The dinner party

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Dinner Party , art installation by Judy Chicago

The Dinner Party is an installation by the American feminist artist Judy Chicago , which aims to depict the history of women in Western civilization on the basis of individual important women. In addition, 39 lavishly arranged place settings are displayed on a banquet table. Each place setting represents a well-known woman from mythology or history. The individual place settings are arranged in such a way that they form a table in the shape of an equilateral triangle .

At each seat there is an individually designed, hand-painted porcelain plate on a table runner, which is embroidered with the respective name as well as applications and a gold border. A ceramic cutlery and a bright, inside gold-colored porcelain cup also part of the place setting. Almost all plates are designed either to identify the invited guests with pictures or symbols of their achievements or in the form of stylized flowers or butterflies. Chicago takes up the cultural contribution of the placeholder. She chose the butterfly motif as a poetic paraphrase for depicting the anatomical variations of a vulva . The dinner table is on a floor that consists of more than 2000 white glazed triangular tiles. These have a further 999 names of mythically or historically significant women in gold letters .

The installation was made from 1974 to 1979. Afterwards, various museums showed the work of art before it became part of the permanent collection of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art in the Brooklyn Museum in New York in 2007 .

history

Emergence

Judy Chicago's work was preceded by the premise that the accomplishments of women in history were mostly concealed. Women need their energies in the fight waste, on the culture share , rather than equal mitzuformen . The work of art was supposed to show the achievements of women in human history and at the same time also the tragedies that resulted from the oppression of women.

Work began with the much smaller project, Twenty-Five Women Who Were Eaten Alive , in which Chicago combined butterfly and vulva images with her interest in Chinese porcelain painting. The motif of the butterfly-vulva pictures can already be found in her early works from 1972–1975, which is a synthesis of the depiction of butterfly and vulva. Chicago soon expanded the project to 39 women, arranged in three groups of 13 each. The triangle is often seen as a symbol for the feminine, which is why Chicago liked to use it with this meaning in their works. The number 13 corresponds to the number of people at the Last Supper . This is an important reference for Chicago as only men were present.

With The Dinner Party, the artist pursued the goal of "ending the ongoing cycle of omission with which women were written from the historical record". The selected personalities are intended to exemplify the historical achievements of women in Western culture. The work pays tribute to the traditionally female forms of art, such as textile art (weaving, embroidery, sewing) and porcelain painting , which are often little valued as handicrafts . Chicago's concern was for The Dinner Party to be recognized as a work of art with intention and message.

It took six years to complete the dinner party . Chicago worked on the work alone for three years before bringing in others. Over the past three years, over 400 people, mostly volunteers , have contributed to the implementation. 125 of them were named “members of the project”, indicating their long-term involvement. The helpers included female and male ceramists , sewers , stickers and researchers. The cost was approximately $ 250,000, which does not include the work of the volunteers.

Exhibitions

At the opening event at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art on March 14, 1979, 5,000 visitors viewed the work of art; during the three-month exhibition there were around 100,000. The subsequent nine-year international tour started in Clear Lake City ( Texas ) at the University of Houston-Clear Lake within the University of Houston System , followed by the Boston Center for the Arts in Boston in 1980 , the former Jewish place of worship in Cleveland Heights , Cleveland im 1981, Chicago , Atlanta and three museums in Canada . Over a million people in Europe saw the work, including at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe in Scotland, 1984 in the London warehouse and the Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt in May / June 1987. The tour ended in 1988 with the exhibition in the Australian Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne and the subsequent storage at the National Museum of Women in the Arts in Washington, as there was not enough exhibition space to present it.

In 1990 Chicago donated her work to the Congress- administered University of the District of Columbia . It was intended to be on permanent display in the former Carnegie library that was part of the university campus as part of the growing collection of multicultural art. The trustees planned the renovation and repair of the intended building from funds that would not burden the current budget of the university. Ultimately, the trustees rejected this move after Congressmen spoke out on television against the installation, which they viewed as pornographic and offensive, and the Washington Times falsely reported that the work had been banned by several art galleries across the country for depicting female genitals on the plates. and that the trustees would spend nearly $ 1.6 million to acquire and display such a controversial work of art.

