Notes: Why have there been no great women artists? (Linda Nochlin)
The white western male view point, unconsciously accepted as the viewpoint of the art historian and therefore the construction of the male dominated art historical canon - it is this canon which therefore needs to be challenged.
'A feminist critique of the discipline of art history is needed which can pierce cultural- ideological limitations, to reveal biases and inadequacies, not merely in regard to the question of women artists, but in the formulation of the crucial questions of the discipline as a whole.'
'This so called woman question can become a catalyst, a potent intellectual instrument, probing at the most basic and 'natural' assumptions, providing a paradigm for other kinds of internal questioning.'
Former differencing of women artists from men which asserts them to have a different kind of greatness for art , such as a recognisable feminine style posted on 'the unique character of a women's situation and experience', is not a sufficient argument for explaining why female art has not been catalogued at the same level as the work of men.
There is no strong evidence to suggest that 'subtle essence of femininity' connect the work of female artists over anything else. 'In every instance, women artists and writers would seems to be closer to other artists and writers of their own period and outlook than there are to each other.' This so called feminine style can perhaps be attributed to a greater extent to the era of certain styles, such as the rococo style of eighteenth-century France. 'If women have at times turned to scenes of domestic life or children, so have the Dutch Little Masters, Chardin, and the impressionists - Renoir and Monet, as well as Morisot and Cassatt.'
In the founding of such an argument there is a general misconception of what art actually is : that it is 'the direct personal expression of individual emotional experience - a translation of personal life into visual terms.' 'Yet art is almost never that; great art certainly never.' Style is discovered through artistic progression rather than innate within the inner self.
In some areas women have achieved equality, whether it be in literature or dance, however, why is it that women have not achieved such status within fine art?
The 'whole crucial question of the conditions generally productive of great art' is one to be investigated- in which analysis of the 'institutionally-oriented approach would reveal the entire romantic, elitist, individual-glorifying and monograph-producing substructure upon which the profession of art history is based.'
So what are the conditions, generally productive of great art?
1. The concept of the Great Artist as Genius, with the discovery of artistic talent found in boys at a young age. The myths surrounding such a belief have , despite art historians pooh-poohing such sort of mythology about artistic achievement, been retained as the unconscious basis for their scholarly assumptions - claiming that "If women had the golden nugget of artistic genius, it would reveal itself."
2. Failure in the past to fully acknowledge the power of which father-son inheritance of profession has had in the fostering of male artistic talent. The historical pattern of male dominant occupations has been kept alive by this bloodline, with the opportunity for women to enter the field of such a profession less likely.
3. In questioning 'Why have there been no great women artists?' one can also consider 'Why have there been no great artists from aristocracy? Aristocracy rarely contributed any work into the sphere of Art, despite educational and leisure advantages- with women only dabbling in art as a means of showing themselves to be accomplished suitors.
'Could it be possible that genius is missing from the aristocratic make-up in the same way that it is from the feminine psyche?' But of course, it is perhaps more likely that the kinds of demands placed on aristocrats and women, such as social engagements, prevented both parties from being able to fully engage and contribute to the art world. General social situations and institutionalised implications need to be considered in regards to the 'Why have there been no great women artists?' question, rather than just gendered assumptions. The notion of individual genius as innate is a notion which needs to be abandoned by scholars, in the construction of art historical canons.
4. The question of the nude- women's' exclusion from life drawing classes within all academic and art institutions, until the late 19th century, is a key disadvantage placed upon the progression of female artistic talent. ' To be deprived of this ultimate state of training meant to be deprived of the possibility of creating major art.'
5. Other dimensions of the situation such as the apprenticeship system and the academic educational pattern - largely exclusive of women, also need to be accounted for. The fact that development in art-making has 'traditionally demanded the learning of specific techniques and skills in a certain sequence, in an institutional setting outside the home' has meant that house bound , homemaking women have been more readily excluded from this education- more so than for the female poet or novelist, in which the work can be created from the home.
