Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party

Oh to be a tourist in New York.  I think I could spend a month here quite happily, there is so much to see and do as an art student.

Anita and I went off to the Brooklyn Museum.  We walked to Penn Station to get the subway.  What a confusing system.  Subway, Transit and Tracks.  Even now I am not sure what the difference is. We managed to buy a ticket (no all-day rover tickets, just a return) and struggled with the ticket barrier - you need to swish the ticket through really fast (and we were too slow!).  We found the train indicators confusing, as we could get a 2 or 3 train (no line names, but letters or numbers on the same coloured line) - I think the different numbers relate to the destinations. Whereas in London, a line might be named the Central, with a destination of Hainault or Epping, in New York the 2 or 3 run on the same line but with different destinations.  Confusing, but a useful experience to remind me how it feels to be  stranger in an unfamiliar city.  Easy when you know how, but unsettling when you don't.

Then we were puzzled by the line diagram on the train.  We were on a red line going to Eastern Parkway (Brooklyn Museum).  But the train had a green line diagram, and the stations we stopped at seemed intermittently different to the diagram.  We sat tight until we were sure we were in Brooklyn, then asked another passenger.  She said there were engineering works as it was the weekend, and the train company had put different rolling stock into service on the 2/3 train service.  And the next station was ours!  Yippee!

Judy Chicago was wonderful.  I had not realised it was a history of women from Primordal Goddess to Georgia O'Keeffe.  Most of the first place settings were about generic, historically researched types, then moved on to specific people.  When it was made, all but one of the people depicted were dead (Georgia O'Keeffe was still alive) so I wondered about the ethics of making work about them.  I found all the artworks to be positive and respectful, but Anita loathed the depiction of vulvas in each ceramic plate and found them deeply vulgar and offensive.  So where is the positioning of ethics?  Did remaining family members need to give their consent (like I am doing for my samplers) or does the statement "there is no slander for the dead" apply?

I considered how to document my thoughts.  Without looking at the detail of the postcards, I decided to buy the box of postcards, and stick each one on the left hand leaf of an A5 book.  I made very brief notes about my thoughts on the right hand facing page, for each artwork. I was looking at what values I could see depicted, and maybe a little sketch of something in the place setting.  Unfortunately when I bought the box of cards, it was only the ceramic plate/vulva that was depicted, not the textile place setting.  I also bought the book (weighs a ton) - looks fantastic and should answer my many questions.  As I am not American, I don't understand the symbolism behind many of the place settings.  So how do you convey narrative, meaning and value in an artwork.  I wanted to understand it, but was limited by lack of knowledge, and Anita was deeply offended.  So how do you position your work?

I caught a couple of snatches of conversation about the artworks from a couple of guides going round.  I need to go back and do a tour with a guide to get more from it.  Anita won't want to come so we need a day or half day apart.  I am frustrated by my lack of knowledge.  I need to check the tour times, to make best use of time.

No photos as I was so busy just looking.

Mosiac station sign. 

Empire State Building as we walked back, exhausted, to the hotel

New York, New York!

Anita and I have arrived in New York.  I find long haul travel tedious, and this journey was no exception.  Nothing wrong with it, but long and tedious.

The only bit of excitement was as we approached JFK at about 9pm. Normal slow descent, then when we were about 3 miles from touchdown, and very close to landing, suddenly the engines roared into life and we climbed steeply.  This made everyone look around a bit, and the captain came on the tannoy.  He announced an Air France plane had taxied onto our runway, and he had had to take avoiding action!  We had to fly around in a large circle, and rejoined the queue of planes stacking to land, and landed perfectly 30 minutes later.  Anita and I were through customs very quickly and took our transfer to the hotel.  This took us all around New York so we had a good overview of the city at night - lots of the buildings were lit up and you could see from the shapes that lots were of art deco heritage.  Exhausted, we were tucked up in bed by 11.15pm.

As the UK is 5 hours ahead of New York, I have been awake from 4.30am with jet lag.  Oh well, I can always be first for breakfast at 6.30am!

My tutor Lewis Jones has thrown down the gauntlet!

This morning, I received an email from Lewis, with information from Loughborough University, requesting abstracts for papers to be presented to a seminar.  This led to me going for a swim to get my thoughts in order - 2,200 m!  There was a lot to think about with this Call for Papers!

