Melody's Blog

Abstract Expressionism: The Making of a Heroic Art

Abstract Expressionism: The Making of a Heroic Art

OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION

1. Class Participation!!
   1. Word Association – write down what gender you typically think of with the following words
      1. i.      “L.K.”
      2. ii.      “Nude”
      3. iii.      “Heroic”
   2. Discuss what everyone wrote and why they wrote it
   3. L.K. – genderless purposefully (to be discussed later)
   4. Nude – female
   5. Heroic – male
      1. i.      The calling of Abstract Expressionism as a “heroic” art leaves little room for a woman’s place.

1. Clement Greenberg’s “American-Type Painting”
   1. Greenberg says that Abstract Expressionism is progressive – but for art’s sake, not for society (women have no place there)
   2. Language
      1. i.      Look at the language he uses to describe Pollock’s art
         1. We will compare this language to how Krasner’s art is described later in the discussion
      2. ii.      Does Greenberg leave any room for women to have a role in Abstract Expressionism?
      3. iii.      Are women able to have a role in art, specifically the Abs-Exp?
      4. iv.      How would Greenberg have reacted if a woman painted in the Abstract Expressionist style?

1. Harold Rosenberg’s “The American Action Painters”
   1. Rosenberg gives his own interpretation of what Abstract Expressionism is, specifically that it focuses on the action of painting as opposed to the previous focus on the sketch and product of a work.
   2. Language: Does it allow for female art?

1. Anne M. Wagner’s “Lee Krasner as L.K.”
   1. Initials and Names: Are they gendered?
      1. i.      L.K. is purposefully androgynous
      2. ii.      She refused to sign many of her works – in fact, it is mentioned that Pollock signed some of them for her.  Why?
      3. iii.      She chose to go by Lee instead of Leonore, again choosing a more ambiguous name for herself.
         1. Compare to Nochlin’s example of Meret Oppenheim, a distinctly androgynous name
   2. Krasner vs. Pollock
      1. i.      She destroyed many of her works that resembled his style.  Why do you think she did this?
      2. ii.      During their marriage, Krasner’s lack of self-identified art was an effort to establish herself artistically as related to Jackson Pollock in a non-gendered way.
      3. iii.      Her art is typically more masculine, a conscious decision to separate herself from feminists/women artists as well defining herself individually than with Pollock.
         1. Why would she choose a masculine style of painting?
      4. iv.      La donnesco mano: the female hand
         1. Krasner lacks any kind of feminity in her art – and the paintings that contained any delicate style were later destroyed by the artist.
         2. She removed any kind of gender out of her art.
         3. Page 429
      5. v.      Her art is described as “quiet” and “harmonious” – an “understated presence”
         1. Pollock’s art is viewed as aggressive, violent, etc.
            1. How does this separate her from Pollock?
            2. How does this further separate her from women’s art?
            3. How does it simultaneously bring her closer to women’s art?
      6. vi.      Pollock’s art, as described by Greenberg: “allusive and altogether original vocabulary of Baroque shapes with which he twisted Cubist space to make it speak with his own vehemence.”
   3. Krasner as a wife
      1. i.      Why would Krasner give up her art for Pollock?
         1. Was it a decision she made willingly or because she is a woman and therefore subservient?
         2. Judith Leyster’s art took a back seat to her husband’s more prolific art (Jan Miense Molenaer)
      2. ii.      The irony of Krasner as a housewife – seeing herself as “Mrs. Jackson Pollock” instead of “Lee Krasner”
         1. Making jelly on a Saturday morning instead of painting (refer back to article)
   4. Krasner after Pollock’s death
      1. i.      How do you think she reacted to articles describing her art after Pollock’s death?
         1. “found her own voice”
         2. came “out of the shadows”
   5. Krasner as a woman
      1. i.      She refused to associate herself with feminism or any kind of femininity.  Why would she make that choice?

1. How does gender play into Krasner’s art?

1. Abstract Expressionism is inherently a man’s style – the aggression flowing through Pollock’s art, as an example.
   1. Can it even be recreated with a feminine hand?
   2. Does gender need to be taken out completely for this style?

1. Abstract Expressionism is typically the “boys’ club” – there was no room for any female artists.
   1. If Krasner hadn’t put her work on hold for Pollock, had she actually focused on her own style, would she have been accepted into the club?  Or would she have been rejected?
   2. Would she have been accepted because she removed gender from her art?
   3. If there was gender in her art, if the “female hand” was seen, would she still have been accepted?