Visual Arts: 1970-1992

[This is the fourth part of a bibliography in five parts on feminist aesthetics. The bibliography is number 65 in the series “Wisconsin Bibliographies in Women’s Studies” published by the University of Wisconsin System Women’s Studies Librarian’s Office, 430 Memorial Library, 728 State Street, Madison, WI 53706.]

VISUAL ARTS

Alloway, Lawrence. “Women’s Art in the 1970’s.” ART IN AMERICA 64 (1976): 64-72.
Alloway lauds the politics and social engagement of feminist art practice–in women’s exhibitions, organizations, and co-ops–but he describes feminist art theory as woefully behind the practice. Limited by a narrow definition of feminism as collective action, he criticizes feminist art theory–from concepts of “central imagery” to reevaluations of women’s “crafts”–for focusing on elements that are not exclusive to women’s art. Thus he excludes shifts in representation and interpretation as a means of political change.

Alpers, Svetlana. “Art History and Its Exclusions: The Example of Dutch Art.” Broude and Garrard 183-199.
Alpers argues that we must rewrite art history, not to include women, but to analyze the historical construction of meaning that affects concepts of women. Alpers compares Italian painting to Dutch painting, describing the fifteenth-century Italian aesthetic, which she considers the basis of current Western aesthetics, as one of mastery and possession, and the Dutch as one of presence and process.

Barry, Judith, and Sandy Flitterman. “Textual Strategies: The Politics of Art-Making.” SCREEN 21 (1980): 35-48.
Barry and Flitterman discuss four categories of women’s art: art that glorifies an essential female power, art that celebrates an alternative woman’s tradition, art that considers women’s cultural activity as excluded from a monolithic patriarchal culture, and art that analyzes the social representations of women. Favoring the last category, they argue that this art exploits existing social contradictions and actively engages the viewer in the construction of social meanings, thus creating the possibility of representations and cultural change.

Berger, John. WAYS OF SEEING. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1972.
In this complex but highly accessible work, Berger connects the commodification of art to the commodification of women and of representations of women. Berger exposes the social underpinnings of aesthetic judgments by analyzing visual representations as a means of conferring status and conveying a sense of power to the viewer.

Betterton, Rosemary, ed. LOOKING ON: IMAGES OF FEMININITY IN THE VISUAL ARTS AND MEDIA. London: Pandora, 1987.
In this anthology, Betterton has gathered articles that analyze the still image in advertisements, news media, fine art, and pornography, bringing feminist theories to issues of representation and the social construction of femininity.

Bonney, Claire. “The Nude Photograph: Some Female Perspectives.” WAJ 6.2 (1985/86): 9-14.
Bonney discusses nude photography in terms of its revision of the concepts of femininity as represented by pose, activity, and erotic energy.

Broude, Norma. “Miriam Schapiro and `Femmage’: Reflections on the Conflict Between Decoration and Abstraction in Twentieth-Century Art.” Broude and Garrard 315-329. Schapiro’s “femmage”–her “collage” of and collaboration with traditional women’s arts–is, according to Broude, a challenge to the distinction between the “merely” decorative “low” arts, usually associated with women, and the more “meaningful” abstract “high” art of (usually) male artists. Broude notes the irony that makes the “content” of Schapiro’s decorative arts important as a statement about the need to include art forms without “content.”

Broude, Norma and Mary D. Garrard, eds. FEMINISM AND ART HISTORY: QUESTIONING THE LITANY. New York: Harper & Row, 1982.
The editors of this book of essays consider feminism in art history “an adjustment of historical perspective.” The essays explore the impact of feminism on art history by reassessing values and historical contexts from the classical to the contemporary periods in Western art. See Alpers, Broude, Comini, Duncan, and Mainardi.

Brunet, Monique. “Le banquet au feminin: THE DINNER PARTY.” CWS 1.3 (1979): 9-10.
Brunet critiques Judy Chicago’s work on THE DINNER PARTY, arguing that Chicago undermines the implicit objective of raising “feminine” art forms to the level of “high” art by leaving the 400 men and women who worked on the project unheralded, regaling the “conceptual artist” as “Goddess” and creator while the “artisans” or workers are merely tools. This places the physical craft below the conceptual, as well as offending the feminist ethic/aesthetic of attribution.

Caldwell, Susan Havens. “Experiencing THE DINNER PARTY.” WAJ 1.2 (1980/81): 35-37.
Caldwell responds primarily to the religious symbolism–Christian symbolism suggesting the sacrificial nourishment provided by women–and the “religiosity” in the work’s emotional appeal, which together with the collaborative effort, suggest to Caldwell a parallel with the construction of a cathedral in the middle ages, the creation of an art form “meaningful” to the entire community.

Chadwick, Whitney. WOMEN, ART, AND SOCIETY. London: Thames and Hudson, 1990.
In this feminist reevaluation of art history, Chadwick infuses her overview of Western women’s art with considerations of social contexts, aesthetic expectations, and concepts of “femininity,” concluding with discussions of feminism, postmodernism, and political change in women’s art.

