women artist in statistics

[anne (bxl)]

Hi girls I need your opinion on this, but you guys are welcome too! ;)

A major french art magazine (Beaux-Arts) conducts a survey this month with a question to art professionnals from US, Japan and Europe (gallerists, commisonners, art critics,...) : "For you which living artists are the most importants, whatever their generation is?"

On a list of 30 artists only two women (Louise Bourgeois and Cindy Sherman) have been recognized as important by professionnals! Why is it so? Are we undergifted? under-recognized? not ambitious enough? less mediatic??

any comment welcome.

[fritchie]

Hi girls I need your opinion on this, but you guys are welcome too! ;)

A major french art magazine (Beaux-Arts) conducts a survey this month with a question to art professionnals from US, Japan and Europe (gallerists, commisonners, art critics,...) : "For you which living artists are the most importants, whatever their generation is?"

On a list of 30 artists only two women (Louise Bourgeois and Cindy Sherman) have been recognized as important by professionnals! Why is it so? Are we undergifted? under-recognized? not ambitious enough? less mediatic??

any comment welcome.

Anne - I think an equivalent survey in the U. S. would include many more women. I'm assuming from your post that the magazine chose this list of 30 and asked readers to rank them. Is that right, and how were the 30 people distributed worldwide, roughly?

[anne (bxl)]

Anne - I think an equivalent survey in the U. S. would include many more women. I'm assuming from your post that the magazine chose this list of 30 and asked readers to rank them. Is that right, and how were the 30 people distributed worldwide, roughly?

You misunderstood, Frichie. As I said the magazine asked professionnals (not readers!) from all over the world to answer (including Moma and Guggenheim responsibles, LA or Tokyo gallerists, etc...). So the survey could be published in a US magazine and would be the same.

The answers were free and not listed. The list has been established based on the answers. Among the 30 selected artists, 14 are americans (12 men/2women), 1 canadian, 1 mexican, 1 japanese, 13 europeans (all men).

So why women are not more recognized as valuable artists on the top selection... I wished an humble and friendly reflexion on the subject.

[JAZ]

You misunderstood, Frichie. As I said the magazine asked professionnals (not readers!) from all over the world to answer (including Moma and Guggenheim responsibles, LA or Tokyo gallerists, etc...). So the survey could be published in a US magazine and would be the same.

The answers were free and not listed. The list has been established based on the answers. Among the 30 selected artists, 14 are americans (12 men/2women), 1 canadian, 1 mexican, 1 japanese, 13 europeans (all men).

So why women are not more recognized as valuable artists on the top selection... I wished an humble and friendly reflexion on the subject.

Perhaps it's in part due to the disparity between men and women's views of themselves. I think a good part of how successful an artist is at surging ahead of the thousands of other artists trying to be known is how strong your self-image is, how much you believe that your work deserves to be at the top echelons and how single-minded you are at getting it there. I tend to delay making solid art world contacts with my portfolio, my website (which I've talked about doing for years, yet isn't there yet). I've only approached galleries myself twice, and instead I volunteer for art advocacy stuff to help everyone around me. That's the mother in me coming out and the former Catholic, trained to be more humble. If I were a guy, I'd think my stuff was more important.

So, why wasn't Helen Frankenthaler on that list? She was the first stain painter and has done fabulous stuff since. What about Magdalena Abkanowicz (sp?), Barbara Hepworth or Louise Nevelson? Now Sarah Sze? And I think you are right that people in the US are a little more open about women artists at the top.

[sculptorsam]

Or how about Lee Bontecou? I don't know the answer. It is even more surprising since it included all visual arts. It could be possible to make a purely numbers-based case if it was just sculpture (though oddly enough, the great women artists listed so far are generally sculptors... probably just the people that hang out on this forum showing their own biases.) Probably some sexism, probably some of what JAZ brings up along with some more stuff. How's that for a specific answer?!

Sam

[Araich]

It's depressing, and quite unresonable. I don't know why it should be this way.

But Anne, I did notice that you nominated a male as your favorite artist of the XX century (http://sculpture.net/community/showthread.php?p=3031) and go on to speak of 11 other artists - all of which are male.

[JAZ]

That's ten points for Araich!
It's so funny, Anne. So pervasive, isn't it? I give Robert Hague credit for pointing it out. Does this mean then, that men are actually better? (if so, my disclaimer would be that the women sculptors are doing something nurturing that distracts them from their work. It's not that they don't have the brain power.)

