In this year that Artrust wanted to dedicate its activities to women artists – with exhibitions dedicated to Yvonne Canu and Marianne Werefkin – we have posed questions on the seeming invisibility of female talent in the art history.
Women are prevalent in male’s paintings, but where are they, with their brushes in the hand, that become subjects of artistic creation? Does it exist or does it makes sense to speak of a feminine art? Who have been the major protagonists?
We spoke with Simona Bartolena, an art historian and author of the book “Feminine art”.

1. Let’s start by clarifying one aspect. Going through the pages of art history books or wandering through the corridors of museums, you very rarely come across the artworks of women artists: this is because, indeed, there are few examples in the history of female artists who are able to distinguish themselves or because, on the contrary, their productions are not being considered, by those who write books or manages the museum collections, the same way as those of men colleagues?

Both explanations and both reasons that can be defined more for social than historical-artistic ground. Until very recent times, women have not had the same opportunities as men, neither in the professional field nor in the education and the cultural field. The female artists, in particular, had no access to the Academies (those first women only took part in the main European Academies from the late eighteenth century) nor could go for an apprenticeship with a master. Women were also excluded (on moral grounds) from the copy of the real anatomy studies of both male and female bodies, and in some periods, they were even excluded from visiting the museum because of what could be found on the walls could be those painted subjects, which are considered inappropriate. Women, after all, could not directly be in touch with any clients and buyers as they always have to rely on a male figure for any negotiation or contact with the exterior. From what have been said, it is clear that a young female with artistic aspirations would only think of art as a private hobby, which is to be exercised in their living room, a pleasant hobby, as we would say today. Although it was held in high regard (together with music and poetry ) to education of a young girl of a good family. More fortunate were the “daughters of the artists”: to have a father or a brother as a painter, who gave them the opportunity to approach art more easily. Rather in an advantaged position were the nuns, who protected by the walls of the monastery, could better dedicated themselves to artistic creation with complete freedom, even at the professional level, without fear of encountering accusations of immorality.

2. Tracing a brief history of art by women, who are the artists that have significantly marked their eras?

Talented female artists are numerous. Much more numerous than one can think of at first glance. To limit ourselves to the most renowned names, I would mention the three major protagonists of the art of sixteenth and seventeenth century: Lavinia Fontana, Sofonisba Anguissola and Artemisia Gentileschi. Three strong characters, three different but equally fictional biographies; certainly three women who have managed to establish themselves in the art scene of their time and to make history. During the Renaissance, we must also remember the Flemish art scene, very open to women artists. Judith Leyster, with her flourishing atelier and, above all, independent is one example. In the eighteenth century, instead I would cite three extraordinary figures: the Italian Rosalba Carriera, the French Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun (the first woman to have entered Academie de France and to have interpreted painting as a real profession in the modern sense), the Swiss Angelica Kauffman.

In the nineteenth century, especially in the second half of the century, things get complicated: the number of women artists has multiplied by hundred. Paris is filled with young people from many different parts of Europe (mainly from the Nordic countries, where women artists are very numerous) and the United States. The French capital, the heart of European culture, welcomes more or less talented artists, including some that are destined to remain in the history. To name a few: the barbisonnier Rosa Bonheur (extraordinary painter of rural scenes and animals, who was scandalized for her menswear and for she went for walks with a lion cub on a leash), the Impressionist Berthe Morisot (a pupil of Corot and Manet’s sister in law, as well as one of the most active members of the group founded by Monet) and Mary Cassatt ( an American, who left from Pittisburgh to study art in Paris). Lively, although very different, is the English art scene; not to forget is that in the Pre-Raphaelite brotherhood’s period, women were not only muses and companions of men painters. Many of them were also artists and poets, such as, to name only one of the most famous, the beautiful and unfortunate Elizabeth Siddal, model of many of female figures of Rossetti, Millais, Hunt and theirs fellows but also an excellent painter herself.

