1

Julie Amrany MFA Art Institute of Boston Faculty Advisor (Michael Newman Group 1) Critical Theory Paper August 27, 2011 Evolution of a Gender

The universe, like our galaxy, and stars is constantly altering form; we as humans must adapt to evolution and keep in unison with the new paradigm of the sexes. Art as self expression, and reflective of human society throughout the ages can be used to analyze how woman and men situated themselves throughout history. It is obvious that the patriarchal system still dominates our art history as well as all other fields; a few noted names such as Artemesia Gentileschi, Camille Claudel, Mary Cassatt, Berthe Morisott, and Suzanne Valadon have held a place in history from the renaissance to the 20th century though they were never considered the front runners of new movements of their time. We have been fighting for centuries to have a voice in society, be it political, social, in the scientific world or in the arts, and I might add in some cultures we are still struggling to have a voice in the privacy of our own homes. In many cultures once the women bore and raised the babies, they were of no more use to their male counterparts; they mostly became domestic slaves. In our Critical Theory 1 Class with Stuart Steck, Stuart clearly reiterated the point by mostly addressing the agenda of male artists of the19th and 20th centuries; I think he excluded the women to make a point

until the 1960s and after, though the names were sparse. Ironically, many of the readings he recommended were written by feminist writers. The femme fatale was used for the muse, the model, the inspiration, and for the courting. There wasn't room in society for her intellectual prowess. Her beauty has been revered for ages and even deified and mystified, but rarely were women given the platform to express themselves amongst their contemporaries. Linda Nochlin states so poignantly in her article "Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?" "things are as they are and as they have been in the arts as in a hundred other areas, are stultifying, oppressive and discouraging onto all these women among them, who did not have the good fortune to be born white, preferably middle class and above all male"(1). I cannot say that is it 100 percent accurate to blame only the white male. I think women have enabled men somewhat so that women stay in a housebound situation; it is more comfortable and safe that way for many. Though counterproductive to society, dating back to the renaissance period and earlier women were barred from academic institutions of higher learning, so there were no possibilities for them to advance, other than seeking enrichment for their own interests. Also, unfortunately in some cultures any kind of education was forbidden to them. Today, both men and women must formally push to educate youth differently. Men need to be willing to inhabit their feminine side and visa versa. There is room for equality. Nochlin quotes John Stuart Mill, a proponent of women's equality. "...men demand of them (women)not only submission but unqualified affection as well thus women are often weakened by the internalized demands of the male dominated society itself, as well as by a plethora of maternal

goods and comforts; the middle class women have a great deal more to lose than her chains"(2). I totally agree with Nochlin in simplifying that it's up to us to shift our social structure and educational institutions to embrace women in their birthright to express their genius. Both sexes have to be willing to take the risks and also be willing to make the commitment to change; I believe it will empower the whole of society. Carol Duncan is another writer we read in Stuart Steck's class. In her article "Virility and Domination in Early Twentieth-Century Vanguard Painting" she reflects on the famous painters of the Fauve, Cubist, and German Expressionist movements, and how they used the female nude to exemplify their own male fortitude in the avant-garde movement of that time. Take a look at Kirchner's " Tower Room,Self Portrait with Erma" for example. She talks about innovation but more important what these works say about the social relations between the sexes. " Vanguard painting was a male preserve" (3). Using Kirchner, Moreau, Gauguin, Munch, Picasso, Matisse etc, she points out " the assertion of the artists sexual domination-is in large part what these paintings are about" (4).Women are reduced to pure objects. Men could avoid confrontation at that time, by trying to paint " the beauty of women's bodies", if they were painted in that manner, as a focal point, but they were not. Not only were men painting nude models in this way but women were as well, though they painted them in a more self actualized manner. You can recognize some identity and character in their faces. Some of these women were Paula Moderson Becker, Suzanne Valadon, and Sonia Delaunney Terk. They were part of the Expressionist, Fauvist, and the Brucke School as well, but weren't recognized like their male

counterparts. Camille Claudel, a sculptor from the impressionist period also fought for recognition during her lifetime; she like all other women were not admitted into academic institutions because of her gender. The French in the late 1800s were educating their young daughters and attitudes were beginnings to shift, but the process was, and is slow today. It seems the evolution of change crawls, it expands and contracts, one step forward, three steps back. In a conceptual way I'm always comparing the human form and the human psyche to that of our cosmos on both a macro and micro level. We are all made up of the same elements; we are all interconnected. Our understanding of the universe and our history as a species will always aid in trying to decipher how we operate as homosapiens in nature, and gender to gender. The term evolution could umbrella the idea of how things change over time, whether it be a celestial body or that of our own. The time element is also reflective of the length of a human life vs that of a star. In general, the particles that comprise living and nonliving matter are similar in nature. The earth from which we came is partially composed of rock which is comprised of atoms and atoms make up all living particles as well. The pertinent question becomes whether stars and particles have consciousness, a consciousness which is more universal than our own; it is that which is timeless. Being an adamant believer in the theory of evolution, I think it is obvious that we have evolved from our cosmos and we are only a spec in time compared to how many years our universe has been in existence. So, really there is hope for humans, we can have the possibility to grow and become more humane towards each other and allow for