Chicago, Judy. THROUGH THE FLOWER: MY STRUGGLE AS A WOMAN ARTIST. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1977.
Representing herself as exemplar, Chicago traces her growth from an awareness of her individual womanhood to her comprehension of social gender structures, in the art world and in heterosexual relationships. She avers that as a teacher and artist, she has a social responsibility to depict women’s values and world view through the form and imagery of her art and by choosing to work outside of the male institutions of art.

Comini, Alessandra. “Gender or Genius? The Woman Artists of German Expressionism.” Broude and Garrard 271-291.
Comini reassesses the German expressionist movement by bringing into its history and definition the works of three women artists–Kathe Kollwitz, Paula Modersohn-Becker, and Gabriele Munter. She argues that the exclusion of these women misrepresents the movement, and that Kollwitz in particular expresses a more socially conscious side of expressionism.

de Bretteville, Sheila Levrant. “A Reexaminination of Some Aspects of the Design Arts from the Perspective of a Woman Designer.” ARTS IN SOCIETY 11 (1974): 114-123.
De Bretteville argues that complexity and the use of fragmentary elements in design evoke the participation of the viewer and thereby undermine authoritarian control. She suggests that these, and other, “female” values presented in visual and physical forms can break down socially constructed divisions between male and female, work and leisure, public and private.

Duncan, Carol. “When Greatness Is a Box of Wheaties.” ARTFORUM 14 (1975): 60-64.
Duncan describes Nemser’s book of interviews, ART TALK, as an act of exploitation of the artists that forces their voices into Nemser’s social discourse and art history agenda. She argues that Nemser uses the interviews to attempt to prove her thesis that women are as “great” as men–and greatness is inherent and universal–but that men have tried to suppress their importance.

—. “Happy Mothers and Other New Ideas in Eighteenth-Century French Art.” Broude and Garrard 201-219.
Duncan incorporates the writing and painting of eighteenth-century France to reckon with the economic and social development of the family and its representations in paintings, thus delineating the processes by which representation is interwoven with historical forces.

Feinberg, Jean, Lenore Goldberg, Julie Gross, Bella Lieberman, and Elizabeth Sacre. “Political Fabrications: Women’s Textiles in 5 Cultures.” HERESIES 4 (1978): 28-37.
Interested in “the politics of art and aesthetics” the five authors analyze works in different cultures within the contexts, “both real and ideological,” of the work’s production, while avoiding assessments of quality and the imposition of contemporary Western notions of oppression on the women discussed.

Friedlander, Judith. “The Aesthetics of Oppression: Traditional Arts of Women in Mexico.” HERESIES 4 (1978): 3-9.
Commenting on the feminist aesthetic that wishes to reevaluate folk and women’s arts, Friedlander warns that we must be aware of the real consequences in women’s lives of preserving traditional arts (her example is cooking). While traditional arts may exemplify the undervalued artistry of women, they may also carry with them the traditional overburdening of women as workers in the home and must not be idealized as “timeless, authentic female culture.”

Garrard, Mary D. “Feminism: Has It Changed Art History?” HERESIES 4 (1978): 59-60.
Garrard argues that feminism should do more than attend to previously ignored women’s achievements. Feminist art history must expose the politics of female exclusion and conceptions of femininity that have shaped the entire discourse on art.

Gouma-Peterson, Thalia, and Patricia Mathews. “The Feminist Critique of Art History.” THE ART BULLETIN 69 (1987): 326-357.
Gouma-Peterson and Mathews’ article is both a historical overview and an incisive analysis of methodology, valuable for its scope, in the writers treated, and for its extensive footnotes. The authors argue that from the first to the second generation of feminist art criticism and history, the question of aesthetics has moved from one of a “female sensibility” to considerations of “representation and gender difference.” They favor deconstructive approaches, since they see the “unfixing” of the category of femininity, in its relations to class and race, as the most progressive means to undermine the ideological constructions that fix social categories and social roles.

Hammond, Harmony. “Horseblinders.” HERESIES 9 (1980): 45-47.
Hammond writes that “feminism is not an aesthetic,” arguing that a “feminist visual rhetoric” that associates a particular style with feminism, is restrictive and divisive, rather than a stimulation to feminist art and women’s creativity.

Hess, Thomas B., and Elizabeth Baker, eds. ART AND SEXUAL POLITICS: WOMEN’S LIBERATION, WOMEN ARTISTS, AND ART HISTORY. New York: Macmillan, 1973.
This book begins with Linda Nochlin’s signal essay, “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?,” an essay important both for its assertion that art history must examine social and institutional practices that shape artistic opportunity and conceptions of the artist, and for its central role in redirecting debate in feminist art history. The essays in the rest of this book, various responses to Nochlin’s essay or her title’s question, rarely carry the debate out of a liberal, ahistorical analysis.

Hudson, Christine. “Pour une approache feministe de l’histoire de l’art.” CWS 1.3 (1979): 4-5.
Hudson suggests that to find a feminist approach to art history, the historical reasons for women’s exclusion from art production and from the historical annals of art should be a part of the art historical analysis, while at the same time the current material conditions that continue such exclusions should be addressed.

