Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Assignment 1: Please Post Here
Please be sure to reread the Instructions before you turn in the assignment, this way you can be sure that all of the required components of the assignment have been done. And remember, you are not your assumptions. The goal of the exercise is to shake up your assumptions- to look at them with honest and critical eyes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
List of Assumptions
1. I assumed art was only for aesthetic values.
2. I assumed that feminism was only believed in by women who thought that men subordinate, therefore that only woman are feminists.
3. I assumed that women would not be portrayed sexually, because they were trying to break man-made stereotypes. But only as strong and independent, most especially without men.
4. I assumed women’s clothing style would progress as society did through the years.
5. I also assumed that women in cultures not as patriarchal as our own would also be more independent in their clothing.
6. I assumed that women’s art is new and that it would not date further back than the 1900’s.
7. I assumed that women’s art would be mostly based on portraits and clothing
Sergio Orellana
WMST 250
2/10/2008
My Assumptions about Feminism and Art
Coming into a women’s studies class as a young straight male means that I have come into the class with very few facts on feminism. Add this lack of knowledge to my very new interest in art, and I have a lot of assumptions. First off, I assumed that art was only meant for aesthetic purposes, and nothing more. Also, I assumed that feminism was only believed in by women who thought that men subordinate, therefore that only woman are feminists. I also assumed that feminist art would not portray women in a sexual way, but only as strong and independent, with no need for men. Therefore no men in would be represented in feminist art. Since women have become more independent since feminism started, I assumed that women’s clothing style would change in a way that would reflect this independence. I also assumed that women in cultures not as patriarchal as our own would also be more independent in their clothing. I assumed that feminist art would only be seen in portraits and in clothing designs. Lastly I assumed that feminist art is new and that it would not date back further than the 1900s. With these assumptions I went into Washington to see which were right and which were wrong. The first day I went to D.C., I went and visited the National Museum of Women and the Arts. Then the second time I went down, I first went to the National Museum of the American Indian, then the Hirshhorn, followed by the Daughters of the American Revolution in Constitution hall. Each museum gave me more of a perspective on feminist art and what art can truly be defined as.
The National Museum of Women and the Arts was an intimidating place to go to. There were a lot of exhibits there, and I was unsure of where to start. However, as I was wandering though the different areas, I noticed many things about the paintings. One of the most startling was that I saw paintings that dated back to the 1500s, much earlier than I had assumed women artists would have been around. As I looked at each painting, subjects ranged from portraits to household items, but women created all of it, so it would seem that my assumption that only women did feminist art would be correct. However, my assumption on males in feminist art was proven incorrect as I saw many men displayed in the art. One painting was of a young girl seemingly helping a cadet get his belongings, however on closer analysis it seemed more likely that she was telling him what to do and how to do it; that the girl was in fact in charge and commanding a man. After moving on from the permanent exhibits, I looked into the other exhibits at the museum. One that caught my attention was the exhibit on Native American pottery. Women who still practice the ways that have been passed through their tribe for generations created it all. I had never thought of pottery as feminist art, especially since it did not have even a depictions of women, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that since it was done by women, and that it was women whom this ancient art was entrusted to, it was in fact very feminist. This peaked my interest for the next museum that I planned to visit.
As I walked toward the National Museum of the American Indian the first thing that I noticed was the architecture of the building. The building had many curves and had a sense of ocean waves. The building itself was art. When I walked inside, I saw a lot of empty space, and that the whole building seemed to be moving around a center focal part. Add to that the dome over top letting in natural light, just being in the building felt like being a part of art. However, the architecture left many open and unusable spaces, so it was beautiful, but it was impractical, which I later found to be a great contrast to the art that I found inside the museum. Everything displayed not only showed its splendor, but also showed its overall practicality, proving my assumption on art incorrect. Their art was displayed in their pottery, homes, tools and weapons. More than anything else, I noticed that their art was prominently seen in the clothing that they wore, especially the women.
The current changing exhibition was the Identity by Design: Tradition, Change, and Celebration in Native Women’s Dresses. The exhibit displayed the different dresses worn in the different regions of the United States. It explained the style, material, and what the bead-work meant. These dresses ranged from form-fitting to loose and baggy. Each dress told a story in its stitches and decorations. I had assumed that women’s clothing had evolved through time, and at first glance it would seem that I was correct. However, on closer observation, I noticed a few qualities in the clothes that are still reflected in today’s society. Most notably would be that the higher class a woman was, the more beads and decorations there would be on the dress, making it more expensive. Today we still show our social class by how expensive the clothes we wear are.
Overall, I found the museum to be pro-feminist, even though it would not appear so. The clothes showed how the women documented their tribes’ culture. This along with the pottery was created by the women, showing even more the roles that the women had in the society at that time. The museum also showed sculptures displaying women who were prominent in their tribes, and had displays on how storytelling, which is what helped the tribes keep their traditions, was done by the women. It was the women who keep the tribe together, and the museum showed that again and again. Realizing this, I was once again proven wrong in my assumptions, there was art here that showed feminism, but was not clothing style and was not paintings; it was pottery, sculptures, and storytelling.
When I then traveled down the Mall to the Hirshhorn, I was more aware of the different forms of art which feminism could be seen. Inside I saw sculptures of women looking deformed, and paintings of women which took away any of their natural beauty. After initially seeing these art forms, I could only assume that the Hirshhorn was not a feminist museum. However, I then saw a set of paintings which made me question if I was indeed correct in this assumption. The first picture was of a woman driving a car with a man in the passenger seat. The woman was clearly in charge, making the painting seem feminist, and breaking my assumption that feminist art would not have men in it. The other painting was a woman who, upon first glance, seemed to be having an orgasm. This was then supported by the flower in the background, since in art flowers can often represent a woman’s vagina. This picture was showing the freedom of a woman’s sexuality, an obviously feminist trait, and more so, on the nightstand by the woman’s head was a picture of another woman. This could mean that it is more than just feminist art; it could be lesbian art as well. This picture disproved my assumption that feminist art would not portray women in a sexual way. Another exhibit that proved this assumption wrong was in the basement. It was a collection of photographs of women, all naked or half naked in different positions. Though the women often seemed dead, it still seemed very sexually charged. Looking at the artists other works; I noted that all of them seemed to be about sexual liberation of women. So when I left the Hirshhorn I felt though the whole museum was not feminist, there was a very strong feminist presence.
I assumed that the Daughters of the Revolution would have more then just a feminist presence; I assumed that it would be overtly feminist. Though it was not what most people think of as feminist, it was what I have learned to be feminist, focusing on women how important their role in the world is. The special exhibit at the Daughters of the Revolution on clothing from the revolution to 1910. I found that though there were definite changes in style, there was a more overwhelming feeling of similarity in the clothes. The clothes for women, even for dolls, were very conservative and covered most of a woman’s body. Today, we think that women have more freedom in what they wear, and while this is true, we still find that people will be far less likely to take a women wearing reveling clothing seriously. The other thing I noticed here was how tobacco companies started to target women for their products. It would seem that this was liberating for women, however in the end all it was doing was using women to earn more money for men and their companies.
After going to all these different museums, my perception of feminism has greatly changed, and I have had most of my assumptions proven wrong. I learned that art could be practical and beautiful. Feminism is about more than women being superior to men; it is about women being freer to be whatever they want to be. I was proven right that it is women who make feminist art. I learned that women could be portrayed sexually in feminist art. I learned that men could be seen in feminist art. I learned women’s clothing has not changed as much as we would like to think. And I learned that feminist art has been around far longer than the 1900s. In fact has been present since as far back as the 1500s. I have learned so much in just two days and a few visits to museums. I makes me assume that I will learn much more in the coming semester.
Michael Baird
Assumptions
I assumed that I might feel offended by feminism.
I assumed that feminism was a bad thing without really knowing what it is.
I assumed that I would feel awkward about being in the National Museum of Women and the Arts.
I assumed that I would be the only male in the National Museum of Women and the Arts.
I assumed that clothes hangers could never be used to create a piece of artwork.
I assumed that the museums would be boring.
I assumed that art only included paintings and sculpture.
I assumed that art should be uplifting.
I assumed that all of the artwork would look the same.
Assignment #1
This past week I visited four museums, which included the National Museum of Women and the Arts, the National Museum of the American Indian, the Hirshhorn Museum, and the National Museum of African Art. While visiting these various museums, I learned some historical facts, saw a huge variety of art, discovered more about women and art, learned about myself, and I also had to rethink some assumptions that I had made prior to my visit.
