“Sometimes a rose is a rose is a Rrose.”
Although I recently bought my first car, I wasn’t about to drive seven hours by myself from North Bay to Montreal. To get to a book launch and panel discussion at La Centrale Galerie Powerhouse last Friday night, I had to choose between taking a bus at 2 am or taking two six-hour train rides that connected at Toronto’s Union station. That’s when it hit me that I had really moved to northern Ontario. I opted for the train since it meant breaking up the trip with a night of sleep. It also meant that I got to bid farewell to the Northlander in its penultimate week of operation.
I’ve been spoiled traveling with my husband, not just because he loves driving, but because he is bilingual. As I looked unsuccessfully for a map in a Gare Centrale store, I fretted about what I would say if the clerk didn’t speak English. Simple answer: improvise. (“Je desire de chercher pour les directions dans la grande papier [I want to look for directions on large paper]”). The French translation for ‘map’ came to mind an inconvenient five hours later, which was doubly frustrating since I’d had a teleconference with map librarians earlier in the week in which French terminology was discussed.
I didn’t fare much better at La Centrale, where I could only catch a string of four French words at a time, and only two of the six panelists spoke in English. So much for having called ahead to ask if all presentations would be in English. Here’s the punchline of my visit: the following evening, I was having dinner at the home of a former La Centrale board member when she pointed out that the book is being launched at Art Metropole. In, ahem, Toronto. Alas, I’m glad I attended the standing-room-only event to show my support. And perhaps this post will bring people to the Art Metropole launch, which happens tonight. Therein lies the power of self-publishing in the Internet age. As Chris Kraus argues in said book, Féminismes Électriques (2012), blogs are the new zines.
At the launch, editor Leila Pourtavaf spoke about the desire to give feminism “renewed life” through the book’s essays, interviews, and artist project (the latter by G. B. Jones). In short, this means enhanced inclusivity, encompassing trans and queer artists as well as artists with diverse ethnic backgrounds. Trish Salah provides a compelling account of the risks inherent in pluralistic feminism, such as treating male artists as special or as non-men of sorts. Interestingly, La Centrale, Canada’s first gallery for women, recently programmed its first show for a man, the late Will Munro. This shift is the outcome of the gallery spending six years reworking its mandate through consultation with members and colleagues. The publication is equally thoughtful.
Why would six years of contemplation be necessary? Consider that, according to Bernadette Houde, ‘lesbian’ remains a radical term. Helena Reckitt suggests that gender is equally (and relatedly) radical, provoking genderqueer art that experiments with gender rather than accepting existing anatomically-derived definitions. If feminism in its initial iteration focused on the needs of traditional women, how can its contemporary counterpart advocate for those labeled as Other?
Féminismes Électriques is a fitting title, because its content reminds us how electrifying feminism is: it is feisty, inspiring, sometimes serious and other times fun. Often, feminist art evokes the familiar, such as Women with Kitchen Appliances, a collective that blends images with audio work created using kitchen appliances. ‘Familiar’ doesn’t mean banal, though, as proven by a video by Palestinian artist Jumana Manna featuring her adult self breastfeeding from her mother. Sometimes feminist art takes the familiar and reworks it to emphasize clichés, like Lesbians on Ecstasy, which does ‘performative sampling’ of lesbian folk music from the Second Wave, to resist the association between women and nature and the disregard for female musicians’ technical skill. Arguably opposite to playing with the familiar is indulging the imagination as Stéphanie Chabot and Dominique Pétrin do, with role-playing involving vampires and cannibals. In an interview with Manon Tounigny, Pétrin emphasized how universal art is but also how open to interpretation it is: in performances involving monsters, she found that children have a literal interpretation, teens are impressed, intellectuals interpret it as subversive, gays think it’s queer, and older people find it exciting. Sometimes a rose is a rose is a Rrose.*
The book concludes with a chapter by Aneessa Hashmi, who writes, “The circulation of knowledge cancels out hierarchy” (p. 191): a fantastic mantra for feminists and librarians alike.
On the occasion of my 100th post, I would like to thank everyone who has read, commented on, or encouraged my writing.
*Apologies for the inside art joke, but I couldn’t resist.
Image: reproduced in 2019 via fair use/dealing. Source: http://www.editions-rm.ca/livres/feminismes-electriques/
Friday, September 28, 2012
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Rethinking Professionalism
“Charlotte Schreiber…couldn’t attend [Royal Canadian Academy
of Arts] meetings because it would have meant being alone with 39 men.”