6. The Lady's Accomplishment- art making seen as a 'self-demeaning level of amateurism' - a suitable "accomplishment" for the well-brought-up young women. 'Women were warned against the snare of trying too hard to excel in any one area.
'To be able to do a great many things tolerably well, is of infinitely more value to a woman than to be able to excel in any one. By the former she may render herself generally useful; by the latter she may dazzle for an hour.'
(In Mrs Ellis's widely read The Family Monitor and Domestic Guide.'
Painting and drawing was seen as a kind of therapy which "keeps them out of trouble" (the comment of a young doctor about his wife, of about 100 years ago). 'For such men, the "real" work of women is only that which directly or in-directly serves them and their children.'
Successes.
What qualities characterise successful women artists?
'Almost all women artists were either the daughters of artist fathers or... had a close personal connection with a strong or dominant male artist.'
Women artists who have not come from this background still, often as is the case, tend to have supportive fathers, who are willing to support their independence.
'It is also by adopting.. the "masculine" attributes of single-mindedness, concentration, tenaciousness, and absorption in ideas and craftsmanship for their own sake, that women have succeeded, and continue to succeed in the world of art.'
Ref to: Rosa Bonheur (1822-1899) - one of the most successful and accomplished women painters of all time.
- career was supported by her father's own feminist views.
- escaped social norms (ie. marriage) in order to achieve success, yet despite this still considered marriage to be "a sacrament indispensable to the organisation of society".
Conclusion
'Hopefully by stressing the institutional, or the public rather than the individual, or private, preconditions for achievement in the arts, we have provided a paradigm for the investigation of other areas in the field.'
'What is important that women face up to the reality of their history and of their present situation. Disadvantage may indeed be an excuse; it is not, however, an intellectual position.' Rather using their situation as under-dogs and outsiders as a vantage point, women can reveal institutional and intellectual weaknesses in general.'
'A feminist critique of the discipline of art history is needed which can pierce cultural- ideological limitations, to reveal biases and inadequacies, not merely in regard to the question of women artists, but in the formulation of the crucial questions of the discipline as a whole.'
'This so called woman question can become a catalyst, a potent intellectual instrument, probing at the most basic and 'natural' assumptions, providing a paradigm for other kinds of internal questioning.'
Former differencing of women artists from men which asserts them to have a different kind of greatness for art , such as a recognisable feminine style posted on 'the unique character of a women's situation and experience', is not a sufficient argument for explaining why female art has not been catalogued at the same level as the work of men.
There is no strong evidence to suggest that 'subtle essence of femininity' connect the work of female artists over anything else. 'In every instance, women artists and writers would seems to be closer to other artists and writers of their own period and outlook than there are to each other.' This so called feminine style can perhaps be attributed to a greater extent to the era of certain styles, such as the rococo style of eighteenth-century France. 'If women have at times turned to scenes of domestic life or children, so have the Dutch Little Masters, Chardin, and the impressionists - Renoir and Monet, as well as Morisot and Cassatt.'
In the founding of such an argument there is a general misconception of what art actually is : that it is 'the direct personal expression of individual emotional experience - a translation of personal life into visual terms.' 'Yet art is almost never that; great art certainly never.' Style is discovered through artistic progression rather than innate within the inner self.
In some areas women have achieved equality, whether it be in literature or dance, however, why is it that women have not achieved such status within fine art?
The 'whole crucial question of the conditions generally productive of great art' is one to be investigated- in which analysis of the 'institutionally-oriented approach would reveal the entire romantic, elitist, individual-glorifying and monograph-producing substructure upon which the profession of art history is based.'
So what are the conditions, generally productive of great art?
1. The concept of the Great Artist as Genius, with the discovery of artistic talent found in boys at a young age. The myths surrounding such a belief have , despite art historians pooh-poohing such sort of mythology about artistic achievement, been retained as the unconscious basis for their scholarly assumptions - claiming that "If women had the golden nugget of artistic genius, it would reveal itself."
