Ally B, Post 6

Ally Best
Post 6

In her essay, “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists,” Linda Nochlin wonders whether Picasso would have achieved the same attention and fame if he had been a woman (Nochlin). It’s an interesting thought. Was his artistic talent the only factor that played a role in his success? Or might his gender have had an influence as well? Looking throughout history, art has tended to be male-dominated, not only in the artists themselves, but also in the subject matter of the artwork. Because of this trend, the viewers have become conditioned to viewing images in a certain way. Mary Devereaux refers to this set of “spectacles” through which society views art as a “male gaze” and claims that “the postulate of an unbiased eye demands the impossible” (121-122). The male gaze is not necessarily limited to anatomically male viewers, but instead refers to a “male” way of seeing things that places women as objects to be viewed. Hannah Wilke once remarked that, “people would rather look at women than they would look at art” (Wilke documentary). Because of this “male gaze,” women artists have often lacked the success of their male counterparts. In her essay titled “Feminist Art Education: An Analysis of the Women’s Art Movement As an Educational Force,” Renee Sandell explains that one of the three “main influential factors” in the creation of art is the “prevailing historical and critical attitudes of the time” (19). Over the years, women have, understandably, had a difficult time creating work that truly expresses how they feel while still maintaining the male gaze that is almost demanded of artwork. Nochlin mentioned in her essay how the “traditional idea of fine art” tended to “overlook the creative products customarily undertaken by women” (Brand). This phenomenon results from the reluctance of society to accept “new,” or simply more feminine styles of art. At several points in her essay, Devereaux remarks about the content and style of different works of art in relation to their “gender” ; and indeed, through style and content, gender has had a significant impact on the success (and failure) of many pieces of artwork.

Emma Amos was one artist who used gender to her advantage to raise interest in her artwork. “Tightrope,” in her own words, “looks autobiographically at race, sex and identity.” The style of the painting is comprised of clear lines and bold colors. These techniques portray an almost stressful situation to the viewer. The content certainly goes along with that theme. The piece depicts a woman balancing on a tightrope as she carries an umbrella in one hand and laundry on the other. However, this image is clearly referring to more than simply a woman on a tightrope. The woman symbolizes women everywhere who are attempting to juggle the roles thrown upon them. She represents a mother, a wife, and an individual trying to keep up with the world. Her clothing is symbolic as well. While her underneath layer consists of an American flag leotard, she covers this leotard with a black negligee. This wardrobe choice implies that she is “both warrior and seductress” and that “the attributes of true womanhood are veiled by popular conceptions of womanhood” (www.kenyon.edu). This painting shows a woman trying her best to live up to everything society expects her to be. Yet, by showing her own personal struggle, it also shows her as an individual. The viewer can almost sympathize with the woman, as it is easy to understand the stress she must be under while trying to remain true to herself. Evidence of the popularity of this piece, as well as others by Amos, is shown by the numerous solo exhibitions she has attended. Her works have been shown at museums throughout the USA. She has also received fellowships from the Rockefeller Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Miriam Schapiro also achieved success not by attempting to imitate the popular male artists of the time, but by creating uniquely feminine works. This theme is particularly evident in “The Poet #2.” Rather than rely on the strong, loud arguments for equality as some feminists did, Schapiro chose to celebrate the role of women as it was. The style of her artwork was very feminine, indeed. Her media consisted of a variety of materials from women’s everyday lives. As for her technique, she used stereotypically “female” skills such as embroidery and quilting (Grove Art). She called this style “femmage” (Grove Art). The art depicts a cloth dress. Therefore, the content is closely related to the style as it, too, focuses on traditionally female roles. She created the collage from brightly colored fabric in order to capture the beauty of women’s everyday lives. She once commented that, "I felt that by making a large canvas magnificent in color, design, and proportion, filling it with fabrics and quilt blocks, I could raise a housewife's lowered consciousness” (www.albany.edu).

While many pieces of art were praised for their feminine influence, this was certainly not the case with all pieces of art. One piece in particular that received criticism was Womanhouse. Miriam Schapiro and Judy Chicago teamed up with several other female artists to turn an old Hollywood mansion into a life-size piece of art. The style of the work itself made the content much more controversial.By walking through an actual house and seeing the art (which were in the form of exhibits or rooms), the viewer related much more strongly to the art than if it had simply been a painting on a canvas. The content, however, was clearly the most controversial aspect of the art. One of the art scenes depicts a powder room. Inside, there was a woman who sat applying and removing makeup all day long (www.bris.ac.uk) . This room was meant to symbolize society's expectations of women to be flawless. They were expected to hide their imperfections. As this image portrays, such a large emphasis was placed on maintaining feminine beauty that women sometimes became almost like puppets, constantly striving to improve themselves. Another room was called "Menstruation Bathroom." As the title suggests, this piece of art depicts a part of women's life that few like to think about. However, the goal of the artists was, in fact, just that. They aimed to make people contemplate the actual realities of being a woman, including the nastier aspects. This room was the most controversial because "such domestic, inherently feminine issues were not seen as sufficiently erudite to be the subjects of true art" (www.bris.ac.uk). Viewers (men in particular) were not comfortable with seeing this more private side of women's lives. This sort of topic was unheard of during the sixties and seventies where, if a woman wanted to succeed in art, she was forced to "produce masculine art, especially... when minimalist styles prevailed" (www.bris.ac.uk).