Jaudon, Valerie, and Joyce Kozloff. “`Art Hysterical Notions’ of Progress and Culture.” HERESIES 4 (1978): 38-42.
To expose assumptions of art history and to pinpoint the importance of language in shaping the concepts of the discipline, Jaudon and Kozloff compile quotations from art historians revealing the sexist basis of their judgments.

Kahr, Madlyn Millner. “Women as Artists and `Women’s Art.'” WAJ 3.2 (1982/83): 28-31.
Kahr is against creating a category of “women’s art,” decrying the “special pleading and extravagant claims” she feels have been made under its rubric. She feels that women should fight for “equal but not preferential treatment” rather than ghettoize themselves and relegate themselves to “women’s work.”

Kampen, Natalie B. “Women’s Art: Beginnings of a Methodology.” FAJ 1.2 (1972): 10+.
Kampen argues that female artists are like female workers, and aesthetic standards and definitions of quality must move from purely formal to social, historical, and psychological considerations to deal adequately with women’s art.

Kraft, Selma. “Cognitive Function and Women’s Art.” WAJ 4.2 (1983/84): 5-9.
Using scientific data Kraft argues that “there is a particularly female way of processing information and that this sensibility reveals itself in art which emphasizes intervals and arrangements of repeated motifs.” Despite her caution, she implies that this phenomenon is transcultural and transhistorical.

Kramer, Marjorie. “Some Thoughts on Feminist Art.” WOMEN AND ART 1.1 (1971): 3.
Kramer argues against any inherent qualities of femininity, and against any assertions of a feminine aesthetic, sensibility, or form. She writes that feminist art is a result of a feminist consciousness, it is figurative rather than abstract, and it is recognizable as a social statement.

Krauss, Rosalind E. L’AMOUR FOU: PHOTOGRAPHY AND SURREALISM. New York: Abbeville Press, Publishers, 1985.
Krauss calls surrealist photography a scandal and a contradiction, since it tampered with the conception of photography as a direct witness of the real, and it revealed that the object of photography is always manipulated. Using texts by Lacan, Freud, and Barthes, along with numerous photographs, Krauss poses the canonized surrealism of Breton against that of Bataille, showing how the female body as the “form” of formalist aesthetics is used by surrealists to interrogate representation.

Kuspit, Donald B. “Betraying the Feminist Intention.” ARTS MAGAZINE 54 (1979): 124-126.
Kuspit defines the “feminist intention” in art as an unmasking of the ideological character of art, apparently making art practice inseparable from feminist art criticism. He attacks feminist decorative art as an authoritarian art that posits a pure, absolute, and idealistic order, demanding uncritical submission by the viewer.

Lauter, Estella. WOMEN AS MYTHMAKERS: POETRY AND VISUAL ART BY TWENTIETH CENTURY WOMEN. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984.
Through analysis of six twentieth-century women artists, and overviews of works by many other women artists, Lauter argues that visual as well as verbal artists can change cultural codes by altering mythology and creating new mythic images.

—. “`Moving to the Ends of Our Own Rainbow’: Steps Toward a Feminist Aesthetic.” PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES IN ART. Ed. Patricia H. Werhane. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1984. 537-543.
Lauter discusses Lippard’s essays as formulations of a new aesthetic theory that redefine art as gendered, inclusive, and part of a dialogue with its audience, breaking down the separation between the social and aesthetic aspects of art.

Linker, Kate. “Eluding Definition.” ARTFORUM 23.4 (1984): 61-67. Linker argues that theories of psychoanalysis and deconstruction can find rich applications to contemporary women’s art, since many artists depict the dismantling of the centered self and fixed categories of meaning, and the construction of gendered subjectivity within shifting social and ideological forces. [She concludes that “in this questioning of meaning’s autonomy we recognize a dagger directed at a tenet of Western esthetics that artworks are unified structures, enduring objects, expressions of the creative subject.”]

Lippard, Lucy R. FROM THE CENTER: FEMINIST ESSAYS ON WOMEN’S ART. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1976.
In one of the early works of feminist art criticism, Lippard intends “to help forge a separate feminist esthetic consciousness.” Her essays, written between 1970 and 1975, explore many exciting directions of feminist art in the 70s, from the creation of the L.A. Woman’s Building to the new conceptual art, from discussions of female imagery to the work of individual artists. Her approach includes many cultural and artistic evaluations while never forgetting the economic, material, and practical concerns of women artists.

—. GET THE MESSAGE? A DECADE OF ART FOR SOCIAL CHANGE. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1984.
In her most recent collection of essays, Lippard elaborates on the conjunction of art, feminism, and left politics. Especially interested in overtly political art, she writes about the Art Workers’ Coalition, street art, performance art, and murals, addressing the purposes of art and how art is deployed in the world, from the institutional commodification of art to the potential for art to stimulate social change.

Loeb, Judy, ed. FEMINIST COLLAGE: EDUCATING WOMEN IN THE VISUAL ARTS. New York: Teaching College Press, 1979.
The essays in this book cover a wide variety of topics and approaches, concentrating on examinations of the role of institutions in shaping aesthetics, both in art education and reception. For example, in the article, “The Male Artist as Stereotypical Female,” June Wayne concentrates on the ways that society uses aesthetic judgments–of women and art–to isolate and deny artists power, while in the article, “The Pink Glass Swan,” Lucy R. Lippard discusses the use of aesthetics to designate and separate by social class.