The only other exhibition of the installation took place in 1996 at the Armand Hammer Museum of Art under the title Sexual Politics: Judy Chicago's Dinner Party in Feminist Art History , curated by Amelia Jones. The plant was then put back into storage.

Elizabeth A. Sackler , philanthropist, art collector, and board member of the Brooklyn Museum, began considering options for purchasing the artwork. In 2002 the Elizabeth A. Sackler Foundation, which she founded, acquired the installation and donated it to the Brooklyn Museum . The following special exhibition in the museum was visited by 80,000 people. After the completion of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art in the Brooklyn Museum building, The Dinner Party has been on permanent display as a central work of art since March 2007, accompanied by changing exhibitions of feminist art. By the end of 2017, 1.5 million people had visited the exhibition. On the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Sackler Center, the special exhibition Roots of 'The Dinner Party': History in the Making was shown, and at the same time Inside 'The Dinner Party' Studio at the National Museum of Women in the Arts in Washington.

description

The whiteboard

The massive tablet is triangular in shape and measures 48 feet (14.63 m) on each side. With 13 place settings on each of the three sides, there is a total of 39 seats. On the first side of the board there are seats for historical or fictional people from prehistory to the emergence and decline of classical antiquity . The section begins with primeval goddesses and ends with Hypatia of Alexandria during the Roman Empire . The second page begins with Saint Marcella and covers the rise of Christianity . He concluded with Anna Maria von Schürmann in the seventeenth century at the time of the Reformation . The third page represents the "Age of Revolution ". It begins with Anne Hutchinson and runs from the American Revolution through the twentieth century to the first and second waves of feminist upheaval and ends with the places of Virginia Woolf and Georgia O'Keeffe .

The 39 women seated at the blackboard are:

Page I: Prehistory up
to the Roman Empire
1. Primordial Deity
2. Fertility Goddess
3. Ištar
4. Kali
5. Snake Goddess
6. Sophia
7. Amazons
8. Hatshepsut
9. Judith
10. Sappho
11. Aspasia
12. Boudicca
13. Hypatia

Page II: Christianization
up to the Reformation
14. Marcella
15. Brigida von Kildare
16. Theodora I.
17. Hrotsvit
18. Trota
19. Eleanor of Aquitaine
20. Hildegard von Bingen
21. Petronilla de Meath
22. Christine de Pizan
23. Isabella d Este
24. Elisabeth I.
25. Artemisia Gentileschi
26. Anna Maria von Schürmann

Page III: American Revolution
to the Women's Movement
27. Anne Hutchinson
28. Sacajawea
29. Caroline Herschel
30. Mary Wollstonecraft
31. Sojourner Truth
32. Susan B. Anthony
33. Elizabeth Blackwell
34. Emily Dickinson
35. Ethel Smyth
36. Margaret Sanger
37 . Natalie Barney
38. Virginia Woolf
39. Georgia O'Keeffe

Due to the triangular shape of the board, there are corners in each of the three points on which three different, triangular Millennium runners lie. These are provided with embroidery inspired by altar cloths. All three were embroidered with white threads over a white background using different techniques and have the letter "M" in their center. This letter is the thirteenth letter of the alphabet and with the Millennium Runner the three thematically divided areas of the board are interrupted and separated after every thirteen women.

The place settings

Table runners and place settings on the dinner table

Each seat is equipped with a table runner embroidered with the woman's name and the pictures or symbols that illustrate her achievements. The embroidery was done using the techniques customary at the time of the named woman. In addition, a napkin, a goblet and a plate belong to each place. Except for two, all plates have a butterfly, flower or vulva-like shape (for a description of each individual place setting and table runners, see the list of 999 women on the Heritage Floor ). The one from Sojourner Truth is adorned with three stylized faces. Truth is the only African American woman represented by a place setting at the table, and Chicago picked that up in the design. The African stripe weaving technique on its runner was a textile method traditionally used by slaves. The other place setting is dedicated to Ethel Smyth . It forms a three-dimensional piano model and stands on a table runner that looks like a man's jacket. Smyth liked to dress in such a jacket and the runner is meant to remind, and the design of the table setting expresses that Smyth was not only an activist for women's rights and an advocate for the rights of women musicians in the early 20th century, but also an important composer.