" CfP: Gender in art: production, collection, display (AAH Summer Symposium) (8-9 June 2016 Loughborough) (CfP 23 March 2016)

We welcome contributions from all periods and contexts that critically engage with notions of gender relations in the production, collection and display of art. Topics may include, but are not limited to:

•       Gender roles in the home and domestic art
•       Transgender art, exhibitions and collections
•       Gender-aware approaches to display and collections of art
•       Women artists in the ‘public’ and ‘private’ sphere
•       Gendered sensibilities in public/institutional settings
•       Feminist approaches to collection, curation and exhibition practices"

The question is, do I have the backbone to grasp the nettle?

My work is about how I think women should be valued - that the domestic and mundane are as worthy of respect as that traditionally valued by those in power (usually, men, with educational/financial power).  I am interested in how artworks in public galleries and museums represent the full breadth of society (or not) and what values are embodied within these artworks.  I am interested in the status or hierarchy of media used, and its impact on whether it gets displayed by galleries.  I enjoy narrative in art and want to make art that enables the viewer to understand and empathise with the values described and  also identify with it from their own or familial experience.  I need to read more around the hierarchy of artistic media; the portrayal of value in art; and narrative art.

While quaking in my boots about the thought of presenting a paper at a seminar, I have evaluated why Lewis might have put this opportunity forward to me.  I think communication skills would need to be a key criteria - and he has seen my writing in my Literature Review, and listened to me talk in a couple of presentations.  I hope this means he thinks my research is of sufficient standard to cut the mustard.  I also have demonstrated that I am prepared to travel to investigate things, so going to Loughborough would not be an issue. I am acutely aware that when I get going in a presentation, my volume goes up, particularly when I am passionately interested in the subject.  I am not sure how I would get on with microphones, if it is a conference where you get wired for sound!

So, I am considering taking a large brave pill and putting in a submission.  Decision not made yet.

In the meantime, images of gauntlets and nettles are floating around in my head!

More details of the Modern Scottish Women Seminar.

Key points from speakers:

Amelia and Noel Paton.  Amelia 1820-1904.  She was always known as sister of, wife of or daughter of her relations.  Noel sculpted and believed the greatest artwork status was to do work in stone and marble, and for it to be monumental.  Amelia also did sculpture but was limited to busts of the notable.

Joanna Soden spoke about the Edinburgh Atelier 1882-89.  This was a female only art school as females at that time were proscribed from attending life class which was deemed the essential entree to the profitable art career.  Numbers of women studying increased during this time.  Women students were taught by women tutors, but were assessed by visiting male lecturers, and received full written feedback as was done at the RSA.  27 attendees.  It closed in 1889 (not sure why) but women were still not allowed to join the SRSA until the early 20th century.  Instead the leading women of the day founded the Ladies Art Club for the education of lady artists.  Kirkcudbright has a relevant exhibition at its art gallery.

This led to a debate about women as subject/women as self portraiture painters.  The women artists of the day were typically genteel, affluent and with family support.  However they did not have extensive funds to support their art and painted what was available - portraiture gave their best works.  There were few landscapes painted as opportunity and finance limited this source.  However it was noted women travelled to paint, but did not do the landscape.  Circumstance led them to paint family and friends - this was not deliberate but what was available.  So, it makes me wonder whether painting en plein air was deemed risqué, whereas painting indoors was not.  I have a vague recollection that the French Impressionists did portraits of men and women at a picnic, which appears innocent to modern eyes, but in the Art History lecture, it was explained the women in these circumstances were probably prostitutes.

Middle class women art students needed parental support.  It was 5GBP a term for fees.  Grants were few.  This art education had its roots in design schools, where there were very early morning and evening classes for commercial workers, and day classes for women.  Not sure how less affluent students survive - probably they just were not able to attend.

Key points about patronage - women supported other women, or possibly had a male patron (Fra Newbery).  Putting self forward was deemed improper.  Some women used a nom de plume (another reason why women's art is hard to trace and attribute), or signed work "a lady", used just their initials, initials and surname to appear male.  Being female in art was highly stigmatised.  During the course of organising the exhibition more works by women appeared.  Relatives of women artists, collectors and dealers came forward.   Notably the painting by Margaret Macdonald Mackintosh, came up at auction, and Alice Strang, the curator, had  very tense afternoon when that lot came up …. before discovering the Scottish National Gallery had been successful and had bought it!  She noted exhibitions stimulate research!

Sian Reynolds spoke about Scottish Women Artists - The Paris Connection.  The reason to go to Paris to study was because it gave the opportunity to study the body - which was very important for sculptors.  In addition to everything men had to achieve to be able to study, women additionally needed income, family approval and luck.  In Paris there were private art schools and academies which included women in life classes!  Colorosy was more progressive than many and therefore there were a lot of women there.  It had a bit of a reputation for the risqué, but one Scottish woman, writing to her parents quoted it as "The famous mixed life class is more like a Sunday School".  Whether this was to assuage family concerns, or the truth, is not known!

