Who Does She Think She Is?

Creativity belongs to the artist in each of us. To create means to relate. The root meaning of the word art is "to fit together" and we all do this every day. Not all of us are painters but we are all artists. Each time we fit things together we are creating - whether it is to make a loaf of bread, a child, a day.—Corita Kent, Artist

An artist friend of mine went to a lecture at the local university. The speaker was a female artist by the name of Ellina Kevorkian and she talked about how, when pregnant, she was advised not to go to galleries. My friend, E., posted her thoughts on her blog, which you can find here:

http://emilyryujin.blogspot.com/2010/09/ellina-kevorkian-and-why-cant-artists.html?spref=fb

During (and after) reading her article my mind has raced around (and continues to do so) with thoughts and theories as to why this would be. Why would artists, gallery workers and/or agents discourage motherhood or any signs or symbols of it in the physical form of the human person? Why do they deny it in the flesh, but address it regularly in paint and photograph and clay and etc.?

I gave it a lot of thought, and came up with a variety of thoughts and theories. In the end they are just my thoughts and theories based on my own experiences, exposures and ideas, but here they are.

Perhaps it is a leftover bias against women and a disrespect for their ability not only to create serious and worthy art, but their ability to create and carry life, which is the greatest of art, within them before delivering it to the world to see.
It has been my personal experience that despite being in "modern" times that it is not an infrequent occurrence that men (and some women) in the field of art resent a capable and artistic woman. They push her down if she tries to balance herself between hearth and home and outside endeavors. If she gives more time to her family then to her trade, she is “not committed.” If she gives more time to her trade then to her family she is “cold and un-motherly.” A woman cannot win against the critic-a mother and wife even less so.

It has also been my experience that, to some individuals, if you are not soaked in paint 24x7, and avant garde in your politics and your thinking, if you are not pushing the envelope of social standards, that you are not a true artist. I disagree wholeheartedly with this. I do not think you need to place a crucifix in a glass of urine, or paint with feces or take photos of individuals in compromising positions with bull whips to make an impact. Successful and moving art does not always have to be shocking or offensive, in fact, successful and moving art, the art that truly touches and moves the soul should be something that can be shared and viewed over and over again with a positive result. By no means, does this mean that art should be devoid of controversy, because sometimes that is the greatest provocateur of ideas and change, I’m just saying it doesn’t need to always be insulting or offensive.

You might say, “Well, Tracy…the masses aren’t socially aware and we need to make them…” Really? Do you really need to **make** someone see?

Case in point, and a minor digression: I wrote a paper about Robert Mapplethorpe during the peak of his controversy back in the early 90’s. During the course of my research I found him to be an absolutely stunning photographer, a gifted artist and, through his photography, a social commentator. My issue was not with his talent, or his topic, but rather with his public, tax-based funding, but that is a separate conversation entirely. As a human, not even just as an artist, but as a human being we are free to express ourselves, to create and shout out our voices as we see fit. I am not one for stifling freedom of speech and expression. My point in bringing him up is that he became less about the art than about the controversy, in fact, it was my opinion that his controversy actually hid his art as opposed to exposing it.
Anyway—back to the topic at hand…

Motherhood, being quintessentially human, and a practice that is preternatural to the capacity of a woman's body, is often viewed by the more artistically elite as a parochial process, one that the masses should engage in, but not those who are more "enlightened." (Kind of like their view on voting…but I’m not going there today either.) I don’t understand this at all, if nothing else, a woman **CREATES** with more than paint and clay, she creates with her body, her DNA, it’s a crap shoot because she has very little control over what actually turns out, but she is the vessel for the creation that her cells mindlessly take over and produce. Once the child is born, she has the opportunity to mold that little human being, to influence it, to teach it, to raise it in such a way as to being a unique little being reflective and representative of those things that she found most important…or didn’t. Being that close to the creation process, if she is left to create artwork based on her experiences, what amazingness could she come up with if only encouraged and given the opportunity?

I performed a search online of “motherhood” & “artist” and of course was bombarded by countless examples of artwork that focused on women, motherhood and children. I did a separate search for “discrimination of mothers as artists” and came up with a handful of articles on the actual topic at hand. Most of what came up was about discrimination against women as a whole and I don’t really care about that in regards to this article, because I know about that—I wanted to know about mothers specifically.