Throughout my life, I have never particularly enjoyed going to museums. As a result, I was not thrilled when I found out I had to visit four museums. I assumed that I was not going to enjoy working on this assignment. Something about me changed, however, as soon as I began my trip to D.C. that day. I was looking forward to learning new information, and surrounding myself in an atmosphere that I do not experience often. This new feeling really intrigued me and from this feeling I felt much more driven to learn as much as possible at each museum. At the National Museum of Women and the Art I learned so much information that I was unaware of prior to my visit. Women had great difficulties being artists at times in history. They had lack of training, and were even barred from practicing fresco. Before my visit I assumed that anybody could be an artist without boundaries. Nuns were also active artists during certain periods. They worked in family workshops, and received individual commissions from private patrons. Following my visit to the National Museum of Women and the Arts, I went to the National Museum of the American Indian. This museum was very large and featured many different exhibits. While wandering around the museum, I was able to take in some very interesting information. I had no clue that the American Indians used the owl for medicinal purposes, and that the K’IWINYA’NYA:N tribe included the acorn in their diet. Other groups practiced a “Jump dance” to drive bad things away, while others participated in “The Brush Dance” which was a healing dance. I found that there were many interesting and unique facts about all of the various American Indian tribes. By spending time at these museums, I acquired some very unique and fascinating historical information.
During my schooling, for the most part I assumed that art mainly consisted of painting and sculpture. My visit to these various museums helped to open my eyes and allowed me to gain a new perspective on what I thought art could be. In the National Museum of Women and the Arts, what I saw consisted mainly of paintings. I found many of them to be quite beautiful and intriguing. Yet I was surprised at how some of the paintings appeared to be slightly depressing, at least in my opinion. One painting in particular was The Shakespeare Room where the woman in the painting had a gun and she was pointing at a stuffed animal. Another painting that I remember was Dog Woman, which just came across as bizarre to me. I just always assumed that art was supposed to be uplifting. I am discovering now that art is a form of expressing emotion, whether it is happy or sad. One painting that surprised me was a painting with a young boy and a rifle. I guess I assumed that it was out of place and I did not expect to see a male figure in a painting. The National Museum of Women and the Arts had a huge variety of paintings that I enjoyed viewing. The Hirshhorn museum also had very distinct, memorable pieces of art. The first piece that caught my attention was a huge figure hanging from the ceiling that was made out of only clothes hangers. I was also slightly puzzled when I saw a bed frame sitting in the middle of a room. When I looked more carefully at it, however, I saw what appeared to be a spider web that was made with the springs of the bed frame. There was one piece in the museum that I would not consider to be artwork. It was untitled and consisted of some very plain, simple shapes. I could even make a painting like that. I do not feel that this should be considered art because it lacks any complexity, and I did not see it resembling anything of importance. Maybe there is no requirement for what is considered to be art. The last piece of artwork that really caught my attention was actually a movie. This video/movie was a chain reaction video, where one reaction would lead to the next. It was very creative and imaginative. I really enjoyed the artwork that I saw at the various museums. I feel that I was able to gain a better perspective and a more open mind about art, and how powerful and expressive it can really be whether it is uplifting, or even sad or depressing.
From visiting these museums, I feel that I was able to gain some idea as to the relations between feminism and art. Some of the art that I remember from the National Museum of Women and the Art came across to me as strange, weird, bizarre, and even crazy. Looking back at my visit, I am now beginning to realize that these female painters have created such paintings to possibly try and eliminate some of the assumptions that our society makes about women. These painting are aimed at helping to show others that men and women are on the same level as one another. Another relation that was suggested to me was the importance of the artwork of women during the civil rights movement. Some of the art helped to convey the anger and frustration of women.
Each museum that I visited was unique in its own way. But, were the museums that I visited feminist, or not? I know that the National Museum of Women and the Arts was definitely feminist. Almost everything in the museum reflected something about women. For example, I could see and feel the accomplishment, love, passion, and greatness of women through the various pieces of artwork. Their equality to men seemed very apparent to me through these paintings. Feminism is the principal that the political, social, and all rights of women are equal to those of men. One painting showed the importance and the significance of the mother’s role in a family. The National Museum of the American Indian also appeared to be feminist. One section of the museum had almost nothing but the dresses that female American Indians would wear during that time. Another aspect that stood out to me was that women are one of the main reasons why the American Indian heritage is still around today. Many women are still active in their cultural traditions and continue to pass it on to the next generation. The Hirshhorn and African Art museums did not come across as feminist to me compared to the previous two museums. Nothing really stood out to me in particular, although there was a music video playing that featured a female singer in Hirshhorn. These museums created an atmosphere and display showing why women are equal to men in every aspect of life. I know that I have a great deal to learn about feminism, but reflecting back on my visit has helped me to gain a great understanding.
Taking a day to visit these museums was a great experience for me. Before my visit, I did not really know what feminism was, I was almost even afraid of it for whatever reason. After seeing the different pieces of artwork, I have a much more open minded approach towards feminism. I realize now how ridiculous some of my assumptions that I made were. This assignment has helped me to be more open to artwork, feminism, and learn a lot. I am beginning to learn how important it is to be open to new ideas that are different, and that I need to take my time before I make assumptions about anything in life.
Assumptions of Feminism and Art
The ability to understand and analyze feminism and art breaks down into one’s ability to understand culture. Both feminism and art are reflections of culture. The difficulty in this however, is actually knowing what culture is composed of. Culture is not a term that relates to one specific region or group, but rather as a collection of the various components that make up all regions and groups. These components extend to one’s language, customs, beliefs, and all other areas that make an individual, region, or group similar or unique. While visiting the various museums located in Washington, D.C., we are given the opportunity to better understand these various components of culture. Having the ability to see the various exhibits at the museums allowed me to form my own opinion of culture, move away from my original assumptions, and then realize that both feminism and art are expressions of culture. Breaking this down even further, one could even say that feminism is a form of art.
Walking into the National Museum of Women and the Arts, I assumed that the women working there would not be accommodating to a college male who quite obviously was not there by choice. However, this assumption was completely false after approaching the information desk where the women welcomed me and offered any help they could provide. I assumed that this museum would feature a large collection of artwork associated with the women’s power movement. However, I saw little to no evidence of this, and instead saw art that dated to the 1700s. This art featured portraits of women dressed in colorful and detailed dresses that were consistent with the time period. In many of these pieces, women were also drawn alongside children and dogs, which I assumed they would not be due to history’s depiction of these women as only capable of childbearing and caring for items around the home. Upon moving upstairs in the museum, I saw many pieces of art that depicted women in a particularly masculine sense. The facial features of these women were what attracted my eye as these pieces featured particularly stern faces on the women. I assumed that these pieces were intended to show a time period in which women were unhappy with their situations. Featured in this section, was a piece by Triptych where a group of men were seen drinking while a women stood off in the distance. I assumed that there would be artwork such as this that depicted men in a light that is not necessarily consistent with being a gentleman. The museum allowed me to see women as a part of history that transitioned from era to era as feminism developed. This development showed me that feminism is not about a particular movement but an entity that continues to grow.
After leaving the National Museum of Women and the Arts and heading toward the National Museum of the American Indian, I assumed that the American Indian had little to no relation to feminism. Surely, the connection to art was there, but not feminism. However, upon seeing the exhibit on women’s dresses my assumptions were quickly proven wrong. The dresses were extremely detailed and featured many designs that were particular to the woman’s tribe or position within the tribe. My assumption was that a dress could not be considered a piece of art. However after looking at these garments they proved to me that they were not only works of art but reflections of the tribes’ cultures. I even learned that the women’s dresses were made only of female animals, which I found to be even further truth as to their reflection of art. In many ways, I also found the building’s architecture to be both feminist and a piece of art. The exterior of the building features woman-like curves to reflect the traditional “feminine” side while the stone siding can be seen as a representation of power and fortitude, which I feel are two key components to feminism. The National Museum of the American Indian showed me that art extends beyond “high art” and into areas such as the clothes we wear and the buildings we find ourselves in.
My next destination was to the Hirshhorn Museum where almost all of my previously held assumptions about art were thrown away. While inside, I found myself among abstract paintings and sculptures that were completely foreign to me. I stood for a great deal of time in front of a large royal blue canvas titled, 1950-M No. 1, wondering why I was not in the Hirshhorn because I was sure that I had at one time in my life painted a background of pure blue. Perhaps it is because I don’t have the artistic eye, but I don’t believe this particular work to be art. However, one could argue that because of the feeling this particular painting gave to me, it is inherently art. There was one particular piece at the Hirsshorn that could arguably be my favorite of all the artwork I saw at the museums I visited. This piece was titled, Bedroom Painting #38 by Wesselmann. I assumed that most oil paintings had a slightly dull appearance to them, but after seeing this piece in person I realized how bright these pieces could truly be. The woman in this piece is nearly three-dimensional appearing to come off the canvas. In the background is a picture of a young girl that I believe is the woman at a younger age. For me, this is an example of feminism as you see a young girl in the picture and then see this girl matured into a woman with great power and ability to achieve great things.