The plates, representing the earliest women historically, were modeled flat by Chicago. The closer the representations get to the present, the higher the reliefs are designed. This is supposed to symbolize the gradual independence and equality of the modern woman, even if she is not yet free from social restrictions. The work also includes supplementary written information such as banners, timelines and publications with background information about each woman and the process of creating the work.

The Heritage Floor

The ground beneath the panel is from Chicago as a symbol of our heritage , (German: symbol of our cultural heritage) described. This story floor should be the literal and symbolic foundation of the banquet table. The Heritage Floor under the blackboard and in the interior space that remains free is laid out with 2304 white, triangular handcrafted porcelain floor tiles. The tiles were made by hand in the China Boutique outside of Los Angeles. They were burned several times with rainbow and gold sheen. The process of creating the Heritage Floor took more than two years. From a list of around 3000 compiled names, a team of twenty members selected 999 women whose names were inscribed on the tiles. At least one of the following criteria had to be met for admission:

  1. She has made a valuable contribution to society;
  2. She tried to improve the lot of other women;
  3. Her life and work have highlighted important aspects of women's history;
  4. It offers a role model for a more equal future.

The names of the 999 women on the Heritage Floor are assigned to the place settings on the table. They are written on the tiles below the table setting and flow from there into the space within the table.

The installation includes seven wall panels that contain information about the women represented in the work of art. These wall panels are large-format, hand-colored photo and text collages. They relate the women mentioned on the floor tiles to those who have been given a place setting. As with the Heritage Floor, the names listed on the Heritage Panels are arranged under the corresponding place setting. For example, on the floor under the table setting for Artemisia Gentileschi there are other artists; the names of other earlier goddesses are assigned to the table setting of the original deity.

The names of the women are accompanied by biographical information, photographs of related works of art, and other images. In addition, there are short passages that describe the circumstances under which they dealt with Gerechti

Some mistakes have crept into the work of art. So there are several women who are listed by two inscriptions with different historical names. In addition, a place setting was dedicated to Hatshepsut , but it is also listed under the name Hashop on the Heritage Floor. There Hashop is assigned to the Hatshepsut table setting.

With Kresilas , at Chicago Cresilla , there is also a man on the list. Judy Chicago erroneously assumed that Cresilla was an ancient female sculptor.

reception

1980-1981

The Dinner Party was discussed very controversially. Feminist art theorist Lucy Lippard wrote, "My own first experience was deeply emotional ... the longer I studied the work, the more addicted I became to its complex details and hidden meanings," defending the work as an excellent example of the feminist Engagements. These reactions were shared by other critics, and the work has been praised by many. The American artist, poet and art critic John Perreault described the installation as a great key work.

However, the immediate criticisms of the work were just as clear. For example, the New York Times art critic Hilton Kramer argued, “ The Dinner Party repeats its theme - the glorification of real and mythological women through all ages - with a persistence and vulgarity that may be more appropriate to an advertising campaign than a work of art. “He not only called the work“ kitsch ”, but also described it as“ rough and dogged, ... very bad art, ... failed art, ... art that is so frozen in awe of something that it cannot actually develop an artistic life of its own ”.

Maureen Mullarkey , American painter, author, and art critic for the Catholic magazine Commonweal , described the work as moralizing and untrue about the women it seeks to represent. In particular, she criticized a generalizing reduction of all women to gender-specific stereotypes that contradicted the feminist cause. She also questioned the hierarchical aspect of the work, claiming that Chicago took advantage of its female volunteers. Mullarkey particularly criticizes the fact that women did the work to be carried out on a voluntary basis, even bearing their own travel expenses, while four experts were paid to supervise this work, three of whom (for pottery, tapestry and industrial design) were men. Mullarkey's criticism focused on specific place settings, citing Emily Dickinson, Virginia Woolf, and Georgia O'Keeffe as examples of why Chicago's work was disrespectful to the women depicted. Their portrayal falsifies the achievements of women by blocking out large parts of their artistic and social work and reducing women to their gender.

