Katherine Dzengelewski

November 4, 2015
Crafty Women and the Heirarchy of the Arts
Rozsika Parker and Griselda Pollocks book, Old Mistresses: Women,
Art, and Ideology, investigates the historical and cultural prejudices that
lead to the current hierarchy of arts that is often taken for granted as a true
indicator of value. What Parker and Pollock suggest is that the art forms that
are disregarded as craft or lesser art have been given that status as a
result of their history of predominantly female artists. Embroidery, needlework, and flower- painting, for example, have been given less respect than
sculpture, architecture, and paintings made for museums or public
appearances. In this essay, I will outline some of Parker and Pollocks ideas,
comparing them to the ideas of other thinkers as well as my own.
Parker and Pollock begin by looking at the history of flower painting, a
form of still- life that began in 16th century Europe. It was not until flower
painting became a common genre for female artists, in the late 18th century,
that it began being describes as petty, decorative, or requiring little skill.
Late 19th century writer Leon Legrange wrote, Let women occupy
themselves with those kinds of art they have always preferred the
paintings of flowers, those prodigies of grace and freshness which alone can
compete with the grace and freshness of women themselves (Parker and
Pollock, 1995). This is a very telling comment about the general attitude
about art done by females at that time. Not only was it seen as having no

real value other than a way of occupying women, but it was seen as nothing
more than an extension of female nature, implying that it is also effortless.
Next, Parker and Pollock investigate the history of embroidery, an art
form that was once produced in organized, male- controlled workshops, with
the collaboration of men and women. It wasnt until around the Elizabethan
era that large- scale embroidery production ended, and domestic embroidery
gained increasing importance. This was when it became primarily womens
work, which served the cause of maintaining class position of the family.
Women ornamented clothes and furniture in order to express a refined
lifestyle and the domestic female values of selfless service.
Women were expected to decorate their husbands and their homes
with beautiful embroideries, and their skill was closely tied to their sense of
worth in society. From childhood, girls would learn to stitch on samplers in
order to acquire the prescribed feminine characteristics: patience,
submissiveness, service, obedience and modesty (Parker and Pollock,
1995). Although this work was expected, it was very much under- valued.
Again, it was seen as being an extension of the female spirit, which was
petty, lifeless, and [] strictly limited (Hoernes and Menghin, 1925). Like
Parker and Pollock, I am appalled by this statement, which not only devalues
the work that women do, but also insults everything about female nature.
In order to see woven art for what it truly is, a spectator must address
the historical ideas about the females who made them. For example, Navajo
Indian blankets have been displayed in several major museums, and critics

attempt to forget who made them in order to appreciate them like any other
work of art. I am going to forget, in order to really see them, that a group of
Navajo blankets are not only that. In order to consider them, as I feel they
ought to be considered as Art with a capital A I am going to look at them
as paintings created with dye instead of pigment, on unstretched fabric
instead of canvas by several nameless masters of abstract art (Navajo
Abstraction, 1974).
While I think the critic makes an important first step of acknowledging
that his personal perspective creates a lens that alters the way he views art,
I do not think that lens can or should be put aside entirely. I agree much
more with Hans- Georg Gadamer, who believes that when we bring our own
culture, history, and feelings to a work of art, and acknowledge that we come
from that unique place, we can see a work with much more perspective.
Gadamer believes that a work enables the viewer to enter into a
conversation with the artist, even if they are living in different times and
places, as well as a conversation with all other spectators, trying to
understand anothers viewpoint. The more that viewers allow themselves to
understand a work of art fully, the more they are able to consequently
understand themselves more deeply. Self- understanding always occurs
through understanding something other than the self, and includes unity and
integrity of the other (Gadamer, 1975).
Aesthetics writer Gordon Graham also agrees with the idea that art has
a great capacity to enhance understanding, which differs from enhancing

knowledge. Understanding, according to Graham, is the awakening to a new

perspective on reality. We can only accomplish this, he says, through
viewing the world against art, rather than checking art against the world
(Graham, 1997). By neglecting to call flower-painting and needlework art,
we deny ourselves the opportunity to see the world more fully. A true
appreciation of these art forms, I believe, reveals that women once
experienced more freedom and imagination through their art than they were
allowed in any other aspect of their lives. Because of this, their art can be
seen as having a uniquely profound purpose and window into their
experiences.
Another form of artwork that Parker and Pollock discuss is blanket
weaving. Blanket weaving is a particularly unique form of art because it
serves a practical, functional purpose. According to Immanuel Kant, true art
cannot serve a functional purpose, or its functional purpose must be
overlooked. Again, I lean more towards Gadamers perspective, which is that
the viewer must attempt to see every aspect of the art fully in order to
engage in a sort of conversation with the artist. Attempting to overlook the
functional purpose of the quilts women made for their families, for example,
implies that what is made for families or homes is not as valuable as what is
made for museums or for public admiration.
Similarly, cooking is a form of art that is overwhelmingly a womans
work. It has a functional purpose of feeding and sustaining the family, but it
is also a creative task that transforms nature into culture. This is one of the

many flaws to the notion that women are closer to nature, while men create
culture. Interestingly, however, when a culture develops a tradition of
haute cuisine real cooking as opposed to trivial, ordinary, domestic
cookingthe high chefs are always men. Thus the pattern replicates that
[]women perform lower level conversions from nature to culture (Rosaldo,
1974).
Like Parker and Pollock, I see a strong connection to female history and
the current hierarchy of the arts. Today, as I went to the exhibition of Elaine
McBride, I realized it was the first time I had ever seen embroidery in a public
art exhibition. It was incredible to see and hear about the love, inspiration,
and dedication that goes into her work, and all I could think about was how
far it was from being limited, petty, or mindless as it has often been
viewed in the past. Although I do not believe art has to be in a museum to
be valuable, I hope that more artists like Elaine McBride are able to have
their artwork seen and appreciated, and that the attitude towards these
traditionally female art-forms continues to shift. I believe that these
traditionally female artworks of the past and present, if given a little more
recognition, can help society move away from the long- withstanding
prejudices towards women and their contributions.

Works Cited
Gadamer, Hans. Truth and Method. New York: Seabury, 1975. Print.
Graham, Gordon. Philosophy of the Arts an Introduction to Aesthetics. London: Routledge,
1997. Print.

Hoernes, Moritz, and Oswald Menghin. Urgeschichte Der Bildenden Kunst in Europa Von Den
Anfangen Bis Um 500 Vor Christi,. 3. Aufl. ed. Wien: A. Schroll, 1925. Print.
Kant, Immanuel, and J. H. Bernard. Critique of Judgment. New York: Hafner Pub., 1951. Print.
Navajo Abstraction, Art and Artists, 1974, p.30.
Parker, Rozsika, and Griselda Pollock. Old Mistresses Women, Art and Ideology. New ed. 1995.
Print.
Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist. Woman, Culture, and Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1974.
Print.