London, Julia, and Joan Howarth. “Evolution of a Feminist Art Working with WAVAW.” HERESIES 6 (1979): 86-88.
This article describes the shaping of a media event as a model for effective “radical intervention of artists in society.” The editorial statement that follows this article elaborates on the media’s power to shape representation and communicate social concepts, underlining the importance of controlling the representation of one’s ideas.

Mainardi, Patricia. “Quilts: The Great American Art.” Broude and Garrard 331-346.
Mainardi describes quilts as universal female art forms and part of women’s cultural heritage that have played a role in female creativity, community, cooperation, and communication. Although the mainstream art world still excludes them from the designation of Art, quilts address issues of originality and tradition, individuality and collectivity, content and values in art, and the feminine sensibility.

—. “Feminine Sensibility: An Analysis.” FAJ 1.2 (1972): 9+.
Mainardi reviews elements of a feminine sensibility as they were discussed in a conference. The heated debate over these issues is quieted in this inclusive and non-judgmental review.

Moss, Irene, and Lila Katzen. “Separatism: The New Rip-Off.” FAJ 2.2 (1973): 7+.
Moss argues that art and art standards are universal and that separatism is against the natural order in which both sexes participate equally. Katzen argues that separatism creates unrealistic expectations for women and causes them to lose their competitive role in the mainstream art world.

Nemser, Cindy. “Art Criticism and Gender Prejudice.” ARTS MAGAZINE 46.5 (1972): 44-46.
Nemser condemns gender-charged sexist language by male art reviewers, calling for new critical language. She cites psychological tests to argue that intellect and creativity are ungendered, and she concludes that only “reactionary female chauvinists” would claim that biology or cultural conditioning differentiate male and female art.

—. “Stereotypes and Women Artists.” FAJ 1.1 (1972): 1+.
Nemser decries stereotypical categories that male reviewers use to undermine the power of women’s art. Nemser concludes her article by denying a different feminine sensibility, based on the most egregious formulations of that sensibility delineated by hostile male reviewers.

—. “The Women Artists’ Movement.” FAJ 2.4 (1973-74): 8-10.
In her historical overview of women artists organizing in the years 1969 to 1973, Nemser challenges both the male establishment and the women working toward concepts of a female aesthetic. She limits the term feminist to those who are seeking to expose male sexism and are working to have women included in the male art structures.

—. “Towards a Feminist Sensibility: Contemporary Trends in Women’s Art.” FAJ 5.2 (1976): 19-23.
In this article, Nemser rejects the possibility of a “feminine” sensibility, concentrating instead on “feminist art as a doctrine of equal rights for women in the aesthetic area.” She argues that this “feminist” sensibility is evident in any art in which “women’s immediate personal experience” is expressed.

Nochlin, Linda. WOMEN, ART AND POWER AND OTHER ESSAYS. New York: Harper & Row, 1988.
Nochlin’s collected essays conclude with her pivotal 1971 essay, “Why Are There No Great Women Artists?” in which she challenges the notion of inherent genius by raising the many issues of social and institutional situations, such as the exclusion of women from studying the nude and social dictates of feminine behavior. In her later essays, Nochlin expands on her social and institutional analysis: in one essay, she describes Berthe Morisot’s depiction of a wet nurse as a deconstruction of the sacred mother-child dyad and, in her title essay, she reads the narrative and iconographic levels of paintings to reveal their ideological messages on the conjunction of women, art, and power.

Owens, Craig. “The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Postmodernism.” THE ANTI-AESTHETIC: ESSAYS IN POST MODERN CULTURE. Ed. Hal Foster. Port Townsend, WA: Bay Press, 1983. 57-82.
In exploring the intersection of the feminist critique of patriarchy and the postmodernist critique of representation, Owens finds psychoanalytic and deconstructive theories useful, but he cautions against the limitations of any single theoretical discourse. Owens argues that the exposure of invisible power structures is not an adequate explanation of many contemporary women visual artists, and he discusses their works as forms of representation that destabilize identity, refuse appropriation, and undermine authoritative subjectivity.

Parker, Rozsika. THE SUBVERSIVE STITCH: EMBROIDERY AND THE MAKING OF THE FEMININE. London: The Women’s Press, 1984.
Parker traces the history of embroidery as a sign of the shifting ideology of femininity from medieval to contemporary England. Through an economic and social perspective, she discusses how embroidery was depicted and what it depicted, how embroidery was used to train girls in femininity, and how it has been used to express rebellion against social definitions.

Parker, Rozsika, and Griselda Pollock. OLD MISTRESSES: WOMEN, ART AND IDEOLOGY. New York: Pantheon Books, 1981.
In their book, Pollock and Parker analyze the ideological forces that shape the discourse of art history to discover “Why modern art history ignores the existence of women artists.” Through a historical and structural analysis of the representation of women and artists from the nineteenth century to the present, the authors find that artists are increasingly associated with social and intellectual independence and genius attributed to masculinity, while women are represented as homebound, dependent, and mentally fixed. The authors conclude that in women’s relation to traditional institutions, as well as in their own art practice, women artists can expose and deconstruct these ideological constructions by changing, to quote Lippard, “the way art is seen, bought, sold, and used in our culture.”