My final destination was to the National Gallery of Art where I saw what Professor King refers to as high art. I assumed that this museum would be a gallery of landscape paintings, but soon realized that there were many paintings featuring people, particularly women. These paintings of women were not far off my assumptions as they typically depicted them in long tight dresses with various types of hats that is consistent with the clothing worn during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. These paintings were not particularly bright, but instead had a rich, bold color to them. I felt this rich color could be seen as feminist as they also gave off an aura of power and accomplishment. I assumed that this museum would feature only this type of art, but soon discovered a large collection of photographs. I saw various types of buildings mostly from Britain that featured no color. However, these photos allowed me to see photography as yet another form of art that I had previously not considered to be so.
Visiting these museums forced me to go outside of my normal comfort zone as I traditionally take things at face value and rarely analyze them closer. However, the pieces of art that I saw at these museums forced me to look deeper into what I was truly seeing before me. Even the royal blue canvas that I would never believe to be art forced me to stop and think about what I was looking at. The same can be said when I think of the term feminism. My previously held assumptions of feminism as being an action or a particular part in history were greatly changed as I realized that there is a piece of feminism in my every day life. Buildings, art, and even the clothes we wear are related to this idea of feminism, and perhaps all it takes is a second to finally realize this.
Assumptions:
1. I assumed that feminist art would use a lot of light colors, like yellow, pink, and white.
2. I assumed that feminist art would use very soft brush strokes.
3. I assumed that feminist art would appear very elegant and sophisticated, rather than abstract.
4. I assumed that feminist art would focus more on still life, like flowers and landscape.
5. I assumed that feminist art would glorify women in a way that is outside their traditional roles.
6. I assumed that a lot of feminist art would include children as subjects in order to create a sense of innocence and softness.
7. I assumed that feminist art would focus on finding a sense of beauty and orderliness.
8. I assumed that feminist art would use normal proportions and angles.
My recent visit to Washington DC forced me to re-evaluate my view on feminist art. My past perception of feminist art had been impacted by society and its often deficient definition of not only feminist art, but also of art in general. Before I evaluated the different artworks at the museums, I formulated assumptions that I had about art and afterwards I formed somewhat surprising conclusions, that refuted these assumptions.
The first museum that I visited was the National Museum of Woman and the Arts. I was surprised to see certain paintings in the museum because they didn’t seem to represent “feminist art”. One of my first assumptions was that feminist art would primarily incorporate light, vibrant colors. I was expecting a lot of paintings that used pink and yellow tints, but instead I found that many of the artists did not use light colors. Many of the feminist artists used a palette that was primarily based on dark colors. For example, in the painting Portrait of a Woman with Blackhood, the artist, Mary Beale, used mainly the color black to create the portrait. Because the distribution of colors seemed to be have a masculine undertone, I was quite surprised to find that the work was done by a female. Another assumption that I had had was that feminist art would exhibit an elegant and sophisticated style. Although there were many sophisticated-looking portraits and artworks, such as Marguerite Gerard’s Prelude to a Concert and Lilla Cabot Perry’s Lady With a Bowl of Violets, there were many other artworks that did not share this “feminist” style. For example, the painting Wonderful You by Jane Hammond did not seem feminist to me at first glance. The artist replaced her face with that of different animated characters. The painting seemed like something that could come out of a comic book rather than that of a feminist museum. Although some of the work within the museum did not seem feminist according to my definition of feminist art, I did feel that the museum itself did exude a feminist feel. The building was made of pink marble and included high ceilings and large pillars that created an overall elegant design that seemed suitable for that of a queen. Overall, the museum did seem feminist.
After visiting the National Museum of Woman and the Arts, I visited the National Museum of the American Indian. The museum did not seem feminist at all. There was nothing about my initial view of the museum that would cause me to believe that the museum is feminist. I assumed that feminist art would glorify women and show them as strong, capable figures. I assumed that feminist art would show woman in a role, outside of that of the traditional role of housekeeper. But, for the most part, the artwork within the American Indian museum did not corroborate any of these assumptions. Most of the artwork came across as having cultural messages, rather than feminist messages. The work within the museum glorified the American Indians as one whole group. The museum included such items as masks, clothing, and feather bonnets. The art glorified the American Indian culture and showed women as part of a work. There was nothing to set women apart, which I assumed would be something that would be part of “feminist” museums.
The next museum that I visited was the National Gallery of Art. When I first walked into the museum, I was surprised to see how the layout of the museum did not take on a traditional style like most museums. There were pieces of art hanging from the ceiling and most of these pieces did not come across to me as either feminist art or art in general. Most of the first pieces of artwork that I saw seemed very abstract and I would presume that these pieces would not be unanimously accepted as art by the viewing public. I believe the art that I saw on the main floor cannot be considered feminist art because of the abstract nature of the art. I assumed that feminist art would stick to traditional styles and that most feminist art would focus on beauty and aesthetics. But a lot of the sculptures and designs used absurd angles and proportions. But the museum as a whole was not uniform in style like I had seen at the National Museum of Women and the Arts and the National Museum of the American Indian. Each collection took on a different style and the museum seemed to incorporate many different styles and time periods. For example, I found one collection by the artist, Mary Cassatt, that seemed to represent the classic definition of feminist art. The subjects of many of her paintings, such as Little Girl in a Blue Armchair and Children Playing on Beach, were children and I think because she used children as her subjects her artworks took on a very innocent and soft style. This softness is, in my opinion, a key element of feminist art. Overall, the National Gallery of Art was in itself not feminist, but included feminist art.
The last museum that I visited was the Hirshhorn Museum. Before I even walked into this museum, I did not feel that it was feminist. The museum in itself seemed more like a mall. In my opinion, the Hirshhorn had the most unique collection of art. Most of the work defies not only the definitions of feminist art, but of art in general. There was a painting with a single black mark on it, and that was supposed to be art. There were screens that flashed different images, creating the illusion of the American flag and that was supposed to be art. This museum displayed different mediums of art. Instead of just showing the classic landscape and portrait paintings, the museum incorporated photographs, sculptures, and videos. Overall, I did not feel that the museum was feminist because much of the artwork was abstract to a degree that seemed dark and mysterious. I think, in a way, a lot of the work seemed to be art just for the fact that they weren’t trying to be art. I think this attitude makes much of the work seem not feminist. To me, feminist art should have a clear obvious message. No matter how dark in color or sharp in brushstroke a piece of artwork may be, there should be some sort of element that makes the work beautiful. The idea of wanting art to be beautiful is an assumption that I had about feminist art. I think that non-feminist art does not try as hard to create these aesthetics. A lot of times male artists will try to voice a message rather than display a sense of beauty.
In conclusion, I found my exploration of feminist art to be an insightful experience. I had many assumptions about feminist art that were refuted by my visits to the different museums. My museum visits made me realize that there is no one way to define art and feminist art. Every person looks at art in a different way. Although some of the artworks that I saw did not seem worthy to be deemed art or feminist art in my eyes, that does not mean that they are not art. This assignment made me realize that the artist defines his or her work as art and feminist art, and although the viewer may share a different opinion, there is no clear cut way to determine if an artwork is "real" art.
Assumptions about Feminism
I assumed that there would be very few women artists on display in museums other than The National Museum of Women and the Arts.
I assumed that textiles were only made by women, and only of interest to women.
I assumed that The Textile Museum was founded by a woman.
I assumed that only women were feminists.
I assumed that the staff would mainly consist of men.
I assumed that the art painted by women would be softer than the art painted by men.
I assumed that women artists would use a lot of pinks and greens.
I assumed that the Native American women made clothes because that was their role in society.
Assumptions about Art
I assumed that I was just going to see a bunch of rugs.
I assumed that The Textile Museum was going to be the most visually-boring museum I went to.
I assumed that the National Gallery of Art would be visually-boring as well.
I assumed that textiles were old-fashioned.
I assumed that there was no versatility in textiles.
I assumed that the art on display would be ancient, not contemporary.
I assumed that I was going to see just paintings.
I assumed that art is flat.
I assumed that art is visual.
Art and Feminism: An Unbreakable Link
A resident of the metropolitan area for my entire life, I had yet to view the spectacular museums offered to me by the District of Columbia. I have taken for granted all of the knowledge and inspiration that the city has to offer. Little did I know, 45 minutes away stood the difference between my everyday assumptions and a world illuminated by a different light. My one day excursion throughout the museums of D.C. has enlightened me far more than I had predicted. For years I have seen the world through the lens which has been molded by my surroundings; my family, friends, and school have all aided me into viewing the world the way I do. Consequently, I had a set vision of what I expected “art” to be, and what I expected when hearing the word “feminism”.
