Background: Judy Chicago is considered a pioneer of feminist art; her work has enraged and enthralled art critics and viewers alike throughout the years. Born in Chicago in the year 1939 as Judith Cohen, she was always making art. For her BFA, she attended UCLA and finished in 1962, a year after she married her first husband, Gerowitz. He died two years after their marriage in 1963. The death of her husband and father would cause her to recreate her identity. She finished her MFA in 1964 and began teaching at Fresno State University.
It was here that she began the first ever women’s art program, where only women were allowed in the courses and she was “…”moving away from the male dominated art scene and being in an all-female environment where we could study our history separate from men’s and see ourselves in terms of our own needs and desires, not in terms of male stereotypes of women”” (593 Jane Gerhard). What drove Chicago to feminist art? It’s hard to believe, but even in the 1960’s and 1970’s, critics still believed that painting was a masculine trade and that women’s art was “craft” and therefore not considered “high art”. Chicago felt trapped in an art world where she had to conform to the male’s art market and style, rather than be a women who creates from her point of view and experiences. Her frustration with male dominance lead her to change her name. In ArtForum, there was an ad depicting this event, with Chicago in a boxing ring and a tagline that read: “Judy Gerowitz hereby divests herself of all names imposed upon her through male social dominance and chooses her own name, Judy Chicago”. A lot of Chicago’s work focuses on women’s experiences and their thoughts on their experiences, independent of men in society.
She eventually went on to begin the Feminist Art Program with fellow artist Miriam Schapiro at Cal Arts. As of now, she works to expand her art knowledge and ways of expressing her views. Through learning new mediums and writing books, she is still a big voice in feminist art.
Select Works by Judy Chicago:
The Dinner Party (1979)
Mixed media
Chicago’s masterpiece, which is now on permanent display at the Brooklyn Museum in New York, aimed to honor major women who impacted history. The piece, which measures 48ft x 43 ft x 36 ft took five years and about $250,000 USD to complete. Many women artists volunteered to help bring this piece to life. The table includes thirty-nine place settings for women from different eras in history, some mythical, though most are real. Each setting has a table runner, which has the name of the woman embroidered on it along with some images that represent her works in history. On top of the table runners, there is silverware, napkins, and a goblet. The plate has a symbols of the female reproductive organs, depicted mostly as flowers or butterflies. In the middle of the table, there are numerous tiles, called the “Heritage floor” which have the names of women who have contributed to history in some way. The piece also made light of mediums traditionally considered “craft” or “women’s domestic art” which were never to be on par with men’s art or the high arts of painting and sculpture. There was a lot of needlework, china painting and textiles that went into the making of The Dinner Party. Women of the past made due with materials they had at their disposal which is why Chicago chose to create the piece with them.
It was an ambitious project that was scrutinized by many, whether they were applauding what she was doing for women’s history, or condemning her for the use of such explicit images. Below, you can see the place setting created for author Virginia Woolf.
Congressman Robert K. Dornan was so upset with this work that he called the plate settings “ceramic 3-D pornography”. There were many other criticisms, including the lack of women of color at the table. The one woman of color present didn’t get a plate designed like everyone else, she had a plate with a regular painting. First wave feminism, while groundbreaking for the female voice and representation, wasn’t an equally great time for women of color feminists. White women, even today, who consider themselves feminist, are learning that they too have a place of privilege in society compared to women of other races and ethnicities. Given how much the feminist movement has changed throughout the years, I’m always curious as to how this dinner party would look today. Who would have a place at the table? Would the plates be created differently? Would this work, if introduced now, receive as much criticism for it’s “vulgarity”? How would women of today view it, feminist or not?
The Birth Project: The Crowning (1984)
Needlepoint over painting on mesh canvas
Chicago later became interested in birth, saying on her website, Through the Flower, that “[birth is] a universal human experience and one that is central to women’s lives. Why are there no images?”. It’s true, birth has always been something the human race needed to experience to continue and yet, there was no art depicting this pinnacle moment. Why? As a society, Americans have always been very hush hush about birth. While all families were expected to have children, one didn’t talk about the process of making them or bringing them into the world, in spite of how it’s one of the most natural things humans do. It was so taboo that the show I Love Lucy, was the first to have a woman say”pregnant” in regards to themselves on live TV. It was met with a whole bunch of criticism. People didn’t believe that a wholesome show should allude to such things and that it was very improper to say on live TV. I also recently read the biography of Zelda Fitzgerald, who went to a country club in the late stages of her pregnancy and was asked to leave for being indecent. It was weird. The whole idea of hiding the creation of human life is weird. Judy Chicago wouldn’t stand for it, and thus began her second big project: The Birth Project, which depicted images to describe the experience of giving birth.
Most of the work was done by needle workers throughout the US and Canada, and Chicago spoke to many women about their personal experiences with birth, many of whom never talked about it before with anyone. She wanted to learn their feelings, their pain, their excitement, their fear and what it was like to bring a child into this world and become a mother.
A Conversation With Judy Chicago and Suzanne Lacey
Video
Finally, as explained in the other entries, it’s one thing to learn about an artist and their intentions, but it’s even better to hear it from their own mouth. This is a video of Judy Chicago discussing feminist art and what she wanted to accomplish with a prior student of hers, Suzanne Lacy at Otis College.
Regardless of how one feels about her pieces, Chicago was successful in redefining what it meant to be both a woman and an artist in a male dominated society. Her work paved the way for many female artists to express themselves and be heard the way they wanted to be.
Sources:
Through the Flower – Projects accessed September 19, 2015
Jane Gerhard, “Judy Chicago and the Practice of 1970’s Feminism,” Feminist Studies (2011): 591-618, accessed September 19, 2015.
“A Conversation with Judy Chicago and Suzanne Lacey” Through Otis College, YouTube.
More Than Three Women Artists 