would facilitate their access to these sites. When something as fundamental as creche provision is still a variable in most academic institutions, women are likely to be easy prey in the new round of discriminatory educational policies proposed by this government.
I t would be disturbing to think that the now prolific production of feminist theory around issues of representation has only been possible at the expense of transforming the institutional structures through which such knowledge is consumed, distributed and produced. Feminist theory should guard against becoming yet another aspect of the newly professionalized yuppie 'enterprise zone'.
*The Policy Studies In stitute, London, 1988.
Reflections on women's art Richard Cork
Twelve years ago, when I devoted an issue of Studio International to the theme of 'Women's Art', the time seemed right for such a publication. Seminars and debates on the subject abounded, survey exhibitions of women artists were regularly staged and books had begun to examine the neglected aspects of their work, both historical and contemporary.
As my editorial made clear, there were dangers involved in treating women artists as a separate category. Ideally, I wrote, 'womenought to take their place in the pages of art magazines as men'snatural equals, not find themselves herded like cattle into a pen which implies that they are a contaminated species, best kept away from their robust masculine superiors.' However much I accepted the validity of such arguments, though, the need for an issue on women'sart seemed to outweigh them. Too little discussion of the subject had then penetrated art magazines in this country. Moreover, apart from committed feminist shows, women artists were still poorly represented in most major surveys of contemporary work. Of the thirty-two artists selected for the Hayward Annual in 1977, the year when this issue of Studio was published, only one was a woman. Selection committees were usually dominated by men, scarcely any important galleries had appointed women directors, and art schools were predominantly run by male members of staff.
In such a context, the notion of organising an issue on women'sart seemed justified. All the articles were commissioned from women writers, in the belief that they had the best qualifications for understanding the problems concerned. A historical perspective was provided by Linda Nochlin, who contributed to the catalogue of the major exhibition 'WomenArtists: 1550-1950' touring the USA during that year. (I recall thinking what a shame it was that no comparable survey had been staged over here.) But most of the issue was given over to contemporary art. Nine women critics were invited to write about women artists of their choice working in the UK, and Lucy Lippard chose five American artists who each produced two-page spreads specially for the magazine. Other contributors discussed broader questions, like the need to engender self-respect or the development of feminist art in Britain during the decade. There was no hint of complacency, and all the contributors were conscious of how much remained to be done. But throughout the issue, there was a gratifying sense that many of the formidable barriers impeding women's fulfilment as artists were at last being dismantled.
How far has that faith been borne out over the years since then? There is no single- or indeed simple - answer to such a question, and it is probably presumptuous of me to tackle it. But I have certainly been conscious, during my visits to galleries in the 1980s, of an increasing range of memorable exhibitions by women. Not collective surveys exclusively and polemically dealing with feminist concerns. They have dwindled, but in their place an impressive number of one-woman shows has been staged. Indeed, I would argue that their sustained growth is one of the most heartening aspects of art over the past decade. Young sculptors like Shirazeh Houshiary and Alison Wilding have played a distinguished part in the renewed vitality of British sculpture, while from a more senior generation Paula Rego has at last been recognised as one of the finest painters at work here . Her recent retrospective at the Serpentine Gallery was a particularly welcome event, marking her maturity as an artist and providing a timely re-examination of earlier work which had for a long time been overlooked.
Many other women artists deserve to be given exhibitions on a similar scale. By reinforcing a show of current work with a selection from past achievements, a greater understanding of the individual's distinctive contribution is reached. In this respect, much still remains to be 'written in' to the history of twentieth-century art. The small but well-selected survey of Winifred Nicholson's career, held at the Tate in 1987, is bound to affect the way her work is discussed in future assessments of modem British painting. Women who were married or otherwise related to well-known male artists have often been underestimated, but once the truth is disclosed they invariably turn out to be more substantial than anyone imagined. Gwen John is the most spectacular example, emerging from her brother's shadow and slowly, quietly, outstripping him in reputation. During her lifetime, no one knew the full extent of Gwen John's work: she seldom exhibited, and died in utter obscurity. During the 1980s, however, her inimitable genius was fmally revealed in a comprehensive retrospective at the Barbican Art Gallery.
That exhibition was held half a century after her death, and the elation of discovering Gwen John's real stature must be measured against the delay involved in arriving at a just estimate of her abilities. I t should warn us against drawing any premature conclusions about the improvement in women artists' prospects today. While continuing to enjoy their increased prescence, and looking forward to a greater expansion of outlets for them in the future, we ought to remember how easy it was for an artist of Gwen John's abilities to be belittled and ignored. Prejudice lingers on, whether deliberate or unconscious, and will doubtless continue for a long time to come. So will the awesome pressures exerted on women by the dual and in many ways conflicting demands of motherhood and art. They should never be underestimated, and might always prove difficult to resolve.
But that is no reason to lapse into pessimism. The climate for women artists is in many ways healthier today than it was when I edited that issue, and no limit ought to be placed on the opportunities awaiting them. Now that they play a more visible role in shows of every kind, and in the extra-gallery world (where Tess Jaray is at this moment designing an immense floor for Centenary Square at the heart of Birmingham), women no longer need to press their claim in the old militant way. Even so, nobody should ever forget how much of a debt is owed to the women's movement. As Linda Nochlin pointed out at the end of her article in Studio, it has 'brought into being a new history - a more valid, complex, expansive interpretation of the past - in art, as in every other realm of human experience.' I t remains our responsibility to ensure that the 'new history' is accompanied by an equally 'valid' picture of women's contribution to presentday art as well.
ANGE LECCIA • MARTINE ABALLEA 20 January - 12 February l l YA KABAKOV: TEN CHARACTERS 21 February - 26 March
Gallery open lues - Sun 1 - Bpm nversKiestudiOSc:.-.----·-••·l••m••h·-••·l41:a-..
17