2. Failure in the past to fully acknowledge the power of which father-son inheritance of profession has had in the fostering of male artistic talent. The historical pattern of male dominant occupations has been kept alive by this bloodline, with the opportunity for women to enter the field of such a profession less likely.
3. In questioning 'Why have there been no great women artists?' one can also consider 'Why have there been no great artists from aristocracy? Aristocracy rarely contributed any work into the sphere of Art, despite educational and leisure advantages- with women only dabbling in art as a means of showing themselves to be accomplished suitors.
'Could it be possible that genius is missing from the aristocratic make-up in the same way that it is from the feminine psyche?' But of course, it is perhaps more likely that the kinds of demands placed on aristocrats and women, such as social engagements, prevented both parties from being able to fully engage and contribute to the art world. General social situations and institutionalised implications need to be considered in regards to the 'Why have there been no great women artists?' question, rather than just gendered assumptions. The notion of individual genius as innate is a notion which needs to be abandoned by scholars, in the construction of art historical canons.
4. The question of the nude- women's' exclusion from life drawing classes within all academic and art institutions, until the late 19th century, is a key disadvantage placed upon the progression of female artistic talent. ' To be deprived of this ultimate state of training meant to be deprived of the possibility of creating major art.'
5. Other dimensions of the situation such as the apprenticeship system and the academic educational pattern - largely exclusive of women, also need to be accounted for. The fact that development in art-making has 'traditionally demanded the learning of specific techniques and skills in a certain sequence, in an institutional setting outside the home' has meant that house bound , homemaking women have been more readily excluded from this education- more so than for the female poet or novelist, in which the work can be created from the home.
6. The Lady's Accomplishment- art making seen as a 'self-demeaning level of amateurism' - a suitable "accomplishment" for the well-brought-up young women. 'Women were warned against the snare of trying too hard to excel in any one area.
'To be able to do a great many things tolerably well, is of infinitely more value to a woman than to be able to excel in any one. By the former she may render herself generally useful; by the latter she may dazzle for an hour.'
(In Mrs Ellis's widely read The Family Monitor and Domestic Guide.'
Painting and drawing was seen as a kind of therapy which "keeps them out of trouble" (the comment of a young doctor about his wife, of about 100 years ago). 'For such men, the "real" work of women is only that which directly or in-directly serves them and their children.'
Successes.
What qualities characterise successful women artists?
'Almost all women artists were either the daughters of artist fathers or... had a close personal connection with a strong or dominant male artist.'
Women artists who have not come from this background still, often as is the case, tend to have supportive fathers, who are willing to support their independence.
'It is also by adopting.. the "masculine" attributes of single-mindedness, concentration, tenaciousness, and absorption in ideas and craftsmanship for their own sake, that women have succeeded, and continue to succeed in the world of art.'
Ref to: Rosa Bonheur (1822-1899) - one of the most successful and accomplished women painters of all time.
- career was supported by her father's own feminist views.
- escaped social norms (ie. marriage) in order to achieve success, yet despite this still considered marriage to be "a sacrament indispensable to the organisation of society".
Conclusion
'Hopefully by stressing the institutional, or the public rather than the individual, or private, preconditions for achievement in the arts, we have provided a paradigm for the investigation of other areas in the field.'
'What is important that women face up to the reality of their history and of their present situation. Disadvantage may indeed be an excuse; it is not, however, an intellectual position.' Rather using their situation as under-dogs and outsiders as a vantage point, women can reveal institutional and intellectual weaknesses in general.'
Seminar Notes - Week 2
The Image – what do we actually see?
-The gaze of the King and Queen being reflected back into the image.
-Representation of a space .Back of the frame of the canvas being an indicator towards the idea of space beyond the visible plane of the painting – towards other realms of representation
-This is a painting – a representation of something.
