"The Lost Culture of Women's Liberation" Project
Thoughts on an Evolving Method
Suzanne Bellamy 2015
The Lost Culture of Women's Liberation, the Pre-Dynastic Phase 1969-1974, began its multi-layered life as an art/women's history/satire project in my studio in 1995[1]. 25 years after having been an active young participant in the Glebe Group of Women's Liberation (1969-74), I wanted to construct a project beyond text, which would catch the feeling of that time, and give me a new lens through which to explore what had been such a growth period in my life. I had already published several essays on the early days of Women's Liberation[2] and also read a lot of the new celebratory mythologies and archaeology of what came to be called the Old Goddess Cultures.[3] As an artist I enjoyed the re-emergence of this iconography, its controversies and theories, its critics and the artefacts themselves. In the fusion of all this came an idea, seeded by having studied Archaeology and History at the University of Sydney, taught Women's Studies at Macquarie University, carried part of the Women's Liberation Archive around with me since 1974, particularly the material culture artefacts like layout sheets, photos, odd objects. The core idea was to do a "dig" of 67 Glebe Point Rd, 500 years in the future, to be the archaeologist and also a kind of hologram pre-dynastic woman of the period, someone curiously like myself. Making it an art project gave freedom for personal interpretation, as well as a multi-media studio approach to making models, clay figures and specimens. It always seemed funny to me, I laughed my way to all the ideas, the site gags, the mocking of disciplines, the Museum format. I consulted Anne Bickford, a Sydney archaeologist and Heritage Consultant, and Women's Liberationist of the period, to check through the basic disciplinary terms and concepts. She is a Privy Specialist so that was a perfect invitation to "dig" a toilet, and we laughed a great deal on the phone about verisimilitude, and basic applications. It was Annie who said to me "there is really only one rule in archaeology, if you don't know what it is, it's of ritual significance." The purpose of calling the period Pre-Dynastic was to make the point that this was a pure ideas period, there was no financial benefit to any of us, no funding existed for any women's projects, it was before International Women's Year in 1975 when many things changed, a different politics of engagement opened out for feminists. This was the "pure ideas" period, and I wanted to explore it again, from a new place of enquiry within myself and the culture. Memory, satire, being a participant, not wanting to be nostalgic, these were all the challenges, and my original goal was for it to have rigour at the core, be educational and work for a diverse audience. There had to be parts that would work for some if not for everyone, levels of access through the visual, through juxtaposition, and some just plain funny gags. I had wanted to revisit this very thrilling period in my own youth, but I had to find a place to base it on that would allow me some eccentricities in the presentation, but my deal with myself was to be rigorous at the core.
Women's Liberation had been so subjected to analysis by outsiders, media, various factions and threads of feminism as ideas developed over the period from the 1970's on. The story of what it felt like from the inside was drowned in all this partisan imposition so I felt a freedom to play with this. Labels of essentialism, simplifying the story, having the story told by others, invisibility and erasure, scholars just erasing the whole thing, saying feminist action all started with WEL in 1972. Then there was the old criticism about being told we had no sense of humour, humourless feminists. It was an intellectually intense period, things happened fast, ideas morphed fast, discussions and Consciousness Raising brought a whole new kind of material into play, and there was a great deal of laughing, the play, the joy of new ideas was always present. I needed to honour that, the kind of humour that breaks old forms, the realisation that there are new ways of seeing through humour, and that it is infectious and very intellectually clever. That had to be the core. The whole body of patriarchal ideas that had such prestige and pompous presumption had to be taken apart, and so I aimed for that also with the knowledge I used in the satire. Calling it a 'Lost Culture' by 1995 was quite an accurate observation. If we had become fossils, I would make us fossils.
Using the idea of the Museum, being a museum, becoming a museum, resonated for me with a Surrealist Idea in art practice, "make it strange", make the ordinary extraordinary, shift some of the parameters, the time frame, the context; allow the freedom and humour of getting it wrong. All the commentary about archaeologists and mythologists who imposed concepts and schema on places and evidence came back to me. I especially remember, as a young archaeology student, the reports that were just coming out about Catal Huyuk in Anatolia/Mesopotamia, where no king's grave could be found, no weapons, no evidence of a fortress, no military structures, lots of evidence of female images and presence, so where was that king, how could this be a society that was not war-like?
