Friday, May 29, 2009

Jerry Saltz on Facebook

Some people think Facebook is a timesuck, but it can be the place where you repeat and investigate your obsessions. We may have stated something once or twice or far too many times in our blogs or website. But we can REALLY hash it out on this other gabbier site.

Jerry Saltz has posted at least five posts, all short observations, on the paltry numbers of women artists showing at the MOMA. He’s had to post his views so many times because literally hundreds of responses follow and his page nearly sets itself on fire.

I just had to mention it because more than one person has alluded to gender bias in the art world as tediously “my thing.” But this thing, which is so boring to many, is still a hot topic to others. I was surprised and encouraged – not by the sad statistics of course but by the willingness of so many to be that unfashionable. I think you’ve got to be Jerry’s “friend” to see all these posts, but he’s already got thousands and seems to be pretty generous about that….

4 comments:

Sheree Rensel said...

Eva,
You and I both know "gender bias" is far bigger than being anyone person's "thing". Unfortunately, it should be the THING of those who consider it a passe or boring issue.

There are a whole lot of twisted thinkers. Just yesterday, I got into a heated argument about a certain celebrity woman beater. Comments from others included "She must have hit him first." and "You know how woman can be." I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Perverse attitudes about women still exist and they make my head spin.
Decades ago there was a slogan "We have come a long way BABY!" Well, we haven't come a long way at all. Perceptions about gender are still like a ball of knotted rope and until we untangle the mess we should keep talking (boring or not!)

namastenancy said...

At least Jerry Saltz is aware of gender bias and is (or seems to be) trying to raise awareness in a positive way. I can't say the same for SF Chron critic, Kenneth Baker. He bashes women artists in every way he can, sometimes by a really idiotic critique or by sly but spiteful remarks. When he can, he simply doesn't mention women artists. I've made reviewing art by women one of the priorities of my blog. But, here are times when it's work that I can't relate to, so I have to (regretfully) pass on by. But I won't jump on the "hooray for the boys" bandwagon that so often passes for art criticism these days - or -what passes for it in SF.

Eva said...

Hey everyone,

Here's what Two Coats of Paint says on the subject.

And Art Fag City weighs in here.

namastenancy said...

The "Follow the money" comment in Sharon Butler's page is most telling. In my Women and Art class this spring, we watched a number of films about the NY art world. One of them interviewed a group of collectors (all women) who were being taken around the galleries by some sort of art facilitator (also a woman). All they talked about was the value of their purchases - all work by men. It's a real catch 22 situation. Women don't get the big shows, therefore don't get into the museums, therefore don't command the high prices. Etc. Heck, most women artists can't even get their feet on the bottom lung of the career ladder, much less make the sales. We may have come some ways but sure no as far as we need to go - and since the last decade set women back a lot, we will be covering the same ground over and over.