-The painting privileges the viewer – replacing the king and queen in the position of power.
-Painting commissioned by the powers to represent something of the sovereign.
-How is the space, in the painting, structured?- nice link to the MOMA article.
-Everything acting as a pendulum, an oscillation (the movement of the artist, man in the background, reflection in the mirror.
-Painting not just set in a studio space- the subject space is a space of representation.
-Figure of the small girl (centre) in a position of power (posture) yet not recognised by anyone else in the frame of the painting. Is the painting really about her?
-Las Meninas = ‘the girls’ title suggest the painting is about the group of women, yet this is not an interpretation which many give.
-Dissecting something to understand the positions of power- challenges the history of looking at paintings.
-The gaze of the King and Queen being reflected back into the image.
-Representation of a space .Back of the frame of the canvas being an indicator towards the idea of space beyond the visible plane of the painting – towards other realms of representation
-This is a painting – a representation of something.
-The painting privileges the viewer – replacing the king and queen in the position of power.
-Painting commissioned by the powers to represent something of the sovereign.
-How is the space, in the painting, structured?- nice link to the MOMA article.
-Everything acting as a pendulum, an oscillation (the movement of the artist, man in the background, reflection in the mirror.
-Painting not just set in a studio space- the subject space is a space of representation.
-Figure of the small girl (centre) in a position of power (posture) yet not recognised by anyone else in the frame of the painting. Is the painting really about her?
-Las Meninas = ‘the girls’ title suggest the painting is about the group of women, yet this is not an interpretation which many give.
-Dissecting something to understand the positions of power- challenges the history of looking at paintings.
Old Mistresses Lecture Notes- Week 2 (Griselda Pollock)
Feminist analysis – looking at the whole history of art in a new way – not restricted by former categories, such as style in relation to era. Not recreating a monograph approach to female artists.
Two considerations:
1. Allowing men and women into the field as players.
2. gender- not just tied up with men and women, part of culture on a wider scale, with cultural divisions and social structures enabling / disenabling gendered alternatives.
Standard histories of art don’t see art as a way of thinking about the world, adopts a practice very specific to particular practices, ie. Painting. The study of art should not just be about the materiality / the medium (the pigment etc)
How have people thought the world through forms of representation?
Painting: one of the major way in which people thought – the artistic discipline with the greatest cultural dominance. The modern alternative perhaps now being cinema and installation.
Why did painting become the dominant practice for the development of thought?
Image 1 . Diego De Silver Valasquez (1599-1660), Self portrait.
Self portrait of an artist- already a statement making the proposition of the I-ness of an artist. Linked to the development of authorship as a significance.
Concept of perpetual movement of the gaze.
Male standing-upward force.
Queen Isabel
1632
Oil
132 x 101.5 cm
Kunsthistoriches Museum, Vienna
Confines of the skirt- boxed in
set face- restricted.
Prince Felipe Prospero 1659 Oil 128.5 x 99.5 cm
Infanta Margarita
c. 1656
Oil105 x 88 cm
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
Representation of children – formality of the baby body. With structured garments acting as a strength against the fragility of the child’s body. Shows children entering into a marked out gendered world.
How do you embody . signify power?
Also relevant to landscape painting – a form which simultaneously shows itself as a painting and as a world with the painting oscillating backward and forwards between these two things. You can’t see the world without seeing the paint.
Velasquez
Marsc. 1639-41Oil181 x 99 cmMuseo del Prado, Madrid
Former militarised masculinity not present in the same way. An aging Mars, showing bare feet, who has pathetically left his helmet on. Seems lost in the darkness, in melancholy – completely undercutting what should be in his function.
Nonetheless, he is still upright (taking the masculine form) whilst Ve;asquez representation of Venus is along the horizontal plane.