The artist Maria Manhattan satirized the work with her counter-exhibition “The Box Lunch”, advertised as “a major art event in honor of 39 women of dubious importance”, which ran in November and December 1980 in a gallery in SoHo .

Later reception

Critics like Mullarkey said in later years that they had not changed their minds about the dinner party , while many later reactions to the work were moderate or appreciative, if only by giving the installation a value due to its continued importance .

Amelia Jones, for example, looks at the work in its art-historical context in order to analyze the critical reactions. She attributes Hilton Kramer's rejection of the piece to the transfer of modernist views to art and says that "the work obviously undermines the modernist value system that prefers the 'pure' aesthetics of an object to the well-worn sentimentality of popular art ." (Im Original: the piece blatantly subverts modernist value systems, which privilege the 'pure' aesthetic object over the debased sentimentality of the domestic and popular arts. ) Jones also attacks the argument of some critics that The Dinner Party is not an upscale one because of its great popularity Art belongs. While Kramer saw this popularity as a sign of inferior quality, Lippard and Chicago believed that the statement that the work can appeal to a larger audience should be assessed as a positive quality. Regarding the question of whether the dinner party is a collaborative project, Amelia Jones argues, “Chicago itself never referred to the project as collaborative or non-hierarchical. She insisted that The Dinner Party was neither conceived nor presented as a joint project in the general sense of the word. [...] You have repeatedly emphasized that The Dinner Party was a cooperative project in the sense that the successful completion contained a clear hierarchy, but also a cooperative way of working, and not a collaborative project. "

The depiction of the “butterfly vaginas” continues to be both highly criticized and appreciated. In 1990 Congressman Robert K. Dornan summed up the view of many conservatives in his statement that it was "ceramic 3D pornography", while some feminists found the works problematic due to their essential passivity. However, the work fits into the feminist movement of the 1970s, which glorifies and focuses on the female body. Other feminists disagree with the main idea of ​​the work, which propagates a universal female experience that does not exist. For example, lesbians and women of all ethnicities that are not white or European are underrepresented in the work.

On the occasion of the Frankfurt exhibition in 1987, Christoph Vitali wrote that the dinner party offered important assistance in “understanding the contribution of women to world history as an integral part of human history”, “by calling attention to achievements - and suffering - that all too often suppress become".

Gisela Brackert is of the opinion that the sometimes vehement criticism cannot be attached to materials, colors or shapes, but rather arises from the context in which Judy Chicago places these symbols. “This connection is called history, oppression and suffering of women. [...] It is this connection that makes the object so difficult to bear for many, not the signs related in this connection. This connection has a name: feminism. […] For too long, talk went from man to man in art. That she is going from woman to woman here is the real scandal. This - and not any formal provocations - sparked the resistance of the art scene [...] The dinner party calls into question the very fundamental rules of the game ”.

Hannes Stein sees the work as an "impressive installation", "... breathtaking, sublime, a bit crazy - and of course it's kitsch".

Verena Auffermann titled the work on the occasion of the exhibition at the Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt in 1987 as “purest American kitsch”.

The art critic and art reviewer for the New York Times , Roberta Smith , wrote about the work that it was just as much a part of American culture as Norman Rockwell , Walt Disney or the AIDS quilt and was just as controversial. She expressed "that its historical influence and its social significance could be greater than its aesthetic value". She explained that the details in the installation were not worked out equally. Smith thinks the runners seem livelier, more detailed and more varied than the plates. In addition, the runners would become stronger in the course of the work, while the plates, on the other hand, would become weaker, more monotonous and exaggerated the further the work progressed. She also notes that the backs of the runners are hidden from view and that these are perhaps the best and most expressive parts of the installation.