Making this an art practice allowed for this kind of experiment in reversals. My goal was to not only recreate the story of the period, but to use my own involvement in Women's Liberation over many years, the reading and research I had done and read about women's history, art history, women and archaeology, and a critique of patriarchal assumptions. By using knowledge of archaeology, humour and site gags, drawing on models, artefacts, graphs, speculations about time periods, the project could all come together once I had the freedom to put the whole thing into the future.
The first full exhibition was at the Women and Labour Conference 1995 Macquarie University, subtitled "A Preliminary Archaeological Study of the Site once known as 67 Glebe Point Road Glebe NSW Australia." The second and only other full museum format was at the Women's International Congress, University of Adelaide in 1996. Julia Ryan (who played the character of Professor Dame Hildegarde Gumbutas) and I drove it to Adelaide in a truck, and the funds raised for our expenses was set up by Julia's mother Edna Ryan, a great feminist and supporter of the project. After that exhibition and performance launch, with Julia and I in character, I archived the fragile and heavy artefacts and transformed the show into a slide event with performance, in order also to be able to take it to feminist conferences and audiences in the USA. The first of these was the National Women's Studies Association Conference in St Louis Missouri in 1998,followed over many years by a variety of conferences and gatherings in many cities.
Museum Display
Photos, maps, geological diagrams and graphs displayed in a sequence showing aerial satellite views of Sydney Harbour from space, commentary on the vaginal form of the harbour; the site of the dig in context, large photos of a barren landscape, the Great Harbour Trough and Opera House Mountains formed by volcanic thrust post climate change, post desertification. The site at 67 Glebe Point Rd preserved, photos of trenches, first finds, evidence of wall mosaics of shopping trolleys, coins, earliest dating methods. Images of the original streetscape, photos of the building in the 1960's (BE), explanation of the changed dating systems from that period. A Gregory's Sydney Street Directory for 1969 is displayed and an image of the Neolithic site of Avebury is overlayed onto the Glebe street structure, clearly showing the circular formation of the area, indicating both continuity of formations and the presence of a "sacred precinct."
A scale model of the structure and surrounds is displayed, called The Temple Precinct, fronted by metal power poles thought to have had some generative function, possibly large crystals. The building type was known as a terrace house, several rooms of a long corridor, workrooms know as kitchen and laundry, outhouse (privy dig), yard where a grave was excavated. The model accurately reconstructs the interiors of the rooms, from the evidence found in the Saltglaze Sewer Pipes (thought to be a time capsule left when the site was abandoned).The large meeting room with accurate banner replicas on the walls was based on preserved photographic images, and includes ceramic figures of the pre-dynastic women in a circular formation, talking and gesticulating all at the same time, with coffee cups and cigarette butts on the floor. Other rooms include the MeJane Room, where a newspaper was produced, and a Gestetner Room where leaflets were produced. The model attempts to replicate the various devices by the use of old plumbing parts. The Gestetner Room (aka the laundry), proved very significant when subjected to solar and astronomical analysis. It was conclusively proved that the Sun, at the Winter Solstice, passed through the laundry door and struck the Gestetner, thus lending weight to the theory that it was a sacred object. Vast numbers of fragments and ceramic shards were present at the site, allowing the reconstruction of the temple goddess, known as The Glebe Goddess or the Teapot Goddess, as she was made from broken crockery. The drinking of tea was thought to be sacred.
Carbon Dating puts the site at 1950 plus or minus 50, and 1969 B.E (51-46 B.E), confirmed by thermo-luminescence readings, B.E referring to Before the Great Event. The unknown nature of the specific upheaval that led to the abandonment of the site fortuitously preserved many artefacts, preserved by fat, vulcanized sewage perhaps, but still to be researched. Among the most significant were a series of clay tablets naming the Four Core Principles of Women's Liberation: Sisterhood is Powerful, Consciousness raising, The Personal is Political, Direct Action.
Artefacts displayed in the Museum Exhibit were presented in the style of the period where possible, drawing on the concept of Verisimilitude, using wooden display and specimen boxes, and hand written descriptors, and principles of museum design of the period.
The Artefacts included the Sewer Pipes, which were at the time of the dig considered more significant than the Dead Sea Scrolls. Early print technology including accessories for the Gestetner, fabric from dresses, a broom with DNA residues, plus large layout sheets from MeJane pre-production processes.