Before I was able to engage myself with new perspectives of art and feminism, I had to thoroughly understand my current perspectives. It’s embarrassing, but although I’m a dancer, I neglected to think of art as a function of motion, and although I’m an English major, I neglected to think of art in the literary sense. My immediate definition of art, pre-assumption-shaking, was flat, visual, pictures framed on the wall. My definition of feminism was also insipid before my assumption-shaking, as I thought of feminism as the movement to boost women in society over their male counterparts. Four museums later, these definitions have changed drastically.
The National Museum of Women and the Arts was first on my list of new ventures. Walking in, I assumed the museum was going to be feminist, without question. Walking out, I still felt the same way. It wasn’t so much the fact that the museum was solely dedicated to the achievements of women in the arts, but as to the aura I felt while I was there. Immediately I was stricken with confusion. Is it fair to have a completely female museum and not a completely male museum? If women want to be equal to men, why do they detach themselves into a separate museum, rather than delve themselves more heavily into the male-dominated art museums? It wasn’t until I went to the National Gallery of Art that I realized the “fair” quality of having a female-oriented art museum, a topic which I’ll further engage later. Quickly I began to appreciate the function of the National Museum of Women and the Arts in society. I feel as if it was designed to showcase what might have been overlooked in a regular art museum. It’s a celebratory place, to acknowledge the accomplishments of women who had been neglected the attention in the past. My jaw dropped when I saw Paula Rego’s beautiful pastel interpretation of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre. Seeing the visual and literary art coalesce so fluidly was remarkable. I still would rather have men and women united into one glorious museum, as equals, but I won’t deny the magnificence of the collections in The National Museum of Women and the Arts.
My next stop was The Textile Museum. Two seconds after walking in I realized that it was the polar opposite of what I had expected; the place was flooded with men. It wasn’t until I saw the plethora of men that I became conscious I was expecting to see women. It was an awkward moment for me, because I stopped mid-walking, noticing how I had just judged the museum’s clientele and never realized it. It may seem small, but it was most certainly eye-opening. The Textile Museum, after my exploration, is a museum I would deem not feminist. In actuality, the museum was founded by a man, George Hewitt Myers. Myers had no focused intention of women in the world of art upon his creation of the museum. Actually, as a passionate textiles collector, his vision was to ignite the same love for the craft within others. Women historically were the main producers of textiles, due to the past gender-roles which deemed women appropriate for needlework. Consequently, there is a dominating abundance of women artists on display, but not in any particular division from the men. Imagining a museum filled with rugs, I was shocked at how swiftly I was consumed in the unconventional splendor of art. The exhibition Ahead of His Time: The Collecting Vision of George Hewitt Myers gave me my first taste of non-Western art. The fascinating symmetrical detail, all done by hand, gave me a new appreciation for mastery of a craft, and a new appreciation for those willing to give so much time and effort into producing language through imagery.
I imagined white walls with paintings as I entered the National Gallery of Art, and I couldn’t have been more wrong. The span of the building was massive, the architecture intricate, and the art outdoors as vibrant as the art indoors. Everything in the building was dazzling, and it roused my senses to the importance of displaying brilliant art, brilliantly. The Gallery, as one of the personnel called it, wasn’t a feminist museum. The number of male artists and sculptors exhibited far surpassed the number of female artists and sculptors exhibited. Mary Cassatt’s Child in a Straw Hat was one of these select few pieces displayed from a female creator. Listed under “Artists” for the online collection tours, there are 31 names. Julia Margaret Cameron is the only woman to grace the list of artists. Yes, that means 30 of the 31 artists listed are male. The Gallery was male-dominated, which gave me a strong grasp for why The National Museum of Women and the Arts was created. However, the fact that there is an entire museum housing the art of women may possibly deter the Gallery from adding more women artists. The masculine air doesn’t take away from the marvel, as there is the gorgeous outdoor Sculpture Garden with an ice-skating rink that I was awed to find. For opening in 1937, thanks to Andrew W. Mellon, the now-federally funded museum is phenomenal, and will only get better with Richard Misrach’s On the Beach exhibit beginning May 25, 2008.
Following the Gallery, I investigated the National Museum of the American Indian. After viewing the museum in entirety, I feel strongly that the National Museum of the American Indian is a feminist museum. Many of the displays focused on the function of women in Native American society and the effect they hold over the progression of culture. It elucidates women beyond domesticity and motherhood, such as Woman Fishing by Jim Schoppert shows a woman doing the “manly” task of hunting food. The largest factor that leads me to believe the National Museum of the American Indian is feminist is that there seemed to be a conscious effort to include an array of exhibitions dedicated to women. It is apparent that a sense of equality was considered while piecing together the wondrous collections. The Identity by Design collection was an incredible, extraordinary display of clothing by Native American women. I failed to previously recognize fashion as an art, and wasn’t expecting the generous amount of clothing that the museum housed. I also found it quite interesting to see that the website url is “edu”, indicating that the museum is an organization designed to teach.
Having been there twice previously, I spent a small portion of time at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. It is truly implausible how tastefully such a horrific account of history is displayed. Although I am not Jewish, I find the museum to be beyond emotionally moving, and very upsetting. There has yet to be a time where I have walked past the tower of children’s shoes haven’t been moved to tears. The museum is quite indifferent to feminism. The artistic displays don’t favor a specific gender. It isn’t about the women, it isn’t about the men, it is about the human race breaking any barriers which segregates them, remembering those whose lives were taken out of malice, and exposing the bitter truth of hatred. The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum eliminates gender from the equation, as it carefully binds the human spirit without partition of gender, race, or religion. It is a museum of reverence, where I feel masculinity and felinity are the last issues at hand.
My personal definitions of art, feminism, and the relationship between art and feminism have been completely transformed. With my new perspectives in mind, I would now define art as expression; movement, sound, emotion, and inspiration in a three-dimensional world. Paintings may be flat, but in theory, art is never flat. My newly created definition of feminism would be a way of celebrating the achievements of women, striving for total gender-equality, and being proud of the women accomplishing goals in today’s society. Art and feminism are whatever you make of them, as they are permanently intertwined but discretionary based on the lens of the person viewing them. It is safe to say my opinions have greatly shifted from before and after my visit to the museums. I’m very pleased by what I’ve received from these tours, both visually, emotionally, and spiritually.
Summary List of Assumptions
1. I assumed that the women at the National Museum of Women and the Arts would not be accommodating to college-age man.
2. I assumed that the National Museum of Women and the Arts would focus mostly on the recent power struggle of women.
3. I assumed that there would be little focus of 16th and 17th century women in art.
4. I assumed that the art would depict women in a feminine manner.
5. I assumed that there would be a great deal of art that degraded men in some form.
6. I assumed that art was only that which could be placed on one’s wall or some form of sculpture.
7. I assumed that art needed to show a particular scene or of individuals.
8. I assumed that oil paintings were dark with little to no colors.
My Assumptions
1.I assumed art was limited to paintings and drawings
2.I assumed the National Museum of Woman and the Arts,would be more artsy and have fantastic use of color. I also assumed it would be more modern as opposed to being from the 18th century
3.I assumed that feminist art would display images like flowers and pretty scenery
4.I assumed that the Hirshorn museum pertained to Asian influence in the world of art since I had looked at the Native American Museum and was later going to the National Museum of African Art.
5.I assumed the National Museum of African Art would be colorful and have interesting use of patterns. I also believed it would have a lot of cultural influences in their artwork. I also assumed it would be animal themed or a jungle setting.
It is almost unbelievable how versatile and wide-ranging art truly is. Before completing this assignment I had my own personal interpretation about art and what could be considered art. If I was to define art in my own words, Art would mean a form of expression that captures the moods and emotions of a person. I would have argued that art is limited to a canvas and paint or other drawing tools. However, after being to the Museum, art took on an entirely different meaning for me. Through attending all the Museums I learned that art comes in all shapes and forms and is not restricted to paint and paper but can be expressed in objects, sacred images, videos as well and light installations. The following paper will explore themes of feminism, cultural influences and what art means throughout the world.