The artist Cornelia Parker described The Dinner Party as a work that she would like to see “packed in a container”. She said, “There are too many vaginas for my taste. In my opinion, it's more about Judy Chicago's ego than the poor women she supposedly honors - we're all reduced to vaginas and that's a little depressing. It is actually the largest work of art of victimization to date . And it takes up so much space that I really like the idea of ​​keeping it in a tiny container - it's not really feminist, but in my opinion it's not this work either. "

In her book on The Dinner Party , published in 2013, Jane Gerhard, who holds a doctorate in American studies , takes up isolated reviews that criticized the limited presentation of non-European women. She argues that Chicago and her team were not guided by a desire to tell a global, transnational story of women, which they might have done if they started work ten years later. Rather, US gender politics and the issues that were most dear to the heart of US white feminists of the early 1970s would have shaped the vision of the story Chicago tells through The Dinner Party . The concern to highlight the discrimination against women on the basis of their female body - a view that was predominantly articulated by white middle-class women - would be embedded in the dinner party , while other issues such as welfare rights, feminist aspirations of black women or lesbian- and would not find gay discrimination again. As a result, the story of women as portrayed at the dinner party is incomplete. Against the background of a culturally oriented US feminism, the work of art should best be understood as a symbolic genealogy , not as a representation of global women's history.

Esther Allen, professor at Baruch College and CUNY Graduate Center , criticized in 2018 during a review of the exhibition "Radical Women: Latin American Art, 1960–1985" at the Brooklyn Museum that Spanish, Portuguese or Latin American women were not chosen for any of the 39 place settings. Chicago replies that most of the names of the women named by all are on the Heritage Floor. As one reason for the underrepresentation of this group, she cites that when the Dinner Party was first established in the 1970s, her research “was done before the advent of computers, the Internet, or Google searches” and little or no knowledge of these women was available in order to be able to represent it appropriately on the board.

Criticism of the portrayal of black women

For the table setting of Sojourner Truth , the only black woman at the table, Chicago chose the depiction of three faces with design elements of African masks and American quilts that grow out of a body shape. The left face, with a large falling tear, weep the suffering of the slaves, the stylized right one reflects the anger that black women experienced, but could only be expressed at the risk of severe punishment - sometimes to the point of death. The middle face in the form of a richly decorated mask symbolizes the veiling of the true self, which is required not only by black women, but also by their white sisters. On the floor tiles there are other names of black women that are assigned to different place settings.

In 1984 the African-American literary critic, feminist and professor at Vanderbilt University , Hortense J. Spillers published her critical article "Interstices: A Small Drama of Words", in which she criticized Judy Chicago and The Dinner Party . She contended that Chicago, as a white woman, would once again pursue the eradication of the female sexual identity of black women. Spiller explains this using the Sojourner Truth table setting. After careful inspection, it can be seen that all place settings show clearly designed vaginas, with the exception of that of Sojourner Truth. Spillers writes: "The removal of the female genitals here at this point represents a symbolic castration." By obliterating the genitals, Chicago not only abolishes the disturbing sexuality of her subject, but also hopes to be able to suggest that her sexual being does not exist and can be denied.

Alice Walker , a prominent representative of Afro-American literature , expressed a similar opinion in her essay published in the magazine Ms .: Chicago's ignorance about black women in a historical context (especially painters) is particularly evident in the representation of Sojourner Truth's plate at the dinner party , The only one who shows no vagina, but three faces. She explains: “It struck me that white feminists, like white women in general, may not be able to imagine that black women have vagins. Or that if they can, they are going too far where their imagination leads them ”.

Publications

  • Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party: Restoring Women to History . The Monacelli Press, New York 2014, ISBN 978-1-58093-397-1 .
  • Jane F. Gerhard: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970-2007 (Since 1970: Histories of Contemporary America Ser.) . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-3675-6 , muse.jhu.edu .
  • Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party: From Creation to Preservation . Merrell, London 2007, ISBN 1-85894-370-1 .
  • Judy Chicago: Through The Flower: My Struggle as A Woman Artist . Authors Choice Press, Lincoln 2006, ISBN 0-595-38046-8 .
  • Amelia Jones: Sexual Politics: Judy Chicago's Dinner Party in Feminist Art History . University of California Press, Berkeley 1996, ISBN 0-520-20565-0 .
  • Judy Chicago, Susan Hill: Embroidering Our Heritage. The Dinner Party Needlework . Anchor, New York 1980, ISBN 0-385-14569-1 .
  • Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party: A Symbol of our Heritage . Anchor, New York 1979, ISBN 0-385-14567-5 .

