Quantcast

national

Reclaiming Women’s Anatomy: The Visible Vagina at Francis M. Naumann Fine Art and David Nolan Gallery

By

January 31, 2010   ·   10 Comments

Explicit views of women’s pudenda have never been in short supply in New York City but one found them on 42nd St. (before Disney arrived), not in established art galleries. Inspired by Eve Ensler’s Vagina Monologues, Francis Naumann began collecting work for an exhibition and when it grew too large, enlisted David Nolan to join him; the exhibition, The Visible Vagina, continues at both galleries through March 20.  The results include the entire range of responses one might expect from women to their own most singular parts, and respectful, appreciative study by men of the most mysterious parts of women.  This is an important exhibition.

Mira Schor ‘Slit of Paint’ (1994) oil on canvas, 12 x 16"

Mira Schor ‘Slit of Paint’ (1994) oil on canvas, 12 x 16"

Carolee Schneemann ‘Vulva’s Morphia’ (1995) wall installation 5 x 8', each panel 8 ½ x 11"  installed with fans

Carolee Schneemann ‘Vulva’s Morphia’ (1995) wall installation 5 x 8', each panel 8 ½ x 11" ; installed with fans

I never shared Ensler’s discomfort with the word, vagina;  I was raised in a doctor’s family where all parts of the anatomy were fair game at the dinner table, as long as one used the correct term.  Speaking of which, while vagina has come to be popular shorthand, the word refers to the unseen part of the female sex organs (unless one has a speculum); the external portion is the vulva or pudenda.

Sarah Davis ‘Britney (Notorious)’ (2009) pastel on Somerset ‘velvet’ paper, 22 x 30"

Sarah Davis ‘Britney (Notorious)’ (2009) pastel on Somerset ‘velvet’ paper, 22 x 30"

The most striking thing about the more than one hundred artworks is how few of them objectify women or suggest a salacious use of the imagery, other than as humorous or ironic commentary; the most egregious exception is Mark Kostabi’s large close-up of a vulva in the pallate of Las Vegas at night.  The tone is rather searching, affectionate, wonderous, knowing, celebratory and humorous, with a fair number of nods to artistic precedents.  The obvious and most-cited of these are Courbet’s frankly-pornographic The Origin of the World, never intended to be seen in mixed or polite company, and Duchamp’s transgressive Étant donnés, which permanently brought the imagery into the art museum. Mira Schor’s Slit of Paint (1994, above) surely respond’s to Jasper Johns’ Painting with Two Balls and Cathy de Monchaux’s I saw the past splayed with the skin of my youth (2009) to Jay de Feo’s The Rose; Allyson Mitchell’s Hungry Purse; The Vagina Dentata in Late Capitalism (2006, below) pays homage both to Faith Wilding’s Crocheted Environment (aka Womb Room) at Womanhouse and Nikki de Saint Phalle’s Hon; and I suspect that Sarah DavisBritany (Notorious) (2009, above), based on a famous and revealing news photo of Britany Spears makes note of Richard Hamilton’s Swinging London, itself based on a news photo of Mick Jagger attempting to hide his face.

Nancy Grossman ‘Bride’ (1966) mixed media, 22 ½ “ diameter

Nancy Grossman ‘Bride’ (1966) mixed media, 22 ½ “ diameter

The exhibition primarily covers recent work and the period from the late 1960s-1970s, when feminism encouraged women to look at their own and each other’s sex organs; workshops were arranged for the purpose.  This coincided with my own maturity and I can well-remember the frisson of transgression around such investigations.  Several works date from the period (by Magdalena Abakanowicz, Nancy Grossman, Barbara Hammer, Henri Maccheroni, Ana Mendieta, Hannah Wilke, Carolee Schneemann, Robert Watts and others) but perhaps none is more closely associated with the times than Judy Chicago’s Red Flag (1971): a photograph, slightly manipulated, so it takes a moment to recognize the subject as a woman removing a bloody tampon from her vagina.  Chicago’s in-your-face image of menstruation was produced against a background of ads for sanitary napkins that still showed ball-gowned women in grand settings, with the elliptical text: Modess…. because.