[jwebb]

I think it's sexism, pure and simple. And it's not limited to Sculpture. It's been pervasive in all of the Arts and so many other fields. The only positive thing is, it does seem to be changing. I'd guess that if that survey were limited to people under about 25 yrs old, the result would be different. For instance, in Jazz, prior to about 1980 there were only about 2 women jazz musicians, other than singers, that anyone could name. I think that's true. Now there are a bunch of them, and they are kicking butt. It seems to me the same across a wide spectrum of endeavors. It's very bizarre, but this momentous change seems to have begun to occur in my own lifetime. And I can't understand at all why it waited so long to dawn on people.

[RuBert]

I don’t know of any demographic studies of Sculpture departments, but I can say that KCAI sculpture department in the early 80’s had only four or five women and probably fifty or more men. I’ve heard that it is about even there now and I have a good friend that heads a Masters level sculpture program with more women in it than men.

I think it’s great that women are doing it and are not intimidated by the hot metal or purported testosterone level that these departments exude.

[fritchie]

I don't want to buck the warm and fuzzy "Women are great!" thread going here, but it occurs to me that something else may be at work, now that I understand the original survey. My guess is that these “art professionals” are looking as much to the future as to the past in nominating these people, and they see almost entirely a group of males who have the commitment, energy, and assertiveness to succeed in the coming years.

I believe most answers above look to talent or capacity and originality, but not to the “push” which these processionals may think is necessary to succeed in the high-pressure world of commercial “fine art”. We’ve lamented the state of the field in several places on this forum, focused as it seems to be on pushing a small number of media-grabbing people. Probably these professionals are doing just what the magazine asked them to do - name people with the energy, originality, grit, and selfpromotional skills to succeed in this very media-driven occupation.

[anne (bxl)]

It's great you all seems astonish about the survey, meaning that artists are more open-minded than art deciders!

Araich, you make me laugh :D and I am happy you read my posts with so much attention! all the men I mentionned were part of the early XX century and as Jwebb and Russ said things are changing.

People born in the 70's and after have another perception of the women. All artists listed in the survey are born in the 60's or before (It takes time to get a top career!).

As Jaz said, the image women have of themselves in our chrisitian-minded context, is not strong enough yet. It's interresting you noticed, Sam, that there are a lot of great women sculptors (compare to painters). Actually photography and music seem success fields for women also.

And to run the way the world goes I hope more women will actively participate at the future of this quite male forum. ;)

[JAZ]

In tandem with RuBert's data about proportion of female to male in sculpture departments, in 1996 the welding for sculpture classes I was in at the School of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston consisted of nine students and there were three teachers in the department. All of the students and two of the professors were women. I'm sure that was an effect of the alignment of the stars or something because there were also lots of other guy welders around too, I guess a semester ahead or behind, or whatever. But that class was all girls. I wonder how many of them are still doing it, though. It was really intimidating to continue once I graduated.
And it seems to me that Fritchie has set a challenge for us, right girls?

[fritchie]

In tandem with RuBert's data about proportion .. deletions ..
And it seems to me that Fritchie has set a challenge for us, right girls?

It wasn’t my intent to challenge female artists or any others, but to put a reality check in place. The commercial aspect of high art can be overwhelming. Just imagine even a share in the expense of a month or so’s rent in NYC, London, or any other world capital, and then add advertizing in glossy art magazines, newspapers, TV, etc., AND then salaries of high art professionals.

The galleries take big gambles, and they need to scrutinize artists very carefully for personal qualities, not just look at the art. A stimulating thread; I’d like to hear more views.

[fused]

You can't look at teaching positions and student number ratios to determine
the quality of artists and art available by gender. It just doesn't work that
way.

"For you which living artists are the most importants, whatever their generation is?"

Important living artists is the is the focus of this phrase. If you added
gender, race, nationality, or discipline/style/media to the equation it changes
everything. My first thought leans towards the list of 30, who is on it???

Ann Hamilton, Laurie Anderson, Ann Wilson, Rosie Thompson, Petah Coyne,
Winifred Lutz, Magdalena Abakanowicz, Sharon Kopriva, Nancy Kienholtz,
Judy Pfaff, Nancy Holt, Sherry Owens, Ursula von Rydingsvard, Maya Lin,
Rebecca Horn, Beverly Pepper, Louise Bourgeois, Jody Pinto, Mary Miss,
Melissa Miller, Lee Bonteceu (who's show in Chicago right now is a rare treat),
Kiki Smith, Lin Emery, Rachel Whiteread, Mona Hatoum, Jeanne-Claude,
on and on and on...

