admin
Fichier
Edited Text
78
10.
11
12.
13.
. Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 20 (1975), p. 2, from a letter to the
editor by the Women’s Week Planning Committee.
. Glenda Madrid (of the Aerospace Office of Equal
Opportunity and Women’s Planning Committee) in
conversation with the author.
. Though some of the non-feminist viewers more familiar
with contemporary art forms did not share the pro-
testers’ offense, it is very unlikely that a “neutral” ex-
hibit of contemporary art would have caused similar
negative reactions. In addition, none of the protesters
mentioned any criticism of art forms; all their com-
ments tended to focus on content, and most of them
made reference to a general distaste for feminism.
. All the quotations from artists are from recent inter-
views conducted for this article.
. The precedent for this feminist use of the sticker is
Susana Torre’s exhibition catalogue for “Twenty-Six
Contemporary Women Artists” (Aldrich Museum,
Ridgefield, Conn., April, 1971), in which tearing the
seal implied not only physical violation in order to
“enter” the long-hidden works of women artists, but
also the destruction of a square cold black seal on a
white cover, which represented the prevalent Minimal
Art, to reach the warm inside covers, colored red.
. Kollwitz’s etching Raped is unique in its complete
focus on the experience of the raped woman: she is
lying on the ground, dead or unconscious. Neither the
rapist nor his act are in the picture.
. The men seemed to react neutrally to the show, prob-
ably because the art did not expose their experience,
and possibly, as was suggested to me by Glenda
Madrid, because they are more prone to intellectualize
and thus more removed from the level of emotional
response the show raised for women.
When | curated the Aerospace exhibition | did censor
myself at one point: | did not include Chicago’s Red
Flag lithograph even though, dealing with menstrua-
tion, it would have fit well into an exhibit on female
experience in art. Its literal character prevented me
from exhibiting it in that context, as | anticipated that
it would be shocking to the audience.
Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 17 (1975), p. 2.
Ibid.
Joanne Parent (one of the authors of “The Fourth World
Manifesto”) told me the following incident. While she
was working in a factory, experiencing first-hand the
hardships involved, she understood how well Rivera’s
14.
15.
. Art Week, Vol. 6, No. 29 (Sept. 6, 1975).
17.
18.
mural portrayed those; but when she commented on
that to her fellow workers they negated or at least min-
imized their own experience of oppression compared
to its heightened portrayal in the mural. The similarity
to women'’s situation is that workers who (consciously
or unconsciously) feel powerless in their jobs deny the
pain of their experiences if its expression would jeo-
pardize the only wage-earning option available to
them. It is no accident that women all over the country
first explored their oppression in the private, safe, and
supportive context of consciousness-raising groups,
removed from the institutions in which they experi-
enced that oppression in their daily lives.
Itis for this reason that feminism and feminist art have
validity for all women. For the same reason, the Marxist
model of workers’ oppression does not ultimately ad-
dress itself to women’s oppression, beyond that of
working-class women. For an extensive analysis of
these issues see “The Fourth World Manifesto,” re-
printed in: Radical Feminism, Anne Koedt, Ellen
Levine, Anita Rapone, eds. (New York, 1973), pp.
322-357.
Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 20 (1975), p. 2.
Glenda Madrid, in a recent conversation with the au-
thor. Madrid was also a major source of information for
the responses to the exhibition and the statistics and
position of women employees at Aerospace.
The Feminist Studio Workshop is the first alternative
institution for women in the arts and humanities; it is
housed in the unique context of the Woman’s Building
in Los Angeles. Since it was founded in 1973, over 100
women have received their education at the Feminist
Studio Workshop, and several thousand students have
participated in the Extension Program at the Woman’s
Building.
Ruth Iskin is a feminist art historian living in Los Angeles,
formerly co-director of Womanspace and the editor of
Womanspace Journal. Now she is director of the Woman'’s
Building Galleries, on the faculty of the Feminist Studio
Workshop, and an editor of Chrysalis: A New Magazine of
Women'’s Culture.