Velasquez
Venus at Her Mirror ("The Rokeby Venus")
Two considerations:
1. Allowing men and women into the field as players.
2. gender- not just tied up with men and women, part of culture on a wider scale, with cultural divisions and social structures enabling / disenabling gendered alternatives.
Standard histories of art don’t see art as a way of thinking about the world, adopts a practice very specific to particular practices, ie. Painting. The study of art should not just be about the materiality / the medium (the pigment etc)
How have people thought the world through forms of representation?
Painting: one of the major way in which people thought – the artistic discipline with the greatest cultural dominance. The modern alternative perhaps now being cinema and installation.
Why did painting become the dominant practice for the development of thought?
Image 1 . Diego De Silver Valasquez (1599-1660), Self portrait.
Self portrait of an artist- already a statement making the proposition of the I-ness of an artist. Linked to the development of authorship as a significance.
Concept of perpetual movement of the gaze.
viewer = seeing someone seeing – meeting the gaze (encountering the power of the gaze)
When we look at it we see a representation of the gaze.
Viewer found in the secondary space that the painting produces.
Reference to the history of covered paintings / veiled religious icons – the idea that one only meets the gaze of the subject at particular moments. Something has happened in the history of painting to open up the painting to viewing.
Valasquez is a pivotal figure in the history of painting – he creates work where we begin to see the pivotal motion of the gaze, with the viewer animating the life of the image. The images call upon the viewer to think subjective thought – invoking thoughts about life issues such as life and death.
16th / 17th Century marked a shift in the way of knowing things – as Foucault terms ‘the birth of classical representation’.
Painting exists not just as a set of illustrations, hence why it is difficult for us to say what we’re seeing.
Visibility / Invisibility
Space / question of space ]- all elements of painting.
The gaze
Velasquez – the court painter for Spain (Phillip IV) , so responsible for producing royal and sovereign images.
What is it that makes a sovereign body?
Velasquez attempts to find a visual representation in which you can experience the embodiment of power.
What are the rhetorics of representation that allow us to be in the presence of power?
The sovereign in very much represented in the masculine and the feminine (which is why portraits of Elizabeth I are so interesting)
Philip IV in Brown and Silver
c. 1631-32
Oil
199.5 x 113 cm National Gallery, London
When we look at it we see a representation of the gaze.
Viewer found in the secondary space that the painting produces.
Reference to the history of covered paintings / veiled religious icons – the idea that one only meets the gaze of the subject at particular moments. Something has happened in the history of painting to open up the painting to viewing.
Valasquez is a pivotal figure in the history of painting – he creates work where we begin to see the pivotal motion of the gaze, with the viewer animating the life of the image. The images call upon the viewer to think subjective thought – invoking thoughts about life issues such as life and death.
16th / 17th Century marked a shift in the way of knowing things – as Foucault terms ‘the birth of classical representation’.
Painting exists not just as a set of illustrations, hence why it is difficult for us to say what we’re seeing.
Visibility / Invisibility
Space / question of space ]- all elements of painting.
The gaze
Velasquez – the court painter for Spain (Phillip IV) , so responsible for producing royal and sovereign images.
What is it that makes a sovereign body?
Velasquez attempts to find a visual representation in which you can experience the embodiment of power.
What are the rhetorics of representation that allow us to be in the presence of power?
The sovereign in very much represented in the masculine and the feminine (which is why portraits of Elizabeth I are so interesting)
Philip IV in Brown and Silver
c. 1631-32
Oil
199.5 x 113 cm National Gallery, London
Male standing-upward force.Palpable, fresh, moist lips.
Queen Isabel
1632
Oil
132 x 101.5 cm
Kunsthistoriches Museum, Vienna
Confines of the skirt- boxed inset face- restricted.
Prince Felipe Prospero 1659 Oil 128.5 x 99.5 cm
Infanta Margaritac. 1656
Oil105 x 88 cm
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
Representation of children – formality of the baby body. With structured garments acting as a strength against the fragility of the child’s body. Shows children entering into a marked out gendered world.How do you embody . signify power?