Richard Hunt, Martin Puryear, Al Laverne, Mark Di Suvero, Albert Paley,
James C. Watkins, James Surls, Peter Shelton, Art Shirer, Anthony Caro,
James Turrell, Robert Rauschenberg, Andy Goldsworthy, Pedro Almodovar,
Herb Parker, Patrick Dougherty, Arthur Ganson, Robert Irwin, Richard Serra,
John Van Alstine, Eduardo Chillida, David McManaway and on and on...

My second thought is to what purpose does a list of 30 serve? It's not like
we are picking the top seeds for an Artist Tournament. The History of Art is
a humongous fabric that intersects with all aspects of life as we know it. Most
artists are aware of the traditions that preceded them and respond to that
knowledge by rebelling against those aesthetic choices, or combining those
aspirations with the technologies of their own era towards new ends.

It's not a competition with other artists to get on the 'A List'. It's a struggle
within oneself to extend beyond your own perceived limitations and meet new
challenges head on. When an artist does this successfully and you see it with
your own eyes... gender, race, and all that other bullshit is irrelevant.


Is this list actually published somewhere yet?

This list might just inform us that the most important artists of this generation
may be living vicariously through the ideas and forms they left behind.

[anne (bxl)]

In "Beaux-Arts Magazine" january 2004 (the main contemporary art review in France) :
Bruce Naumann, Gerhard Richter, Sigmar Polke, Matthew Barney, Mike Kelley, Louise Bourgeois, Dan Graham, Maurizio Cattelan, Cindy Sherman, Rirkrit Tiravanija, P.Fischli/D.Weiss, Gabriel Orozco, Pierre Huyghe, Jeff Koons, Damien Hirst, On Kawara, Paul Mc Carthy, Richard Serra, Franz West, Jeff Wall, Carsten Höller, Ed Ruscha, Liam Gillick, Robert Gober, Douglas Gordon, Andreas Gursky, Philippe Parreno, Francis Alÿs, Olafur Eliasson, Gilbert and George.

[sculptor]

Jaz's comment about being single minded rang a bell.

In several psychological studies it has been demonstrated that in general, women are better at multitasking, while men are more singleminded, and try to multitask serially while women are comfortable juggling 7 items at a time parallel circuitry?

I suspect that this is connected to the greater activity in the female corpus callosum ................................

It's a blessing, It's a curse

viva la difference

[rjustin]

Just a quick thought the feild of clay and ceramics is overwellmingly female and still if you look at most magazines "Ceramics monthly," "ceramics art and perception" men get most of the press.

Also in my humble and a little byassed veiw the top undergrade program in clay The Kansas city art Inst. has three teachers 2 female one male.

lastly, A lot of people that i know would consider university of colorado and washington the top two grad programs in clay washington is all male but colorado is 2 female one male.

rjustin
www.rjustin.com

[fused]

Universities with open faculty positions have been working hard
to balance out the gender equation. The last two teaching spots
I applied to only interviewed women applicants.

What makes KC the best undergrad program and Washington & Colorado
the top Graduate level programs?

[manal75]

thankyou for this sobject ..
in my country there is no good chance to sucseed in sculpture.. becouse peopel hier don't believe in art .. but we are going to ...

manal75

[JAZ]

thankyou for this sobject ..
in my country there is no good chance to sucseed in sculpture.. becouse peopel hier don't believe in art .. but we are going to ...

manal75

Manal, it's good that you are optimistic - you believe that things will change. That change is starting with you.
Where do you live? What kind of sculpture do you do? Wood? Metal? Stone?
JAZ

[slivings]

[QUOTE=fritchie]It wasn’t my intent to challenge female artists or any others, but to put a reality check in place. The commercial aspect of high art can be overwhelming. Just imagine even a share in the expense of a month or so’s rent in NYC, London, or any other world capital, and then add advertizing in glossy art magazines, newspapers, TV, etc., AND then salaries of high art professionals.



The costs are the same whether you are female or male to live in NY. And you seem to be subtlely asserting that women are less dynamic then men, which is absolute bollox and that they make less money, with is not neccesarily true. The rest of your schpiel on galleries critizing character as well as art also seems to be saying in the context of this discussion that women do not have the character to work in the gallery world. Louis Bourgeois and Cindy Sherman made the list and in light of those excellent albeit diverse selections, I do think it is short sided to not have more women on the list. There are many more dynamic female artists with the character, talent, and the commercial skills to make the list. I think it is far more about the ever present sexism in the art world. I don't think that it is intentional, but it is quietly pervasive and has been for centuries. Art History is full of fabulous female artists who were not given a second glance by the predominant forces of the art world, usually simply because they were women and were assumed to be less dynamic, less talented, and sadly this idea seems to still be present.