‘#미술계_내_성폭력’ 운동과 미술사학의 과제 - 미투운동 시대, ‘페미니즘 미술사 리부트’를 위하여

What's So Feminist about the Feministische Kunst Internationaal?Critical Directions in 1970s Feminist Art Kathleen Wentrack (bio) In 1978, when the first installation of the Feministische Kunst Internationaal (International Feminist Art, or FKI) exhibition opened in Amsterdam, it was enthusiastically embraced by its participants—women artists from throughout Europe and the United States. However, its critical reception remains mixed, not least because it was not truly "international." Some perceived a dominance of issues raised in the work of the American participants, with all too frequent references to earlier appearances of feminist concepts in art in the United States than in most European countries. Perhaps more significant are the issues raised around the quality, subject matter, and execution of the work. Paradoxically, the exhibition is virtually unknown by American art historians despite its groundbreaking status for European women artists. Other elements adding to the conflicting position of the show were the heated debates that developed between some European and American feminist art activists over what constituted a "feminist" art (as well as the implication that all women artists must concern themselves with such issues) and the question of whether work should be judged by new standards of quality. This most important European exhibition of feminist art of the decade demanded that the work elicit a feminist content. Thus, this essay will reexamine the curatorial choices that shaped the character of the exhibition to reveal how feminist art was understood at this late-1970s moment and to expand our understanding of how some European artists, art historians, and curators defined and debated feminist art in this era. Context: The Advent of the Women's Movement Guided by the actions of women's movements, feminist art developed as a recognizable force in the 1970s. Diverse in its manifestations, the feminist art movements of the 1970s generally worked toward greater recognition of work [End Page 76] by contemporary women artists and those of the past, while protesting the lack of support from, and representation in, galleries, museums, art schools, and other art world institutions. A new awareness and valuation of traditional art making by women, which was conventionally relegated to the distinctly separate and less valued realm of craft, took place. Moreover, performance art and video attracted feminist artists of the period as they represented new mediums free of male-dominated styles and traditions. These endeavors often incorporated the consciousness-raising efforts of the new women's movements throughout the United States and Europe. For the purposes of this study feminist art can be defined as, but not limited to, artwork that exposes the prejudices against women in society, challenges representations of women in art, engages feminist issues or theory, critiques sociohistorical concepts of femininity, develops new media as a feminist trope, or presents new ways of working with traditional art materials. These general directions in feminist art practice in no way mean that there is or was agreement on what constituted a feminist art. Rather, questions over what was permissible or could be referred to as feminist were debated from the beginning in the United States and Europe. Furthermore, this project aims to build on what art historian Marsha Meskimmon calls a "critical global cartography of 1970s feminist art" in which a spatial, rather than temporal, history of feminist art would be produced and the dominance of Anglo-American scholarship on feminist art problematized.1 The years 1970 through 1974 marked the most active political period in the US art world with respect to women's issues—a time of strikes, marches, and protest letters.2 Women artists challenged the status quo in the art world by establishing new education programs for women and alternative exhibition venues that often functioned as spaces for lectures and debate.3 By the mid-1970s the prevalence of the feminist art movement in the United States contrasted with the less visible movement in many European countries, as the German art historian Anette Kubitza noted in 1996: "Although European artists often work together in groups or on special projects, and although there have been some landmark exhibitions of feminist art in Europe, there has not been a close-knit women's art community there."4 However, this...