—. FRAMING FEMINISM: ART AND THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT 1970-85. London: Pandora, 1987.
This anthology, based on “a correlation between the value system that sustains the institutions of art and the sexual division that structures our society,” constructs the historical context for British art criticism and practice in the 70s and 80s. The selections, almost one-third of which are by the editors, emphasize feminist deconstructive and materialist critical approaches, as in Pollock’s argument against “Images of Women” criticism, complemented by Parker’s “Images of Men.”

Peel, Giovanna. “A Room of One’s Own: A Case for Women’s Architecture.” CWS 3.3 (1982): 44-45.
Peel contends that women have a more “traditional” aptitude for architectural construction because they have “traditionally” dominated home spaces and because the construction of homes is a long dormant female occupation.

Pollock, Griselda. “Women, Art and Ideology: Questions for Feminist Art Historians.” WAJ 4.1 (1983): 39-47.
Pollock argues for an adaptation of Marxist forms of analysis in feminist art history, shifting art historians’ focus from descriptive histories to an analysis of art in its historical context, to show how art production is affected by ideology and how it expresses ideological assumptions.

—. VISION AND DIFFERENCE: FEMININITY, FEMINISM AND THE HISTORIES OF ART. London: Routledge, 1988.
Pollock declares that feminism has brought about a paradigm shift in art history that exposes previous art history as a masculinist discourse and that reconceptualizes art as a social practice. In her essays she employs Marxist and psychoanalytic discourses to analyze and deconstruct the social construction of femininity and woman in artistic representations.

Rabinovitz, Lauren. “Issues of Feminist Aesthetics: Judy Chicago and Joyce Wieland.” WAJ 1.2 (1980/81): 38-41.
Comparing Wieland’s TRUE PATRIOT LOVE to Chicago’s DINNER PARTY, Rabinovitz defines five aspects of feminist aesthetic value: that the work encourages “active artistic participation” by the viewer/reader, that artists work cooperatively on an equal status, that traditional women’s crafts are considered art, that female imagery be used without misappropriation or objectification, and that the contradictions inherent in making images into “art” be dealt with consciously.

Raven, Arlene. CROSSING OVER: FEMINISM AND THE ART OF SOCIAL CONCERN. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1988.
In this collection of her essays, Raven uses an associational method to draw together historical events, poetry, descriptions of works of art, the words of artists, and her own voice. In her verbal weaving, Raven treats a variety of topics and individual artists, discussing spirituality and ethnicity, concepts of home, and the battle against rape. Using feminism to cross over traditional boundaries–between artistic and political commentary, between critical and poetic writing–her essays merge artistic and social concerns.

Raven, Arlene, and Ruth Iskin. “Through the Peephole: Toward a Lesbian Sensibility in Art.” CHRYSALIS 4 (1978): 19-26.
In a dialogue between Raven and Iskin, Raven attempts to broaden the idea of a lesbian sensibility by considering lesbianism as a model for all feminists, as a symbol of a woman who takes risks, is in control of her life, and who is the source of her own artistic creation, and she suggests that the lesbian sensibility “reflects a new process, form, and content,” though she does not elaborate on this idea.

Raven, Arlene, Cassandra L. Langer, and Joanna Frueh. FEMINIST ART CRITICISM: AN ANTHOLOGY. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1988.
The essays in this book, organized chronologically from 1973 to 1987, utilize a variety of theoretical approaches, while addressing Chicana art, African American women’s performance art, erotic art, cinema, and general theories of feminist art criticism. Despite their differences, all of the theoretical approaches–Marxist, psychoanalytic, deconstructive, etc.–implicate a social dimension as basic to feminist aesthetic considerations.

Richert, Shirley Kassman. “From Women’s Work to Art Objects.” FAJ 2.1 (1973): 17.
Richert describes women’s creative work in quilts, weaving, pottery, basket weaving, and leather as work that has been aesthetically ignored and undervalued because it is traditionally private, women’s work, created for use rather than solely for display.

Robinson, Hilary, ed. VISIBLY FEMALE: FEMINISM AND ART. New York: Universe Books, 1988.
This anthology opens up a number of dialogues in feminist art criticism, such as that between Griselda Pollock and Ann Sutherland Harris about ideology in art. It covers views, from archetypal theory and psychoanalytic theory, develops positions from black and lesbian women artists, and delves into issues such as definitions of pornography, as in the article entitled “Towards a Feminist Erotica.”

Rom, Cristine C. “One View: THE FEMINIST ART JOURNAL.” WAJ 2.2 (1981/82): 19-24.
Rom reviews the historical position and editorial policies of THE FEMINIST ART JOURNAL, criticizing the magazine’s editors, and especially Cindy Nemser, for excluding many important currents in the feminist art movement and silencing many questions regarding feminist aesthetics and historical analysis by labeling “right wing” the efforts of many radical and separatist feminist artists and critics.