Film documentaries

  • Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party - A Tour of The Exhibition on YouTube , October 3, 2012, video, 41 min. Retrieved June 30, 2017
  • Johanna Demetrakas: Right Out of History: The making of Judy Chicago's "Dinner Party" . DVD, Phoenix Learning Group, 2008, 75 min.

Web links

Commons : The Dinner Party  - collection of pictures, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d Maura Reilly (founding curator) of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art, Brooklyn Museum: Tour and Home . Retrieved June 30, 2017
  2. ^ Judy Chicago, Durch die Bume , Rowohlt, Hamburg, 1984, p. 243
  3. ↑ Emma LE Rees: The Vagina: A Literary and Cultural History . Bloomsbury Academic, London / New York 2013, ISBN 978-1-62356-871-9 , p. 156
  4. ^ A b c d Lucy R. Lippard : Judy Chicago's Dinner Party . In: Art in America , Vol. 68, No. 4, April 1980, pp. 114-126.
  5. ↑ Shirley Ardener: A note on gender iconography: the vagina . In: The Cultural Construction of Sexuality . Pat Caplan (Ed.), Routledge, London / New York 1987, ISBN 978-0-415-04013-6 , p. 131
    Judy Chicago, ACA Galleries: Judy Chicago, the Second Decade, 1973-1983: Exhibition, May 5 -26, 1984 . ACA Galleries, New York 1984
    Cäcilia Rentmeister : Women's Worlds - Men's Worlds: For a new cultural-political education . Springer-Verlag, 1985, ISBN 978-3-322-95493-0 , p. 75
    Mithu Sanyal : Vulva - the revelation of the invisible sex. Verlag Klaus Wagenbach , Berlin 2009, ISBN 978-3-8031-3629-9
    Marie EP König : At the beginning of culture .: The sign language of early humans . Gebrüder Mann Verlag, Berlin 1973; Ullstein, Frankfurt / Berlin / Vienna 1981, ISBN 3-548-36061-0 , p. 210
  6. ^ A b Sarah Cascone: How — and Why — 'The Dinner Party' Became the Most Famous Feminist Artwork of All Time . In: artnet News of November 7, 2017. Retrieved September 21, 2019
  7. ↑ a b c d e f g h Amelia Jones: The Sexual Politics of "The Dinner Party": A Critical Context . In: Reclaiming Female Agency: Feminist Art History After Postmodernism . (Eds.) Norma Broude, Mary D. Garrard. University of California Press, Berkeley 2005, pp. 409-427
  8. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: The Tour That Very Nearly Wasn't: The Dinner Party's Alternative Showings, 1980-1983 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , p. 200.
  9. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: The Tour That Very Nearly Wasn't: The Dinner Party's Alternative Showings, 1980-1983 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , p. 204.
  10. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: Debating Feminist Art: The Dinner Party in Published and Unpublished Commentary, 1979–1989 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , p. 246.
  11. ↑ Camden New Journal: DISHING UP MEANINGFUL ART: A feast of 'Dinner Party' artist Judy Chicago's work , December 13, 2012. Retrieved June 30, 2017
  12. ^ Letter to the editor, in: Frankfurter Rundschau, June 8, 2002, page 8.
  13. ^ Lucy R. Lippard: Uninvited Guests: How Washington Lost "The Dinner Party" . In: Art in America , Vol. 79, No. 12, December 1991, pp. 39-49
  14. ↑ a b c Brooklyn Museum: Place Settings . Retrieved September 21, 2019
  15. ^ Brooklyn Museum: Curatorial Overview. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved September 22, 2019 .
  16. ^ Brooklyn Museum. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved September 22, 2019 .
  17. ^ Brooklyn Museum. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved September 22, 2019 .
  18. ↑ a b Jane F. Gerhard: Going Public: The Dinner Party in San Francisco, 1979 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , p. 174.
  19. ↑ Janet Koplos: The Dinner Party Revisited . In: Art in America , Vol. 91, No. 5, May 2003, pp. 75-77
