Feminist art ‘the most important artistic movement since World War II’

// 27 July 2009

This Washington Post article from the archives makes the case that the feminist art movement – particularly from the 1960s to ’70s and in the US – was the most important since WW2.

“Wack!” has the same mix of media you’d find in any contemporary biennial: Lots of video; installations of all kinds, ranging from a feminist “clubhouse” built from mattresses to a room-size sculpture made of sand-filled pantyhose; plenty of photography, staged as well as documentary; detritus and documents left over from performances and conceptual projects; a smattering of idea-driven painting.

And the show has the same political charge and drive as a lot of very recent work in those media. Even some of the most innovative experiments of the 1960s, such as the conceptual abstraction of Sol LeWitt or the radical video and film works of Bruce Nauman and Michael Snow, had centered on asking questions about the nature of art.

The feminists cared less for art than for the important things it can be used to talk about.

And because gender affects just about every aspect of human experience, feminist artists found occasion to talk about almost everything. They dealt with topics that leading artists have been broaching ever since: bodies, class, race, consumerism, the art market, colonialism, political and cultural power.

Even when they borrowed approaches dreamed up by men, the feminists gave them new political heft. At first glance, Eleanor Antin’s 144 black-and-white shots of a female body, arranged in a 4-by-36 grid, look like plain-Jane conceptual art, perhaps addressing issues such as photography and form. In fact, Antin’s grid represents four daily shots of the artist herself, trimming her nude body down to a more “ideal” size through 36 days of dieting. It’s called “Carving: A Traditional Sculpture,” riffing on the ancient Greek idea of the male artist who whittles away at gross matter to find the ideal beauty — usually slender, female beauty — hidden deep inside.

Via GuerrillaGsOT

Incidentally, the article was inspired by WACK! a feminist art exhibition in the US a few years ago – the site for the exhibition is still live and full of interesting stuff on feminist art and photos of some of the works.

Comments From You

Michael White // Posted 28 July 2009 at 3:34 am

Feminist art (and art by women that might not have an easily seen political aspect) is the most important section of art today. It is so big that “Women in Art” is to big of a category to define. But feminist art has opened up new views and cultures into contemporary art. And that is good.

HarpyMarx // Posted 28 July 2009 at 11:25 am

Indeed there was an explosion of feminist art at that period but still it was at the margins. Great website btw. I know it is mainly US women artists but shame it missed out punk artist Linder.

Art historian, Linda Nochlin, wrote this in 1971 about women’s art.

http://www.miracosta.cc.ca.us/home/gfloren/nochlin.htm

Robin // Posted 29 July 2009 at 6:09 am

“The feminists cared less for art than for the important things it can be used to talk about.”

This phrase perfectly sums up my problem with this article. Can a body of work wholly focused on politics and message, without consideration for the craft or medium through which those messages are conveyed, even be called an “art movement”? Art these days seems to be all about what transgressive, rule-breaking point the artist is making. The work itself is just an excuse to talk about an idea, not a thing of substance in and of itself. When a narrative film or novel is infused with an overbearing and all consuming MESSAGE, it’s dismissed as simplistic and manipulative. But fine art is lauded for such a goal. Just to be clear, I’m not saying this is a problem with feminism, and it’s wonderful that people can express their beliefs and ideas through a visual medium. But if the artists themselves don’t care about their art, why should we?

“It’s called “Carving: A Traditional Sculpture,” riffing on the ancient Greek idea of the male artist who whittles away at gross matter to find the ideal beauty — usually slender, female beauty — hidden deep inside.”

Actually, the Greeks were far more concerned with male beauty than female, and, for that matter, the women portrayed in Greek statues tend to be considerably more full-bodied than the current “ideal” female.

Have Your say

To comment, you must be registered with The F-Word. Not a member? Register. Already a member? Use the sign in button below

Sign in to the F-Word

Further Reading

Has The F-Word whet your appetite? Check out our Resources section, for listings of feminist blogs, campaigns, feminist networks in the UK, mailing lists, international and national websites and charities of interest.

Write for us!

Got something to say? Something to review? News to discuss? Well we want to hear from you! Click here for more info

  • The F-Word on Twitter
  • The F-Word on Facebook
  • Our XML Feeds