"Who you study with" and "which school you belong to" and "who tutors your thesis" was very important.  Individual artists were known to influence students in their studio.  I need to think about this more.  I think it is obvious that tutors influence student work, and this is what you are paying for, but how can work be original if strongly influenced?  Maybe it is about the tutor challenging your thinking and directing your reading, rather than directing the artistic output.  I keep hearing bits about the impact of the tutor on research - do you get pushed to present your paper to a seminar or not; do you get pushed to exhibit or run workshops or ….?  Basically do you get pushed outside your comfort zone?  I think a good tutor does this.  Analysis of my own situation is that I have had both great, indifferent and dreadful tutors.

Studying in Paris, meant women evaded the restrictions of the UK.  Cost of living was ok.  Lots of museums.  Buzz of lifestyle "light, learning and research".  Therefore a very international scene.  Few french students were outnumbered by UK, USA, Russian and German.

The outcome of studying in France 1880-1914 was there were lots of Movements developing.  Sculpture moving from Rodin naturalistic to streamlined.  The main form of work for the people studying sculpture at this stage became war memorials.  Very few by women.  France has over 2000 villages and every one ended up with a war memorial to honour their dead.

Matthew Jarran (excellent speaker) lecturer from Dundee university spoke about Placed Under No Disqualification, which indicated that although women were accepted in the town art society, they were not exactly welcomed either.  He looked at factors in their careers.  Press interests in women artists (to gain female readers), art education (women as students and teachers); artists as activists (suffrage and birth control, Mary Irvin); and noted many women had careers cut short (marriage, children, marriage bar) .

Phillida Shaw had inherited the family archive of Alice Meredith Williams 1877-1934. I was tired by now and just listened and did not take notes.

The last speaker was about Emma Gillies, 1900-1936, a painter of porcelain.  200 items were found in a locked cupboard at the Edinburgh College of Art.  When it merged with another university, an audit of artwork was conducted and this trove was found, believed to have been used in still life classes.  Her work was clearly signed on the bottom and family research indicates she was from an artistic family, with an abusive father.  She had bouts of extreme behaviour and emotions and times of extreme productivity, and it is now believed likely that she had Graves Disease (as diagnosed in her Father and it is hereditary).  This led to a discussion about what is a collection - "stuff that has been left behind".  To create an exhibitions (which was what was done immediately the porcelain was found) they linked family, drawings, photos, and narrative.  "If you know a good thing, pass it on".  This should be the mantra of every good teacher!

Modern Scottish Women Study Day at Scottish National Gallery

Great day.  23/1/16

Alice Strang, senior curator of the SNG opened the event.  She was the senior curator for the Modern Scottish Women exhibition.  She touched on many of the subjects on the information boards in the exhibition.

Alice Strang set up the exhibition to focus on painting and sculpture.  Few Scottish women in these fields had been seriously studied, whereas serious research in the applied arts has already been conducted about women. The hierarchy she has observed is

Painting - (women allowed to be recognised for flowers)
Sculpture (male, the least feminine of the arts)
Applied Arts - more suitable for women.

So the exhibition focussed on portraiture, landscape, sculpture and photographs by women to challenge what had already been studied.

Women had short artistic careers for various reasons - the marriage bar precluded women from holding full-time teaching positions which many used to support their artistic practice.  This has led to very few women producing enough work for solo shows, so this exhibition brings together the work of many women.

Focussed on 1885-1965 because of conflicting views on women in 1885 times - the misogynist Sir William Fettes Douglas, President of the Royal Scottish Academy declared the work of a woman artist was like a man's, only weaker and poorer, but Fra Newbery Director of the Glasgow School of Art drove the Institution into its heyday by supporting and recognising women.  The end date is 1965, death of Anne Redpath, first woman elected to full membership of RSA.  Additionally in the 1960s state support for the Arts and university grants meant more women accessing education and artistic employment.

Another difficulty to be overcome was the changing of female artists names.  Some had 4 or more names - maiden name, one or several marriages, and possibly a husband attaining a peerage and therefore a title.  Daughters and sons of female artists supplied back-up information.  Challenges of gaining information included the Academy system ignoring women; critics using restricted vocabulary about work when it was identified as by a woman "charming"; and women being referred to by their husband's name "Mrs William …" making it difficult to identify them.

