Feminist Art?

The New York Times recently reviewed an article on a show about "Feminist Art" that is currently on display at the Brooklyn Museum.

I was born as part of a generation that came to maturity after the women who've fought hard for the equality of the sexes. So I honestly don't always have the proper appreciation for their efforts. Being born into a family who raised me to believe that there was nothing I couldn't accomplish, I couldn't comprehend at the time that the rest of the world wasn't the same way. So it shouldn't be much of a surprise that "feminist art" never made as much as a blip onto my radar, either.

In covering the show, the Times article explored "the false idea is that there really is such a thing as feminist art, as opposed to art that intentionally or by osmosis reflects or is influenced by feminist thought." Study some of the exhibit's works closely enough, says the paper, "and your bra (if you’re wearing one) may spontaneously combust".

The show is reportedly heavy in photography and video, curious since some of the strongest women I know paint, draw, and sculpt. Perhaps it's the ability of photography and video to present societal issues like this in all their pretentious ugliness -- and make them look so "real" -- that makes them ideal media for messages of this type.

The reviewer, Roberta Smith, notes that many of the artists "fall back on making art from the thing nearest at hand that separates them from men: their bodies." She wisely notes that " feminism is not of itself an aesthetic value. It is an idea that can assume an organic force in some artists’ work, but others just pay it lip service without much exertion or passion."

Well, I'd like to continue this discussion, but I really need to go iron my apron and bake some cookies...