Rosenberg, Avis Lang. “PORK ROASTS: 250 FEMINIST CARTOONS.” CWS 3.3 (1982): 30-33.
In her review of an art exhibit and the accompanying catalogue of feminist cartoons, Rosenberg describes as “feminist” cartoons that show an awareness and exposure of the ways in which gender shapes experiences and perceptions in the situations depicted. She also insists that the gender patterns that create male privilege, and not men per se, are being “roasted.”

Sawyer, Janet, and Patricia Mainardi. “A Feminine Sensibility? Two Views.” FAJ 1.1 (1972): 4+.
Sawyer believes that there exists a collective female unconscious, untainted by “male” consciousness, that women must tap to find a female sensibility. Mainardi calls those who are developing a female aesthetic, the “right wing of the women artists’ movement,” describing them further as opportunistic, reactionary, and upholders of biological determinism. She avers that “Feminist Art” is political art, much different than a “feminine sensibility.”

Schapiro, Miriam, and Judy Chicago. “Female Imagery.” WOMANSPACE JOURNAL 1.3 (1973): 11-14.
Schapiro and Chicago argue that certain forms in women’s art, especially the “central core” iconography, reflect the biological form of female sexuality and that these forms reverse the way the culture sees women and they assert female values–such as “softness, vulnerability and self-exposure”–in art.

Tickner, Lisa. “The Body Politic: Female Sexuality & Women Artists since 1970.” ART HISTORY 1.2 (1978): 236-247.
Against the historical background of the erotic depiction of women as a mediating sign for the male, Tickner discusses women’s erotic art as a process of de-eroticizing and de-colonizing the female body by using artistic strategies to challenge taboos and celebrate female biological processes and morphology.

Vogel, Lise. “Fine Arts and Feminism: The Awakening Consciousness.” FS 2 (1974): 3-37.
Vogel begins this early analysis of feminist art history with a painstaking critique of Hess and Nochlin’s WOMAN AS SEX OBJECT. With a clear eye for economic factors, and the social and analytical implications of class, race, and gender, Vogel outlines directions for feminist art teachers and historians.

Watterson, Georgia. “When My Vision is Cohesive, I Draw: Banahonda Kennedy-Kish (Bambi).” CWS 3.3 (1982): 20-22.
As a Native artist, Bambi feels her art is intrinsically bound to balancing the white and native cultures she lives with. Her statements as a Native artist are particularly interesting because they claim for the Native sensibility similar characteristics that some feminist theorists claim for women, suggesting that ideological opposition to white patriarchal culture may influence the choice of identifying characteristics.

Whelan, Richard. “Are Women Better Photographers Than Men?” ART NEWS 79 (1980): 80-88.
Whelan argues that the difference between male and female photographers is socioeconomic rather than aesthetic. He suggests that social roles imposed on women can help in photography and photojournalism because photographic subjects tend to trust or discount women more easily, considering them less powerful and intrusive than men.

Withers, Josephine. “Three Women Sculptors: Jackie Ferrara, Lila Katzen, Athena Tacha.” FS 5 (1979): 507-8.
“Faith Ringgold.” FS6 (1980): 207-212.
“Betye Saar.” FS 6 (1980): 336-341.
“Audrey Flack: Monumental Still Lives.” FS 7 (1981): 524-529.
“Musing About the Muse.” FS 9 (1983): 27-29.
“In the World.” FS 9 (1983): 325-6.
“Inuit Women Artists.” FS 10 (1984): 85-88.
“Jody Pinto.” FS 11 (1985): 379-381.
“On the Inside Not Looking Out.” FS 11 (1985): 559-560.
“Eleanor Antin: Allegory of the Soul.” FS 12 (1986): 117-121.
“Revisioning Our Foremothers: Reflections on the Ordinary. Extraordinary Art of May Stevens.” FS 13 (1987): 485-498.
Withers’ brief art essays, usually accompanying examples of the artists’ work, contain feminist analyses that elaborate on various aesthetic considerations. For example, in “Musing About the Muse” she considers female appropriations of the nude as a destruction of the active-male-subject/passive-female-object opposition common in male nudes; in “In the World” she describes the earthworks of women as “a more cooperative, organic, and process-oriented modeling.” Thus, Withers opens up many possible considerations of feminist aesthetics as a dynamic and shifting process of “reading” and reacting to works of art.

[The following list brings our bibliography a bit past a turning point in the scholarship that links feminism and aesthetics–a bend in the road that occurred in 1989-90 when the conjunction that had been forming for roughly twenty years in the feminist theory and practice of separate arts was sufficiently noticeable to require recognition by Philosophy, the academic home of Aesthetics since its inception in Aristotle’s POETICS (or at least since the term came into English in the eighteenth century). Acceptance occurred nearly simultaneously in special issues of the influential APA NEWSLETTER, of a leading feminist philosophy journal, HYPATIA, and of the American Society of Aesthetics’ JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM, all listed below. In the same academic year, the title of Rita Felski’s book, BEYOND FEMINIST AESTHETICS (see literature section, above), implied that the amorphous mass of ideas only recently identified as “feminist aesthetics” by Gisela Ecker’s 1985 title (above, literature section), was already a discipline worth contesting. Although arguments about its name may continue for some time, I expect the systematic feminist study of the arts to be a highly visible component of multi-cultural Women’s Studies in the decades ahead.]