The first museum that I visited was the National Museum of Woman and the Arts. Upon arriving to this museum of Woman and the arts I expected the stetting and atmosphere to be completely different than it actually was. Before entering the museum, I assumed it would be more artsy and have fantastic use of color. When I think of art created by women I think of it as being flashy and modern. This was contrary to the actual place. Its use of color was dull and it set up a serious environment as opposed to a playful one that art usually sets up. The exhibits held in this museum depicted the 18th century. It was during this era that the term “Feminism Age” was coined. I am not sure if I am interpreting the artwork correctly but nothing stood out as feministic. I am assuming woman expressing themselves artistically and learning a craft that was restricted for men is what makes it radical and feminist. However the irony in the images is that is shows woman living out their role in a domestic manner. The perfect example of this was the image “The Family of the Earl of Gower” illustrated by Angelica Kauffman. This picture illustrates the role of woman and men during this time. There are three women in the painting as well as two men. One of the women is holding flowers and appears to be either decorating the house or tidying it. The next woman is playing the harp which may be considered a popular pastime for women during this time. Then there was a woman with kids which can be interpreted as her fulfilling her motherly duties. The two men however are the only individuals in the painting with scrolls or paper documents in their hand. This only highlights the advantages men had over women and were allowed to work and handle business matters. Another painting that captured my attention was Angelica Kaufman’s “Cumean Sibyl”. The woman in the picture is dressed nicely and by her attire you can determine her status. She has a book in her hand but it is behind her body. The expression on her face is unique. It is as though she is hiding something. This could be true because reading books during this time were possibly outlawed or not acceptable for women. This image could have possibly seen as radical.
Another powerful exhibit as well as artist in this museum was Paula Rego. I felt that all her images portrayed woman in a respectful light. There were certain images where she may have crossed boundaries. She has quite a few images that are extreme however she exemplifies the millions of roles that woman take in life. One of the many images that were appealing was her “Studies for Crivellis Garden”. This painting may have pushed the envelope in Brazil. It contained images of Saints but in a different light that included swords. The image even made a metaphorical reference to woman saints being a lion. This symbolized strength and power as well as a perception that she would like women to attain. I believe that she is expressing feminist themes through illustrating powerful women. A lot of her images show women doing work outside of their domestic life. It shows woman taking a superior role as well as being affectionate with each other. She also makes note of the hardships that women face whether it be health related issues like abortion, wearing uncomfortable clothes or adjusting the standard of normalcy that society has imposed. A noticeable trait that Paula Rego seemed to repeatedly use was giving the females masculine physical features and traits. I especially enjoyed her painting titles “Dancing Ostriches” because although the image represents ballerinas it also embodies full figured women. A concept that is foreign in the world of ballerinas. A common assumption would be that thinner women may have been drawn to make the image appropriate however she did the opposite. I really liked that because it shows her stepping out the box and proclaiming that women should love there bodies no matter what. A lot of her work is playful and exemplifies her powerful use of imagination.
The second museum I went to was the National Museum of the American Indian. Out of all the museums this was the only one that set up the atmosphere perfectly. Before entering the museum it prepared you for what was awaiting inside. The museum is surrounded my tepees. I went on a Sunday therefore there was a live band playing which gave tourists as well as visitors a closer linkage to Indian culture. What surprised me as well were the people dressed in costumes. A lot of people in the museum had on traditional Indian dresses. The Indians wore dresses as method to express their personal identity. A lot of interesting contributions that Indians have passed on to American culture were moccasin boots as well as leggings. What makes this exhibition more feminine than masculine is its tribute to the tradition and meaning behind the dresses they wear. This acknowledges woman’s role in the designing process as well as how important woman were in families. All over the exhibit are side notes and quotes made by American Indians of today that recall their fondest memories of their ancestors. I believe it is no coincidence that they all express sincere love for their mothers and grandmother and explain how they were. This museum may possibly be feminist because it reveals women’s role in this specific culture. While being at this museum I learned the history behind the Ghost Dance Dresses. The dresses embodied a collective effort of Native American women to voice their opinions and speak out against the rapid cultural changes being forced upon them. The dresses symbolize a visual indication of women’s participation in the spiritual rites of their people. This active movement to attain their rights was carried out peacefully. Native American Indian women were attached to their culture and the dresses ensured that their culture would not be forgotten. Another interesting fact concerning Native American women during this time was what would later be called the Blackfoot War Bonnet Society. In Native American culture it was uncommon for women to express themselves physically. This meant dancing in ritual ceremonies was outlawed. However in 1920 the Owl Dance Society allowed women to dance but only in a circle around women. Although it was a step from their previous privileges women did not think that was fair and in turn started the War Bonnet Society where they could express themselves freely through the art of dance. Feminism is definitely shown within this culture because they take on a lot of roles outside of domestic life an they fought for whatever it was they felt the deserve
The third museum I visited was the Hirshorn Museum. This museum by far was the most interesting one I visited. Hirshorn is definitely responsible for me looking at art in a whole different retrospect. After hearing the name of the museum I made many assumptions on what exhibits would actually be there. I assumed that this museum pertained to Asian influence in the world of art since I had looked at the Native American Museum and was later going to the National Museum of African Art. However my assumption was incorrect. This exhibit actually displayed modern art as well as light installations. This exhibit showed less of the common perception of art like paintings and introduced a new definition for art through the use objects. The “Currents: Recent Acquisitions” was the exhibit that stood out the most to me. There were many memorable images there; for example there was a video being played called “I am Making Art Too” by Jill Miller. What was fascinating about this video was that it incorporated hip hop with rhythmic movement. The video lasted about three minutes and thirty seconds. It was surprising because such fast paced music is not common in a museum. Therefore I did not assume it would be played. In the video a middle-age man is dancing and then a younger woman comes out and dances as well but she takes the lyrics from the song and expresses the exact interpretation off the words. The next thing I encounter are these index cards with water paint that have words spelled backwards which is interesting because something that seems so simple to do and can be accomplished by anyone is considered art. I think this is where mood and emotions comes into place. The art of such an image is revealed through the symbolism and meaning behind it as opposed to its simplicity. This exhibit also contained a bunch of hangers hanging from the ceiling. I would say an estimate of 60 hangers. I was confused with the meaning behind it but was fascinated by its classification as art. There was also a bike attached to a wheelchair created by Edgar Oplanieta. Although there was no title for the exhibit another one that was interesting was fruit baskets made out of chairs. Each fruit basket contained lemons and oranges. Overall this museum expanded my perception of art as a whole and at this point I had a better understanding of the many types of art.
The last museum I visited was the museum of African Art. I assumed this museum would be colorful and have interesting use of patterns. I also believed it would have a lot of cultural influences in their artwork. I also assumed it would be animal themed or a jungle setting. Although that may seem like a stereo-type, it was my assumption. Although Body of evidence was closed I was able to see a ton of other images that represent African culture. A segment of the “Body of Evidence” exhibit that was open was a film by Georgia Papageorge entitled “Africa Rifting Lines of Fire: Nambia/Brazil”. The film referred to the Gondwanaland split between South America and Africa. Through out the video you see red lines, a red flag, red cloth, red stream and red X’s. The use of red was purposely used to depict the internal conflict. The red banner that crosses throughout the film symbolizes the fiery continental drifty as well as the crucifixion and sacrifice blood. It shows the two countries sharing a theme of catastrophic violence, hope, redemption and salvation. A lot of the images in the African art museum had a lot of religious significance to them. I think religion is a major theme in African art and was their way of expressing their love for their God. Another example of African art was the abundant amount of masks found in the museum. Africans wore a lot of masks whether it was for combat or a tribal ritual. I think African Art is more ceremonial and has a dash of culture and tradition incorporated into their art work, similar to the Native American Indians.
In conclusion, this experience has truly been enlightening. My narrow-mindedness towards art and its appropriate definition has changed. I am now more comfortable in defining art and what it means in my opinion. I believe that art is a craft that can be done when least expected. Anything can be art because the creator is the one that determines if it is art or not. Art delivers emotion and feeling that may be difficult for the creator to say with spoken words. Finally art is like a story book that conveys a message that the artist is trying to get across.
Tania Cox 0102
Women Studies 250
But is it Feminism?
“The man who knows something knows that he knows nothing at all” (Badu). Aside from commenting on humility and a sense of greater understanding, this verse is an accurate reflection of my feelings upon beginning this assignment. The hard part was not discovering my assumptions, since the only criterion was that it had to be something I assumed. The hardest part was evaluating the topic of my assumptions: feminism. I did not know what feminism was. I had plenty of assumptions but an actual understanding of a working definition for what feminism was new to me. But before I decided to do some further investigations, I decided it was best to visit all four museums first so that my assumptions would not be interrupted by my findings.