Image: reproduced in 2019 via fair use/dealing. Source: https://www.mqup.ca/rethinking-professionalism-products-9780773539662.php?page_id=73!prettyPhoto/1/
Women. Art. Professionalism. Isolated concepts or a natural
combination? I’ve been pondering this question for the past three weeks, ever
since I started embroidering in the campus parking lot half an hour before
starting work to take advantage of the natural light that has waned by the time
I extract myself at the end of the day.
The convergence of women, art, and professionalism is also
the subject of the book, Rethinking Professionalism: Women and Art in
Canada, 1850-1970 (McGill-Queen’s
University Press, 2012). Full disclosure: I am a
former Queen’s employee and my former place of work, the Agnes Etherington
Art Centre, is mentioned on the opening page of the preface for its
contribution to feminist art history.
An outgrowth of the inaugural Canadian Women Artists History
Initiative conference, this multi-authored, hefty tome is a very useful
addition to academic library collections supporting gender studies or Canadian
art history.
While reading Kristina Huneault’s introductory chapter about
the ill-fitting concept of professionalism for women artists, my mind kept
flitting back to Eunice Lipton’s Alias Olympia: A Woman’s Search for Manet’s
Notorious Model and Her Own Desire (1992, Charles
Scribner’s Sons). Spurred
on by Linda Nochlin, who famously asked why there have been no great women
artists, Lipton traveled to Paris to restore dignity to Victorine Meurent,
Edouard Manet’s model. Although Meurent was an exhibiting artist and a member
of an esteemed professional art society who declared herself an artist twice in
the French equivalent of the census, her contemporaries and later art
historians dismissed her as an amateur and a prostitute. Huneault’s parallel examples from Canada are lower profile
but no less gripping. She identifies discrepancies between a census count of
female artists compared to the membership in the Ontario Society of artists.
And then there’s the case of Charlotte Schreiber, the only female artist
accepted into the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts in its first 50 years, who
couldn’t attend meetings because it would have meant being alone with 39 men.
If you read this book, the historical references may make
you angry, whether it’s the virile description of the Group of Seven or the
flipside, emphasis on the feminine stature and fashion of Canada’s first female architect.
(Curiously, the impulse to emphasize the gender of artists continues today, as
one of the female artists’ techniques in the book is described as loving). At the very
least, you’ll probably find yourself annoyed by comments like Group of Seven
member A.Y. Jackson calling the arts appreciation show hosted by his former lover
Anne Savage “quite a little job” (p. 121).Yet, there’s inspiration to be found
in women’s comments; consider Margaret Watkins’ retort about a critic who
passionately disliked her photo of dirty dishes: “Evidently the poor duffer
knows nothing of Modern art” (p. 170).
Lest you get the impression that art is unique in its gender
bias, Jennifer Salahub reminds us that it affects other disciplines too. As a
librarian, I found her comment disheartening: “…when I first began to research
Canadian needlework in the 1980s, the Library of Congress Catalogue directed me not to needlework, sewing, or even
embroidery but to the letter ‘w’—women’s work.” (p. 138). I tend to be angry
rather than annoyed when I read such things, but this book helped me slow down
and resist a knee-jerk response. Reading the rest of Salahub’s chapter about
intriguing artist, Hannah Maynard, I learned that the Victorian artist included
textiles in her photos to maintain a lady-like image while pursuing an
unconventional career. From a contemporary perspective (read: privileged life—the kind where I am allowed to drive and work and vote), it’s so
easy to overlook awesomely experimental work and harp on what’s traditional,
like the artist marketing herself as Mrs. Richard Maynard.
The most poignant content for me was Sherry Farrell
Racette’s roll call of names of Akwesane artists who practiced basketweaving.
Seeing a photo by Mary Kawennatakie Adams, the first artist on the list—of a
basket adorned with teeny decorative baskets the size of a thumbnail—had a
tip-of-the iceberg effect and served as a strong argument that female
Aboriginal artists have been grossly overlooked by the existing model of art
history. Add to that other groups like nuns that have historically been heavily
engaged in craft and the entire concept of professionalism starts to fall
apart.
Image: reproduced in 2019 via fair use/dealing. Source: https://www.mqup.ca/rethinking-professionalism-products-9780773539662.php?page_id=73!prettyPhoto/1/
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry
“...Ai is so shocking
because he ‘points out society’s dark side’. He does this pointing, very often, with his middle finger.”