Peter Saul ‘Relax Sonny’ (2009) acrylic, colored pencil and marker on paper, 23 x 29"

Peter Saul ‘Relax Sonny’ (2009) acrylic, colored pencil and marker on paper, 23 x 29"

The most striking sign of how far we’ve progressed is the fact that the exhibition was arranged by men and includes male artists.  Peter Saul’s drawing, Relax Sonny says it all concerning male anxiety about women’s bodies. Chuck Close’s Untitled Dauguerreotypes (2010), a diptych, is a loving study of what I assume to be the vulva of his beloved, and likely to raise no opposition. But I can’t help remembering the feminist objections (retrospective, I’d guess) to S0l LeWitt’s Muybridge I (1964), sequential photos of a nude woman as the facing camera moves closer and, focusing on her belly-button, includes ever closer views of her crotch. Is it just the times that make the Close acceptable, or is our tolerance based on the misconception that sixty year old men (Close or Picasso) can do nothing but look?

Beatrice Wood ‘Un peut d’eau dans du savon’ (1917, 1977 replica) Glazed earthenware and soap, 11 ¾ x 9 7/8 “

Beatrice Wood ‘Un peut d’eau dans du savon’ (1917, 1977 replica) Glazed earthenware and soap, 11 ¾ x 9 7/8 “

I’ve always been fascinated by what can and can’t be shown and The Visible Vagina raises the question again and again.  The earliest work is Beatrice Wood’s small clay relief, Un peut d’eau dans du savon (1917, shown in a replica of 1977), a woman’s body in the bath with a heart-shaped piece of carved soap functioning as a fig-leaf. I suspect that the charming image could appear on a Hallmark greeting card these days, but Naumann told me that when included in the 1917 exhibition of the Society of Independent Artists (which rejected Duchamp’s Fountain), it provoked a scandalized reaction and extensive press; Wood told of daily having to remove  calling-cards that men had left in the frame.

Allyson Mitchell ‘Hungry Purse; The Vagina Dentata in Late Capitalism’ (2006-7) view from within towards entrance

Allyson Mitchell ‘Hungry Purse; The Vagina Dentata in Late Capitalism’ (2006-7) view from within towards entrance

Each of the galleries includes and installation that visitors can enter. Allyson Mitchell’s wonderful and hilarious Hungry Purse; The Vagina Dentata in Late Capitalism at Nolan is a lair formed primarily of riotously-polychrome crochet of the sort recycled by Mike Kelly.  The large clitoris above the entry is discretely shielded as one enters by a fringed g-string and the throne opposite is decorated with owls — Athena’s, no doubt.  Pendant cages house chipmunks (squirrels?), one of which is visibly lactating.  At Naumann Carol Cole’s equally humorous Back into the Womb uses a pup-tent as armature for what reads as the skirt of a ball-gown of beige tulle over red satin, until the anatomical reference becomes clear.  Visitors can put their heads through the aperture where a handy flashlight is provided to illuminate the roof, decorated with baby pacifiers and nipples, and the floor, covered with red-sprayed egg-crate foam; certainly the most imaginative use of the material I know, although the referent was open for discussion.

Maureen Connor still from ‘Heads’ from ‘The Sixth Sense’ (1993) video

Maureen Connor still from ‘Heads’ from ‘The Sixth Sense’ (1993) video

The installation at Nolan had a few delightful surprises: next to the entrance are two images by Mel Kendrick of bark on a tree, done in ink on Japanese paper.  The aperture on each is so subtle that one might believe he intended them as knots on the tree trunks.  In the second space the surprise is the pairing; I saw Judie Bamber’s astonishingly-lifelike, narrow close-up of a woman’s pudenda – surely a photograph, beside Beth B.’s delicate, pencil drawing of an equally-narrow view of pudenda and anus.  Or that’s what I thought I saw, for the Bamber is a tromp l’oel oil on panel, while Beth B.’ is a photo.  Close by is Maureen Connor’s wonderfully-deadpan video, Heads, from The Sixth Sense in which a woman’s thoughts are recorded on her forehead; as she puts on make up she fantasizes she’s Grace Kelly, then when she see’s a young Cary Grant and Paul Newman, she’s fingering her clitoris.

