Thank you for a portal into this important show. I’m overwhelmed by your preservation message because I have so much art and many artifacts from my feminist-artist-mother’s loft to care for or dispose of or give away or .. write about. It’s incredible to learn about this same era on the other side of the pond. My mother founded consciousness raising groups and even broadcast hers over NYC radio airwaves. She wrote articles for Women Artists Newsletter. I wish I could get to the Tate to see this exhibition.
In the well-funded and resourced art world I dream of, there would be support for you in preserving your mother's collection: that's the work of museums. Meanwhile, you're doing an amazing job being here on Substack and sharing in the way you do. My grandmother was a painter and her work was distributed around family members after she died. I have quite a few pieces that I keep in storage. I'm sure that's a familiar story. I wonder if there's a way we can collectively support each other? I will ponder on that.
Thanks for the amazing review.I too will no be able to attend in person but look forward to recommending the exhibit to faculty and UK at Oxford Brookes.I am currently researching the role of Ruskin College in Oxford in the 1930-1950's where working class people including women and my grandfather where supported to education for all alongside completing a MA thesis on the Role of Participatory Art on Social Cohesion and Positive Peacebuilding.
Wow Deb, that’s fascinating. Would love to hear more. I come from a community/participatory arts background so your MA speaks to my soul. Thanks for being here.
I am reminded of the exhibit I went to see at the “Art Gallery of NSW”: Louise Bourgeois. She had an experience (such as motherhood, moving to a new country) or a reflection (on family members) or a depression, she documented it ... I wasn’t keen on seeing it because of the giant spiders but oh my gosh, the “night” room, brilliantly placed in WW2 oil tanks repurposed as gallery space ... was incredible. It was amazing amazing. The funny thing is the Kadinsky exhibit is the headliner (at least that’s how it feels) as it’s the biggest one yet of his work to be shown in Australia, but ... it just felt so distant and mannered although I got plenty of painting ideas from him.
Louise is one of my art s/heroes. I was in awe at the range and scale of her work when I saw it in the flesh. Oil tanks repurposed as a gallery sounds amazing! What a treat to experience her work in that space.
I love your approach to writing up your thoughts on this show Jacqueline. I also felt emotional the first time I saw it. Yesterday was my third visit, and I still didn't get through all of it. Going again for the final time next week. I couldn't disagree more with the Show Studio review. I don't think black and lesbian art was tacked on at the end. It was a significant part of the exhibition, and I think justifiably is curated into rooms /areas focusing on different themes and groups. This reflects the history of women's lib too. I'm sure there might be other ways to group the work but I thought it was coherent.
I also think that it's absolutely fine to focus on a particular period in history 1970-1990 rather than any later work. This was, after all, a significant moment in women's history. It was already overflowing with content. And I'm glad for that. I want to see as much art as possible because it will no doubt be a long time before it gets a chance for another public airing.
The critique about GCSE display quality I think is also unfair. There's a lot rammed in there, but frankly there's a lot to include on a subject that doesn't usually get enough exhibition space. What this show demonstrates to me is the slippage between political and personal expression, and I think it's an excellent thing that it does a job of history education for some gallery goers. Frankly, the more men and younger women understand and know about the history of women's fight for equality the better. Sometimes dialogue between art from the past and the present in an exhibition is a useful thing. Here I don't think it's needed.
I'm going back to see it again in March when I'll be in London. I think the criticisms of it being overwhelming are justified but that's the point really, isn't it?, women felt overwhelmed and still do. I like to include other points of view, that's why I referenced the two critiques, but I agree with your comments. Some folks have been unnecessarily unkind about the presentation and once again prove that when it comes to women's art, nothing is ever quite good enough. Thanks for taking the time to add your thoughts, I appreciate it.
Yes, there's too much to see in one go. No one can possibly take it all in. The way in which it is curated IMO adds to the depth of the show. I do think those who are bashing this aspect of it are actually just bashing the art -- it's a roundabout way of saying 'this is all just the silly ephemera of silly talentless women'. Which I have read in one review, and which completely reinforces one of the key points of the show about misogyny and the sidelining of women's voices.
Thank you for a portal into this important show. I’m overwhelmed by your preservation message because I have so much art and many artifacts from my feminist-artist-mother’s loft to care for or dispose of or give away or .. write about. It’s incredible to learn about this same era on the other side of the pond. My mother founded consciousness raising groups and even broadcast hers over NYC radio airwaves. She wrote articles for Women Artists Newsletter. I wish I could get to the Tate to see this exhibition.