Last night at
Doc North in North Bay, I watched Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry (2012), a documentary
about the provocateur. Since the Chinese artist was detained last spring and
interrogated daily with no communication about his well-being made to his family or
the international community for 81 days—presumably for his activism but
officially for tax fraud—screening the film had a pronounced resonance with
this week’s jailing of three women in Russia. Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Yekaterina Samutsevich, and Maria Alyokhina, who are suspected members of the anonymous feminist punk
band, Pussy Riot, which addresses issues ranging from the environment to
politics, were charged with hooliganism. To quote Ai(who is described even
by one of his friends as a hooligan) commenting on his own struggle: “If there is no
free speech every single life has been in vain.”
Ai’s mother
says she wishes her son were purely an artist, but notes that if no one speaks out,
what will happen? Her comment is undoubtedly informed by memories of her
family’s exile to a remote region of China because of her late husband’s
modernist poetry. Growing up in the family he did, Ai knew exactly what he
was getting into by taking on the mantra, “Art is about sharing information.”
One of his most engrossing projects has been the compilation of the names of
5,212 child victims in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, attributed in part to poorly constructed schools. This endeavour later took visual
form in a installation of backpacks that spelled out “She lived happily for
seven years” (trans.) and audio form in a recording of individual voices reading one name. As
one of his volunteers says, his work “…doesn’t just have to do with art. It has
to do with life.”
Blogger and media figure Hung Huang says Ai is so shocking because he “points out society’s dark side.” He does this pointing, very often, with his middle finger (see movie poster). The night that police broke down his door at 3 am and punched him in the head, causing a brain injury that required surgery, Ai shot back with a photo on Twitter, which has become his international mouthpiece after authorities shut down his blog. The price he has paid has been high (he was fined the equivalent of $2.4 million US for tax evasion), but the reward is also high: he was named the most powerful artist by Art Review Magazine last year. Watching him walk through his installation at the Tate Modern with his young son on 100 million ceramic seeds hand-painted by assistants who revere him, one senses his vision and his resolve. “Everybody just live your life,” he told reporters upon his release from those mysterious 81 days. And this is his.
The
film directed by American Alison Klayman opens with shots of the cats milling
about Ai’s Beijing studio. Taking matters into its own paws, one of those
cats figured out how to leap into the air and press on the door handle to exit.
Ai is like this exceptional cat. That he regards himself as more of a chess
player than an artist reveals his exceptionalism.
Blogger and media figure Hung Huang says Ai is so shocking because he “points out society’s dark side.” He does this pointing, very often, with his middle finger (see movie poster). The night that police broke down his door at 3 am and punched him in the head, causing a brain injury that required surgery, Ai shot back with a photo on Twitter, which has become his international mouthpiece after authorities shut down his blog. The price he has paid has been high (he was fined the equivalent of $2.4 million US for tax evasion), but the reward is also high: he was named the most powerful artist by Art Review Magazine last year. Watching him walk through his installation at the Tate Modern with his young son on 100 million ceramic seeds hand-painted by assistants who revere him, one senses his vision and his resolve. “Everybody just live your life,” he told reporters upon his release from those mysterious 81 days. And this is his.
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Denise Green: An Artist’s Odyssey
“…far from a tell-all memoir.”
The other night, I was in the biography section of The Strand in New York when I overheard a customer ask an employee how she had located a particular book. The employee explained that the bookstore’s system allows for multiple fields to be searched simultaneously and she had used publisher and author. The customer thanked her and said, “You’re so sweet.” If only all reference interviews were this pleasant! Interestingly, the new Denise Green biography I picked up for half price eludes bibliographic organization. In the introduction to Denise Green: An Artist’s Odyssey (2012, University of Minnesota Press), Ingrid Periz asks, “Where would it fit on a library shelf?” (p. 11). She elaborates on how it blurs genres: it’s part autobiography (Green has written or co-written only a third of the content) and part multi-authored biography, mixed with advice and art criticism, in a tone that vacillates between scholarly and chatty.
Contributor Peter Timmins writes, “…words remain the subservient partner to images” (p. 169) in Green’s practice but they are what interest me most, as much as her simplified renditions of everyday objects and fluid use of line are engaging. She’s a good writer—a case in point is the description, “the uncontrollable spread of colour which was India itself.” It’s no wonder the New York-based artist became editor of the feminist journal, Heresies and the equally radical Semiotext(e). What fascinates me is that she began writing about art with the explicit goal of becoming respected as an intellectual, to fight the gender bias facing artists. Her secondary purpose was to weigh in on how paintings were critiqued during the postmodern era governed by Clement Greenberg’s writing; she fought for critics to consider the subjective experience rather than interpreting works in a vacuum.