10.
11
12.
13.
. Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 20 (1975), p. 2, from a letter to the
editor by the Women’s Week Planning Committee.
. Glenda Madrid (of the Aerospace Office of Equal
Opportunity and Women’s Planning Committee) in
conversation with the author.
. Though some of the non-feminist viewers more familiar
with contemporary art forms did not share the pro-
testers’ offense, it is very unlikely that a “neutral” ex-
hibit of contemporary art would have caused similar
negative reactions. In addition, none of the protesters
mentioned any criticism of art forms; all their com-
ments tended to focus on content, and most of them
made reference to a general distaste for feminism.
. All the quotations from artists are from recent inter-
views conducted for this article.
. The precedent for this feminist use of the sticker is
Susana Torre’s exhibition catalogue for “Twenty-Six
Contemporary Women Artists” (Aldrich Museum,
Ridgefield, Conn., April, 1971), in which tearing the
seal implied not only physical violation in order to
“enter” the long-hidden works of women artists, but
also the destruction of a square cold black seal on a
white cover, which represented the prevalent Minimal
Art, to reach the warm inside covers, colored red.
. Kollwitz’s etching Raped is unique in its complete
focus on the experience of the raped woman: she is
lying on the ground, dead or unconscious. Neither the
rapist nor his act are in the picture.
. The men seemed to react neutrally to the show, prob-
ably because the art did not expose their experience,
and possibly, as was suggested to me by Glenda
Madrid, because they are more prone to intellectualize
and thus more removed from the level of emotional
response the show raised for women.
When | curated the Aerospace exhibition | did censor
myself at one point: | did not include Chicago’s Red
Flag lithograph even though, dealing with menstrua-
tion, it would have fit well into an exhibit on female
experience in art. Its literal character prevented me
from exhibiting it in that context, as | anticipated that
it would be shocking to the audience.
Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 17 (1975), p. 2.
Ibid.
Joanne Parent (one of the authors of “The Fourth World
Manifesto”) told me the following incident. While she
was working in a factory, experiencing first-hand the
hardships involved, she understood how well Rivera’s
14.
15.
. Art Week, Vol. 6, No. 29 (Sept. 6, 1975).
17.
18.
mural portrayed those; but when she commented on
that to her fellow workers they negated or at least min-
imized their own experience of oppression compared
to its heightened portrayal in the mural. The similarity
to women'’s situation is that workers who (consciously
or unconsciously) feel powerless in their jobs deny the
pain of their experiences if its expression would jeo-
pardize the only wage-earning option available to
them. It is no accident that women all over the country
first explored their oppression in the private, safe, and
supportive context of consciousness-raising groups,
removed from the institutions in which they experi-
enced that oppression in their daily lives.
Itis for this reason that feminism and feminist art have
validity for all women. For the same reason, the Marxist
model of workers’ oppression does not ultimately ad-
dress itself to women’s oppression, beyond that of
working-class women. For an extensive analysis of
these issues see “The Fourth World Manifesto,” re-
printed in: Radical Feminism, Anne Koedt, Ellen
Levine, Anita Rapone, eds. (New York, 1973), pp.
322-357.
Orbiter, Vol. 15, No. 20 (1975), p. 2.
Glenda Madrid, in a recent conversation with the au-
thor. Madrid was also a major source of information for
the responses to the exhibition and the statistics and
position of women employees at Aerospace.
The Feminist Studio Workshop is the first alternative
institution for women in the arts and humanities; it is
housed in the unique context of the Woman’s Building
in Los Angeles. Since it was founded in 1973, over 100
women have received their education at the Feminist
Studio Workshop, and several thousand students have
participated in the Extension Program at the Woman’s
Building.
Ruth Iskin is a feminist art historian living in Los Angeles,
formerly co-director of Womanspace and the editor of
Womanspace Journal. Now she is director of the Woman'’s
Building Galleries, on the faculty of the Feminist Studio
Workshop, and an editor of Chrysalis: A New Magazine of
Women'’s Culture.
Media of