I first went to the National Museum of Women and the Arts. My overall impression of the museum and the design was positive. I felt it was beautiful and that the marble and the statues were very interesting. Going off of my assumptions, I assumed this museum was feminist because it showcased female artists of varying mediums. I first assumed that simply the presence of a woman was enough to qualify something as feminist. But then I thought of a room with a White, Black, Chinese, and Hispanic person inside, and even though there were different people inside of a single space, this did not necessarily make the room diverse. I then though about brothels which are full of women, but that does not make them a place teeming with feminism. I instantaneously recanted that thought and said that brothels could definitely be places where feminism abounds; it just depended on how you looked at it.
The confusion followed me to the National Museum of the American Indian. I saw exhibits on tribes like the Mowhawk, in which the women had prominent roles in their society. This was in stark contrast to a conversation I had with Juanita Velasco. Juanita worked for the museums by doing live exhibitions of weaving from her native Guatemala. While I was watching her weave, we began talking and I started asking her things about her culture. She said it was mostly comprised of things from the Native Americans even though there was some outside influence. When I asked her about the role of women in her society, she said that they were not on the same level as the men. She said that weaving was central to a woman’s life and that even though some women achieved high status, like the medicine women, they were still not on the level of men who were in charge of all decision making. When I reflected on this and the fact that the Culture by Design exhibit, which had the most female presence, displayed primarily the weavings and dresses of Native American women, I began to feel that the museum was less feminist than I initially though upon entering. I felt the same sentiments at the Textile Museum because a lot of the work centered on the making of textiles by women. To me this seemed like a celebration of the status and the tasks delegated to women by men even though men took part in the making of textiles as well. My recognition of the latter made me feel that I had a particular bias when it came to feminism and feminist issues. It made me feel like I was too picky and that I would never find anything that in my opinion was truly feminist.
The National Gallery of Art was not immune to this belief of mine and was by far the least feminist of all four museums. Most of the ‘art’ was male, and reflected male biases in their depiction of women. I was particularly disappointed by the works at the NGA, even the painting by women like Mary Cassatt, were in my opinion ‘dry’ and narrow. The one exception was Georgia O’Keeffe which was a pleasant surprise. Drawing off of my assumptions, the most repetitive image I received about the relationship between feminism and art was that the art was in general about the female experience. Artemesia Gentileschi, the dresses of Native Americans, Mary Cassatt, and the stories in the weaving of indigenous peoples around the world, all spoke to some aspect of the female experience. There were a few exceptions however, like Rosa Bonheur and Emily Kame Kngwarreye’s Aboriginal art. After some deep though, I was not able to infer anything about feminism. I was only able to juxtapose my assumptions with what I saw. The result of which was a mass of confusion from which I concluded one of two things. Either feminism did not exist and it was a social construct subjected to each of our own presumptions and prejudices or, feminism was something I was entirely unfamiliar with in terms of higher thinking, and that I needed to further acquaint myself.
To formally acquaint myself with feminism after my museum visits, I did some research. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
Feminism is both an intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms…motivated by the quest for social justice, feminist inquiry provides a wide range of perspectives on social, cultural, and political phenomena (Stanford Encyclopedia).
Using this definition, I was able to conclude that none of the four museums that I visited was exclusively feminist. The highest on the feminist scale would have to be the National Museum of Women and the Arts. They had a range of many different female artists who used different media in order to communicate their perspectives. The only drawback was that the range of artists was a bit small, most of the women in the art or featured in the galleries were white. But outside of that, the National Museum of Women and the Arts gave many women a platform that was absent in many other venues. Such was the case at the National Gallery of Art. Their catalog listed a total of 18 women whose works were on display in the museum. Compare that with number of men whose work was exhibited and it is clear to see that this museum is not the most feminist of venues. Outside of the sheer lack of female artists present at the Gallery, the works that depicted women were mostly of idealized women, naked, and gazing off into the sky. Those that were not naked were dressed up as the example of ‘a perfect lady’ of aristocracy. These images fail to show the broad spectrum of realities that women experience and confine them to the space of a trophy wife. There were a few exceptions but overall, this museum is not feminist. The National Museum of the American Indian and the Textile Museum are also not feminist. They simply feature a lot of artistry, and crafts practiced by women. The museums do not set out to find justice for women in a male dominated world. While their exhibitions provide an opportunity for the work of women to be viewed and appreciated, they do not provide a platform from which women can be seen fighting sexism.
Tania Cox
My Assumptions
I assumed feminism was confrontational
I assumed feminism could not encompass images of “conventional beauty”
I assumed feminism in art had to be produced by women
I assumed feminism was every and anything dealing with women or females
I assumed I knew what feminism was because I am female
I assumed I knew what feminism was in general
I assumed feminism in art had to show signs of oppression
I assumed feminism revolved around white females
I assumed if the feminist art was too serious, it would be polarizing and therefore, flawed
I assumed if the feminist art was not serious, it was trivializing the experiences of women and therefore, flawed
I assumed that my views on feminism were of my own construction
I assumed that sexuality was not feminism
I assumed sexuality was feminism
I assumed feminism did not involve famous people
I assumed I would be looking primarily at paintings and possibly sculptures
I assumed only women produced textiles
I assumed feminism related to specific colors which should be present i.e. pink
I assumed feminism had to reject stereotypical colors i.e. pink
I assumed that Native Americans were perfect
I assumed there were no Native Americans in Guyana
I assumed that the Amerindians were not the same as Native Americans
I assumed there was no possibility that I could have descended from Native Americans
I assumed all people were proud of their Native American heritage
I assumed all feminist art was captivating
I assumed all feminist art was compelling
I assumed most of the art would be relatively recent
I assumed feminism was counterculture
I assumed the Textile Museum would have just roles of cloths and materials
Samantha Holcomb
February 12, 2008
WMST 250
Assumption about Feminism and Art
There is no place like Washington DC and the Metropolitan Area. It offers so much to a learner. Being the nation’s capital, and where most of the political decisions are made, although it offers political education, it also supplies a learner with multicultural education. On my “adventure” through the Metropolitan Area and visits to the varying museums I was astounded and surprised at the many different perceptions of art in different museums. Museums such as the National Museum of Women in the Arts offer a different perception than that of the art in the National Museum of the American Indian. Not only does the perception vary in appearance, but also in meaning. Through these different perceptions I have learned a great portion of information on different culture, and the different views and “takes” on art.
The National Museum of Women in the Arts is a place to honor the perception of art by women. It glorifies art by women and art that depicted women, both good and bad. Events that take place are events created to empower females such as Business and Professional Women’s Council Events. Exhibits that take place at the museum are also empowering to females, such as the Paula Rego exhibit. While visiting the National Museum of Women in the Arts I learned that there is still more to women than “meets the eye”. Women are responsible for their contributions to the household, such as the adding of a female’s touch in a house and the educating of the young females of how to be a strong woman. Because they usually do not engage in hunting, fishing and hard labor activities, women are underestimated and it is atoumatically perceived that they are weak. Although a woman may be perceived as a weak being, woman can add strong political and emotional feedback to there life situations. Most of the art pieces that were viewed on this visit were very confusing to the eye, but very capturing. While visiting the museum I felt very independent and very connected with my feminine inside. It was a powerful visit that really gave encouragement for me to be a strong woman of the 21st century. This museum is feminist because it portrays the women’s point of view on what art is to them and their perception of what is beautiful. This connects to feminism because feminism is about the woman’s theory on things, therefore, does meet this definition of feminism in the ways of art defining a woman’s theory. The museum is currently exhibiting work by Paula Rego. Paula Rego’s art ranges from figure studies to semi-abstract political paintings and collages. Through her art she expressed “her anger toward the fascist regime in her native Portugal.” (Pamphlet on Paula Rego from Women’s Museum)This museum gave a very different perception of art as opposed to the National Museum of the American Indian.
The National Museum of the American Indian is a place to honor traditions, rituals, ceremonies and life conditions of the Native Americans. It highlights the traditions and ways of the Native Americans lifestyle. It displays the different clothing, food, instruments, and personal valuables of Native Americans. This museum can be recognized as a feminist museum to the extinct that women played an important role within the tribe and their households. This is because some of the art that is displayed honors and highlights the role of women, such as the Our Lives Exhibition and the Changing Exhibition. Both contained very capturing exhibits that dealt with women and their contributions to their tribe, household and lives. For example in the “Our Lives” exhibition it displayed a very sentimental piece that pertains to women called the “Hemp Time Ball”. This artifact is a woman’s interpretation of her life and her own story. Beginning with the courtship of a female’s life, she would begin to make knots and tie beads on to some twine and would roll it in to a ball (this was done to keep organization) that only she could interpret the meaning of. Each knot or bead represented a major happening in her life. Every 25 years she would begin a new ball. I felt that this artifact was a great symbol of feminism because it was all about a certain woman’s life and individuality. I was very captivated by this piece of art, not only this specific artifact, but the museum as a whole was an amazing visit. I learned that we, as a diverse country, do not give the Native Americans their fair honor and recognition for begin different. I assume this is because the Native Americans are so intertwined with other cultures that we have overlooked their role that they play in America. Currently the museum is celebrating the origins of chocolate through an exhibit called “The Power of Chocolate”. This exhibit celebrates the making process, history and culture of chocolate. It also celebrates where it came from such as Bolivia, Peru, Columbia, Ecuador, and many other South American countries. The purpose of the various exhibitions is to focus on the Native American tribe as a whole, and to honor all of the details and people that made the Native American culture so different from any other culture. Art by women or crafts by women have so much to do with the museum, due to the fact that the clothes, food and other crafts that were need around the house such as pots, shoes, etc. were made by the women in the tribe. Like the National Museum of the American Indian, there are other museums that also contribute to the lifestyles of a culture, such as The National Museum of African Art.