Venus rising, Furies raging: bodies redressed in contemporary visual art

When women's movements challenge the forms and nature of political life, the contemporary play of powers and power relations, they are in fact working towards a modification of women's status. On the other hand, when these same movements aim simply for a change in the distribution of power, leaving intact the power structure itself, then they are subjecting themselves, deliberately or not, to a phallocratie order. This latter gesture must of course be denounced, and with determination, since it may constitute a more subtly concealed exploitation of women. Indeed, that gesture plays on a certain naivete that suggests one need only be a in order to remain outside phallic powers. -Luce Irigaray, Speculum of the Other Woman Feminism's headline-grabbing conflicts with New York City's museums have usually been addressed to straightforward equal-opportunities issues. Damning statistics about the low numbers of women artists are accompanied by photo-friendly scenes of placard-waving women. This is a mission that the Guerrilla Girls art collective has combined even more effectively with the use of theatrical costume. In January 2007, wearing their signature gorilla masks to maintain anonymity, two Guerrilla Girls took the platform at the Museum of Modern Art's (MoMA's) first-ever feminist conference, Feminist Future: Theory and Practice in the Visual Arts. Among the list of eminent and emerging scholars and artists present were Marina Abramovic, Ute Meta Bauer, Beatriz Colomina, Coco Fusco, David Joselit, Geeta Kapur, Carrie Beatty Lambert, Lucy Lippard, Richard Meyer, Helen Molesworth, Wangechi Mutu, Linda Nochlin, Griselda Pollock, Martha Rosler, Ingrid Sischy, Anne Wagner, and Catherine de Zegher. Feminist Future was the first in a yearlong round of feminist-centered events in the art world. These have included panels at the College Art Association conference in New York organized by the Feminist Art Project; the establishment of a center for feminist art at the Brooklyn Museum with the permanent installation of Judy Chicago's monumental work The Dinner Party (1974-79); and two major exhibitions, Global Feminisms: New Directions in Contemporary Art at the Brooklyn Museum, and WACK! Art and the Feminist Revolution at the Geffen Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles (with further venues to follow, including MoMA's contemporary art venue, P.S.I).1 Perhaps as an attempt to remedy the atrocious record on women artists in New York's museums, these two major exhibitions of feminist-engaged art were women-only affairs. Following Irigaray's warning, however, we must pay careful attention to the form that feminism takes as it enters the mainstream museum world. The complicities it ends up enduring in the name of woman may not in fact benefit that half of the sky. Although the statistical approach is a necessary means of pressurizing museums to improve their policy on gender equality, it is a far less adequate format for presenting the more complicated issues of sexual difference and artistic representation. Before actually viewing these two ambitious exhibitions and attending MoMA's inaugurating conference, I had hoped that the nearly four decades of feminist art, art history, and theory taken up there would assert themselves with a degree of intensity and complexity that would knock me off my feet. Alas, they did not. Perhaps this is an overly tall order, considering the framing dates for the two exhibitions and MoMA's infancy in matters feminist. To be sure, certain occlusions and limitations became visible to me immediately. With WACK! focused on 1965-80 and Global Feminisms addressed to art by a younger generation of women born after 1960 (with works made mostly after 1990), the 1980s seem to have dropped out of the picture. That decade saw feminism embarking upon its first serious period of self-examination. The celebration of universal sisterhood was complicated by differences, of power, geopolitics, sexuality, and so on, and psychoanalytic approaches such as Irigaray's asked difficult questions about the unconscious as well as women's complicity with masculinist structures of power. …

Comment: World without Art

Today’s culture presents new important challenges for the education system. The transformation of cultural norms and standards and the movement of social consciousness towards tolerance require the formation of a new ideal of "cultural human". The value of professional knowledge implies a strong connection with the moral upbringing of future professionals and their orientation towards general cultural values. For its part, actual educational paradigm focuses on the principle of complexity and interdisciplinarity, integration of different scientific methods. This is appropriate for the studying and teaching the art disciplines. Of course, art has always been considered in close connection with the cultural and historical context, because art cannot exist outside it. Today, however, the search for new perspectives in interdisciplinary research is relevant in the field of culture and the arts, as in humanities and social sciences in general. This is also due to the transformation of the concept of art in today’s world, which requires the search for new vectors of analysis, addition and expansion of traditional tools of art’sanalysis. The objectives of this study are to analyze the educational and work programs and textbooks of the History of Fine Arts (the History of Arts) of the last five years; to determine what scientific culturological methods are most commonly used in the development of today’s educational and methodicalliterature (textbooks, manuals, educational programs) of “The History of Fine Arts ("The History of Arts"); to identify what other methods should be appropriate to include in the toolkit of studying and teaching the art history; to present the interaction between the teacher and students as a "cultural dialogue"; to reveal the role of cultural approach in the spiritual and aesthetic education of future artists.The researchers’ interest in the cultural aspects of the pedagogical process in today’s Ukrainian studies is increasing. O. Malanchuk-Rybak, I. Pyatnitska-Pozdnyakova, O.Shevnyuk, N. Kovaleva, Yu. Solovyova and others consider the cultural aspects of studying art history and teaching art disciplines. The cultural approach to analyzing the evolution of the world's art systems is demonstrated by the textbooks of the last decade, including “The History of the Arts” by O. Shevnyuk (2015), “The History of Arts” by K. Tregubov (2015), “Ukrainian Art in the Historical Dimension” (Yu. Solovyova, O. Mkrtichyan, 2017), etc. As well asthe research has determined the culturological orientation of educational and work programs in last five years: “The History of Arts” (Trofimchuk-Kirilova T., 2017), “The History of Fine Arts”(O. Kirichen-ko, 2019), “The History of Fine Arts and Architecture” (Panasyuk V. 2015), “The History of Fine Arts” (Panyok TV, 2016), etc. The article deals with the cultural aspects of the study and teaching of the art on the basis of these educational and methodological publications. For this purpose the following methods are used in the article: descriptive method, method of system analysis, axiological approach and socio-cultural analysis.The analysis of these textbooks and work programs made it possible to formulate the subject, purpose and main objectives of the course “The History of Fine Arts”. The aim of the course is to form students' systematic knowledge of the development of fine arts from archaic times to the present.In this context the culturological orientation of teaching "The History of Fine Arts" makes it possible to solve the following educational problems: forming a complex of knowledge about the essence of art, its functions in culture and society; moral and aesthetic education and involvement in cultural values; revealing the general patterns of evolution of the world art systems; forming an artistic picture of the world through mastering the system of artistic knowledge; understanding of the historical and cultural conditionality of aesthetic canons in art; mastering the basic principles and forms of communicative experience of art as a means of transmitting socially meaningful cultural meanings; development of critical perception and interpretation of works of art, ability to navigate in artistic styles and movements; involvement of artistic and creative artifacts in the fulfillment of various socio-cultural tasks. Thus, future artists not only learn to solve immediate professional tasks, but also accumulate the ideological and artistic experience of the past, acquire the ability to interpret it and make certain predictions, in particular in thetoday’s art market. Domestic researchers believe that the synthesis of methods of art studies and cultural studies is relevant in teaching the course "The History of Fine Arts". It was found out that systematic analysis, diachronic and synchronic methods, socio-cultural approach, biographical method allow revealing the content of the course most completely. Semiotic analysis and gender approach can also open up the new perspectives of the studying and teaching of art history in today’s humanitarian discourse.

This article combines the progress of Western feminist art history with contemporary art cases at home and abroad, attempting to go beyond the popular identity politics perspective when discussing gender issues today, and explore the theoretical potential of feminism in the field of art in the post human context. The first part of the thesis focuses on the 1960s and 1970s in America when the feminism became present in art world. American feminist art exposed the myths in formalist theory in a singular view, driving the reflection on modernity. The second part focuses on the changes in feminist intervention in art in the context of French theory’s “travel” in English world during the postmodern period. With the linguistic shift of subjectivity theory, feminism has been incorporated into identity political discourse, reflecting on the meaning of discourse and text in art history while also exacerbating division and conflict beyond its original intention. The third part combines contemporary new materialism and post human thought to consider how feminism from a post human perspective can stimulate new potential for differentiation and coexistence.

