1. Linda Nochlin is a feminist art historian. She received her undergraduate degree from Vassar College in Philosophy and also has a M.A. in English from Columbia University. She has a PHD from New York University’s Institute of Fine Arts on The Development and Nature of Realism in the Work of Courbet. She taught one of the first undergraduate art history courses about women “The Image of Women in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries” at Vassar then went on to teach at Yale.
2. “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists was originally published in ArtNews in 1971, an American arts magazine including articles and reviews of artwork past and present.
3. The author is questioning the lack of women who are considered great artists. Nochlin is less concerned with the insinuation that this means women are inherently not good at art but is interested in picking apart pre-existing ideas of what ‘great art’ is and how women have been systematically separated, prevented, and denied the ability to partake in this biased competition. She does not necessarily speak of specific artworks but in her argument she uses some artists as evidence such as: Mary Cassatt, Angelica Kauffmann, and Artemisia Gentileschi.
4. Nochlin’s main thesis is that the issue is not so much ‘why have there been no great women artists’ but how do we pick apart the systems of what is considered great art to understand how women have a have not been able to participate. Who has created this standard/what are the means of comparison/how equal are the modes of education/how subjective is the term great art/to what extent are we participating in this narrative? She brings up the point on page 136 that “attempting to answer it, they tacitly reinforce its negative implications” making the argument that the question itself is part of the biased system of art.
She goes on to address the necessity to redefine the understanding of what art is and how we have been conditioned to accept this pre-existing definition. She also makes the point that those with privilege are often not inclined to renounce those privileges until they are forced to. White males have had cultural and educational privileges not afforded to women and minorities that has influenced their ability to have an environment conducive to greatness and any greatness achieved by women or minorities is a reflection of exponentially more work and determination.
We must realize that the study of great artists considers the artist first and the social systems they have resided in for the entirety of their lives second, when in fact that is just as important in considering the pool we are picking from when deciding who is a great artist. The education of women artists has also been created under different sets of guidelines and requirements, these structures in education don’t align with the standards set for great artists. Therefore, women have not been provided the opportunity to join the pool of applicants for this criteria since they have been denied the ability to participate. In addition to the bias of the art world, socially women have had to decide between career and marriage (p 146).
5. Nochlin uses a series to examples to support her claims. She discusses the story of Michelangelo constantly drawing and exhibiting signs of artistic genius since birth, this narrative doesn’t take into consideration cultural and societal influences but insinuates that these male artists were just born with greatness. She also explores the perpetuation of artistic prowess through familial gains; ‘the transmission of artistic profession from father to son was considered a matter of course, sons of academicians were exempted from the customary fees for lessons’ (p 141).
A specific example of institutions treating women artists differently is the drawing of the nude figure. “It was argued there could be no great painting with clothed figures” (p 143). Women students at the Royal Academy were not allowed to draw nude models and in some instances were not even allowed to draw a clothed body and were given animals to study instead.
If great paintings needed a nude body but women were never allowed to draw the nude figure anything they created would already be discredited. Women who were successful were generally from families with artists or ties to the artistic community, they had an ability to assimilate into the male dominated culture because of the insight and understanding they gained by observing the exclusive world.
6. Nochlin studies the social context of the world to make her point, drawing conclusions and following it with evidence to support her claims. She used artistic references to prove her point but also made a larger argument by simply referencing the world we exist in and its implications on the systems within that world. Everything is effected by a perception and perspective that we learn about the second we are born.
7. Nochlin comes to the conclusion that this systemic and institutional inequality has created this disadvantage and the way to work against this situation is to reveal its issues, destroy its reasoning, and create a new institution where the challenge of becoming a great artist is open to everyone willing to try.
8. I think Nochlins argument is convincing and true. As a woman, not just an artist, I have personally witnessed and been a recipient of being viewed as less than, unskilled, or unable to complete certain tasks based on predetermined ideas standardized about women. This argument is also easily understandable after the reading and research I have been doing on systemic racism and the way these biases are not overtly taught to people but quietly and skillfully put into our minds as fact through the world we have to exist in. I find this writing so important because without an understanding of the systems we don’t have a language to discuss it, and it is through that discussion we are able to understand its problematics and discover a way to undermine and overcome it.