Exhibition catalogues are the legacy of exhibiting careers.   Valuable starting points for research.  Also Yourpaintings website - has online record of all paintings held in public galleries.  Also used contacts in art galleries, auction houses and dealers.

The exhibition did not seek to portray a feminine aesthetic - there were images of self portraits, portraits, religious themes, Belsen and landscape waves.  The curator chose to have a chronological ordering.  There had been criticism of the photos being displayed in a corridor, but this was done as the light levels were lower and were better for photo conservation.

Marketing of the exhibition was neutral/factual.  But even the image by Dorothy Johnstone of Anne Finlay was controversial as it was deemed sexy by some.  However it was chosen as the exhibition image as it was by a woman, of a woman.  It did not come across as sexy to me - I very much like it because of the bright, cheerful colours, tonal contrast and direct case.

An excellent opening given by the curator.

More to follow

Some of the girls from class

Sophie, me, Shiv, Lieta and Cecelia

Plus Nora

I love our class, and one of the reasons is that we are diverse.  It might not be immediately apparent from these selfies of first and second year students, but we represent Brazil, Portugal, Italy, London, China and the hearing impaired.

Progress with Mrs Konieczny's crossword

Across

  1.  River with endless building block makes fine fabric.  (7)

  5.  The orient in one who entertains leads to Walthamstow thoroughfare. (3, 2)

  8.  An affectionate peck twist forms a ringlet. (1, 4, 4)

  9.  French one does not begin a song. (3)

10. Good day within a bushel load. (5)

12. Burial place in charge of the cross word! (7)

13. Scots in Verona form discussions. (13)
15. Teach a foreign coin inside two points. (7)
17. Follow evenly tennis cure. (5)
19. Sharply pull stomach back. (3)
20. Non starting assent with queen in Christmas entertainment creates artificial language. (9)

22. Flowers of war? (5)

23. Lee term forms a large garden plant. (3, 4)

Down

  1. Teach bus. (5)
  2. Embroil evenly a scan (1,1,1)
  3. Meatball function contains one ship.  (7)
  4. Somehow crutches help Elizabeth to the highest point in the village. (6, 7)
  5. Sacred grasps a learner evergreen. (5)
  6. Quoin eats in order to calculate formulae. (9)
  7. 3-card flushes with Church of England in layers. (7)
11.  Sung algae creates tongues. (9)
13. Organic compound reacting with water follows church at Roman town. (7)
14. Odd after godly hypothesis. (7)
16. Declares status revamp in reverse. (5)
18. Bring forth the endlessly annulled. (5)

So far, so good. I still need to work out the words that fit the gaps in the grid.  It could also be tweaked with better words to describe Mrs Konieczny, as in some places the words chosen just fit the grid, rather than associate with her.  But quite a good start.

Building relationships with museums

More thoughts from the swimming pool (1750m this morning)

I was thinking about my trip to Edinburgh today, to attend the Modern Scottish Women seminar tomorrow, and the trip to New York next week, to go to the Brooklyn Museum.  I have discovered museums are the places to find people who really know their stuff about the objects therein.  So I want to take my theme to a higher level of study, it might be worth building relationships with the staff.  I always talk to staff in museums, and have been given contact details for a specialist textile curator at the Burrell in Glasgow.  If I want to do detailed object analysis, it would help to have the contacts.  A key purpose of textile art, according to Peter Dormer in The Culture of Craft, is to convey political messages, because of the context of the material.  It would be interesting to contrast how museums use textile, in the UK, the USA and other countries that have a positive view of women, e.g. Sweden, Finland etc.  So this seminar tomorrow at the Scottish National Gallery might be worthwhile for networking purposes.  I wonder who else I might meet there?

Hmm, I wonder how far I could travel if I take my studies in this field to Phd level!

Hand-In and Cryptic Crosswords

Hand-in of our assessment went smoothly.  It was interesting to see the differences in what was submitted, as we are all studying our own subjects with individual styles.  My display space (half a table) had a lot of books - sketchbooks (hand made and ready bound); exhibition book; various objects with analysis on luggage labels (sweater, soap, embroidery sampler, knitting pattern book); blog printout; contextual review; proposal.

Depending on students' focus, other people submitted 2/3 folders of carefully filed written work and nothing else; books documenting different styles of analysis and lengths of paper with landscape artwork experiments; several files of thoughts and extensive architects drawings; and some textile rubbings samples, and files of documentation.