"Books and Magazines" were plentiful, using old style non-pictographic Late English, and were classified as cellulose-fibre objects. Sound Recordings(Records) were classified as "plasticized incised sound etchings." A bone study was made possible because of the material from the privy dig and the presence of coprolites, and analysis startlingly revealed the diet of the pre-dynastic women in the first period to be hamburgers, and fish and chips, but unaccountably changed around 1972 to tofu and bean sprouts. This was said to have changed the shape of their bones. Other curios included the object called a Speculum thought to be a sacred bird feeder, leather objects like feet thought to be hole punches, sea grass matting used to breed sacred cockroaches, and a number of objects needing visual recognition but thought to be contraceptive devices. Commerce, unbanked cheques, indicated that the site was abandoned in a hurry, leaving behind actual money. An unfortified site, abandoned in some crisis, this lead to speculations by Prof Dame Hildegarde Gumbutas that it was an early site of the great Bean Sprout Revolution that later swept the planet.
As well as fossilized fish and chips, there were artefacts of adornment known as badges, and many objects still to be identified. Most of the artefacts were clearly of sacred or ritual significance. The Museum display concluded with some 3-D images of other pre-dynastic sculpture uncovered in later periods and thought to be related to the site, including The Buried Women's Army, Observing and Documenting The Transit of Patriarchy, and the Great Spirit Boat -aka "and we hid our secret knowledge even from ourselves," now in future museums.[4]
In the first display there was also a section called The Bad Museum Shop, referring to the practice of curators choosing something totally incomprehensible from the site and merchandising cheap reproductions, copies on mugs, tea towels, aprons, and pencil cases.
Early feedback sheets from the first two exhibits (now incorporated among the artefacts) carried positive and encouraging responses from women who came to see the show: "a successful dig, with evidence for many conflicting theories," "more relevant than the usual Egyptologist fare," "should be a permanent museum in Sydney!!", "this is the most authentic archaeological exhibition I have ever seen or read about," "evocative, especially the sacred cockroaches," "so Glebe is really the centre of a large (stone) circle," "I came, I saw, I rejoiced," "witty, wild, nostalgic and classy," and from a professional archaeologist at Sydney University " this magnificent exhibition opened by the distinguished Dame Hildegarde stands as a tribute to the impeccable excavation techniques and post-processual interpretation of the archaeologists." Over the years I have found that the Museum/Archaeology format allows space for a sense of inclusion, discussion and feedback, collection of new material, challenging ideas for expansion. A key idea which assists this interaction and sense of identification is the stated position that this was a tiny minority of women at a very specific moment in time who were a little part of some vast social upheaval of ideas brought through to cultures in the late 1960's and very early 1970's.
Music and sound forms were very central to the Women's Liberation experiment, as important as writings in some ways, and the visual elements of the group were important. When doing the show in the USA I found music, lyrics and festivals were even more important for the US WL groups, who in many cases built actions and experiences around women's music and festivals. In fact we obtained records from the US women's movement, like the Chicago Women's Liberation Rock Band, and the records of Alix Dobkin, Meg Christian, Holly Near. But we played a lot of Janis Joplin too. Bev Grant tapes came from Boston with our wonderful American arrival Martha Ansara, and this was the first of the new women's music I had ever heard, titles like "My Body Is Mine To Control." Robin Morgan's poetry Monster had a big impact, and when her work was banned because of a poem accusing Ted Hughes "of the murder of Sylvia Plath", the MeJane collective wrote to Robin in support and printed her poem and a letter from her on the cover of MeJane.
The spread and change in the presentation format from full Museum exhibit to slides, videos, storytelling and performance, meant that feedback and discussion was useful in expanding some of the material, in a Diaspora process. The small group structure that was common to Women's Liberation in those early days, autonomous, a movement structure not an organisation, proved to be the common link everywhere, allowing experience and diversity to emerge in the feedback sessions. As an art practice, it exists in a continuum, unfinished, no one format, although the Museum spoof is integral to all forms. A variety of presentation methods also relates to diverse audience, art students, peers, women's studies students, wider communities, all respond to different elements.