Also relevant to landscape painting – a form which simultaneously shows itself as a painting and as a world with the painting oscillating backward and forwards between these two things. You can’t see the world without seeing the paint.
Velasquez
Marsc. 1639-41Oil181 x 99 cmMuseo del Prado, Madrid
Former militarised masculinity not present in the same way. An aging Mars, showing bare feet, who has pathetically left his helmet on. Seems lost in the darkness, in melancholy – completely undercutting what should be in his function.Nonetheless, he is still upright (taking the masculine form) whilst Ve;asquez representation of Venus is along the horizontal plane.
Velasquez
Venus at Her Mirror ("The Rokeby Venus")
c. 1644-48Oil122.5 x 177 cm
National Gallery, London
Back view prevents the artist from having to represent the Venus Pudica pose.
Looking in the mirror- she bcomes the figure who is locked into the circular gaze – the virtual space in the painting for which the gaze can exist.
How does the painting produce the volume for this space – in or out of the painting?
Early and late paintings of Velasquez – exploring the potential for representing different worlds.
Foucault Essay
Starts with a description- looks systematically.
There is nothing in the painting that is not significant.
- Position – posture of the artist already inserts into the painting the act of looking between the artist and the canvas and the model (or the viewer – the subject of the artist’s gaze)
Through describing / tracking the painting we are working through what it is that the painting proposes.
The shell shape – creating volume in the space of the canvas.
Light
The mirror? – an image , of luminous quality showing two figures – the models(?)
The space within the frame of the painting consists of essentially four spaces: the back space (in which the silhouetted figure stands), the centre space, the forward space (reflected back into the centre / back space by the presence of the mirror, and then forward again) and the (imaginary) space contained within the artist’s canvas.
The viwer thinks that we are summoned to be the model in the construction, yet the mirror changes this.
It is the mirror which holds the representation of the sovereign body and the sovereign gaze.
Illustrating the moment in which the painter thinks what the next gesture he makes is is a moment that brings into being the making / production of the thought. Reminding us that representation is produced.
What method does Foucault give you for examining paintings?
- Descriptive element of great importance.
- Paintings anticipate being looked at.
- We must allow paintings to do their work
- We must try to see what the painting does
- We must recognise the level at which the painting works.
Back view prevents the artist from having to represent the Venus Pudica pose.
Looking in the mirror- she bcomes the figure who is locked into the circular gaze – the virtual space in the painting for which the gaze can exist.
How does the painting produce the volume for this space – in or out of the painting?
Early and late paintings of Velasquez – exploring the potential for representing different worlds.
Foucault EssayStarts with a description- looks systematically.
There is nothing in the painting that is not significant.
- Position – posture of the artist already inserts into the painting the act of looking between the artist and the canvas and the model (or the viewer – the subject of the artist’s gaze)
Through describing / tracking the painting we are working through what it is that the painting proposes.
The shell shape – creating volume in the space of the canvas.
Light
The mirror? – an image , of luminous quality showing two figures – the models(?)The space within the frame of the painting consists of essentially four spaces: the back space (in which the silhouetted figure stands), the centre space, the forward space (reflected back into the centre / back space by the presence of the mirror, and then forward again) and the (imaginary) space contained within the artist’s canvas.
The viwer thinks that we are summoned to be the model in the construction, yet the mirror changes this.
It is the mirror which holds the representation of the sovereign body and the sovereign gaze.
Illustrating the moment in which the painter thinks what the next gesture he makes is is a moment that brings into being the making / production of the thought. Reminding us that representation is produced.
What method does Foucault give you for examining paintings?
- Descriptive element of great importance.
- Paintings anticipate being looked at.
- We must allow paintings to do their work
- We must try to see what the painting does
- We must recognise the level at which the painting works.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)