tolerance, growth, and even equality between the sexes. That is if we maintain homeostasis on our planet and preserve ourselves, though we know inherently nothing ever stays static. Acquiring knowledge on the evolution of the stars is important, also it is essential to learn from human history specifically art history: the Fauvists, Cubists, and the German Expressionists; these artists were displaying interest to tear down the establishment; they were looking to disrupt the bourgeois society. Freud was developing his theories at this time, and they were a major influence on how men viewed women as a threat. Duncan points out in her article: "Freud acted in concert with young avant-garde artists giving new ideological shape and force to traditional sexist bias"(5).The suffragist movement was then at its height. It seems that the Expressionist Movement was a response to the female uprising as a denial of what could be a new future for women.These artists brought women back to being viewed as sexual objects. This movement like the Fauvists and the Brucke School represented rebellion and anarchy toward society and it's constructs, though I think that the advantage was toward only the male situation. Communal life was common in these circles, and nude women were everywhere for the artist to indulge in; you could see women were painted more as commodities in paintings of Van Dogen, Kirchner, Modigliani and Derain. " According to their paintings, the liberation of the artist means the domination of others; his freedom requires their unfreedom"(6). Also Duncan points out "it condoned libertinism; it also drew a veil over the deeper question of emancipation and the frightening thought of freedom"(7).

The idea here is not only to focus on what these feminist writers both Nochlin and Duncan brought to the table, but the issue that we still fight the glass ceiling as women artists in society. Stuart Stecks pointed out that women had gone into performance art in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s so as not to clash with Abstract Expressionist painters such as deKooning, Kline and Pollack etc.. This created a shift in woman being more recognized in the art world. I feel that these women were abusing their own identities by overtly once again playing the femme fatale,and exposing themselves to the public such as Marina Abramovic and Carolee Schneeman. Yves Klein also used women's bodies to paint his canvases in the 50s, again the woman were looked upon as sexual objects. The nude is classic to art and I use it all the time, though, it should be on some equal platform. I don't fall for the idea that the woman's body is the more sublime to represent of the sexes; Michelangelo dismissed that whole notion in his renditions of the male nude. Luckily we can give thanks to female artists like Frieda Kahlo, Remedios Varo, Louise Bougeois, Giorgia Okeefe, Judy Chicago, and Debra Butterfield who have made us proud and given us role models to follow. As a female sculptor being involved in the Public Art for many years, I can say from firsthand experience that I have tried to maintain some kind of balance in my life between being a mother and a wife and my professional life. I have struggled for both recognition and respect in my field; this has not been easy. I have been fighting the demons of my own up bringing (generations of women's servitude to men) along with the current underlying prejudices in society of what women should, would, and could do. In today's society, women's position is even more hypocritical than in the renaissance

period or 18th and 19th century; people want to appear liberated and that they believe in equality, yet I think that they are afraid of it. Men are hesitant to let their feminine side be expressed and women feel that to show strength in society they will be labeled aggressive.The ways of society are slow to change. I am an artist and have done many Public Art Projects, and because my husband is also an artist and my business partner, a majority of the time people assume that he was the creator. He is sympathetic to my frustrations and tries hard to correct these misnomers though most people have an antiquated view of the world. So what I'm up against in general is the male chauvinist view of woman, in addition to that is the ingrained idea of my own upbringing that woman are docile and that they should maintain a low profile. I must say that the situation is forever challenging, and the hope is that we are evolving. This view of women is difficult to shift seeing that it was learned over many generations of woman in my family. The evolution of the sexes is endless and limitless, like that of our universe. We, like the stars are forever altering form, brightness, intensity, and relation to that of others.

1.) Nochlin, Why Have There Been No Great Woman Artists? page 2 2.) Nochlin, " " " " " " " ". page 3

3.) Duncan, Virility and Domination in the Early Twentieth-Century Vanguard Painting page 294 4.) Duncan, " 5.) Duncan, " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " page 297 " page 308

6.) Duncan, " 7.) Duncan, "

" "

" "

" " " " " "

" "

" "

" "

" page 311 " page 313