Estella Lauter
AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION NEWSLETTER ON PHILOSOPHY AND FEMINISM (1990).

Armitt, Lucie, ed. WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE: WOMEN AND SCIENCE FICTION. Routledge, 1991.

Baker, Houston A. WORKINGS OF THE SPIRIT: THE POETICS OF AFRO-AMERICAN WOMEN’S WRITING. University of Chicago Press, 1991.

Bassard, Katherine Clay. “Gender and Genre: Black Women’s Autobiobraphy and the Ideology of Literacy.” AFRICAN AMERICAN REVIEW 26. 1 (Spring 1992), 119-130.

Bergstrom, Janet and Mary Ann Doane. “The Female Spectator: Contexts and Directions.” CAMERA OBSCURA 20/21 (1990): 5-27.

Brand, Peg and Carolyn Korsmeyer, eds. “Feminism and Traditional Aesthetics.” Special issue of THE JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM 48.4 (Fall 1990).

Broude, Norma. IMPRESSIONISM: A FEMINIST READING: THE GENDERING OF ART, SCIENCE, AND NATURE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. Rizzoli, 1991.

Chadwick, Whitney. “Negotiating the Feminist Divide.” HERESIES 24 (1989): 23-28.

Chave, A.C. “O’Keeffe and the Masculine Gaze.” ART IN AMERICA 78 (January 1990): 114-125.

“Contemporary Quilts.” Special focus issue of GALLERIE: WOMEN ARTISTS 3. 1 (1990).

Daly, A. “Are Women Reclaiming or Reinforcing Sexist Imagery?” HIGH PERFORMANCE 12 (Summer 1989): 18-19.

Davis, Kathy. “Remaking the She-Devil: a Critical Look at Feminist Approaches to Beauty.” HYPATIA 6. 2 (Summer 1991): 21-43.

DeKoven, Marianne. RICH AND STRANGE: GENDER, HISTORY, MODERNISM. Princeton University Press, 1991.

Devereaux, Mary. “The Philosophical and Political Implications of the Feminist Critique of Aesthetic Autonomy.” In Carr, Glynis, ed. “TURNING THE CENTURY”: FEMINIST THEORY IN THE 1990S. Bucknell University Press, 1992.

Dotterer, Ronald and Susan Bowers, eds. POLITICS, GENDER AND THE ARTS. Susquehanna University Press, 1992.

Edmondson, Belinda. “Black Aesthetics, Feminist Aesthetics, and the Problems of Oppositional Discourse.” CULTURAL CRITIQUE 22 (Fall 1992): 75-98.

Evans, Patricia, ed. ISSUES IN FEMINIST FILM CRITICISM. Indiana University Press, 1990.

Fullbrook, Kate. FREEWOMEN: ETHICS AND AESTHETICS IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY WOMEN’S FICTION. Temple University Press, 1990.

Gamman, Lorraine and Marshment, Margaret. THE FEMALE GAZE: WOMEN AS VIEWERS OF POPULAR CULTURE. Real Comet Press, 1989.

Garb, T. “The Forbidden Gaze.” ART IN AMERICA 79 (May 1991): 146-51.

Gates, Eugene. “The Female Voice: Sexual Aesthetics Revisited.” JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION 22. 4 (Winter 1988): 59-68.

Goettner-Abendroth, Heide. THE DANCING GODDESS. Krause, Maureen T. translator. Beacon Press, 1991.

Grigsby, Darcy Grimaldo. “Dilemmas of Visibility: Contemporary Women Artists’ Representations of Female Bodies.” Special issue of MICHIGAN QUARTERLY REVIEW 29.4 (Fall 1990): 584-618.

Hammond, Harmony. “Historias: Women Tinsmiths of New Mexico.” HERESIES 24 (1989): 38-43.

Hanna, Judith Lynne. DANCE, SEX AND GENDER: SIGNS OF IDENTITY, DOMINANCE, DEFIANCE AND DESIRE. University of Chicago Press, 1988.

Hein, Hilde and Carol Korsmeyer, eds. “Feminism and Aesthetics.” Special issue of HYPATIA 5. 2 (Summer 1990).

Jacobs, Lea and Patrice Petro, eds. “Feminism and Film History.” Special issue of CAMERA OBSCURA 22 (1990).

Jezic, D.P. WOMEN COMPOSERS: THE LOST TRADITION FOUND. Feminist Press, 1988. (Cassettes available.)

Jolicoeur, Nicole. “Feminism and Art Curatorial Practice.” CANADIAN WOMEN’S STUDIES 11. 1 (Spring 1990): 10-11.

Jones, S. “The Female Perspective.” MUSIC JOURNAL 91 (Fall 1991): 24-27.

Keeling, R. “Women in North American Indian Music.” NOTES OF THE SOCIETY FOR ETHNOMUSICOLOGY 47 (1991): 1148-49.

LaDuke, Betty. WOMEN ARTISTS: MULTICULTURAL VISIONS. Red Sea Press, 1992.

LaDuke, Betty. AFRICA THROUGH THE EYES OF WOMEN ARTISTS. Africa World Press, 1991.