  20. ^ Judy Chicago, Durch die Bume , Rowohlt, Hamburg, 1984, p. 247
  21. ^ A b Brooklyn Museum: Heritage Floor. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved September 21, 2019 .
  22. ^ A b Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party: From Creation to Preservation . Merrell 2007, London, Heritage panels, p. 289, ISBN 1-85894-370-1
  23. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Heritage Panels. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved September 21, 2019 .
  24. ^ Judy Chicago: The Dinner Party: Restoring Women to History . The Montacelli Press New York 2014.
  25. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Cresilla. In: brooklynmuseum.org. Retrieved November 1, 2019 .
  26. ^ Susan H. Caldwell: Experiencing "The Dinner Party" . Woman's Art Journal 1.2 (Fall 1980 - Winter 1981), pp. 35-37
  27. ^ A b c Hilton Kramer: Art: Judy Chicago's Dinner Party Comes to Brooklyn Museum . The New York Times, October 17, 1980.
  28. ^ A b Maureen Mullarkey: The Dinner Party is a Church Supper: Judy Chicago at the Brooklyn Museum . Commonweal Foundation, 1981.
  29. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Emily Dickinson . Retrieved October 12, 2017
  30. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Virginia Woolf . Retrieved October 12, 2017
  31. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Georgia O'Keeffe . Retrieved October 12, 2017
  32. ^ Website Maria Manhattan: The Box Lunch . Retrieved October 25, 2017
  33. ↑ Christoph Vitali: Foreword . In: Judy Chicago The Dinner Party , exhibition catalog Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt, Frankfurt / Main 1987, pp. 7–8
  34. ^ Gisela Brackert: Speech for the opening of the "Dinner Party" in the Schirn Kunsthalle , p. 13. In: Judy Chicago The Dinner Party , exhibition catalog Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt, Frankfurt / Main 1987, pp. 11-14
  35. ↑ Hannes Stein: Dinner party with 13 women . Die Welt, February 18, 2009
  36. ↑ Verena Auffermann: The suffering triangle . Die Zeit, No. 20/1987 of May 8, 1987
  37. ^ Roberta Smith: Art Review: For a Paean to Heroic Women, a Place at History's Table . New York Times, September 20, 2002. Retrieved November 25, 2017
  38. ↑ Hermione Hoby: Michael Landy: modern art is rubbish… . The Guardian , Jan. 17, 2010
  39. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: Debating Feminist Art: The Dinner Party in Published and Unpublished Commentary, 1979–1989 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , p. 240.
  40. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: Joining Forces: Making Art and History at The Dinner Party, 1975–1979 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , pp. 110-111.
  41. ^ Department of Modern Languages ​​and Comparative Literature of Baruch College: Vita Esther Allen . Retrieved September 22, 2019
  42. ↑ Esther Allen: Returning the Gaze, with a Vengeance . In: The New York Review of Books, July 8, 2018. Retrieved September 22, 2019
  43. ^ The New York Review of Books: A Place at the Table: An Exchange. Judy Chicago, reply by Esther Allen . Retrieved September 22, 2019
  44. ↑ Jane F. Gerhard: Joining Forces: Making Art and History at The Dinner Party, 1975–1979 . In: The Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970–2007 . University of Georgia Press 2013, ISBN 978-0-8203-4568-0 , pp. 131-132.
  45. ↑ Brooklyn Museum: Sojourner Truth . Retrieved October 13, 2017
  46. ^ Hortense J. Spillers: Interstices: a small drama of words . In: Pleasure and danger: exploring female sexuality . (Eds.) Carole S. Vance, Routledge & K. Paul, 1984, pp. 74-80
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on September 22, 2019 .