It’s ironic, then, that the book doesn’t delve too deeply into Green’s personal life. The chapters she has written, however, are far from a tell-all memoir. In part, this discretion may be the result of thematically arranged chapters like ‘the Paris years,’ meaning there is some jumping around (though not to the extent of Bob Dylan’s Chronicles Volume One). For example, she mentions that her alcoholic father had a car accident and in another passage, she concedes that one of her painting series stems from latent grief for him, but the reader never learns whether said accident was fatal. Nor does she disclose any details about the courtship leading to her second marriage. The majority of self-revelation is concentrated on her childhood in Australia and the family dynamics that prompted her to leave the country as a teenager. Periz is accurate in observing, “…Green the woman stays somewhat hidden” (p. 15). In a sense, this strategy allows the reader to focus—intermittently at least—on Green’s art independent on her gender, which is refreshing. Not surprisingly, the chapters written by her colleagues—primarily art critics, curators and gallerists sprinkled around the globe—focus on her extensive artistic contributions over the past 40 years.
The other night, I was in the biography section of The Strand in New York when I overheard a customer ask an employee how she had located a particular book. The employee explained that the bookstore’s system allows for multiple fields to be searched simultaneously and she had used publisher and author. The customer thanked her and said, “You’re so sweet.” If only all reference interviews were this pleasant! Interestingly, the new Denise Green biography I picked up for half price eludes bibliographic organization. In the introduction to Denise Green: An Artist’s Odyssey (2012, University of Minnesota Press), Ingrid Periz asks, “Where would it fit on a library shelf?” (p. 11). She elaborates on how it blurs genres: it’s part autobiography (Green has written or co-written only a third of the content) and part multi-authored biography, mixed with advice and art criticism, in a tone that vacillates between scholarly and chatty.
Contributor Peter Timmins writes, “…words remain the subservient partner to images” (p. 169) in Green’s practice but they are what interest me most, as much as her simplified renditions of everyday objects and fluid use of line are engaging. She’s a good writer—a case in point is the description, “the uncontrollable spread of colour which was India itself.” It’s no wonder the New York-based artist became editor of the feminist journal, Heresies and the equally radical Semiotext(e). What fascinates me is that she began writing about art with the explicit goal of becoming respected as an intellectual, to fight the gender bias facing artists. Her secondary purpose was to weigh in on how paintings were critiqued during the postmodern era governed by Clement Greenberg’s writing; she fought for critics to consider the subjective experience rather than interpreting works in a vacuum.
It’s ironic, then, that the book doesn’t delve too deeply into Green’s personal life. The chapters she has written, however, are far from a tell-all memoir. In part, this discretion may be the result of thematically arranged chapters like ‘the Paris years,’ meaning there is some jumping around (though not to the extent of Bob Dylan’s Chronicles Volume One). For example, she mentions that her alcoholic father had a car accident and in another passage, she concedes that one of her painting series stems from latent grief for him, but the reader never learns whether said accident was fatal. Nor does she disclose any details about the courtship leading to her second marriage. The majority of self-revelation is concentrated on her childhood in Australia and the family dynamics that prompted her to leave the country as a teenager. Periz is accurate in observing, “…Green the woman stays somewhat hidden” (p. 15). In a sense, this strategy allows the reader to focus—intermittently at least—on Green’s art independent on her gender, which is refreshing. Not surprisingly, the chapters written by her colleagues—primarily art critics, curators and gallerists sprinkled around the globe—focus on her extensive artistic contributions over the past 40 years.
Monday, July 16, 2012
Better living through chemistry? Lise Melhorn-Boe's artist's books make you think twice
“... there’s a mindset
of, 'I don’t want to know this.'”
Now that her show, Endangered, is over in North Bay (where, incidentally, I’m moving next month), Kingston artist Lise Melhorn-Boe was free to chat about her work.
Now that her show, Endangered, is over in North Bay (where, incidentally, I’m moving next month), Kingston artist Lise Melhorn-Boe was free to chat about her work.
HS-Your show
at the W. K. P. Kennedy Gallery focuses on intense subject matter, like the
recent increase in deformed penises in babies attributed to chemical exposure
and the positive correlation between homelessness and multiple chemical
sensitivities. I swear my eyes started stinging right after reading your Toxic Face Book, which describes the
toxins found in common cosmetics. What kinds of reactions have you received in
relation to this body of work?
LMB- I have had a lot of positive feedback. Even people who thought they
knew a great deal about our environment told me they had learned something.