Lauter, Estella. “Feminist Interart Criticism: A Contradiction in Terms?” Special issue of COLLEGE LITERATURE 19. 2 (June 1992): 98-105.

Lippard, Lucy. MIXED BLESSINGS: NEW ART IN A MULTICULTURAL AMERICA. Pantheon Books, 1990.

Lippard, Lucy R. “Both Sides Now.” HERESIES 24 (1989): 29-34.

Longhurst, Derek, ed. GENDER, GENRE, AND NARRATIVE PLEASURE. Unwin Hyman, 1989.

Lovely, D. “Speaking in Tongues: Women Artists and Modernism, 1900-1935.” ARTS REVIEW 42 (May 1990): 235-236.

MacDonald, S. “Demystifying the Female Body.” FILM QUARTERLY 45 (Fall 1991): 18-32.

“Making a Difference: Women in Museums.” MUSEUM NEWS 69 (July/August 1990): 37-50.

Maksymowicz, Virginia. “The Practice of Photography: Education, Gender and Ideology.” WOMEN ARTISTS NEWS 15. 3 (Fall 1990): 2-5.

Malti-Douglas, Fedwa. WOMAN’S BODY, WOMAN’S WORD: GENDER AND DISCOURSE IN ARABO-ISLAMIC WRITING. Princeton University Press, 1992.

McClary, S. “Feminine Endings: Music, Gender and Sexuality.” JOURNAL OF MUSIC 9. 3 (1991): 397-98.

“Native Women.” Special issue of Canadian Women’s Studies 10. 2&3(Summer/Fall 1989).

Parkerson, Michelle. “No More Mammy Stories: an Overview of Black Women Filmmakers.” GALLERIE 1989 Annual: 12-16.

Richards, Catherine. “Virtual Reality: the Rebirth of Pure Art?” WOMEN’S ART 41 (July/August 1991): 4-6.

Robinson, S. “Demarginalizing Women Photographers.” ARTWEEK 20 (July 1989): 11.

Ruppert, Jeanne, ed. GENDER: LITERARY AND CINEMATIC REPRESENTATION. Florida State University Press, 1990.

Russ, Joanna. “Anomalousness” and “Aesthetics.” Warhol and Herndl 194-211.

Schapiro, Miriam and Faith Wilding. “Cunts/Quilts/Consciousness.” HERESIES. 24 (1989): 6-10.

Scott, Bonnie Kime, ed. THE GENDER OF MODERNISM: A CRITICAL ANTHOLOGY. Indiana University Press, 1990.

Seitz, B. “Songs, Identity and Women’s Liberation in Nicaragua.” LATIN AMERICAN MUSIC REVIEW 12. 1 (1991): 21-41.

Shapiro, A.D. “Music and Gender: Another Look.” THE SONNECK SOCIETY BULLETIN FOR AMERICAN MUSIC 17. 2 (1991): 58-60.

Slyomovics, Susan. “Ritual Grievance: the Language of Women?” WOMEN AND PERFORMANCE 5. 1 (1990).

Smith, Paul Julian. THE BODY HISPANIC: GENDER AND SEXUALITY IN SPANISH AND SPANISH-AMERICAN LITERATURE. Oxford University Press, 1989.

Tracy, Laura. “CATCHING THE DRIFT”: AUTHORITY, GENDER AND NARRATIVE STRATEGY IN FICTION. Rutgers University Press, 1989.

Villarejo, Amy. “Reconsidering Visual Pleasure.” NWSA JOURNAL 3 (Winter 1991): 110-116. Review essay.

Walker, Cheryl. “Feminist Literary Criticism and the Author.” CRITICAL INQUIRY 16. 3 (Spring 1990): 551-571.

Wallace, Michelle. “Variations on Negation and the Heresy of Black Feminist Creativity.” HERESIES 24 (1989): 69-75.

Warhol, Robyn R. and Diane Price Herndl, eds. FEMINISMS: AN ANTHOLOGY OF LITERARY THEORY AND CRITICISM. Rutgers University Press, 1991.
Includes articles by Friedman, Gilbert and Gubar, Jones, Kolodny, Mulvey, Robinson, Showalter, Tompkins, and Zimmerman(listed in the annotated sections of this bibliography), and others.

Werden, Dyana. “‘Languaging’: an Image/Word Conjunction.” TRIVIA 16/17 (Fall 1990): 40-49.

Weston, Jennifer. “Thinking in Things: a Woman’s Symbol Language.” TRIVIA 16/17 (Fall 1990): 84-98.

Williams, L. “Firm Bodies: Gender, Genre and Excess.” FILM QUARTERLY 44 (Summer 1991): 2-13.

Wolff, Janet. FEMININE SENTENCES: ESSAYS ON WOMEN AND CULTURE. University of California, 1990. “Women’s Studies / Women’s Status.” College Music Society. NOTES 47 (1991): 801-02.

Young, G. “Letters From the Front Line: The State of the Art for Women Composers.” EAR 15 (Mar. 1991): 16-19.

Zimmerman, Bonnie. THE SAFE SEA OF WOMEN: LESBIAN FICTION 1969-1989. Beacon, 1990.