| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| <re:tracing: the feminist
art program> arose from work with feminist art of the seventies in Los Angeles.
In the following I will go into more details of my interest in the theme and present
the letters of the former students of the Feminist Art Program without, however,
discussing the individual statements. I would like to avoid such a judgement of positions
and feel that it is more important that material published here is regarded as a
launching pad for further discussions. The Feminist Art Program was founded in 1970 by Judy Chicago in Fresno, California. One year later the program moved to CalArts in northern Los Angeles and Miriam Schapiro became the co-director. Already at that time, the percentage of women among the students of the art school was high while likewise, very few women were working as professional artists after the completion of studies. The heads of the program saw the reason for that not only in the education based on the male-artist but in the patriarchal art system as a whole. Therefore, a concern from the beginning on, was to create art education specific to women and simultaneously an alternative context for the art from women. |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| In the Feminist Art Program,
through consciousness raising, the students formulated the commonalities of their
supposed individual experiences and made them the basis of their artistic work. One of the constantly discussed projects in the Feminist Art Program is an exhibit in a residential house in Hollywood, Womanhouse. However the internal critique of the authoritarian structures and of radical separatism as well as conflicts with Miriam Schapiro led to Judith Chigago's departure from the Feminist Art Program in 1973, convinced that the patriarchal atmosphere in CalArts had ruined "her" program .(1) Two years later the Feminist Art Program was dissolved. The history of the program and the shifts in the course of its existence are documented, among other sources, in texts from Mira Schor, Faith Wilding and Judy Chicago.(2) |
|||
|
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| In the following I will
refer to that which often approachs a critique of the feminism of the seventies from
today's perspective and with the background of current theoretical confrontations
only in so far as it was fundamental for my interest in the Feminist Art Program
and the achievement of <re:tracing>. My original scepticism with regard to
feminist (self) experience art which is also addressed in Mira Schor's letter, is
based on a fencing off from theories of universal femininity which I associated with
current theories of essentialist popular feminisms. I reacted in a similarly dismissive manner when, "as women and artist" I was asked, for example, about my opinion of things like menstruation images, as the reference to "characteristics of women" presented itself as an identificational necessity. The extent to which such constructions in the historical context of the seventies were an important strategy and base for policies within the movement became clear only later. |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| What I read about the Feminist
Art Program was contrasted by the dusty anti-theory and genius cult atmosphere in
which I studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna: a group of women brought themselves
together at a university, collectively countered the myth of the lonely artist in
his studio, occupied themselves in an atmosphere of radical consciousness building
with feminist theory and developed new forms of praxis. The confrontation stood in
direct connection to the political women's movement and was simultaneously an active
critique of common norms within art: the universal claims of modernism were unmasked
through women's perspectives, feminist content and material and techniques which
were until then unknown to art. My research pushed to the forefront the confrontation with the career goal "artist" and the sketches of a life possible within this framework. The Feminist Art Program and the work of the students have indeed found a place in a canon of feminist historiography and have again and again been shown in exhibits in the past few years.(3) |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| There was not, however,
connected with this, information about the years after graduation from art school
or the possible current art production of the students. It appeared as though the
two program leaders who established themselves in the male-dominated US-american
art world of the sixties, and on whose experiences the idea of the Feminist Art Program
touched upon, had chalked up this success for themselves. None of the students became
as renown as artists. It is true that criterions such as "success" or "career"
are doubtful here where it is a critique of existing patriarchal institutions and
norms which led to the construction of alternative structures. Many of these self-organized
galleries, presses, newspapers, work and discussion groups dissolved at the latest
in the eighties, which inevitably led to a new orientation of the persons involved. Apart from that, what seemed exciting to me was the connection of the Feminist Art Program to a progressive Institution of high-art which CalArt certainly was in the early years.(4) An important concern of the Feminist Art Program was the search for positive role-models; for women who had succeeded. The Project "Letters to a Young Woman Artist" came about in 1974: women artists, art historians, gallerists, curators and critics were invited to write about their experiences and give advice to younger women.(5) |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| For <re:tracing>,
letters seemed an appropriate form for another reason: I wanted to give people who
are equated with a certain art-historical position a presence beyond this small slice
of their biography. The seventies are only twenty five years away and since the available
material didn't answer my questions, it seemed obvious to contact the women themselves. My letter to the former students of the Feminist Art Program was short and more impersonal than many of the answers. As I wanted to make as few conditions as possible and had no concrete impression of those I approached, it was very openly formulated: I asked the women about the influence of the group experience and the political ideas on their biography and if they were active in the "art world" after this, or why they had left it.(6) |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| Apparently the Feminist