Introduction:Feminist Art and Social Movements Beyond NY/LA Michelle Moravec (bio) Imagine a far-flung network of moles, each separately burrowing under a cultural landscape that spans from the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to the Whitney Museum in New York. The moles may not be entirely aware of it, but after several thousand of them individually put in a decade or so of subterranean overtime, it appears that together they quite literally made an imposing mountain range out of vigorously displaced earth. Never again would anyone dare to regard their peaks as insignificant patch of molehills. Carrie Rickey, "Writing (and Righting) Wrongs: Feminist Art Publications" The vivid image with which Carrie Rickey introduces her survey of feminist art publications captures the sense of subterranean energy and collaborative achievement that characterized the feminist art movement of the 1970s. At the same time, however, Rickey's metaphor belies the geographic bias of histories of that movement. A more realistic map of the molehills would be far-flung and reveal that many other routes existed beside the obvious one between New York and Los Angeles. This special issue seeks alternative readings of this map by examining sites of feminist art ranging from the Midwest of the United States to the Middle East. I initially conceived of this special issue in the summer of 2009 when I was a Getty Scholar working on an exhibition about the Los Angeles Woman's Building, reviewed in this issue by Jennie Klein. The conversations I had with Klein, and the other scholars, Vivian Green Fryd, Alexandra Juhasz, and Jenni Sorkin, spurred me to consider the consequences of the regional biases in histories of the feminist art movement. [End Page xi] In 2006 and 2007 twin events, the creation of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum and the mounting of WACK! Art and the Feminist Revolution, created the sense that the 1970s feminist art movement had finally found its place in the art historical record, but significant gaps still existed. Most accounts continued to rely on the same few groups in two locations, New York and Los Angeles. Furthermore, as a historian who studies feminist artists as part of activism for women's liberation in the 1970s, I feared that the social movement aspect of feminist art was being lost "in a movement that is increasingly being talked about and curated in monolithic ways."1 I began to envision a special issue dedicated to feminist art as a movement "beyond NY/LA." As soon as I conceived of this special issue, Frontiers occurred to me as the perfect venue for it. Since its inception Frontiers has occupied a unique niche in the women's studies community, juxtaposing traditional scholarship alongside articles by activists, as well as women's poetry and art. I would like to thank the editors of Frontiers, Susan E. Gray and Gayle Gullett, the art editor, Hilary Harp, and the graduate assistant, Stephanie Schreiner, for their assistance as we collaborated on this special issue. Initially I sought submissions that dealt with the broad range of artists, activities, and art forms that fall under the umbrella term feminist art movement. I hoped to include groups with strong ties to the women's liberation movement, such as the Chicago Women's Liberation Union Graphics Collective or the short-lived Redstockings Artists, as well as groups and individuals connected to contemporaneous movements, such as the black arts movement or Chicano and Chicana muralists. I wondered if any case studies existed of the ways that the big events in New York or Los Angeles, or the widely circulated writings by feminist artists in those cities, led to organizing in other locations. While not all my envisioned topics are covered in the articles published in this special issue, the contributions included do a great deal to move the focus "beyond NY/LA." In "Frontiers in Feminist Art History," Jill Fields situates these articles within the larger historiographical question: has recent attention to the feminist art movement changed "standard narratives of modern and contemporary art history"? (2) My essay "Toward a History of Feminism, Art, and Social Movements in the United States...

Feminist perspectives in art history of the nineteenth century were stimulated by second-wave feminism and introduced new critical approaches, issues, artists, methods, and interpretations. I will refer to this scholarship as feminist art history of the nineteenth century. Overall, its initial focus was to study art created by women who had previously been excluded or marginalized, and to analyze the constraints and obstacles that hindered women in obtaining art education and pursuing professional careers. Looking at gender biases in art history of the nineteenth century, feminist art historians critiqued the impeding influence of ideologies of domesticity and femininity on women artists and the devaluing categorization of their art as “feminine.” They also stimulated reinterpretations of the art of canonical male artists, critiqued the notion of the male artist as “genius,” and investigated the authority of the heteronormative masculine gaze. Over the years, feminist art history developed a body of scholarship on women artists, focusing on their accomplishments and their ways of negotiating gender constraints rather than merely accommodating limitations. As a result of these acts of recuperating, reevaluating, and reinterpreting the work of women artists, these artists were written into the art history of the nineteenth century. The new scholarship also led to the study of forms of creative production previously denigrated as crafts (like quilts) or ignored (like the political visual culture created by the suffragists). All of this scholarly literature resulted in the realization that what had appeared to be a lack of professional women artists was in fact the result of their exclusion from art history, art collections, and display in museums. Increasingly focusing on female agency, feminist art historians also turned their attention to multiple kinds of gazes, analyzing women artists’ gazes as depicted or performed in their art. As both feminism and art history evolved, feminist art history of the nineteenth century widened its analyses of power to explore the intersections of gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, class, and other components of identity, both in representations in art and visual culture and in the identities of artists and models. Like the field of art history as a whole, feminist art history of the nineteenth century broadened geographically and culturally beyond its initial focus on Europe and the United States to include non-Western artists, art, and visual and material culture. As feminist art history progressed over time, it also expanded the primary focus on women artists and women’s art works and visual representations to include the study of women in relation to exhibitions, museums, collecting (e.g., how women artists are represented or excluded in museums), and also recuperating the contributions of women collectors who made bequests to established museums, participated in founding major museums, and founded their own museums. The texts chosen for this contribution to Oxford Bibliographies in Art History range from early foundational texts of feminist art history of the nineteenth century to recent scholarship, and will give students an overview of the evolution of this dynamic field.