In high good humour, I bounced down the stairs and popped in to see my tutor, Linden.  I happened to say that I had a new idea to work up (while I was on my flight to New York next week).  I said I had been thinking about Mrs Konieczny and how she liked cryptic crosswords.  So I had decided to identify words about her, find a grid, fit the words into it, and set cryptic crossword clues to it.  Then using blackwork, work it onto a sampler.  Linden thought this was a great idea and that it would enable conversations.

Fitting the words to the grid will be the most difficult, but if I can have some words that can be adapted it will help - e.g. she was a nurse, but I could use nurse, nursing, nursed, depending what fits best in the grid.

Suitable words:

Nurse, care, Cambridge, Seven Kings, Walthamstow, Hoe Street, Chemist, Hobbs, conversation, church, Miriam, Anita, Chester, Leeds, appendicitis, hypotenuse, library, Esperanto, married,

I can get a cross word grid from the internet.  Let's have a bash at getting them to fit.

A great day at the Shedio

It was a delight to be back at the Shedio after the Christmas break.  Brenda was back, having completed her first term at UEA.  I was able to give her the pram blanket I had made for her son and daughter-in-law, and the peacock colour, and peacock print lining went down well.

We were working into photos and postcards as media for artwork.  I had photographed some of Aunt Joan's artefacts and stitched into them, as inspired by some artists at the Jerwood prize.  So I cross stitched appropriate colours around  the Woods of Windsor soap, chain stitched the pattern over the jumper, and put a blanket stitch picot edge on the sampler.  I did not get round to working into the book photo.  Neither did I get round to photographing the stitched photos - and they are now part of my work displayed for assessment.

A mixed day at class - Hand-in and Presentations

I went to class, full of confidence that I was going to hand-in my Proposal and Literature Review a week early (the way I like to be).  Famous last words. I should not have been so cocky!   Virtually the first thing I found out, was that I had used the wrong referencing system on both submissions.  Pooh! Totally my fault - I had used the Author Date system, as this is what I am familiar with, and totally failed to Read The Instructions - we use the MHRA system.

I was last to give my prevention in class, and fortunately it went very well.  I had structured the presentation around methodology, and covered some of the key points of the literature review.  I had some images that I found very inspirational to talk around, mostly found when I was doing content and object analysis at the Scottish National Galleries.  I had the class falling about with laughter when I described a gender based example of orientational metaphors - "there is something very upright about the process of fathering a child, whereas women are described as falling pregnant!".  I was delighted to be able to say I planned to go to NewYork later this month to conduct object analysis on Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party.

Then I was told my Literature Review was actually meant to be a Contextual Review.  For some reason, I had it in my head that the written submission was a Literature Review, and the Presentation covered the rest of the context.  Wrong!  It is only the written work that gets marked - not the presentation!  So, I left class, feeling a complete fool, needing to do a re-write on the Contextual Review.  Fortuitously I have done all the research and most of the extra writing can be lifted from my presentation notes.

Doing the re-write and bibliography for the contextual review took a whole day's work.  I also made about 20lbs marmalade.  Just the Proposal to alter now.

Object Analysis Practice - Gilt & Silk Exhibition at The Burrell Collection

I have had another bash at object analysis, using the 2 red petticoats of Anne of Denmark, displayed in the Burrell Collection, Glasgow.  I looked at them in detail, when I was there and made notes, but did not take any photos.  There were no postcards of them for sale, so images have been taken from the internet (Thanks to Susan Elliott's blog - she had the sense to ask when she visited the Collection, whether photos were allowed, which they are.)

Interestingly, although the images I have found of these pieces are from other people's blogs, no-one has analysed the symbolism of the flowers and animals.  Other bloggers are stitch enthusiasts, rather than symbolic researchers.

Anne of Denmark, wearing the silk petticoat.

The petticoat in a perspex case

Embroidered detail

So, during my time looking at the embroidery, I noted down all the plants I could identify, from those plants I knew and from the artwork descriptions.  I have looked up symbolism of plants, and tried to use sources which are pre-Victorian.  It still means there are various different meanings of plants, so is not guaranteed accurate, but I have done my best. I also included the animals I could see.

