I held an evening intervention in the gallery space with a few women (obvs it’s always women who come and also the space is small so it was just 6 of us). It went great. This was the first then I have facilitated groups like this with the art directly in the space and it was really interesting to see the difference it made. It’s also worth noting that this group of women are less familiar to each other than in previous similar interventions were many of the participants were friends or familiar with each other. These women are all of a similar age also, another time it would be great to mix that up more.
When beginning to talk about the work I read the artists statement and elaborated a little, letting the conversation goes where it needs to. To begin with I feel the participants were holding back a little in the way people unsure about art might be, perhaps worried about having an answer, but they all absolutely warmed to it all quickly and responded to both the work and each other amazingly. I know by now that this happens very often at the beginning of a session like this but that I can use both art and information to gently break down those tentative boundaries and everything opens up.
It was great and so informative and interesting to see their responses to the work. I can totally understand some of their aversions or disconnections to some pieces, particularly those artists who use recontextualisation of contemporary media images within their aesthetic language. Including collage in a way, Gen Z and beyond speak a language of images and it seems only natural that it becomes the vocabulary with which they make art also. This isn’t the same for my generation or those before us.
Lots of great topics were covered and we didn’t even get to all of the work but it didn’t matter. I ended the session with two quotes. The one from Nina Hartley that talks about societies getting the porn they deserve and the one from Everyday Sexism founder Laura Bates interviewed by The Times (I’ll put them both in this blog also) As I think the two help sum up why art is important in this context and also the motivations behind the project well.
At the end the participants wrote answers on post-its to the posters on the walls (well the doors actually) of the show in answer to the open ended questions. I have also left these on the doors of the exhibition for the duration and so have been collecting them over time. The feedback from the women was massively positive and they all were in agreement they would like to participate in similar events in the future or a regular one. Something I thankfully and gratefully hear from all the women who ever come to these interventions.
If done again I would do the location differently, whether art is involved or not it needs to be a comfier space. Primarily though some thought needs to be given to how to shift that initial hesitation to say what you think about art or have an answer for it. That wasn’t as strong when I showed people images of art – – – – totally reflecting what Lydia Durnall says in her exhibition text about when a “painting of a rose is a painting of a photo of a rose” —— There is something about seeing an image of the work rather than the work itself that is more comfortable, accessible or familiar perhaps. I’m not entirely sure how you shift that and I have learnt from the journey of this project that you can’t shift everyone and everything. But I think it deserves more iterations before you give up on the idea entirely. I think also I would structure a session around only 1-3 pieces of work. Carefully put together, that would be enough. Given that it’s hard to talk about art on an audio podcast or live stream etc and it’s maybe uncomfortable to be in the room with the work itself perhaps just showing digital images to a real life crowd is the way forward.