FEMINIST CRITIC LAURA COTTINGHAM'S ASSESSMENT OF WOMEN ARTISTS' COOPERATIVES provides two key reasons why the history of these spaces is marginalized and their activist agendas have been historically undervalued. Cottingham (2000:31) commented: The extensive alternative exhibition network that feminists constructed provided them with a sense of community and critical exchange, places to show, and audiences, but it couldn't provide any significant influx of money. Nor did it function as a springboard into the commercial art structure, as most art professionals did not view or place value on art that was presented in cooperative and temporary venues. First, Cottingham's conclusions emphasize the notion that a cooperative's value is based in part on its ability to provide public exposure for their artists and an eventual entry into the commercial art market, sustaining modernism's individualist lens that diminishes collaborative and activist acts that also demand commercial success to establish critical credibility. (2) Second, Cottingham's position places the questions of community and critical exchange between artists on the margins of any historical consideration and, more important, overshadows and dilutes the activist agendas established by many of these separatist cooperatives in the 1970s. As T.V. Reed (2005: xvi) argued, the history of cultural movements or groups, such as the women artists' cooperative, face erasure because it is difficult to quantify the results of their efforts in comparison to other types of activism in which voting patterns, money raised, and legislation passed can be traced. What is often overlooked and will be examined in this essay is that the memberships of these spaces attempted to arm women with the tools necessary to attack from within the institutional structures that marginalized them in the first place. This article will reclaim the voice of these activists; it specifically explores a series of programming and exhibitions implemented by Artemisia Gallery in Chicago from 1973 to 1979, which prepared women artists to enter the professional workforce equipped with feminist pedagogy to promote social justice for women in the art world. Each event was sponsored by the Artemisia Fund, which was founded after the gallery was incorporated in 1973, to foster a national educational dialogue regarding the history of women artists, as well as the social, economic, and political concerns they faced (Poe, 1979). Economic Structures of the Art World (1976), Feminist Art Workers (1976), and Feminist Art Methodology (1976) were workshops opened for enrollment to artists outside Artemisia and run by noted feminist art activists and theorists, such as Nancy Angelo, Candace Compton, Cheri Gaulke, Ruth Iskin, Johnnie Johnson, Laurel Klick, Ellen Lanyon, and Arlene Raven. They taught participants how to apply feminist agendas to their own careers and to assert change where they taught, exhibited, and sold their work. Lastly, Both Sides Now: An International Exhibition Integrating Feminism and Leftist Politics (1979), curated by the noted feminist critic Lucy Lippard, engendered a dialogue regarding emerging shifts in feminist discourse and its relationship to political action. Overall, this assessment of Artemisia's activist agendas and demands for social justice will serve as a case study and call for a thorough reexamination and theorizing of collaborative activist art in general. Reasserting Artemisia's history is also important because many young women are unaware of the struggles undertaken to make female artists visible in the academy and the art market today. As Amelia Jones (1999: 18) observed, feminism among art students is at the same time both naturalized into popular culture and invisible.... Founding and Philosophy of Artemisia Gallery and the Artemisia Fund Historically, the terms and artist were irreconcilable; when combined, they evoked the image of a woman engaging in a hobby in a domestic space, rather than in professional or public practice. …