Bird with leaf - Peace
Caterpillar and Butterfly - Charles I and Charles II (Burrell Collection definition)
Thistles - Scotland and Passion of Christ
Strawberry - good works of the righteous
Honeysuckle - love and generosity
Periwinkle - Virgin Mary, immortality
Lily - Virgin Mary, purity
Borage - courage
Daffodil/narcissus - Triumph of divine love over death/selfishness
Columbine - white dove/holy spirit
Oakleaf and acorns - England and endurance against adversity (oak made the cross)
Pansy - thoughtfulness (pensée) (Burrell Collection définition)
Peapod - fertility (Burrell Collection definition)
Carnation - pure love
Aspen leaves - trembling for Christ's sacrifice
Open briar rose - courtly love (Burrell Collection definition)

The embroidery is stitched on crimson red silk satin.  The colour indicates it was probably dyed with cochineal, so would have been a very expensive, opulent fabric.  Added to all the stitch work and expensive dyed threads, it is reasonable to assume it was created for a Queen.  The exhibit description says it was "probably" owned by Anne of Denmark, and what I have found out makes the symbolism hang together with her story.

This is Iconic Content Analysis as I am looking at a form of artwork. Key questions are "Who says what, to whom, why, to what extent and with what effect".

Who says what:  As the garment was owned by a Queen, she is wearing it as a statement of power and affluence.  The petticoat is an expensive garment, a result of intense labour, made from the finest fabric and dye, embroidered with a huge number of symbolic images.  The symbolism of the flowers and animals listed above alludes to the Catholic faith; the desired accession to the throne of Charles I and II; the hope for the continuance of this line of monarchy; and peace.

To whom: to all the people Anne of Denmark would have seen when wearing it.  Presumably this luxurious, symbolic garment would only have been worn at significant personal and state occasions when observers would have had the knowledge to interpret it.

Why: As a clear indication of her faith and Royal loyalties.

To what extent: To a great extent to anyone who saw it. (This was prior to easy 20th century communications!)  This would include those who planned and executed the work on this garment; her household; the household of anyone who hosted her and her family/prospective in-laws (marriages were arranged in royal circles in this time).

With what effect:  It is not known when this garment was worn. She was painted wearing it, which would have extended the audience, beyond those who she met at the time. If worn during marriage negotiations, it would have given a clear indication of her desires … but this is pure speculation on my part.  If worn after marriage, it gives a clear indication of the intention to return England (and Scotland/) to a Catholic Royal lineage.

As Object Analysis is "A research technique for the objective, systematic and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication", this petticoat is a tool of communication … and what a tool!

Uses: Inferences about 1.antecedents, 2.characteristics, 3. effects of a communication.

Which data are analysed?  

From the Gilt & Silk exhibition I chose the red petticoats.

How are they defined? Not sure what this means

What is the population from which they are drawn?

In this case, the petticoats are drawn from the textile archive of the Burrell Collection.  This collection was gifted to Glasgow c1948 by a Victorian businessman, William Burrell.  He was an eminent collector across various fields: church architecture; Greek, Roman sculpture; metalwork; tapestry and textiles; furniture; artwork.  His collection was revered by many, but his collection style has been denigrated by others who labelled him as having no more discernment than a jackdaw!  This petticoat has a clear link to Scottish heritage and royal aspirations.  It is one of the largest pieces in the Collection.  The Burrell has an international reputation for the standard of its textile collection with many rare and unique pieces.

What is the context relative to the data that are analysed?

The context in which this petticoat is analysed is that of a time of considerable political instability with different factions in Christianity vying for power within Royal households across Europe (not unlike the Muslim situation today!)  The Royal households in Denmark had long held desires for sovereignty over Scotland and Anne's marriage to James I England & VI of Scotland would have given a strong link between the 2 countries.  Anne of Denmark shows she was brought up Lutheran but converted to Catholicism around 1590, the time of her marriage.  Her husband, James I/VI, who was Catholic Mary Queen of Scots son, was brought up Protestant, away from his mother.  Anne of Denmark was known for love of extravagant masques and a prominent sponsor of the arts.

What are the boundaries for the analysis?

The data I have focussed on is the symbolism of the imagery to try to identify the values communicated through a high status piece of embroidery.

I could have considered the people who made it, the process by which the fabric was dyed, the stitches chosen.  I could have considered who had owned the petticoats from Anne's death to present day, and how and why the garment had been altered. These were ignored as they are not my field of interest.

What is the target of the inferences?

That in a time of low levels of written literacy, visual and iconic symbolism was deeply important and significant to communicate power and status.

Planning my next trip - to New York

Today I took a brave pill and decided to have a trip to New York, to go to the Brooklyn Museum to see  Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party.  I want to do some more content analysis, to contrast with the exhibition and gallery I analysed in Scotland.

