Dear List-
Thanks for a number of interesting and proliferating posts on our gender
theme which continues during November. Having had this storm of voices
re ICA media arts, institutional politics, hybrid practices and
questions of 'value-ability', CRUMB would like to return to some points
that have been made on representation/under-representation of women
within the arts and curatorial practices; notions of subject-formation
prior to gender-division; or to refer to Katy's post sent by Marcia, on
the ignorance or disregard of the "wealth" of creative women and a
certain call for recursion to 1970s forms of activism.
From my own perspective - being (not a very active) FACES member - I was
surprised that at ISEA Singapore there was a FACES meeting held, but
exclusive to FACES members it seemed. It was not announced publicly and
although it was a nice gathering of interesting women in one way or the
other connected to FACES, I wonder if, and in what way, this
self-exclusion contributes to the "ignorance" from the larger public.
On the other hand, working as an artist using advanced technologies, I
admit I am not spoiled with much choice of programmers with whom I
collaborate to realise the work. But rather gender-ising the
collaboration, I am thinking of certain personalities that temporarily
come together and make something possible. In a way I feel torn between
my idea of agency and activism which includes questions of gender, and
under-representation of women specifically, and my own "ignorance" of
the ways such strategies might be carried out and possibly erase, or
indeed exceed, established boundaries.
Verina
|