women use their own bodies in their art work, they are using themselves: a significant psychological factor converts these bodies or faces from object to subject. --Lucy Lippard (1) Martha Rosler wrte that the history of video art is nothing more than a celebration of men by men, as it is told according to a single narrative with Nam June Paik as the hero: myths of Paik suggest that he laid all the groundwork, touched every base, in freeing video from the domination of corporate TV. (2) Museums and art scholars celebrate accomplishments of the male-dominated avant-garde of the twentieth century, with luminaries from Pablo Picasso to Jackson Pollock, and foundcrs of performative genres that include Paik and Allan Kaprow. What is missing from the narrative of video art's history is the role of feminist artists--contemporaries to Paik--in the development of this once renegade medium. These women, who may be familiar to some, include Joan Jonas, Carolce Schncemann, Hannah Wilke, and Rosler hetself. Hidden under a seemingly amateurish appcarance, their videos offered a complex counter-narrative to established cultural norms. In continuing this legacy, Kate Gilmore revitalizes and critiques the complex relationship of women and their reception within the art establishment. When Sony introduced the Protapak in 1967, female artists were among the first to embrace video technology and its democratic principle that anyone could use it, since it required no formal training or experience. Video was a highly effective tool in communicating an alternative vision of artistic genius and an ideal medium for the feminist agenda. Since there was no historical precedent for critiquing video, it was untouched by the visual rhetoric of academics and critics and guaranteed a certain freedom for feminist artists to explore the complexities of female subjectivity through a highly personal narrative, of performed in the privacy of their studio or home. What took place in the late 1960s was one of those rare events in the history of art in which a critically acclaimed practice originates at the margins. Roster explains that feminist artists used video art to rewrite art historical discourse and counter the dominance of painting and sculpture by effectively declaring it bankrupt: Video's history is not to be a social history but an art history, one related to, but separate front, that of the other forms of Video ... wants to be a major, not a minor art. (3) It can be broadcast on television screens simultaneously across the globe, denying the singularity of the artistic masterpiece that has endured fbr centuries. Fast forward forty years, and Gilmore's videos re-imagine Frmale agency in the post-postmodern world. As the lone protagonist in a series of self-imposed obstacles, she is always attired in a well-fitted dress with matching shoes that all loo quickly become soiled with the dust, dirt, and paint splatters of her struggles. In So Much It Hurts (2008) Gilmore has a video camera attached to a pendulum-like device that continually hits her in the abdomen. We do not see her face in the video, just hear ohh and ugh as the camera collides with her. This is typical of her strenuous performances where physical comedy meets exercises in endurance. In Between a Hard Place (2008), Gilmore wears a black dress with matching gloves to tear through six layers of drywall, eventually ending in a room painted the same bright yellow color as her heels. As the video fades to black she turns, exhausted, to the camera and smirks. The uncompromising quality of this destruction denies the passivity of reclaiming vulva forms -- think Georgia O'Keeffe or Judy Chicago--in favor of direct assault on the institutions of a male-dominated art world. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Critics have drawn parallels between the endurance qualities of Gilmore's work and Marina Abramovic's now famous masochistic performances that were highlighted in her 2010 Artist is Present exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. …

Contributors

In 1971 Linda Nochlin asked the art world, Why have there been no great women artists? Her subsequent answer suggested that it was institutional boundaries that hindered women from having the same access as their male counterparts. Forty years later the answer to this question has changed. As Catherine Morris suggests here, participation and influence of women in the art world is enormous. Morris is the third director and curator of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum. Part exhibition space, part education facility, the Center is focused on raising awareness of the cultural contributions of feminism to the arts. The exhibition space is anchored by Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party (1974-79), which was created at the time that ''feminism'' came into common use as a term relating to a particular political and social sensibility in art. Moreover, the Center has traced the history of feminism as far back as the prehistoric age with exhibitions like the Fertile Goddess (2008-09) and has gone on to document trends in contemporary video art with Reflections on the Electric Mirror: New Feminist Video (2009 10). The looming question remains: What is feminist art? What arises are only more questions. The cycle of exhibitions that have come through the Center, and those that are forthcoming, only further challenge audience perceptions of what feminist art is and can be. Nonetheless, the task of defining both the history and current state of feminism does not seem to overwhelm Morris. She came to the Center in 2009 after serving as Adjunct Curator of Contemporary Art at the Philbrook Museum of Art in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She has used her short tenure to organize Kiki Smith: Soujourn (2010), which examines universal experiences of life from birth to death, and a small exhibition on the 1864 Brooklyn Sanitary Fair. What makes the Center so unique and, as Morris suggests, so important, is the opportunity to present the lineage of an art practice that has no geographic or chronological boundaries. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] In the following conversation, Morris discusses her background in feminist art, her perspective of its historic and changing role and the future of both the Center and feminist art practices. This conversation took place at Morris's office on April 12, 2010. HARRY J. WEIL: In 2006, for MIT's List Visual Arts Center, you organized 9 Reconsidered, an exhibition that examined Bell Laboratories' bringing together of a group of avant-garde artists with ten scientists. The result was a series of Happenings that took place in 1966 at the 69th Regiment Armory in New York. Several of the artists are now celebrated figures, like Robert Rauschenberg, Steve Paxton, and John Cage. Among them were also some of the earliest pioneers of performance art, including Yvonne Rainer, Lucinda Childs, and Deborah Hay. What was it like to have both men and women working with a technology that few predicted would ever be so instrumental to the creation and reception of art? CATHERINE MORRIS: There was a lot of openness in this group as they came together in the early 1960s in Lower Manhattan. Not only was there an acceptance of women artists, but an acceptance of dance and dance practices. This acceptance was essential to the group's development. The work of those women was on par with the men who participated. However, there was obviously a lot of sexism involved. Despite this, what made 9 Evenings so important and influential, in addition to the engineering aspect and use of new technology, was the community aspect and the way in which different artists came together to complete this project. This was about collaboration. These artists were working together closely before that and it made 9 Evenings quite successful. HW: This emphasis on feminist art in technology is vastly different from the permanent installation that anchors the Sackler Center--Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party, This work is so much in line with the craft movement of the 1960s. …