The National Museum of African Art is a place where the arts and crafts of Africa are honored. They are not only honored, but they are recognized and accepted by the public. Exhibits that are displayed at this museum mostly deals with African Art, such as sculptures, masks, instruments and small housing necessities. The exhibit that is currently there is called the African Vision: The Walt Disney-Tishman African Art Collection. This exhibit contained different ceremonial masks and sculptures that depicted African women, African men, and the lifestyle of Africa. For example, in some of the female figured sculptures women were made supporting their breast to represent the nurturing role of women. Like the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Museum of African Art serves the purpose to recognize the nation of Africa as a whole through its artwork. Also both museums share the same reason of why I think it is a feminist. The fact that there is recognition of the female role in the African culture and the respect that is given to her, I consider the museum feminist to that extent. All of the museums that I visited left me with questions and wondering if what was being displayed was considered art.
The Hirshhorn Museum is a museum of sculptures that depict a person’s feelings, emotions, personality, etc. The exhibit that I viewed was called Currents: Recent Acquisitions. This exhibit contains structure that contributed to shaping people’s understanding of the world and capturing moods during memorable times in history. This museum, in my opinion, has no relationship to feminism whatsoever. This museum did contain art by women, but the art was not made to honor women in anyway. In the museum there did dwell many art that involved women’s opinion, but feminism is about honoring women all together and there impacts. The museum only honored a women’s opinion on a certain event, which is why I believe that this museum cannot be considered feminist.
In conclusion, through my visit to the different museums I have learned that most of my assumptions about the museums were true and some were false. Art contains a different meaning in certain aspects of life. What one may consider art another may consider craft or a necessity of life. But because of the variances in art, although o may believe something is art one may still be thinking “Is that Art?”
Samantha Holcomb
February 12, 2008
WMST 250
MY LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS
The National Museum of the American Indian
1. I assumed to see a lot of hand crafted things such as carvings, masks, and “homemade” war weapons.
2. I assumed to see mostly Native American visitors and tour guiders or people of the Native American heritage.
3. I assumed to see the colors red, brown, yellow, and orange in various exhibits or crafts.
4. I hear and see images of Pocahontas and her tribe and hear about her contributions to America.
5. I assumed to hear and see images and exhibits contributing to Sacagawea and her contributions to America.
6. I assumed to see ceremonial clothing or dances, such as the well known “Powwow”.
The National Museum of African Art
1. I assumed that, with Africans association with in scents and natural smells, the museum would smell like in scents.
2. I assumed that there would be a big elephant once I entered into the museum.
3. I assumed that the foyer would be filled with colors more artifacts than what was provided.
4. I assumed to see masks relating to stories, or social status or ceremonies.
5. I assumed that there would be artifacts there that were in relation to the earth or nature or an African folktale.
6. I assumed that there would be instruments displayed that was/is played during ceremonies or rituals.
Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden
1. I assumed that it would be boring.
2. I assumed that there were sculptures there that was seen in London and Greek art sculptures.
National Museum of the Women in the Arts
1. I assumed the museum to have a pink foyer (do to the professor’s example), but a more serious color throughout the museum because it would symbolize the fact that there is recognition that the place deals with females but “we mean business/seriousness.”
2. I assumed it to have an independent woman feeling while I am going through the museum. A feeling like I am a powerful woman that is capable of anything and fears nothing.
3. I assumed it to smell like women. To have a feminist smell on the inside.
4. I assumed to see picture in the foyer of feminist women that stood out in history.
5. I assumed that there was art of women over powering men or women taking over or women being in power.
I assumed that…
Feminist art would be angry.
Feminist artist would purposely defy the common assumptions of woman.
There wouldn’t be so many women artist in the “Current Acquisitions” section of the Hirshorn because there are fewer women in most other museums.
There wouldn’t be only women working in the National Museum of Women in the Arts.
After the National Museum of Women in the Arts was created there would be more museums around the world that would cater to women.
Women artist would incorporate nude males into their work since male artist have put nude women all over the art world.
Because of a lack of well known women artist, I didn’t realize it was possible for women to step out of their “norm”.
Only the Native American woman made the dresses and was unaware of the fact that men provide the hide and elk teeth.
There would be more women artist throughout the Hirshorn museum because of the large amount in the “Current Acquisitions” section.
All exhibits in the National Museum of the American Indian would be inside and not outside in the landscape.
The National Museum of Women in the Arts wouldn’t have its own famous library.
The National Museum of African Art would be bigger.
Art wouldn’t incorporate blood into its pieces.
A feminist wouldn’t use her nude body as art.
There wasn’t a transmission into womanhood in the Sioux tribe.
Feminism is apart of almost every aspect in life. I believe that there are two ways of looking at things, the mainstream way and the feminist way. It was only after my visits to the museums and participation in this class that I came to this conclusion. When women are willing to go against the stereotypes and assumptions against them that is true feminism. I saw art as a great way to visually prove that all women are not the same and show how pointless it was to place blockades on their abilities. I admit that I had a few negative predispositions about feminism and its place in society, but I now have a new attitude towards this way of thinking. Through art I realized the struggles women face in everyday life from earning less than men to not having many places to put their art in museums. The ideas of feminism and art differ almost as much as its place within the four museums that I visited. Feminism cannot be defined in just one way, thus justifying the reason behind how women’s art was seen within The National Museum of Women and the Arts, Hirshorn, The National Museum of the American Indian, and The National Museum of African Art.
The first museum I visited was The National Museum of Women and the Arts. I started there because it was the furthest away from the other Smithsonians, but as I look back I regret that decision. Beginning my exploration at a women’s museum set an unrealistic tone for the rest of day. It only built my shock at the lack of women at the other museums. The National Museum of Women and the Arts was visually astounding. I immediately loved how beautiful the architecture was in comparison to museums such as the Hirshorn. When I walked in it felt like a huge dollhouse with the pink and marble stairs and pillars.
I assumed that The National Museum of Women and the Arts would be a feminist museum because it was a primary requirement for this class. As I examined the collections closer I developed actual reasons for why the museum was feminist. At first the collections on the first and second floors didn’t seem all that amazing or groundbreaking to me. These works were from the 1700 and 1800s and just seemed typical for that time period consisting of portraits with brilliant detail within the clothing and jewelry. I thought it was funny that back then Angelica Kauffman was known for stepping out of supposed “female norms” because of the way she arranged the people in her portraits. On the other hand, this could be looked at as some type of feminist revolution, because there was a woman doing something that was a head of everyone else.
I was intrigued with a painting by Frida Kahlo because I had never seen anything like it before. Kahlo’s painting titled “Self-Portrait Dedicated To Leon Trotsky, 1937” had such a clear cut meaning and purpose. It consisted of Kahlo standing in a room holding flowers and a letter Leon Trotsky wrote to her. It symbolized her grief with his death and her alliance with Communism. I had never before seen a woman combine her feelings along with her political beliefs. This was what feminist art was to me, putting emotions and ideas into pieces showcasing the depths of the female mind. I would later learn that this was a great way to view feminist art within The National Museum of Women and the Arts, but not for every museum.
The next place I visited was The National Museum of the American Indian and it seemed like the complete opposite of the previous museum. The architecture was incredibly unique because of its incorporation of the elements. The importance of family, cultural ties, and story telling was all throughout this museum. The first exhibit that I went to was “Identity by Design”, which was made up of traditional clothing from numerous tribes. I once again jumped to conclusions assuming that an exhibit about women and clothes could only be emphasizing the stereotypical duty of a woman, but in the Native American Culture.
The “Identity by Design” exhibit had the perfect title because it explained the intention of the clothing so easily. There was more to the clothing than just its appearance, but its purpose and symbolism. At first glance the cradleboards that babies are placed in just appear to be a practical way of carrying a child around. However, the design on the cradleboard is actually meant to protect the child from spirits. Also, the dresses that the women make serve as a representation of an individual’s social status, culture, and tribal values. The Native Americans had so many interpretations for their clothing that this could have been a museum in itself.