Art Program was not a good basis for a traditional artist's career although in some
of the letters it sounds as though there is a desire for that and only a few of the
women fundamentally question the idea of "success". Karen LeCocq writes
that she actually took the Feminist Art Program out of her curriculum vitae for years
as it only brought her difficulty in galleries and at interviews. Again and again,
their own role in art history is brought forward, however at the same time the ascertation
made that the artists of the seventies did not establish a presence as the forerunners
for, i.e. the individual careers of male and female artists, who in the eighties
became international "superstars" through the use of a similar content
and methods.(7) I had hoped to learn more about current confrontations and the change in feminist strategies from the letters. Although a noticeable number of the letter writers are still artistically active, apart from the professional artists there are some who describe their own production as recreation. Some of the descriptions sound almost as though the works formally carry on with the "women's art" of the seventies, their political content lost however due to an end of the movement and a retreat into the personal. |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| Also the position, still basically feminist, exhausts itself in many of the women with the conclusion that they learned in the Feminist Art Program that women and men are equal and in statements such as "it is more difficult for women than for men." That certainly also lies on the unclear line of questioning and the lack of a concrete subject of discussion. On the other hand, it is namely Faith Wilding and Miro Schor, who as artists and teachers play a highly representative role, and can refer to their momentary surroundings in the question of politicization within the Feminist Art Program, who most certainly do confront questions of empowerment. | |||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| The letters open the exchange with women of another generation involved in feminism as a possibility to reflect on one's own position and its references. The same is valid for life after art school, for biographical decisions and fears which are also relevant within other frameworks. This is why I find that the letters from those women who after their studies at the Feminist Art Program work today in other fields, don't have an artist's biography and whose narrations therefore normally don't appear in an art context, are also important contributions.(8) | |||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11
lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| (1) "CalArts for me
was not a success. Because I brought my program into a male dominated institution,
my young students were exposed to one set of values when they were working with me,
but as soon as they left the room they got a whole other set of messages." J.
Chicago in conversation with Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrand in: The Power of Feminist
Art. (2) Schor and Wilding among others in: The Power of Feminist Art, Wilding in: By Our Own Hands, Chicago in: Through the Flower. (3) Sexual Politics, Armand Hammer Museum, Los Angeles 1996 and Division of Labor. "Women's Work" in Contemporary Art, The Bronx Museum of the Arts and MOCA, 1995. (4) The school had just been founded and among those teaching were Allan Kaprow and John Baldessari. (5) The seventy-one contributions in all came, among others, from: Lee Krasner, Lucy Lippard, Agnes Martin, Linda Nochlin, Carolee Schneeman and Hannah Wilke and were published in Anonymous was a Woman. |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| (6) After a short introduction
as an artist presently working in Los Angeles I wrote: "I would like to ask
you for a letter that describes how the group experience and political ideas generated
in the Feminist Art Program impacted your life. Please let me know how your life
proceeded after finishing art school. How did you go on within the art world or for
what reasons did you decide not to?" (7) Faith Wilding names Sue Williams who studied at CalArts at the time of the Feminist Art Program, but also Cindy Sherman, Barbara Kruger or Sherrie Levine as artists, who profitted from the Feminist Art Movement without actually being involved. Also Mike Kelley who also studied at CalArt is named again and again, for example by Karen LeCocq in her letter. (8) For the Online Publication, in addition to the letters, I grouped together quotations by the themes addressed by many of the women. Naturally this choice is also influenced by my own interests and the discussions about the project carried out until now: the quotation groupings should make an overview possible and not replace the letters. |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 lit1 lit2 |
|||
|
|||
| Norma Broude and Mary D.
Garrand (ed): The Power of Feminist Art. The American Movement of the 1970s, History
and Impact. New York, 1994 Judy Chicago: Through the Flower. My Struggle as A Woman Artist. Garden City, New York, 1975 Feminist Art Program: Womanhouse. Valencia, 1972 Amelia Jones (ed): Sexual Politics. Judy Chicago's Dinner Party in Feminist Art History. University of California Press, 1996 Amelia Jones and Laura Mayer (ed): Feminist Directions 1970/1996. Robin Mitchell, Mira Schor, Faith Wilding, Nancy Youdelman. Riverside, 1996 Lucy R. Lippard: The Pink Glass Swan. Selected Feminist Essays on Art. New York, 1995 Carl E. Loeffler and Darlene Tong (ed): Performance Anthology. Source Book of California Performance Art. San Francisco, 1989 |
|||
|
|
||
| page no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 lit1 lit2 | |||
|
|||
| Martha Rosler: The Private
and The Public. Feminist Art in California. in: Artforum, September 1977 Miriam Schapiro/Feminist Art Program: Anonymous was a Woman. A Documentation of the Women's Art Festival. A Collection of Letters to Young Women Artists. Valencia, 1974 Mira Schor: Wet. On Painting, Feminism and Art Culture. Duke University Press, 1997 The Bronx Museum of the Arts and MOCA: Division of Labor. "Women's Work" in Contemporary Art.1995 Faith Wilding: By Our Own Hands. The Women Artist's Movement. Southern California 1970-1976. Santa Monica, 1977 Moira Roth (ed): The Amazing Decade. Women and Performance Art in America 1970-1980. Los Angeles, 1983 |
|||
|
|
||