Place
Studying a Group or Movement involves the study of place, locus, and a clear time frame. Narrowing the focus to one place and one changing group over a specific period allows questions beyond any produced text or formal interactions with the wider society. The story of a building as a material object adds visceral and emotional layers, contextualises actions and group formations. My plan in making the model of 67 Glebe Point Road, recreating some of the walls, using humour to align the importance of the building with other more familiar forms like temples and sacred places, was to open these questions for women's spaces, these avenues of exploration. Comparisons could be made with the functions of a Masonic Temple, a Scout Hall, YMCA, a Church, anything which involved property, rental or ownership, economic questions, a meeting place. I recall a particular early story when four of us from the Glebe group went by invitation to speak to the Hills Group of Women Graduates in 1972. One very elderly member slept through the whole talk, then woke up at the end and asked loudly "Do you all live together?" She touched an important point, even though it was funny at the time, one of perception and of possibility. How is a group seen? What is the function of its home base?
Walter Benjamin wrote about the new spaces which opened up in the 19th C., but private spaces for new formations mattered as much in the 20th C., and certainly for women. Within a dwelling’s interior, people harbour illusions and dreams. The interior of a house or a meeting place is a safe haven, a familiar domain, in which people create a personal history in an otherwise alienating environment. Benjamin observes that the interior also offers meaning through living; it accommodates a story of personal remembrances. “To live means to leave traces. In the interior, these are accentuated.”[5] In other words, life in the interior heightens new realities. Whereas in the public space traces can fade, in the interior they remain visible and tangible for the occupants. And that is crucial: people hold the interior close precisely because of the memories that attach to it. To be at home is more than to merely eat, sleep and work somewhere – it is to inhabit the space. "That is to say, as Benjamin does, to make it your own, to leave traces. The idea of leaving traces raised for me the trope of archaeology, to combine what I had saved and collected both in material artefacts and my memories, to relocate them in a model form of a much cherished interior space and location in Glebe. Neither a true public realm nor a private domestic realm, but with old lounge chairs and furniture, a kitchen, rooms to set up specific projects like the Women's Liberation newspaper MeJane, a meeting room, banners on the wall, a bit like a club house perhaps, casual, messy, expansive, and able to launch new kinds of action and identity, to practice a new self, to plan, and to retreat for more thinking. More formal organisations with office bearers, times of opening, a public face, have a different experience of space, are usually cleaner, less of a crucible of ideas. Inner city urban young students houses, the Glebe precinct itself leant character to the experience. It was very site specific. Habitation of the building could not have gone on for very long, it was rented, run down, in a place about to undergo gentrification, temporary in all ways, marginal, on the edge. The local Glebe women who came along to meetings, Rhonda Ellis the barmaid from the Friend In Hand pub on the Queen St corner, Bessie Guthrie from 97 Derwent St who had lived in Glebe all her life, Gale Kelly who lived on the Glebe estate in a high rise, they came because they could see the building was there, could look in the window and see the banners, and it had a presence that was not off-putting to them. Place mattered, and it held an interesting part of the story itself.
67 Glebe Point Rd, the importance of the house itself as a centre. Had we not had the house, the nature of the experience would have been very different. Being able to write and paint on the walls gave real creative freedom, and this is why I wanted to make the MODEL of the building, a locus for the shifting identity of the movement itself.
The building had a history of radical actions and groups long before Women's Liberation, and is now a cafe. The importance of the interior, in Walter Benjamin's "Paris: Capital of the 19th Century", demonstrates that identity in modernity is linked to new interiors. "Through the mutability of modernity, as symbolised by the arcades with their cast-iron constructions, Benjamin argues that the interior comes into conscious being to the extent that our life, work, and surroundings change. The interior of domestic life originates in the need for a place of one’s own: a small but personal haven in a turbulent world that is subject to constant change."[6]
Friends and Groups
Was early Women's Liberation a modernist expression. Looking at work done on other modernist studies of groups, there are clear connections. "The political instability of friendship as the organising force of a radical collective practice" is a dynamic one, and operated at Glebe. The quote is a reference to Andre Breton's efforts to create an avant-garde group "destabilized by its own purges of non-conforming members." [7] A similar practice applied right through the four year period of the Lost Culture, there were creative tensions because of an open unstructured movement, Trotskyists, Spartacists, CPA(communist) women, tensions between age, experience, alignments, affiliations. A movement has no structures to enable it to expel individuals, and this was a hard-fought principle put to the test and upheld on two occasions. The groups that met in the building as time went on had differences. I say in the project that this was a period of creative struggle more than unity, a creative period of struggle, ideas in flux, which could not last. Like a great rock group it had a period that could contain it and then it could not be contained any more. I think that was a good outcome, it was combustible, complicated by sexual relations, breakups, heterosexual and lesbian tensions, all in those early days of new discoveries. Decisions, positions, confrontations all were in the mix. Two stories I use in the project to highlight inevitable differences of perception involve one particular lesbian discussion night and one with invited aboriginal women who came to a meeting very early to discuss the focus on abortion. The lesbian discussion happened when women from Gay Liberation asked for a meeting. A lesbian who was in the army talked about sexuality and role play that night, butch and femme roles, who wore the pants, all of which set off the feminist ire about patriarchal roles. When the aboriginal women said that they did not want to fight for abortions and birth control, that they were tools to control their population and they wanted every baby, again it was a night when nothing was simple and listening was a real privilege.