Finally, the twentieth century. The age of the Vanguards, which in part opens up to the female artists’ universe. However, still a lot of prejudice remains, even in apparently very free realms, like the Dada group, for example, some impediment in the case of Hannah Höch’s artistic career could be well recognized. Or the Bauhaus group that, despite its extraordinary democratic nature, precluded the metalworking and architecture classes for female students, while directing them instead towards more appropriate activities to women’s attitudes, such as weaving, ceramics and bookbinding!

3.  In our upcoming exhibition, we will exhibit the artworks of Marianne Werefkin, an artist who for a long period of her life had stopped painting, sacrificing her own career, because she believed that only a man (in this case her partner Jawlensky) could yield expression to her idea of art. Are there other cases, in the women’s art history, where this component of “self-censorship” is presented? Or do there exist ideas of not being up to an activity considered exclusively for male?

Marianne Werefkin is an extraordinary figure and very complex, with a very strong personality on the one hand and very fragile on the other hand. Her deep bond with Jawlenskij led her to believe that her role was of a Handmaid, of the right arm of her partner, as far as to abandon her own activities and to follow his. According to her, the role that she decided to assume, she “tried to find the other half of herself.” Her behavior, however, will end up with Jawlenskij moving away from her. Their tormented artistic partnership, which will last a little less than thirty years, mingled personal dramas to the artistic creation. Marianne is a very special case, but do not forget that in the same period, there are also other stories of self-sacrifice on the part of women. Taking into consideration, the case of Gabriele Münter, who was a living force not much less than Kandinsky in the Balue Reiter group in Murnau or that of Dora Maar, who left photography (and was led to depression) as she was crushed by the explosive personality of Picasso, or that of Meret Oppenheim, who preferred to abandon art as a result from strong disagreements she had with the powerful Surrealists … Sometimes it is the society itself that imposes on women to desist from their artistic journey, often reminding them the duties of their gender.

There is a story that has always fascinated me and that I think it has a good sample value for many similar cases, many of which are not even known to us: it is the case of Carla Maria Maggi. We are in the thirties, in Italy. Maggi is the only daughter of a family of Milanese high society. With some difficulty, she managed to convince her father to send her to study painting. He enrolled her at the school of Palanti, a highly esteemed painter by the bourgeoisie of that time. The young woman immediately showed some talent and a well-defined personality, painting portraits and some female nudes, as well as beginning to receive some honorable mention and reaping first successes. It will be the marriage to end her short career: right after the wedding, her husband removed the permission to paint portraits and, much less, naked figures, granting her at the limit to only practice on still life. Rather than being an one-half artist, Carla Maria puts all the working tools and hide paintings in the attic of a house in the countryside, where they will be found, sixty years later, the son who, with great surprise, discovered to have a painter mother. Maggi, in fact, had not mentioned her artistic vocation, hiding all her shattered dream. Here, this way of “storing in the attic” its ambitions to return to the extent that the society require from her, ( a widespread attitude until very recent time) was one of the worst harms to feminine art … sometimes I fear that it still actually exists!

4. Does it exists a correlation between the parallel path of emancipation of women in society and the subjects of art by women? In these recent periods, especially in the era of feminist movements, do the themes on women conditions, the request for new role and a new identity are reflected?

Partly. Trying at all costs to define a specific feminine art is a serious mistake. It does not exist a female or a male in an artistic style. Artemisia Gentileschi had a Caravaggio’s style, which was much more bloody than that of many men colleagues of her time, immediately disproving the cliché that women need to paint with all feminine softness … In more recent times (fortunately), it is very often difficult to distinguish the hand of a woman from that of the man.

There are, of course, themes that are being somehow more interested by the artists, especially if we move the discussion to the past. There are, for example, many works painted by women who portray strong heroines in the history and in the Bible: from Lucretia and Judith, from Cleopatra to Mary Magdalene. The women are often doing self-portrait, as if to establish publicly the seriousness of her status as a painter or otherwise a representative of the culture of the time.

A special case is, however, that of the generation of the great feminist movements, between the Sixties and Seventies, especially in the United States, but not only. There is, no doubt, that the themes there go hand in hand with the struggle for the emancipation and the art becomes the instrument of denunciation.