However, many people do think it’s depressing. I thought I was presenting the
material in a lighthearted enough way that it would take the edge off the
negativity. People are very interested but they’re not gaga over it like they
have been for some of my other work, especially my work about women’s lives
where they could really relate and wanted to share their own stories with me.
With this body of work, there’s a mindset
of, “I don’t want to know this.” Some of the information is very scary. It’s
maybe easier just not to know, so you don’t have to worry about it and you
don’t have to make choices, but art (or some art) is about making people think
and that’s what I’ve always tried to do.
HS- In your
artist books, it often feels like you could keep turning the pages forever to
read more and more dire statistics about the environment. Gypsy Moth was such a lovely read because the woman who almost died
after being dosed with pesticide designed to kill gypsy moth caterpillars gets
better at the end. How do you strike a balance between presenting dark subject
matter and giving people hope that they can change their ways and make a
difference?
LMB- As I said, I was coming at it [the subject matter] from a
lighthearted angle. (Laughs). It’s an interesting question and hope is
important. Because I was so overwhelmed by negative information, I wasn’t
feeling hopeful myself so it was hard to put that in the work. To be honest, sometimes
I am glad I am getting old. I’d be really depressed and angry if I were in my
twenties, knowing what is ahead of us. At this point in my life, I’m more
resigned and cynical.
HS-In terms
of making a difference, you don’t just walk the walk. Not only do you make art
about garbage, but you refuse to use plastic bags to line your own garbage can,
you pick up litter if it can be recycled, and I remember at White Water
Gallery, you would save up styrofoam that couldn’t be recycled locally so you
could recycle it when you went “down south” as the people of North Bay say.
Have you always been so environmentally conscious?
LMB- I made my first environmental project for a Man and Society class
in high school when I was seventeen, I think. (What a sexist name! They later
changed it to Society, Challenge and Change). It was a collaged book on
pollution. So yes, I’ve always been concerned about the environment and
involved in environmental groups. This is a timely question because it struck
me today that I’ve been riding a bicycle for 50 years.
HS- Today’s
protests in Ottawa by scientists angry about the federal government’s cuts to
funding for environmental protection underscore the precarious state of the
environment. If you could have the attention of Prime Minister Stephen Harper,
what would you say to him?
LMB- There’s a term, “precautionary principle,” which posits that it’s
better to be safe than sorry. At the moment, anyone can come up with a product
and market it and later say, “Oops, that was dangerous.” As a nation, we should
think strongly about what materials we’re introducing into our lives rather
than trying to mop up disasters in retrospect... and I’d tell him to forget
about the tar sands and to come up with a different plan.
HS- Text is
very prominent in your work. Which tends to come first: text or image?
LMB- In the past I would have said the text, definitely. When I was
working with women’s stories, the story birthed the form of the piece. I
interviewed women and used questionnaires, but for this body of work, the
responses I got from people were very negative and they weren’t good stories.
People were overwhelmed by their health issues and I was not inspired visually
by their stories. A story has to have a visual component to transform it into a
visual piece. I ended up doing more research in the library than usual, so a
lot of the text is factual as opposed to narrative. Maybe that’s why Gypsy Moth stands out. It has a
beginning, middle and end, and she [the subject] told it well. Pain started with the text, and in Happy Memories, those are all stories
from actual people.
Garbage [in which
she collected garbage for seven weeks—save for organic waste—and displayed one
week’s worth in each of the seven copies in the edition, each stored in a tiny,
adorable garbage can] started with the heavy duty plastic mesh bags which came
from the only organic produce that was available to me in North Bay. I thought
it was so incongruous. Since the store refused to take them back, I decided I
had to do something with them.
With this whole body of work, I was thinking of the environment as a
topic, so I was more aware than usual about my materials. I recycled materials
and I recycled ideas. Toxic Face Book
uses a leftover cast of a face from a feminist piece called Colour Me Dutiful that was too thin to
use at the time. What's For Dinner?
uses a similar format to two earlier books—I have often made work about food.
And I've used clothing a lot too, in the past, so the baby clothes in Endangered Species and the paper doll
clothes in Toxic Kids fit right into
my oeuvre. Endangered Species uses
PVC connectors I found while trying to find a sturdy way to construct a large
tunnel book in the shape of an ice hut for Ice
Follies, an art installation festival in North Bay where artists use ice
huts on the lake for installations. I was initially planning a piece about the
projection that Lake Nipissing [in North Bay] wouldn’t have ice in twenty
years, which would be about sixteen years from now. Then the idea morphed
because PVC is a really toxic material to create and it seemed perfect to talk
about the effect of toxins on babies.