While having my swim this morning (1750m), I decided to restrict the range of what I evaluate.  I have been debating whether I should look at how women are represented in general galleries, or how they are represented in women only galleries or exhibitions.  I happen to have found some interesting stuff in women only galleries, and I think I will restrict the range of women this way, so I consider what skills and talents are being represented first.  I think considering what gets represented in a mixed gallery brings a much wider range of material to be considered, which brings too many variables.  I am a beginner at content analysis and need to start with something manageable.

I am going to New York from 29 Jan to 5 Feb, Friday to Friday.  This is a time of tourist bargains, and I have 3 weeks at uni with no lectures, while tutors are marking our submissions.  You can go to New York for 3 days, but I chose to go for a week, as I cannot face an 8 hour flight for fewer days away.  I suspect I will spend days in the Brooklyn Museum, but it is closed on Monday/Tuesday, so I will do some general tourism as well.  I would like a bus tour, a trip up the Empire State Building and a theatre trip.  I will try to get a show that has not been staged in London.

I have asked my tutor for a tutorial before I go.  I want to be really hot at object analysis if I am putting this much time and effort into viewing and analysing a seminal feminist artwork.

A New Year's Day trip to The Scottish National Portrait Gallery

I tried to do some more content analysis on the images of women in the "Out of the Shadows" Gallery. I looked at the images and tried to work out what the message was in the image, or what the symbolism meant, then read the artwork description.  Sometimes I was spot on, other times very much wrong.  This time I put it into table form, which makes it much easier to read.

Scottish National Portrait Gallery –

Out of the Shadows – Women’s Gallery

1 January 2016

Name My interpretation	Approximate Size of image	Artist Statement
Naomi Mitchison 1897-1999 Scruffy, sad, and weary/wary expression	3’ x 4’	Writer, feminist, socialist, educationalist, economic projects in Africa
Jane Maria Strachey  1840-1928 Unconventional clothing, green cloak, orange lining. Glasses. Upholstered chair in library.  Left index finger pointing on lap.  Wedding ring.  Imperious with defiant chin.  Educated.	2’ x 3’	Poet.  Independent mind and spirit.  Feminist and suffragette.  Mother of 10 – educated all children – boys and girls.  Known for unconventional smart clothing.
Catherine Waterston Nee Sandeman 1755-1831 Widows weeds and modest cap and lace trim.  Quiet determination.  Sombre colours.  Open box (Jewellery?  Tea?) and silk scarf on table.  Looks frugal but very smart.	10” x 14”	Widowed at 25.  Merchant husband’s business expanded by her.  Sealing wax – candles – peppermint cure-all – stationery and books.  Strict Gasite church.  Light from window – representing work ethic
Elizabeth Johnston Hall and Jeannie Wilson & Annie Liston 1843-6 Fishwives.  Cleaner than I would have expected.  Very well wrapped up in shawls around body and head, with arms free.  Hard work in cold, dirty environment.	6” x 8” x 2 Photo	Chumming system when husbands away at sea.   Very poor communities but very strong social relationships.
Anne Rigby 1777-1872 Mother Lace cap and collar.  No gaze – downward eyes.  Folded hands.  Widows weeds.  Looks frugal.  Demure and chaste.	6” x 8” Photo	12 children including quads. A good example of how to age gracefully.
Lady Eastlake 1809-93 Daughter Side profile.  High fashion dress.  Sideways downwards and downwards gaze.  Demure but artificial and posed	6” x 8”  Photo	Intellectual, journalist, art critic.  Frequent sitter  -participated in composing the pose

Isabella Burns Begg 1771-1858 Widows weeds, lace edged bonnet.  Looks frugal, smart and severe.	10” x 8”	Burns sister.  Looks like Rabbie Burns.  Widowed 1813.  Supported 3 children by setting up schools.  Acted as gatekeeper to Burns’ memory.
Alexander Carse + mother + sister (both unnamed). 1770-1843  Women not named.  Chaste gowns and bonnets.  Full length images, seated.  Artists tools depicted – palette,frames and paintings.	8” x 10”	Mother reading from Bible.  Christian values, filial duty, respect for age and the word of God.  Protestant – individual salvation – all (ie inc women)  needed to be able to read the Bible.  Intellectual freedom for women.
Clementina Stirling 1772-1877 High fashion.  Red dress, black lace hat.  Flirtatious. Courtesan?	6” x 8”	Literary circles of Edinburgh.  Eccentric and unmarried.  Used disguises to be free.  Heiress – inherited brother’s estate.  Beautiful and intelligent.  Impersonator, author, translator, and beekeeper.
Isabella Smith 1755-1855 Widows weeds and white muslin cap.  Gentle expression with intelligent, direct gaze.  Chin down	24” x 30”	Inherited husband’s fortune from W Indies.  "Gentle mind, untaught to shine”  Intelligence not encouraged to develop.
Caroline Norton 1808-1877 Demure downward gaze to sketchbook.	14” x 16”	Poet, author and social reformer.  Left abusive husband who divorced hre for adultery with PM Lord Melbourne.  Guiltless but husband kept children. Petitioned Queen Victoria in 1855 re Marriage and Divorce Bill, as Queen Victoria was female.  This led to women in Scotland enjoying more property rights than in England.