Unexpected Parallels:Commonalities between Native American and Outsider Arts Dyani Reynolds-White Hawk (bio) "Otherances" tell more about the social and historical fantasies of the describers than about the people thus described. —Paul Arnett, "An Introduction to Other Rivers" The fields of outsider art and Native American art, when compared with each other, provide discerning critiques of the ways that mainstream art institutions and their constituents tend to treat groups that have not historically been equal participants in the makeup of Western art history.1 By mainstream institutions, I am referring largely to museums, galleries, and the academy that construct the prevailing value systems of the Western art world referenced as dominant in terms of power and prestige. My intent is to provide a broad analysis that complicates prevailing ideas about Native and outsider art in relationship to fine arts as a framework of reference. The comparative analysis of these polar fields will seek to identify repetitive behaviors of the mainstream art world in dealing with marginalized groups. Through the identification of similar patterns of treatment, we are able to reach an educated understanding of mainstream value systems applied to groups considered "other." [End Page 47] While my arguments may appear ambitious or overly generalized in terms of scope, I argue that a critical analysis of how Native and outsider arts are received has not to date been pursued in the literature.2 Thus my explorations of these intersections may serve to introduce this comparative platform for consideration by future scholars engaging in specific case study analyses. My aim is to introduce readers to the complexities of outsider and Native arts reception, and to likewise assist viewers and artists in being equipped to tackle difficult issues such as race and bias while negotiating relationships between the peripheral and center in various arts worlds. As an artist and as a Native American trained in the higher education system, I am inescapably engaged in the challenging relationship between the fine art world and the Native American art world. In this essay, I am seeking to extract core issues and find evidence of some of the larger challenges that are presented in this relationship of Native Americans and the academy. The African American theologian Cornel West has stated, "I'm as much concerned with how we understand modernity and the dominant culture as with the African-American experience."3 This statement parallels the motivations of this investigation, that through an understanding of the values of the mainstream art world, a greater understanding of self and community in relation to this entity can occur. Establishing Foundational Characteristics and Differences of Native American and Outsider Arts The world of outsider arts, also referred to as self-taught, folk, or vernacular arts, is defined by the characteristics of its makers. It is not restricted to a particular geographic location, race, or national heritage. The artist's primary attribute is defined as a lack of formal training or credentials. Along with this lack of formal training, there is a perceived lack of influence by the field of art history and mainstream communities. Outsider arts are therefore perceived as pure, unadulterated, individualistic forms of innate expression, often falling into various classifications such as rural, poor, less educated, mentally ill or unstable, prisoners, homeless, or any variety of other combinations that socially set them apart from the median. Their otherness is "based more on sociological and psychological factors that are held together principally by commonly made claims by Outsider Art's apologists. . . . This difference is not merely marked by exclusion from the mainstream of the professional (western) art world, but also by exclusion from, or marginalization in relation to, the very culture that supports the market for mainstream art."4 Thus, by the nature of its qualifications, outsider art [End Page 48] can be practiced by anyone fitting the outsider criteria of any race, in any country. Although outsider art is not ethnically based, because of its focus on the biography of its makers, the field has been linked to the category of identity art. Native American art, like that of any other culturally specific group, is similarly defined by the characteristics of the artist. Identity lies at the...

For a long time now, many have considered art history to be in a state of crisis. In the last decade, numerous publications have attempted to reimagine the discipline, addressing its future or even...

Prevalence and Characteristics of Sexual Violence, Stalking, and Intimate Partner Violence Victimization—National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United States, 2011