HS-You have
an inventive approach to materials, like using a transparent overlay of fabric
to represent cheese on a pizza in the book, What’s
for Dinner? Do you have fun coming up with these visuals?
LMB- Oh, I have a lot of fun! For me, because it was so much fun making
this work that it overshadowed the negative content, I was taken aback when
people focused on the negative content over the visual presentation.
HS- You’ve
made pop-up books for a long time before your work took an environmental turn.
Do you find this format has a different resonance with this subject matter?
LMB- I’ve always used it for its playful character so it was deliberate
to pair some of these painful topics with this format to affect the tone.
Pop-ups are fun; I teach them to kids in classrooms. I was trying to add an
element of playfulness [with pop-ups in this body of work].
HS- What’s it
like to make explicitly personal work like Body
Map, where you show the interplay between health problems and the
environment, with text overlaying a
fairly sizeable photograph of your naked body?
LMB- Just recently, a woman I know who has had breast cancer told me I
was very brave and I was surprised because I’d never really thought of it that
way. I came up with the idea for Body Map
when I did a residency at Queen’s University. I thought about approaching a
student photographer but I chose to ask my husband to take the photos even
though he’s not a photographer. I’ve been to nudist colonies but I wasn’t
comfortable stripping in front of just anyone. Maybe there’s something
different about being photographed than walking on the beach. I think I might
have been hesitant to do something like that before I had cancer but having had
a mastectomy, I don’t feel quite as sexual as I once did, so it’s less
revealing personally. Besides, once the image is out there, I’m separated from
it.
No Safe
Levels also shows my naked body but I took artistic license with it. It’s a
pop-up and technically, I needed the right breast to pop up because it was on
the fold. That’s actually the one that was cut off, but I just switched them.
It’s much more abstract [than Body Map]
and not everyone realizes it’s my body.
HS- Can you
comment on one of the final images in Breast
Cancer Journal in which a figure floats through the sky, separated from but
seemingly drawn to, the earth?
LMB- It was the result of a meditation, something that came to me in a
vision. I think it’s me but why I’m floating out there I can’t remember. (Turns
the page). This one I had a vision of in a winter solstice ceremony. I saw my
breasts on fire. (Turns the page). And this is me holding up my child self and
coming back up to the light. (Turns the page). I’m holding myself and mothering
myself. It [making this journal] was all very positive. I debated about using
text in this piece but I decided I liked the mystery. It wasn’t actually
intended to be an art piece. A few people I showed the images to found them
powerful, so I thought, “Why not?” In a way, this is more revealing [than works
like Body Map]: this is my naked
psyche or naked soul rather than my naked body.
HS- Your
earlier work was very feminist. Is the relationship between our health and the
environment a feminist issue in your opinion?
LMB- It pertains to everyone but because women have more body fat than
men and toxins reside in body fat, in that sense, these toxins affect women
more, so that makes it a feminist issue. Also, women carry the next generation
and they say the best way to detox is to breastfeed, but that means passing the
toxins on to your baby. It was something I worried about when I breastfed.
(Looks at her son who coincidentally appeared in the stairwell at this moment).
For those reasons, it’s a really important issue for women.
HS- Lastly,
are there other environmental artists you admire?
LMB- This is going back a long time, but I was always very moved by Ana
Mendieta’s work. The way she put her body in the environment—there was such a
strong connection between her and the earth. I suppose that’s essentialist,
stressing the connection between women and the earth, and it annoys some
people, but if I had to choose a camp, that’s the one I’d fall into.
For images, see Transformer Press
This interview
took place on July 11, 2012 at Lise’s home.
Labels:
Ana Mendieta,
Heather Saunders,
Lise Melhorn-Boe
Saturday, July 14, 2012
The legacy of Judy Chicago
“…the Feminist Art Program, an experiment that tested the limits of education.”
On my final bus ride between Toronto and Kingston, I finished reading Entering the Picture: Judy Chicago, The Fresno Feminist Art Program and the Collective Visions of Women Artists (Routledge, 2012). Just as I read about artist Sylvia Savala’s father dictating what she should be when she grew up (legal secretary), just as I was thinking, “We’ve come a long way, baby,” a young man behind me barked at his girlfriend to shut up. I rotated my torso with exaggeration and glared icily. When he asked, “Can’t you just leave me alone and send me a [expletive] text?” I considered inviting her to sit beside me. I decided against it, not only because it could make things worse for her later, but because I too was vulnerable: as a woman travelling alone at night, arriving to a closed bus station with no one to meet me, I wasn’t about to take him on*. With regret, I state the obvious: there’s still a lot of work to be done.
