed and engulfed by the pain caused by the massacre of his loved ones, as well as the collective agony felt of the struggles imposed upon the Indian people. He is shrouded in mystery, but his attachment to his cause is greatly felt as his motives are revealed. Sircar’s presentation of Singh is contrary to what many may assume of a typical freedom fighter, as he doesn’t have a large following and isn’t seen to possess a charismatic or charming personality.  Perhaps this is why his story isn’t famously taught or spoken about. However, Singh does not lack the relentlessness or inexorability of what one would consider a freedom fighter, as he is ready for any consequences his actions will bestow.

Right from the beginning to the end, as well as being engrossing, the film was also an emotionally depleting watch for me. One of the most graphic and heart-wrenching scenes occurs where we see the portrayal of the massacre, seeing the images of an abundance of helpless blood-stained bodies scattered amongst the place, putting into perspective the height of the incident, and it left my heart heavy hours after finishing the film. The poignant atmosphere of the film is needed to accurately present the impacts of the horrors of colonialism and the relationship between England and India. It is essential viewing, presenting a face of the Indian independence movement that derives from the images of pacifism that I and many others have been taught to associate with the fight for Indian independence. It is quite a shame that the Indian jury rejected the Oscar nomination of Sardar Udham, as more traction for the film would have been a perfect way to educate thousands on a forgotten part of history.

Sicar’s portrayal of the life of Sardar Udham Singh is a raw, real and haunting story of an unsung martyr that needs to be heard.

Sardar Udham is available to watch now on Amazon Prime here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B09J21ZP88/ref=atv_dp_share_cu_r

Reviewed by Lian Lakhope. Lian is a MA Global Media and Communications student at SOAS and a volunteer writer for Abundant Art. Lian has written for a number of different publications, mostly about music, culture and film and she is enthusiastic about expressing her passion for creating art and media.

Foot notes-additional context:

The movie traces the journey of Indian freedom fighter Udham Singh, who travels to London and assassinates Sir Michael O’Dwyer, the former lieutenant governor of the Punjab in India, on 13 March 1940 – he was the man responsible for the massacre of over a thousand innocent Indians including women and children in the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre of 1919* (see further details below). 

Udham Singh’s act of revenge was a significant moment leading to India’s independence from British Imperialism in 1947. 

Udham Singh was subsequently remanded in custody at Brixton Prison, tried and convicted of murder and hanged in July 1940.

Britain never formally apologised for the massacre but expressed “regret” in 2019. Here are some instances where former Prime Ministers David Cameron and Theresa May have spoken about the incident. 

*Background information on the Massacre at Jallianwala Bagh

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre, also known as the Amritsar massacre, took place on 13 April 1919. A large but peaceful crowd had gathered at the Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, Punjab to protest against the arrest of pro-Indian independence leaders Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlew and Dr. Satya Pal. In response to the public gathering, the British Brigadier-General R. E. H. Dyer surrounded the Bagh with his soldiers. The Jallianwala Bagh could only be exited on one side, as its other three sides were enclosed by buildings. After blocking the exit with his troops, he ordered them to shoot at the crowd, continuing to fire even as protestors tried to flee. The troops kept on firing until their ammunition was exhausted. Estimates of those killed vary between 391 and 1000+ people and over 1,200 other people were injured of whom 192 were seriously injured.

Responses polarized both the British and Indian peoples. Eminent author Rudyard Kipling declared at the time that Dyer “did his duty as he saw it”. 

This incident shocked Rabindranath Tagore (the first Indian and Asian Nobel laureate) to such an extent that he renounced his knighthood and stated that “such mass murderers aren’t worthy of giving any title to anyone”

The level of casual brutality, and lack of any accountability, stunned the entire nation, resulting in a wrenching loss of faith of the general Indian public in the intentions of the UK.

Britain never formally apologised for the massacre but expressed “regret” in 2019.

Noël Coward’s film script Brief Encounter (1945), adapted for the stage by Emma Rice and directed by Robert Kirby for the Watermill Theatre in Newbury, touched me in so many different ways that I left the theatre crying and longing for a big hug.

Don’t get me wrong, though… Brief Encounter is not just sad, it’s also joyous, funny and heart-warmingly romantic. It’s an epic love story about how sometimes the love that people feel for one another is just not enough to make it work. Especially, in times when divorce was not socially accepted and falling in love with someone new had so many risks.

For this reason, Laura (Laura Lake Adebisi) and Alec (Callum McIntyre), who are both married to other people, try to avoid and resist each other at first when they meet at a train station and fall in love immediately. The emphasis here, however, is on ‘try’ since their love is too strong to keep them apart and they finally accept what could not be avoided. They spend time together, going to the cinema, having dinner and floating around a pond which deepens their love. But while the couple is happy and on cloud nine, they are also torn inside by their guilt of betrayal and the fact that they can never fully be together. So, to avoid a difficult and turbulent future, Laura and Alec do not pursue their relationship further. But when they kiss goodbye, they pledge never to love again. 

​This ending made me want to scream. I wanted to say that they should just run away with each other, that if they really love each other, they can make it work… but both Laura and Alec are more rational than me and so as they part and the light goes off, I struggle holding back my tears.

Brief Encounter is a heart-touching play with a creative and dynamic set design. The actors seamlessly switch scenes and transform the stage into a completely new place while singing and dancing as part of the choreography. The small cast of seven people consists of incredible actors and musicians with some of them playing multiple roles, singing, dancing or playing instruments within their act. 

The so-called Foley Sound technique, named after Jack Foley, is used to recreate and record the sound of all the actions of the play. There are innumerable real sounds that make you feel present with the characters in the scenes in real-time. For example, when the café owner Myrtle Bagot pours tea for Laura and Alec, the sound is created by using an actual kettle to lend a realistic soundscape to the play. 

A lot of love and creativity was put into the production of Brief Encounter. It is definitely a play worth watching – even though I was heartbroken and ended up sobbing during the 60 miles back from Newbury to London.

Brief Encounter is showing until 13th November at the Watermill Theatre in Newbury. Tickets are available here: https://www.watermill.org.uk/brief_encounter.

Callum McIntyre and Laura Lake Adebisi in Brief Encounter. Photograph: Pamela Raith

Reviewed by Giulia Ciccolella – Giulia is interning with Abundant Art during October and supports the organisation writing reviews and helping with marketing and PR. Giulia is German-Italian and graduated with a BA in Media & Communications with first-class honours from Goldsmiths, University of London. She has been living in the UK for over three years and is excited to explore London’s art scene further while learning more about the work of Abundant Art.