Your mother sounds amazing and I wish you luck in preserving her memory and artifacts.Have you considered a show with a catalogue attached ?
It's an overwhelming undertaking... worse than publishing a memoir... so I have a substack. :)
In the well-funded and resourced art world I dream of, there would be support for you in preserving your mother's collection: that's the work of museums. Meanwhile, you're doing an amazing job being here on Substack and sharing in the way you do. My grandmother was a painter and her work was distributed around family members after she died. I have quite a few pieces that I keep in storage. I'm sure that's a familiar story. I wonder if there's a way we can collectively support each other? I will ponder on that.
Thank you. This note really moved me.
Thanks for the amazing review.I too will no be able to attend in person but look forward to recommending the exhibit to faculty and UK at Oxford Brookes.I am currently researching the role of Ruskin College in Oxford in the 1930-1950's where working class people including women and my grandfather where supported to education for all alongside completing a MA thesis on the Role of Participatory Art on Social Cohesion and Positive Peacebuilding.
Wow Deb, that’s fascinating. Would love to hear more. I come from a community/participatory arts background so your MA speaks to my soul. Thanks for being here.
I have yet to explore substack fully so i look forward to seeing your future writings
I am reminded of the exhibit I went to see at the “Art Gallery of NSW”: Louise Bourgeois. She had an experience (such as motherhood, moving to a new country) or a reflection (on family members) or a depression, she documented it ... I wasn’t keen on seeing it because of the giant spiders but oh my gosh, the “night” room, brilliantly placed in WW2 oil tanks repurposed as gallery space ... was incredible. It was amazing amazing. The funny thing is the Kadinsky exhibit is the headliner (at least that’s how it feels) as it’s the biggest one yet of his work to be shown in Australia, but ... it just felt so distant and mannered although I got plenty of painting ideas from him.
Louise is one of my art s/heroes. I was in awe at the range and scale of her work when I saw it in the flesh. Oil tanks repurposed as a gallery sounds amazing! What a treat to experience her work in that space.
I’ll be making a YouTube video about it, and I’m going to go back at the end of the month.
I love your approach to writing up your thoughts on this show Jacqueline. I also felt emotional the first time I saw it. Yesterday was my third visit, and I still didn't get through all of it. Going again for the final time next week. I couldn't disagree more with the Show Studio review. I don't think black and lesbian art was tacked on at the end. It was a significant part of the exhibition, and I think justifiably is curated into rooms /areas focusing on different themes and groups. This reflects the history of women's lib too. I'm sure there might be other ways to group the work but I thought it was coherent.
I also think that it's absolutely fine to focus on a particular period in history 1970-1990 rather than any later work. This was, after all, a significant moment in women's history. It was already overflowing with content. And I'm glad for that. I want to see as much art as possible because it will no doubt be a long time before it gets a chance for another public airing.
The critique about GCSE display quality I think is also unfair. There's a lot rammed in there, but frankly there's a lot to include on a subject that doesn't usually get enough exhibition space. What this show demonstrates to me is the slippage between political and personal expression, and I think it's an excellent thing that it does a job of history education for some gallery goers. Frankly, the more men and younger women understand and know about the history of women's fight for equality the better. Sometimes dialogue between art from the past and the present in an exhibition is a useful thing. Here I don't think it's needed.
I'm going back to see it again in March when I'll be in London. I think the criticisms of it being overwhelming are justified but that's the point really, isn't it?, women felt overwhelmed and still do. I like to include other points of view, that's why I referenced the two critiques, but I agree with your comments. Some folks have been unnecessarily unkind about the presentation and once again prove that when it comes to women's art, nothing is ever quite good enough. Thanks for taking the time to add your thoughts, I appreciate it.
Yes, there's too much to see in one go. No one can possibly take it all in. The way in which it is curated IMO adds to the depth of the show. I do think those who are bashing this aspect of it are actually just bashing the art -- it's a roundabout way of saying 'this is all just the silly ephemera of silly talentless women'. Which I have read in one review, and which completely reinforces one of the key points of the show about misogyny and the sidelining of women's voices.
Absolutely! We could create a book just around the reactions to that exhibition.