Judy Chicago is a woman who knows how to get a lot of work done. Through the California Institute of the Arts, she facilitated Womanhouse, the first feminist installation by 26 female students, which graced the cover of TIME Magazine. She also spearheaded The Dinner Party, the first massive installation reflecting the vision of a single woman, which ended up debated in Congress. But before all that, at a state university campus in rural Fresno, California in 1970, she launched the Feminist Art Program, an experiment that tested the limits of education.
Chicago’s teaching method was the outgrowth of experiments she’d made along the way while teaching art part-time beforehand, like silencing all the men in the classroom so the women could be heard. The fifteen young women under her tutelage in the Feminist Art Program wore work boots and learned to renovate a studio as well as any man. The intuitive curriculum she fashioned promoted self-analysis using Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex. Through consciousness-raising sessions, the women made leaps and bounds in their artistic development.
If this all sounds too good to be true, a little too much like Mona Lisa Smile—the film in which Julia Roberts plays an unconventional art history teacher who introduces her students to modern art and (in the process) feminism—then I’m not delving deep enough. The collective opinion of Chicago’s students was that the being in the program was incredible, but it was also risky. They got themselves into dangerous situations like interviewing rape victims in seedy neighbourhoods in the middle of the night for an audio work. Their emotional states were also at risk. Former students recall Chicago prying into their personal lives, but also pushing them away by insisting, “I’m not your mother!” and throwing a bottle of wine at the wall in one of their many group dinners. They were intimidated by her: one student admitted feeling pressured to make so-called vulvic art, a staple of Chicago’s oeuvre. Others embraced this trendy subject matter with aplomb; witness the CUNT cheerleaders. Having Chicago as a matriarch may have been a tumultuous experience, but her alumnae also recall her devotion to teaching and her generosity, like slipping a twenty dollar bill to a needy student and never expecting it back.
One thing is certain: Judy Chicago has made a major impact on women artists. One says she’ll never forget the time she heard her give a presentation, and another admits she treated her advice as if it had come from God. There are accounts from many women in this book, which is a collection of conference presentations for a symposium celebrating the 40thanniversary of the establishment of the program. Some of them knew Chicago very well, others interacted with her peripherally while engaged in parallel projects, and some were part of the next generation when Chicago moved the program to the California Institute of the Arts. We even hear from Chicago herself, who shares great anecdotes, like the San Francisco Museum of Art making so much money in the bookstore when The Dinner Party debuted that they bought a computerized cash registered and named it after her.
Reflective of conferences in general, some of the writing is superb, but some of the entries meander and trail off. All in all, though, it’s a good read.
*The following month, a similar situation arose and I did intervene by engaging the female and calling campus security. This time, the woman ignored me and the man told me to go (expletive) myself. It seems to be a losing battle.
Reflective of conferences in general, some of the writing is superb, but some of the entries meander and trail off. All in all, though, it’s a good read.
*The following month, a similar situation arose and I did intervene by engaging the female and calling campus security. This time, the woman ignored me and the man told me to go (expletive) myself. It seems to be a losing battle.
Labels:
Heather Saunders,
Judy Chicago,
Sylvia Savala
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Damsels in Distress
“He’s lying. I find that very attractive.” -- Violet Wistler
Sitting in the Westdale Theatre for Damsels in Distress (2011), as part of the Art Gallery of Hamilton’s I Heart Film series, I felt a twinge of irony because I wanted to be rescued. From this movie. Specifically from Violet Wistler (nee Emily Tweeter). Gerta Gerwig plays the self-righteous main character, Violet, whose outreach mission at Seven Oaks University on the east coast involves distributing soap to fraternities and donuts to suicidal students. Her vocabulary harks back to the days of Dawson’s Creek, when a professor friend of mind noticed particular terms seeping into students’ papers in unison, reflecting the improbable diction of Dawson, Joey, Pacey, and Jenn. The only way Violet’s doe-eyed roommate, Heather (Carrie MacLemore), would use the term ‘precocious’ is from hanging around her. Her other roommate, Rose (Megalyn Echikunwoke), is a childhood friend who backs her up consistently, always on the lookout for ‘playboy operators’ and non-suicidal students scamming free baked goods. While applying mascara, she muses, “If humility comes from within and you never had any, where are you supposed to find it? I gave up looking long ago.” Their new rommmate, Lily (Analeigh Tipton), a transfer student, enters their social circle and calls the group’s humility into question, provoking Violet to actually thank Lily for her chastising. She probably is grateful instead of embarrassed, because she would regard the opportunity for increased self-awareness as a gift.
