Viewing page 98 of 110
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
298 The Los Angeles Woman's Building actualized in the new alternative context at a scale more common to nineteenth-century feminist activity. By the fall of 1973, the FSW had changed. Some groups and individuals left. Judy Chicago withdrew to do her own work, starting a large art project in her home/studio. Arlene Raven and I placed more of our creative and professional energy into the Woman's Building although we continued to give lectures and to contribute to feminist art programs in other institutions outside Los Angeles. Also during this period, a nucleus of people who became the collective teaching staff of FSW began to coalesce. We left Cal Arts, bringing colleagues with us: Deena Metzger (a poet and novelist); Ruth Iskin (an art historian); Suzanne Lacey (a performance artist); and Helen Alm Roth (a printer and graphic artist). This group of feminist artists and teachers have remained the collective teaching staff of FSW. The second year at the Grandview site was an extraordinarily expansive year. We initiated an extension program of classes and workshops involving new students and teachers, and as part of the spring break, a series of national conferences in design, writing, performance, and film video were held. It was the students and staff of FSW who most often took the leadership and gave form to these and other expressions of the Woman's Building. With a tenant group left and while another was being found, the creative and committed energy of FSW members filled the gap. The experience of this women's community as a context for work enhanced the creative energies of most members of the FSW. We began to share what we were doing by giving lectures, organizing exhibitions, and running educational workshops. Within the Woman's Building and in educational and professional institutions throughout the United States we made the attitudes, processes, and work of the Woman's Building known. The public description and analysis of our work resulted in a better understanding and communication of woman's culture. Our tone was "conversational" (Deena Metzger), the function of our art was "to raise consciousness, invite dialogue, and transform culture" (Arlene Raven). I called our process "the Sheila Levrant de Bretteville 299 gentle art of mutual aid," a phrase taken from an early article on female involvement in urban reforms. Development of Strains Over time, there was a growing demand for use of the Woman's Building both by local people and by touring shows. Due to heightened consciousness, increased need and sense of cooperation, and the publicity given to the Woman's Building, local people, as well as those visiting Los Angeles, began to contact the Woman's Building to schedule performances. Attendance at the monthly exhibitions, as well as at the lectures, rallied, dances, and autograph parties provided a regular indication of the continued involvement of a growing participatory community. As demands on the Woman's Building increased, strains also began to be felt. Growing demands for the use of the building began to tax our administrative capacity, and the increasing use of the building for social functions like dances raised questions about the educational and feminist goals of the organization. Attempts to share leadership among groups involved in the operation of the building had not been entirely successful and had created problems of cohesion. At the same time, turnover among tenants required vast amounts of energy to find replacements and integrate them into the community. However, by far the greatest strains were created by poverty; despite a large building and an extensive program, the Woman's Building was largely sustained on feminist energy and had no continuing sources of funding. The imminent sale of the building intensified some of the problems. Taking our activities out of one building and moving them to another forced us to confront the problems created by our high-risk entrepreneurial style, which was based on vision, graphic expression, physical manifestation, and public participation. If we were to continue, we needed a thorough understanding of our economic position, greater sharing of the responsibilities (and ambiguities) of leadership, and increased public involvement in our activities.