I came across an interesting article in the NY Times that discussed a documentary entitled “Who Does She Think She Is?” Who indeed. The documentary was directed by Pamela Tanner Boll and Nancy Kennedy and, from the review given, would seem to address these exact issues. Why is the art world dominated by men, when in art school the field is dominated by women? Why must a woman choose between a career as an artist vs. having a family, why do people find it so difficult to allow her to balance the two?

In the world I live and work in I am surrounded by women. These women come from a variety of backgrounds and are diverse in skill, talent and appearance. Amongst these women are many who are artists, some in practice, others in heart, others who have made the trade off for family and put their own creativity on hold.

For myself, I have also made this tradeoff. Some might call it selling out, but I would not. I studied art on a university level and I loved it, couldn’t get enough of it. After graduating, I unexpectedly ended up in a professional world of finance and accounting, travel and numbers. As my career progressed, I fell further and further away from my artistic training, to the point of dust on the brushes and dulled pencils and hardened erasers. On occasion I would take out my old artwork, my notebooks and sketch pads and I would marvel at the girl I had been, my work is good. I asked myself why I left it behind, and then when there was no answer but a melancholic echo and whisperings of things I did not want to hear, I put it all away and returned to the fast paced, high stress world of what had become my “Now.”

As the years progressed, I have dabbled. I have dabbled in drawing, stamping, collage, jewelry making and photography. I have thought about all of the “What If’s.” What if I had seen it through where would I be? What if I had pursued an MFA? What if I had continued additional coursework? What if I hadn’t married and had remained a practicing artist. What if I had only said “I will not choose, but will remain.”? But these “what if’s” lead to a world of nowhere, because you cannot turn back the clock, you cannot change your choices, and would you really if you could?

I would not have missed the experience of marriage and companionship to the man I have loved these almost-20 years. I would not be the same person I am today if I had missed that world of finance and of logic and reason. What I would change if I could have was to have retained some focus with my artistic side sooner than later, but then when I think back on those earlier years, I remember the hardships and when in dire hardship, you’re trying to afford bread and rent, not paint and canvas. You make a choice according to your situation and perception at the time. Overall it is a tough situation and it is a personal choice that we all make. I blame no one. I am who I am because of the choices that I have made, and while I do have regrets as most do, I am happy with who I am at this point in my life. The most interesting thing about it all though…is I still do view myself as an artist.

My point in sharing this is to make note that women, as a whole, often sacrifice their outward showing of creativity for what they view to be a greater good or something more important that must be done now and they often come back to it later on, or perhaps they find daily manifestations and ways to celebrate it and to expose it that allow them to still meet their desires and needs.

With no discrimination against them, nor with a sour word, but rather with experienced truth, men rarely have to choose one thing over the other. It is the nature of the difference of the sexes. They decide and they do. Their primary concern is rarely about having babies in a timely manner or choosing between staying at home and working. Men can have babies forever, women cannot. An old(er) man can father a child and experience the joy of parenting where an old(er) woman cannot. No amount of feminism or discussion can change this. Because of this, why wouldn’t they pursue as they please? In relation to this, perhaps that is why some view women to be weak, because they are limited and dominated on by time and are scoffed at because of it. Due to the nature of biology and the accompanying time constraints, women do often make sacrifices in their youth in order to meet a bone deep desire to perpetuate the species and to procreate while they still can. It doesn’t make them less though, for choosing to do so.

Choosing to be a mother and an artist does not seem to be something that should be in conflict with one another, and perhaps, in the end it is not. Perhaps the conflict is only in the gallery, and in the public forum, where those in power continue to oppress women, holding them down with their hands while they speak sweet words with their lips, for wanting to be who they are without boundaries and limits. Like most everywhere else in life, perhaps the limitations and discriminations are only in the minds of those who hold the purse strings and other scepters of power and who disperse gifts and opportunities based on their unreasonable and/or pet whimsies.

Perhaps women need to shrug off the standardized expectations of others who would define them narrowly and unjustly. Perhaps women should just be who they are, without title, without name, without sex, but just be. Perhaps a woman should define herself as she sees fit, as she pleases, as she desires to be, as she sees herself. Perhaps she should not fear classification or failure because she takes pleasure in who she herself declares and defines herself to be. A woman can be a mother and an artist. A woman can be a stay at home mom without having to justify that she "works too." A woman can be a high powered lawyer. A woman can be a business owner. A woman can be a wife, a friend, a mother, a lover, a grandmother, a neighbor, a human being with dreams and desires, talents and gifts to perform in many different arenas.

Georgia O'Keefe once said "You get whatever accomplishment you are willing to declare."

What do you declare?