The movie, directed by Wilt Stillman, starts out seeming like it might reverse the ‘damsels in distress’ stereotype. The young women attend a party with the intention of helping frat boys discover their potential under the tutelage of Violet. “There’s enough material here for a lifetime of work,” she remarks as one dude launches himself over a railing. Soon, though, the young women become swept away by young men who cause them to say such ridiculous things as, “He’s lying. I find that very attractive.” Heather dates a colour blind student who becomes panicked by rainbows, Lily falls for a friend whose supposed religion supposedly requires him to express his love physically “from the wrong side” and Violet considers—gasp—going to the library stacks on a date. The male-female dynamic isn’t really critiqued, because the only element that bears any resemblance to modern romance is the ethics of boyfriend stealing, from outright to seemingly unintentional. This female-female issue is not plumbed, as the secondary characters disappear as soon as the newer romance develops. Strangely, aside from Violet, all the characters feel like secondary characters and I found myself not really caring about the fate of their relationships, be they friendships or romances.
It’s also difficult to care about an overbearing character like Violet. At the same time, it’s hard not to respect Violet for rescuing herself from her funk when she is spurned by her beau, a frat boy she chose because he is unrefined. She walks in the rain alone, she sits in a diner alone, she checks into a motel alone (Motel 4 instead of Motel 6 because it’s cheaper and thrift is a virtue), and she dances alone before she dances with a new partner. An odd feminist, she implies that you can really only depend on yourself, even if your self is a fabrication, complete with an alias.
Sitting in the Westdale Theatre for Damsels in Distress (2011), as part of the Art Gallery of Hamilton’s I Heart Film series, I felt a twinge of irony because I wanted to be rescued. From this movie. Specifically from Violet Wistler (nee Emily Tweeter). Gerta Gerwig plays the self-righteous main character, Violet, whose outreach mission at Seven Oaks University on the east coast involves distributing soap to fraternities and donuts to suicidal students. Her vocabulary harks back to the days of Dawson’s Creek, when a professor friend of mind noticed particular terms seeping into students’ papers in unison, reflecting the improbable diction of Dawson, Joey, Pacey, and Jenn. The only way Violet’s doe-eyed roommate, Heather (Carrie MacLemore), would use the term ‘precocious’ is from hanging around her. Her other roommate, Rose (Megalyn Echikunwoke), is a childhood friend who backs her up consistently, always on the lookout for ‘playboy operators’ and non-suicidal students scamming free baked goods. While applying mascara, she muses, “If humility comes from within and you never had any, where are you supposed to find it? I gave up looking long ago.” Their new rommmate, Lily (Analeigh Tipton), a transfer student, enters their social circle and calls the group’s humility into question, provoking Violet to actually thank Lily for her chastising. She probably is grateful instead of embarrassed, because she would regard the opportunity for increased self-awareness as a gift.
The movie, directed by Wilt Stillman, starts out seeming like it might reverse the ‘damsels in distress’ stereotype. The young women attend a party with the intention of helping frat boys discover their potential under the tutelage of Violet. “There’s enough material here for a lifetime of work,” she remarks as one dude launches himself over a railing. Soon, though, the young women become swept away by young men who cause them to say such ridiculous things as, “He’s lying. I find that very attractive.” Heather dates a colour blind student who becomes panicked by rainbows, Lily falls for a friend whose supposed religion supposedly requires him to express his love physically “from the wrong side” and Violet considers—gasp—going to the library stacks on a date. The male-female dynamic isn’t really critiqued, because the only element that bears any resemblance to modern romance is the ethics of boyfriend stealing, from outright to seemingly unintentional. This female-female issue is not plumbed, as the secondary characters disappear as soon as the newer romance develops. Strangely, aside from Violet, all the characters feel like secondary characters and I found myself not really caring about the fate of their relationships, be they friendships or romances.
It’s also difficult to care about an overbearing character like Violet. At the same time, it’s hard not to respect Violet for rescuing herself from her funk when she is spurned by her beau, a frat boy she chose because he is unrefined. She walks in the rain alone, she sits in a diner alone, she checks into a motel alone (Motel 4 instead of Motel 6 because it’s cheaper and thrift is a virtue), and she dances alone before she dances with a new partner. An odd feminist, she implies that you can really only depend on yourself, even if your self is a fabrication, complete with an alias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