Work was done on many fronts. Commitments were made to support the abortion fight, volunteering to sit in clinics when raids were expected, picking up young girls from trains to take them to clinics. These actions had ultimately to expand, to move into a better and different form and they did, via Women's Abortion Action campaign and eventually the women's health centre movement, as well as refuges and rape crisis centres. But in the beginning it was all in the combustible core. This is why there has to be a place for oral history, contrary perceptions, ways to present the arguments and the development of new language. This project can only open out some elements, part of the bigger project.
Sex
How I deal with sexuality in the project is tricky. The first joke from the memory of the pre-dynastic woman is that "there was a great deal of talk about sex but we were all too busy to have any." There were several fronts in this matter, the CR discussions of past histories, intimate knowledge shared, across ages, some about abuse, rape, sexual and domestic violence. For many women in the groups this was the first time these things had ever been shared, and for many young women it was a first time hearing such realities. Then there were the research leaflets and newsletters about abortion, birth control, the pamphlet "The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm", a new educational role. Finally and most complicated was the issue of the lesbian presence in the groups. Some lesbians had their primary identification with Gay Liberation and Camp Inc, but there was a fluid interaction across the Sydney radical scene. I personally went through my own coming-out during the life of the group, and like many, knew my primary loyalty was to the women, lesbian and straight. We were the ones who engaged in the process inside groups to confront the assumptions of heterosexuality, while also watching women with straight pasts embrace loving women. It was all very complicated, sometimes secret, not the fare of the usual political movement. There were examples that I still find poignant, older women coming to group meetings who had lived closeted lives for decades, who slowly trusted some of us enough to tell their stories and open their kitchens up for visits and meals. There was so much going on in any given week that it could become too much to handle. Many burned out, many were wounded by all kinds of sleights, misunderstandings and prejudices. It cannot be idealised, it was an eruptive moment of experiential energy, life changing and yet also traumatising often, but bigger than any individual ideology to contain in that form.
Presenting a multi-vocal multi-factional group biography is beyond most methodologies. My project is at best a personal vision which grounds itself in my memory and a professional attempt to stay with events, shapes, place and people. A conference recently on Digital Material stated in its aims that in recent years there has been "an intensification of interest in both digital and material cultures. This broad trend has been mirrored in the academy by the growing prominence of digital humanities and the renewed focus on materiality and material objects within humanities disciplines. Proposals are invited for an international interdisciplinary conference that addresses this important confluence in our contemporary culture."[8] In these new formats and with new tools, new ideas will emerge for these complexities.[9] If I was starting from scratch now I would go for a longer period into the future, but any future versions of Lost Culture will allow for new limits, new scientific techniques to plunder and satirize, new discoveries that will allow a kind of retro feedback process, raising new questions. It will always remain open ended. Site/sight gags and humour especially visual humour are key drivers in the energy of the project. But that raises the question, how long will certain objects and jokes be recognisable? Are there limits to this method. What is funny and to whom? Differences and reactions in the USA were instructive, how much was similar, how many things could be "internationalised." The small group experience resonated closely, there was lots of feedback about the group dynamics, WL definitely can be seen a transnational phenomenon of some form.
The role of the visual in Women's Liberation was so central, making the transnational connectedness more clear, but still very Western. While Australian WL groups exchanged material with groups in several countries including in South East Asia and Europe, the urban group experience could be concluded to be Western.
