Tate Admits Need to Buy More Works by Women Artists
By Arifa Akbar
Monday, 26 March 2007
The trustees of Tate Modern have admitted that the collection fails to give adequate recognition to female artists and that they need to rectify the gender gap.
The gallery's trustees acknowledged the imbalance in the existing collection at a recent board meeting, and have resolved to acquire more works by female painters and sculptors, according to the next issue of The Art newspaper.
Of the 2,914 artists represented in the Tate's collection, only 348 - less than 12 per cent - are women, and only two of the 39 major works bought over the past two years were by female artists.
The initiative was inspired by the need to recognise female talent that had so far gone unacknowledged, the Tate said. "We examine our holdings on a regular basis to identify what may have been overlooked in the past and research what may be available to fill the gaps."
While some contemporary female artists are well represented in the collection - especially those who emerged in the 1990s Young British Artists movement, including Tracey Emin, Sarah Lucas and Rachel Whiteread - those from previous generations are not.
(above photo of) Shibboleth, by sculptor, Doris Salcedo
Those who have been overlooked include the US painter Georgia O'Keeffe, the Mexican painter Frida Kahlo, who was the subject of the 2002 Hollywood film Frida, and the British painter Alison Lapper, who received an MBE for services to art in 2003 and was the subject of Marc Quinn's Fourth Plinth project in Trafalgar Square.
Dame Barbara Hepworth, the Cornish sculptor whose major works are displayed at Tate St Ives, is the best represented female artist, with 128 works. The collection holds 31 works by the German performance artist Rebecca Horn, 30 pieces by the Op Art painter Bridget Riley, and 21 and 19 by the Turner Prize winners Rachel Whiteread and Gillian Wearing. There are also 14 works by the early 20th-century Welsh artist Gwen John.
Sir Nicholas Serota, the director of the Tate, said: "It is striking that among the emerging contemporary artists, the gender balance is much more even. And that is pleasing."
A spokeswoman said: "The contemporary female artists are pretty well represented. Historically, it has been difficult prior to the 20th century."
The Tate said its drive to purchase more works by women was not part of a positive discrimination policy. "While we do not stipulate positive discrimination in relation to women artists, we are very concerned to address areas where, historically, women artists may have been neglected."
The two works by female artists acquired by the Tate in the past two years were by Emin, for less than £50,000, and the Spanish artist Christina Iglesias, which cost £115,000.
Tate Modern has staged several exhibitions by women artists including Kahlo and Riley.
The current programme includes displays of works by the Indian artist Amrita Sher-Gill while a show by the English painter Prunella Clough, opened at the weekend.
Tate artists
The best-represented women artists in the Tate are:
* Dame Barbara Hepworth - 128 works
* Rebecca Horn - 31
* Louise Bourgeois - 30
* Bridget Riley - 30
* Cindy Sherman - 29
* Rachel Whiteread - 21
* Gillian Wearing - 19
Prunella Clough, Alison Lapper, Bridget Riley, Rachel Whiteread, Gillian Wearing, Gwen John, Emin, Christina Iglesias, Amrita Sher-Gill
I don't know if it is the cute short list of women artists' works catalogued at the end of this article, or the lack of specificity written about committees looking at...
I left this article wondering where was there even a mention of any intelligent, proactive program at the Tate, not just recognizing but rather, one that is also already collecting_ historic Women Artists works? Then, it wouldn't just be a committee "looking at" the issue would it? Yet, from this article, it really doesn't seems that there is yet to even be such a program at the Tate Modern! Isn't this what is still institutionally still true here?
Not a real program taking specific action(s), to rectify historical prejudices against women artists' works_ right?
So, the lameness I refer to, is making careers out of writing about admissions of inequity. Boring!
This is writing about institutions that are still not doing something relevant. Writing again about facts that have been highlighted in contemporary culture, since the second wave!
Hello young journalist, it is way past time for the details, the specifics on what is being done!
Looking at women as nouns is a tired, tired subject.
Looking at, has been dragging on and on, over the thirty-five years I have been an adult female, working artist!
"Examining the issue", "finding" mere examples of works," "cataloging" those examples by whatever criteria seems important the time," and actually getting the works into the general institutional setting has lain fallow for hundreds of years, even before my lifetime!
How is it relevant that a younger woman-journalist's voice, view, perspective, hunger for a career, comes along again later to say the same things in the new century?
Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
Don't the young want to write about that instead? Why should your life be just a repeat? How does repeating continue to happen? No, really_ to the extent that one can proactively change old habits? A young collective mindset assumption is rightfully in question here.
I realize the article above does describe committees with quotes even, who are 'looking at the issue'... H-m-m, really?
What quality consciousness is this?! Looking, not doing? This is us, folks!
Is this all anyone really has the courage for, during a lifetime?
Just looking and talking about looking?
Systems, institutions, money-lack-of-consciousness, and change happen all so-o-o very slowly...
First, there is the reactionism to change at all. Then, there is the manipulation of any subject.
Next, seems to come all the varieties of forms that express confirmation that indeed a noble slight has occurred within an environment; a society.
Media manipulation, perspective manipulation and awareness confusion.
These pattern just continue. The goal is to influence all who refuse to see, all who know no better and especially targets those who are newly arrived to the weight, the inertia underneath old, old habits centered in the ego!
You know the ones: "the way it has always been," "the way it has always been done!" "Those in the know, know best and one needs approval from them to go forward!"
No one is in the know!
Anyone holding power, or even imagining themselves as powerful over others, is ultimately only holding onto fear_ even in settings with the best of intentions.
Power and control centered in the ego, is so insidiously endless.
Wake up young journalist to what is possible about the challenges of looking, seeing, understanding_ everyday!! Wake up first! Understand more what it means.
I would love to be independently contracted, housed and fed by the Tate Modern, to research and curate such a project. At least as one active and contributing to the action of collecting the works of women artists; working in an authentically appreciating environment. Undaunted intelligence, flourishing motivation, pro-actively participating in pursuit, acquisition and development of such noble work!
I can draw on my own research skills in addition to contemporary, personal experiences as a woman artist!
I can start if not create, a foundation from which to build a truly, dynamically alive collection of women-centered art. To do so reflects gender balance_ duh!
Again, I bring experience as a researcher of women artists!
Yet, me getting a contract is not going to happen as long as there is the perspective that one is only clamoring to get in. No.
I say outloud to the universe, where are the truly independent teams of women? The courageous, intelligent and motivated? The female dream team of the twenty-first century that is fully self-sufficient monetarily? Women poised and ready to take independent action outside and inside the institutional walls!
As a woman and artist, I do express ego in relation to absolute hunger for greater balance; real tangibility in outer reflection for women like me. Women artists who have been doing what we each do and have done all along!!
I am willing to take action, at the risk of "sounding" lame from my unfunded position on the social spectrum at present.
Again outloud to the universe I say, how long will this walking nightmare of isolationism remain present?!
I am willing and able to actually help build a solid collection of historically representative women artists' works, NOW!
What say you Tate Modern, to contracting an independent woman artist, curator and researcher of women artists' works?
What say you to one completely available to aid in this noble collection-building work in this lifetime?
Oh, one can refer to my post dated May 12, 2008, titled : 3 Lovelies about a woman artist in action; in the verb tense not subject!