In the Sioux tribe creating a beaded yolk dress is not only a challenging task, but a necessary one. These dresses can take years of work, but upon completion a girl is believed to have moved on to womanhood. This custom amazed me because, I have heard of the passage into manhood in other cultures, but never for girls turning into women. I like the idea of girls working towards their womanhood instead of just turning an age like 16 and being showered with gifts. By the end of my visit I see the feminist aspects within this museum because there are numerous examples of the importance of women and their place in society. The way that The National Museum of the American Indian celebrates women made me see it as a feminist museum.
The Hirshorn museum was the third place that I visited for the day. The “Currents” section in the basement of the museum was very diverse in its portrayal of feminism. There were works by a woman considered the pioneer in feminism, Carolee Schneeman. Her work consisted of nude photographs of herself from the 1960s. Shneeman’s photographs were shocking and disgusting to me. In her description they say that she uses sexuality, body, and gender in her work, but I don’t see the significance of it. What message is Shneeman trying to send with her nude body covered in clear plastic as if she is a corpse? I did not see her work as art because I thought that it just resembled porn, and would not be taken seriously in comparison to other works that I feel are more feminist.
The work of Mary Coble within Hirshorn used the body as art, but it had another affect on me. She had the names of hate crime victims tattooed onto her skin and then pressed note cards against the bleeding scars. I appreciated her creativity and powerful message she sent through her actions. I interpreted the wall of bloody names as a way of saying that people shouldn’t forget or ignore these victims. I see Coble’s work as feminist because it is easy to see her intentions. I would have called all of Hirshorn a feminist museum if the rest of the floors had the same ratio of men to women as the basement did. Sadly, I only saw one woman on the upper levels and those were the permanent collections. Hirshorn’s lack of female artist throughout the rest of its building led me to believe that they are overly consumed with the mainstream and anti-feminist.
The final stop of the day was The National Museum of African Art. My first impression of this building was its small size. In comparison to the previous museums it was much smaller, which surprised me because of the large number of African Americans in the surrounding area. In addition, I was expecting it to be much like The National Museum of the American Indian because of its cultural purpose. In some ways the museums were similar, but the exhibits differed.
Within The National Museum of African Art I understood the importance of the body to its artist. The pieces there were often without clothes or had very little on placing the focus onto the human form and shape. In the
The views I had about feminist were greatly generalized in the beginning. I saw them as women that were angry that society catered to men and spent their time trying to convert other women to their belief. As a result, I believed that their art would reflect this and also be angry. I learned that those ideas were merely assumptions and could not classify an entire group of people. I have seen a wide variety of art that I considered feminist and they range from being outwardly angry to just boring and classical. Experiencing the art of each of the four museums proved that women’s art can hold its own along with more famous male artist.
Before analyzing feminism, I was unaware of the different ways in which it could be manifested in our society. When I first considered feminism with art, I thought of art with a lot of feminine symbolism and images of powerful women living their lives in their own manners. Upon further considering the impact of feminism on our current lifestyles through the exhibits I visited, I realized that feminism is much more than a statement, but a political, social and economic movement that changed the lives of women all over the world and continues affecting the way women lead their lives today.
One ongoing theme throughout the four museums I visited was the use of art to revive history and tradition. There was an American Indian Pottery collection at the National Museum for Women in the Arts as well as several pieces of pottery throughout the Native American Indian Museum. It was interesting to first see how integral pottery was to the Native Americans in the past and then see how women are reliving tradition in the present. Not only does it perpetuate the empowerment of women with the exhibition of a special skill they had, but emphasizes the importance of remembering those women who strived to make a statement in the past, when patriarchal culture was all that existed. It is interesting to see how this form of art in a way incorporates the history of the time, especially the most transforming time between 1880s and 20th century during the time that the railroad was introduced and completely changed the Native American lifestyle of the time.
In contrast, I was surprised by the amount of modern art that I encountered. This peaked my interest because I like forming my opinions on modern, abstract art. Louis Nevelson was one of the modern artists I recognized from when I visited the Smithsonian American Art Museum. I assumed that feminist art would be more traditional, but Nevelson completely changed that. I admire her use of angles and lines, perhaps because as an engineer, I enjoy organization and neatness. At the same time, it was completely unique and mostly unsymmetrical. This freedom to be different and stray from the normal interested me because it reflects her freedom to make sculptures however she wished. Making sculptures was one of her freedoms at the time. No one could tell her how or what to sculpt and by enjoying this freedom, she made a very powerful statement for the women at her time and even now. One thing I enjoyed about all the exhibits is that you don’t have to be from the time that the artwork was created; I could related to several aspects of all the artwork.
Another out-of-the-ordinary work of art was the self-portrait by Alice Baily. I was particularly interested in this one because of its title. Typically, self-portraits reflect an artist’s true feelings and since it is a portrait of oneself demonstrates just how the artist perceives herself at the time. The face itself troubled me because it resembled Scream by Van Gogh. However strange the face was, the woman was still beautiful. I thought of what Baily was thinking as she painted and concluded that perhaps she herself felt trouble at the time. The blurring of the mouth could mean that she wanted her opinions to be heard but couldn’t do so. These kinds of portraits force us to analyze the artist’s situation at the time and consider all the aspects of their lives that could’ve caused them to create what they thought should be on display.
Before visiting the National Museum of Women in the Arts, I wondered how I would react when surrounded by feminist art. One reason I thought I would be bothered by it was because the entire National Museum of Women in the Arts was dedicated to a sex. When it comes to race and gender, I don’t find it appropriate to distinguish an individual by any type of characteristic. To me, this just perpetuates stereotypes. However, although this exhibit did make a strong statement on the power of women, it was not the main purpose of the exhibit. The artifacts left by women over time told history. Upon envisioning what these exhibits and the world would be like without women, I saw that the artists were not just trying to make a feminist statement, but they were documenting and leaving a record of feminist movement, dating back thousands of years.
The Holocaust museum impacted me greatly because of the vast number of tiny artifacts recovered from that time period. Being in the presence of things possessed by people of the holocaust made the experience feel so real, like I had known some of the people of the time. I did not consider this a feminist museum because it was not dedicated to the empowerment of women of the time but to all of the victims of the holocaust. I did observe some artifacts left by young girls and women. They depicted how they perceived their situation and there were a lot of writings detailing how they felt at the time. The displays of the things they owned were themselves works of art. It was as if they had frozen a period of time and put it on display. Because of all the detail in the objects, such as the exhibit of a camp cell, I could imagine myself reliving the moment in detail and considering all the aspects of their day to day lives.
During my visits, one deep realization was how precious art made by women was and how vital women themselves were and are to cultures from all over the world. At all museums, I envisioned what the exhibits would look like without the presence of women at that time. Some cultures, like those I observed at the Museum of African Art called women’s art sacred, it was a religious experience to learn the traditional ways of creating useful art. In another exhibit, I read about how collectors of women’s pottery in Mexico actually contributed to the economic success of those women at the time. Women’s art is not only a reflection of female status at different points in history, but it has had the power to influence religion, the economy and several other important aspects of everyone’s style of living, not just women’s.
Assumptions
I assumed that the National Museum of Women in the Arts would contain few sculptures.
I assumed that males were offended by feminism.
I assumed that feminists have one personality type.
I assumed that feminists were only those women who had access to higher education.
I assumed that all feminist art was the same.
I assumed that collecting art couldn’t really help economic stability of a community.
I assumed that I would not find modern art.
I assumed that all African art would consist of the same base colors.
I assumed that I wouldn’t observe much feministic art at the Holocaust museum.
I assumed that I wouldn’t see many people at the museum on a weekday.
It is almost difficult to select a time in my life where I experienced being marked. The only time I can remember being marked was in the sixth grade. I spent my entire life up until that point going to public school. It was in the sixth grade my parents decided to transfer me to a catholic school for educational purposes. I had been there for no more than two months and coincidentally things began missing. One girl had lost her bracelet; one boy lost his pokemon cards and another boy lost his gameboy. In this predominantly white school is what hard for me to find my niche. I remember one day after school the principle called me to her office to discuss all the reported stolen items. She immediately began by saying “I don’t know if this was tolerated in your old school, but we will not allow thievery in this school”. She finished by saying you will return all the items you took. I remember being so confused as to what she was talking about because I knew I had not taken anything from anyone. She had not asked me if I stole the missing things but simply accused me of taking them. At this moment I felt race was an issue at this school and I quickly transferred to my old school.
Post a Comment