Ethics and a Conclusion
Twenty years of presenting the material has allowed feedback and change, and evolving of the concept. Some things are now not funny anymore, like the climate change jokes about Sydney, ecology generally, but at the same time they open up the project for some new phases and methods, new satellite projections, cosmic implications. No doubt ideas will continue to surface while creative struggles exist about meaning, women's spaces and ideas. A recent conference on Feminism and Curating [10] raised ethical issues about curating feminism, about collaborations between artists and curators, about how to decentralize the curating process. In my project I was both artist and curator, I was also the primary collector, primary informant, they are all my jokes as well as my choices. That is also why I chose to make it an art practice, then to road test it in many locations. The basic form has not changed but stories have been collected, new artefacts donated including very important ones like gestetner accessories, the speculum from The Our Bodies Ourselves Collective in the USA when I did the show in Connecticut in late 1990's. The question of Women's Liberation and Modernism remains, an eruptive, disruptive, dissonant, disrespectful, open-ended, non-prescriptive political aesthetic force. The unfolding was necessary, a base for exploration, a break with previous forms of feminism and yet a continuity, always with combatants, born in combat with the old and new male left, it lasted a short time in the first phase but that was the generative form from which all other forms bounced.
Eruptive disruptive, dissonant, informed by irreverence. The later developments in feminism lost some of that hothouse cohesive humour and disrespect as the women's movement moved into new phases of negotiating with government and the public world. The value of the group experiment was its very difference from this, its crucible nature forging new spaces for new words and new links, giving vent to long buried knowledge and perceptions, a new point of view. It kindled what came next even as it burned itself out in the thrill of having happened at all. It should never be lost and will come again in some new form of perception breakthrough just as other early modernist movements did. Susan Hawthorne, Australian poet and publisher, recently wrote of the Lost Culture project "Suzanne Bellamy's performance work The Lost Culture of Women's Liberation paved the way for a new kind of research."[11]
This is an origin story, and as with many origins they are lost, then mythologised, and new forms surface.
Notes
[1] Suzanne Bellamy, 2014. "The Lost Culture of Women's Liberation: The Pre-Dynastic Phase, 1969-74" <http://youtu.be/hweqGjKq_es>
[2] Suzanne Bellamy, "Form - 'we are the thing itself'", All Her Labours, Vol 2. Papers of the Third Women and Labour Conference, Margaret Allen (ed.) (Adelaide: Hale and Iremonger 1984); Suzanne Bellamy, "Freedom from Unreal Loyalties" in Different Lives, Jocelynne Scutt (ed) (Sydney: Penguin 1987); Suzanne Bellamy, "The Narrow Bridge of Art and Politics" in Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed, Diane Bell and Renate Klein (eds) (Melbourne: Spinifex 1996)
See also in my website at suzannebellamy.com , click on Archives
[3] Cristina Biaggi, In The Footsteps of the Goddess (New York: Knowledge Ideas and Trends 2000); Marija Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess (New York: Harper Collins 1992); Gloria Feman Orenstein, The Reflowering of the Goddess (New York: Pergamon Press 1990)
[4] Suzanne Bellamy, Sculpture 2005. "Observing and Documenting the Transit of Patriarchy" <http://www.suzannebellamy.com/pages/galery3.html>
Suzanne Bellamy, Sculpture 2009. "Buried Women's Army", part of The Steps Project. <http://www.Suzannebellamy.com/pages/gallery3.html>
[5] Hans Teerds, "Hannah Arendt, Walter Benjamin and the Importance of the Interior" Amor Mundi Newsletter 2, 26 Jan 2015http://www.hannaharendtcenter.org/?p=15242. Benjamin is quoted from the essay "Paris. Capital of the 19th Century."
[6] ibid., Hans Teerds quoting Benjamin.
[7] Fabio A Durao and Dominic Williams, Modernist Group Dynamics: The Politics and Poetics of Friendship (London: Cambridge Scholars Publishing 2008) p.73
[8] Event posted by Amanda Golden, Georgia Tech, 2014 on Facebook.
[9] Griselda Pollock, Museums After Modernism: Strategies of Engagement (London: Blackwell 2007);Griselda Pollock, After-affects/After Images: Trauma and Aesthetic Transformation in the Virtual Feminist Museum (Manchester: Manchester University Press 2013); Griselda Pollock, Ch 3 "Modernity and the Spaces of Femininity", in Vision and Difference: Feminism, Femininity and the Histories of Art (London: Routledge 1988)
Griselda Pollock, After-affects/ After-images: Trauma and Aesthetic Transformation in the Virtual Feminist Museum. Rethinking Art's Histories (Manchester University Press 2013).
[10] Conference: Curating Feminism: http://contemporaryartandfeminism.com/2014/09/10/conference-curating-feminism/
[11] Susan Hawthorne, Lupa and Lamb (Melbourne: Spinifex Press 2014)