Today it is known, that women have special attention and deeper sensitivity in investigating strong themes, such as the relationship with your body (often as a prisoner of aesthetic canons, commercialize or even violated) or populations drama by endless wars situation or whatever.

5. In conclusion can we talk about feminine art? Can we distinguish feminine art from the art of men, as an expression of a new sensibility, an alternative point of view, a different perspective of the world?

I have partly solved this question in my previous answer. When I wrote feminine art (thirteen years ago), the topic was very relevant and the debate was brisk. Today it is a bit less, but it that does not mean that it is no longer necessary. If it exists a specific women related to the choice of themes, it is then a debate of the modern age, which certainly concerns an interest, which is not of historically relevant but more of an evidence of social analysis. It did exist a separation course, until very recent times. It was a separation that does not end artistic consideration, but that concerns the broader social history of women. The feminist point of view, although it has had its reason in the past decades, now threatens to worsen the gender division as often it simplifies the issue into an opposition between the sexes. Often, I want to emphasize, those who have hindered the path of the artists were not men, but other women! Clearing the field from what the feminist emphasize, I would say that one can speak of feminine art, but it would be better not to even mention it! Many artists, who are aware of the risk of segregation (as if the art by women can be considered a minor genre, different …) they point out how in the Art it does not matter if you are male or female, what accounts is the talent. Today, actually, we have to consider Art as Art, beyond genders and divisions, trying to overcome even those social legacies that the past has left us. Moreover, something to be reckoned is that, nowadays, women also occupy prestigious roles in the art system, working as art historians, critics, museums directors, gallery owners and more. Perhaps it is not equal … but we are on a good track.

Cover image:
Marianne Werefkin, Monte Tamaro, Gouache e pastello su carta incollata su cartoncino, 1920

SIMONA BARTOLENA

She graduated with honors in History of Contemporary Art at L’Università Statale of Milan, Simona Bartolena has published numerous volumes for the most prestigious Italian publishing houses. Her texts have been translated into various foreign languages. Among the many: Arte al femminile (Electa, 2003), Il Musée d’Orsay, (Mondadori, 2005), Omaggio agli impressionisti (Mondadori 2005), Carla Maria Maggi, (Skira, 2007), Donne (Electa, I dizionari dell’arte, 2009), Brianza: terra d’artisti (Silvana Editore, 2009). Numerose anche le esposizioni da lei curate, tra le quali: Tranquillo Cremona e la Scapigliatura (Pavia 2016), Visivi, Dadamaino e Secomandi (Vimercate 2015), I Macchiaioli, una rivoluzione d’arte al Caffè Michelangelo (Pavia 2015), Welovesleep (Milano 2015), Da Degas a Picasso, capolavori della Johannesburg Art Gallery (Pavia 2015), Giorgio de Chirico e l’oggetto misterioso (Monza 2014), Antonio Ligabue (Vimercate 2015), Luigi Russolo, il rumore e il silenzio (Vimercate 2013), Oltreluogo – da Gianni Colombo a Joseph Beuys (Vimercate, 2011); from 2013, she is the curator of the project Tracce di contemporaneo in Ville aperte, promoted by the Province of Monza and of Brianza as well as of Lecco. She is a consultant to several municipalities, cultural associations and galleries, for which she is in charge of art exhibitions and events. Since 2011, she is in the scientific committee of MUST, Museum of Vimercate territory; from 2012, in the Friends Association to the Washington National Museum of Women in the Arts as the head of the contemporary art section, and from 2013, she is in the Bice Bugatti club board. From 2014, she is scientific consultant and curator for ViDi, a company that organizes exhibitions and events and for the Villa Greppi Consortium, Project Arts. Since 2011, she is president of the heart association – heart beating cultural and scientific director of the heart space of Vimercate.

BOOK TIP

To explore the topic we recommend the book:
Simona Bartolena, Marta Alvarez, Donne, Electa – Dizionari dell’Arte, 2009