English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

By golly, I never thought about that!!!!
It is true! None that I ever heard of anyway!

It was something about the men were the only ones who could do stuff, cause the woman was the brood mare...always home with morning sickness, and raising the other nineteen kids.

2006-09-19 04:27:58 · answer #1 · answered by NANCY K 6 · 1 0

I don't know anything about the article you refer to, but I (and the two art historians in my family) would argue that this isn't true.

Literature
- Mary Shelley
- Jane Austin
- Bronte sisters
- and the many contemporary authors who are women.

Graphic arts
- Frida
- Georgia Okeeffe
(I have a book the size of a phone book that lists American female artists).

Prior to the 20th century, it was common for women to be less educated then men. Even women of 'rank' or wealth often were given less opportunity to explore art as anything other than a consumer. And, if they did 'produce' art, it was seen as a hobby and not taken seriously (by both the art community and themselves).

Also, art is often the domain of the wealthy, and women throughout history (and it is still true today) control less wealth and are more likely to be living in poverty.

What I think should be noted are those women who did produce incredible art under those conditions. Imagine what they would have produced if they had had the opportunity.

2006-09-19 04:38:04 · answer #2 · answered by Wundt 7 · 0 0

Are you kidding me?

One of the earliest is Artemisia Gentileschi, a female painter of the 17th century. Until then, due to the extremity of the patriarchal society, women were not allowed to seek a career in painting, and if there were major female artists before then, the names are not known to us (for eons it was common for a piece of art to NOT be signed by the artist).

There have been a myriad of great women artist... but unfortunately it took a long time to break into the art world because of patriarchy.

2006-09-19 04:45:29 · answer #3 · answered by willow oak 5 · 0 0

If we define 'great' as famous, then traditionally, those relatively few (compared to their male counterparts) renowned female artists throughtout history were considered to be somewhat of an anomaly due to patriarchal views and strictures.
- However, if we view the work of Artemisia Gentileschi, Judith Leyster, Rosalba Carriera and Clara Peeters, to name a few, I believe most would agree that these were indeed Great Artists, regardless of recognition (or lack of).
- Linda Nochlin's essay made a well-overdue impact, I believe.

2006-09-19 06:37:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

we have been living since now in the world which is being rolled from the men even though we had women rollers and Queens Roll of the women has been real little , and freedom, women's are gaining freedom little by little and getting active in all the fields including the arts.

2006-09-19 04:28:01 · answer #5 · answered by santa s 4 · 0 0

Men cannot bear children, but we can "give birth" to great works of art.

Mary Cassat and Virginia Woolf are two female artists I do respect, however.

2006-09-19 14:37:56 · answer #6 · answered by Andrew Noselli 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers