I went to see the Gee's Bend quilts at the Indianapolis Museum of Art Dec 30 with my boyfriend Bryan.
With a very few exceptions, I found the vintage fabrics more interesting than the finished quilts, and the very early quilts more interesting than the contemporary (2000 and later; after the quilters were "discovered"). You could tell when they realized that people were comparing their quilts to "modern art" and "African heritage" and they decided to start making their quilts look like modern art and kente cloth.
At the risk of being decried as a racist or a "wingnut," I'm pretty sure the only reason these quilts are getting the attention they've been getting for the past five years is because the quilters are the descendants of former slaves. I say this because most of what I saw hanging on the walls at the museum I've seen in dozens of antique malls and garage sales around the rural Midwest--recycled materials, big sloppy stitches, utility over design--and no one will ever claim that in 1940, Loretta Whitebread from central Illinois was working toward any sort of aesthetic transcending her subsistence existence. No one will ever hang Loretta Whitebread's rectangles of polyester double-knit on the wall and talk about their cultural significance with a straight face. It seems like the "soft bigotry of low expectations" to consider such lowly quilts high art because the makers are black when you wouldn't look at them twice if the makers were white; are the perceived benefits of "inclusiveness" enough to justify throwing out the standards? And if so, can my crappy quilts be high art?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
One difference I did notice is that Loretta Whitebread tends to break up large fields of intense colors into little bits surrounded by white, and the Gee's Bend ladies weren't afraid to put the scarlet next to the evergreen. From a material history viewpoint, you can study the quilts to determine some differences between Gee's Bend society and rural Illinois society. But I still don't buy that either of them are art.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Friends of mine that got to see the Gee's Bend quilts in person have commented only on the size, composition and color. Looking at them not as quilts but as art. Then the quilting doesn't have to be good. I only have a big book of the work and everything looks great in a big, colorful art book. I didn't get to see the quilts when they were at the Milwaukee Art Museum. I don't have a comment about how they look in person, but in the book they look great and I adore them.
As an African-American woman, I am glad that these poverty stricken women are getting some acclaim and hopefully some cash and improvements to their lifestyle. If they are getting it because of being the descendants of slaves...MORE POWER TO THEM. We Blacks are all the descendants of slaves here in America. The Whitebread family gets ahead because of not being black or because they fell off the boat in the colonies.
Don't forget, someone caucasian "discovered" the Gee's Bend quilters...like they were lost or something. My husband has family that lives the same way. Barely realizing that slavery is over. It's sick. So, I'm glad for everything positive these women receive.
Also, the beauty of compositional necessity is something that is truly an African-American trait. That's why we seem to collectively have a fearless use of color.
I've totally lost my train of thought if I had one, but I decided to comment on this because I'm SO HAPPY that you thought they weren't that great as artifacts unto themselves. Then, they really are art because most historically significant art is based in some sort of great social realization or happening. The reason WHY these quilts exist and the way their makers still live in this technological age and the fact that someone discovered them and is exploiting them is a social hammer in the head. Good for you for speaking your mind. Always worth it.
Sonji
Post a Comment