Queen Victoria 1819-1901 Gentle gaze.  Rosebud mouth.  Very fair skinned.  Plump arms.  Awkward arms holding each other. Drooping pink rose in left hand.  White dress – off the shoulder. Privileged, beautiful and genteel.  Everything points to a leisured lifestyle, where lack of practicality is not an issue.	2’6” x 3’6”	Victoria Head of State, Albert Head of Family. Youth and femininity – 2 years after accession.  Power – blue sash of garter.  Crown – small hair ornament.  Strong influence on Govt when Britain had power and influence.
Mary Somerville nee Fairfax 1780-1872 Black gown.  White ruffled collar on shirt.  Fur stole.  Brooch and buckle.  Affluence.  Defiant chin.  Intelligent gaze.	2’6” x 3’	Intelligent with a love of learning.  Forbidden to study maths and algebra.  Studied at night, despite paternal disapproval and got international acclaim for astronomy, science, and geography.  Scientific publications 1831 and 1834.  Was first signatory for first petition for female suffrage in 1869..
Margaret Gourlay Ferrier 1832-1900 Black dress – gaze down at child on lap while playing piano.  Window to front shows view to forest.  Piano stool on top of animal skin – mankind dominates animal life?  Child’s shoes cast aside on floor?	2’6’ x 3’6”	Victorian narrative painting.  Mother and child @ piano.  Teacher and moral instructor of child.  Music uplifting, and love and respect for nature as of God’s creation.
Charlotte Nasmyth 1804-1884 Romantic artist as young woman.  Fresh blond complexion.  White empire line dress – muslin.  Holding flowers morning glory (affection), buttercup  (riches) and rosebud (youth), and sketchbook.  Demure.	2’ x 2’6”	Father gave same education to girls as sons.  Daughters taught art.  She became professional artist of romantic landscapes and exhibited widely
Pheobe Anne Traquair 1852-1936 Working cap and smock.  Imperious gaze.  Formidable.	Sculpture, bust	Painter, Illuminator, embroiderer, enameller.  Had 3 children with paleontologist husband

Susan Ferrier 1782-1854 Severe and chaste.  Imperious.	Sculpture, bust	Satirical novelist on subject of marriage.  A clever, caustic mind.  Independent minded and characterful heroines in her writing.  Devout and charitable.  Emancipated slaves.  A serious woman, taken seriously.
Anne Grant 1755-1838 Silhouette at writing desk.  Plump and imperious.  Absolutely upright on chair.  Books and quills.  Inkpot and pen	7” x 5”	Widowed.  Supported self and 8 children by writing. Scott descrbed her as a bluestocking.  Straightbacked and formidable
Margaret Oliphant 1828-1897  Pencil drawing.  Demure black dress, no collar.  Muslin cap.  Cross and chain x 2.  Sad look.	10” x 12” Pencil	Writer of novels.  Prolific.  Widowed by 30, 3 children.  Heroines resourceful single women.  Age of science, enlightenment and progress.  She believed it was definitely the age of the female novelist.
Jane Carlyle Ballgown and ringlets.  High fashion society.  Affluent.	3” x 4” enamel	Obscured by husband Thomas Carlyle.  Her writings cast a satirical eye on social scene.  Wit, sarcasm, sharpness and humour.

Critiquing what I have recorded, I note it is a bit inconsistent.  I have recorded what occurred to me when looking at the images, rather than always considering where the gaze lies, or what the angle of the chin is.  It is the angle of the chin that makes me think these women appear imperious, or defiant. So what is the difference between the two?  The chin is always up, but to be imperious, the gaze is down.  And with defiant, the chin is up and the gaze is level.

I think the portraits of women in the 19th century had significance in their size, particularly when representing people of a particular faith.  The Scottish protestant churches were noted for their frugality. Perhaps a small portrait gave status from the act of portraiture, but frugality and deference to God meant the image was restrained, respectful and deferential.

The bigger images were of 20th century women, royalty and affluent thinkers of their day.