James Siena ‘Place’ (2008) ink on paper, 6 1/4 x 8"

James Siena ‘Place’ (2008) ink on paper, 6 1/4 x 8"

The exhibition is accompanied by a 124 pg. catalog (The Visible Vagina, ISBN 978-0-98-00556-3-4) with extensive color photographs of many of the works on view and comparative material, and an essay by Anna C. Chave, ‘Is this good for Vulva?’; Female Genetalia in Contemporary Art.  Chave introduces the contemporary work with a history of pre-historic fertility figures that emphasize the vulva, and the man-made narrative that artistic generation is exclusive to men (human generation being unequivocally women’s work).  She traces the artistic emphasis on mother goddesses and generative forms during the early days of feminism  then looks at the dialectic of woman’s body as site of knowledge versus the concern that emphasizing the body is essentializing.  Chave situates the development of feminist art within changing social, legal and cultural currents and looks at several artists from backgrounds beyond the U.S. and Europe.  The catalog gives a unique presentation of several generations of women who use their most private anatomy as a subject for art.

All proceeds from the catalog sales will be donated to V-Day, the organization Eve Ensler founded to end violence against women.  It would make a wonderful Valentine’s Day gift!

The Visible Vagina coincides with another New York exhibition based upon vaginal imagery, Ida Applebroog; MONALISA at Hauser and Wirth, which will be the subject of my next post.

Magdalena Abakanowitz ‘Cercle Clair’ (1971) jute, 59" diameter

Magdalena Abakanowitz ‘Cercle Clair’ (1971) jute, 59" diameter

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 Responses to “Reclaiming Women’s Anatomy: The Visible Vagina at Francis M. Naumann Fine Art and David Nolan Gallery”

  1. Karen LeCocq says:

    Good show, but you left out my now famous “Feather Cunt” (shown in the Armand Hammer show “Sexual Politics”, another show at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art and in the books: “The Power of Feminists Art”, “Sexual Politics” and “A Studio of Their Own”. It recently showed in Laura Meyer’s show at CSUF “A Studio of Their Own, The 1970’s Feminist Art Experiment” that showcased the original members of Judy Chicago’s feminist art program in 1970. We did lots of vaginal art back then, but of all my pieces, “Feather Cunt” was my favorite… Karen LeCocq

  2. Mark Roller says:

    I find it interesting that so many of the images, most of them by women, isolate the genitals in one way or another, rather than integrating them into a depiction of a whole person. Perhaps in the works by women this can be understood as a kind of self-portrait, but I still find it strange. Sometimes, in Penthouse style pornographic photo layouts, you can get some sense of the owner of the sex organs on display as a human being; more so than in most of the images in this show. Apparently the thinking of many of these artists never went beyond the merely transgressive, similar to the somewhat infantile compulsion that motivates so many makers of cable tv shows to overwork the sex and profanity just because they can. The only way to redeem graphic sexual imagery from the pornographic is to invest it with real feeling–a disembodied, de-personalized vagina, in a sleazy magazine or an upscale art gallery, is just an object.

  3. natan says:

    VAG mONO IS TERRIFIC!!!

  4. Concerning the title of the exhibition, The Visible Vagina; are there invisible vaginas? I have never seen one.

  5. george lyne says:

    michael,you have never seen one because they are invisible.

  6. Andrea says:

    You’ll need a speculum. I address that mis-use of the term in the piece.

  7. libby says:

    The real reason we wanted to talk to you is we knew you’d make some trouble in our comments section!!! JK

Leave a Reply