Art = moments of tension, reminders of what is absent (history, unconscious, social justice, beauty, fear, wonder). This makes sense. What would be the need of creating something (art) if it were already present by looking out your window? Sometimes people consider art to be critique, but again, if there is a need to re-examine, then there must be an absence of something, a missing piece.
Effective art is a vehicle for understanding (a motion from ideal > idea > action >reaction). It must be communicated and responded to, not controlled or absorbed. I thought this piece was interesting. I think I've either seen a lot of "uneffective" art or I have a really bad habit of absorbing art and having an extremely limited, controlled reaction. Either way, I'm not understanding much of what art is trying to tell me.
Female culture attempts to integrate art+life, idea+sensation, nature+culture and women are synthesizers, mediators, fusers.
I have poor sense of humor. Ok, now seriously. When I read this I thought of my mother. Mainly because she is the most visible female element of what I've been surrounded by longer than anything else, my family. She is the link between father+children, possibility+reality, innocence+wisdom.
Male culture represents the domination of nature. I found it insanely interesting that men, according to Lucy Lippard, are responsible for:
- ecological disasters
- pollution
- disappearing water supply
- world hunger
- overpopulation
- nationalism
- miltarism
- greed
Damn. I'd also like to tack on cramps and bad hair days. Anybody else think that list is a little ridiculous? For example, overpopulation...it takes two to tango. And it's actually overpopulation (not the Y chrom) that is straining our water supply, food distribution and environment and leading to competition and fighting over space and limited, localized resources because our planet has a carrying capacity, believe it or not. Even if Lippard didn't mean "men" in the literal individual-with-penis sense, but more the culture the have created, I still think this is a angry exaggeration.
An "X" on the earth is a favorite motif of male artists. Hmmm. Just thought this was a curious observation. Territorial, maybe?
Dennis Oppenheim. Relocated Burial Ground. 1978
Mirage Dry Lake, CA.
Black asphalt primer. 2000' square.
For more examples, pg. 52
The Zuñi Indians thought that clay represented female flesh and only women were allowed to work it. This meant that these women not only made the pots and bowls we normally think of, but also built homes. Some people believe that women invented crafts, architecture, medicine and animal husbandry.
Two Zuñi girls.
This last bit, I just thought was cool: the idea of a passageway between our world and the spirit world and the symbolic center of the universe, the omphalos or navel of the earth.
The cone-shaped dome at Delphi was the sanctuary of the Earth Mother (a figure I'm only familiar with through feminist fantasy literature, weird genre right?). Delphi meant uterus. And the supposed navel was a cleft in the rock that housed the waters of wisdom. The Incan capital, Cuzco, means navel. Other omphalloi are found in Celtic sites and the Temple of Jerusalem. I think the idea is that civilization is tied to a nuturing navel of the earth, just like a child is tied to its mother.
Delphi
Peru
Peru
3 comments:
Amanda,
I was also taken aback by the charge that Lippard makes against men in the "Feminism and Prehistory" chapter. However, instead of seeing it as ridiculous, I see it as eye-opening.
I do think that Lippard meant the patriarchial culture of men rather than men as individuals--there are always exceptions :). Men have dominated, and still dominate, society and culture (especially culture). Since men have dominated roles that determine societies' policies, and therefore cultural aspects important to society, it is fair to say that men are responsible for the outcomes of their militant, ecological, and financial decisions.
(Example: Women who are introduced to birth control, which many sexist cultures do not "allow", chose to have smaller families.)
I DO think that Lippard may be too quickly assuming that the characteristics of prehistorical matriarchal societies correctly represent what a present-day matriarchal society would be characterized by, including the stong relationship between women and nature. If women had dominated society, would it have been different, I'm not sure.
Overlay was written in 1983 - 25 years ago and just after the peak of feminism which was the 70's. Feminism today has taken on a more varied approach - neo-feminism suggests that because of the movement of the 70's women today are freer and more at ease with their female selves, as are men. The inter-definitions of the sexes and their social descriptions too are changing ...
Jessica, I agree with you about Lippard's assumptions of prehistorical matriarchal societies vs. a modern one. It's impossible to know for sure, but I don't think we could ever return to a prehistoric-ish relationship with nature. Even if we got there, it could not last.
There are women across the world who would probably benefit from a matriarchal society and a valued existence as a female. I think the greatest tradegy is not belaboring the fact that men/male culture got theirs, but that women's status around the world is so unequal-not with men but amongst ourselves. Some women are successful and CEOs but many are being physically multilated, abused and taught their existence as a woman/person is not valuable.
Basically, if there was a neo neo feminism, it should focus not on the equal status of men and women, but helping women become respected people.
Although I know the book is older, there are still people who feel this way. It upsets me because I think with less blame and finger pointing, we could get change accomplished, not just with gender but race and religion.
Post a Comment