Susan Bee Interview 2/22/2021

Thea Hurwitz:  I was wondering if you could introduce yourself and talk about current projects. 

 

Susan Bee: I'm 69 years old and a native New Yorker. I grew up in Yorkville, near the Metropolitan Museum of Art. My parents were artists. So I've been immersed in the NY art scene since childhood. I went to Barnard College, where I studied art history and art. And then I got my MA in Art at Hunter. Now I'm living in Brooklyn. I've been a member of A.I.R Gallery since 1996. I've had about 20 solo shows and published 18 books. So I've been busy. I had kids and I traveled a lot. I got married. There was a lot you could say that happened.

 

I just had a solo show of paintings that opened at A.I.R. It was supposed to open in March 2020, but because of the pandemic, it didn't open. So it took place instead in September 2020. And now I have a new book called Off-World Fairy Tales with writing by Johanna Drucker, that came out in November from Litmus Press, and we did a talk for the book at the Printed Matter Book Fair. I also have worked as a graphic designer, editor and professor. And that sums up a few of my interests. 

 

TH: I appreciate your summary. And I thought it would be interesting to hear in your own words, because I've read over your stuff, but I feel like nobody can describe it better than you. So thank you. And congratulations on your most recent show, and the book. I looked over both of those projects, and they look so interesting. I really connect in your work, to your use of color, and your exploration of art history and exploration of yourself. So obviously, my independent study is exploring the concept of craft and textiles and women's work. And I wanted to know even though you don't focus on those mediums, specifically, which is totally fine. I was wondering if you could speak to any connection craft has to your personal life, whether that has to do with your childhood or anything at all.

 

SB: My parents were graphic designers and artists. So I considered making graphic design for a living. I never really took to craft, like the craft of making pots, which we had to do in high school. I think craft is really important for women's work. If you're going to focus on craft and women's work, that's obviously a very important intersection. I love quilts and I admire the people who make all of those things but my craft probably is artists’ books because that has involved photography, collage, illustration, typography, design, and it involves paper choices. Also a lot of my books are limited edition books, which are hand painted. So in other words, I'm painting an edition of 40 books, with 1000s of pages of hand painting. I know it's not quite defined as a craft, because artist’s books seem to be their own genre. A lot of people don't really consider how it fits into the craft world. For instance, the Center for Book Arts is its own space.

 

But it's definitely a craft. Everything is a craft about it, especially limited edition books,  including the binding and printing and all my hand coloring. And it's slow work too, now that my work is more likely to be printed, I still do unique one-of-a-kind books, leporellos, which I've been doing at the same time. I'm showing one this week at the Printed Matter Virtual Book Fair. 

I would say there's a lot of craft involved in being an oil painter too, because you have to know a lot of technical things to make sure that the painting doesn't crack, and that it survives for a long time. I still have paintings I did when I was 20, and they're in pretty good shape, because I was pretty careful with the medium. So, that's one great thing about the crafts that I'm involved with is that they have a pretty long lifespan.

 

TH:  I really appreciate your interpretation. I think craft is as much of a verb as it is a noun, and it's as much of one medium as it is another and the values of handicraft and slowness and the alchemy you were describing of being able to treat an oil painting and make sure that is preserved and an appropriate way and so it has longevity, because it is hand done, is really valuable. So thank you for that. A lot of what I'm looking at when it comes to feminist art, I would love to know, what does the phrase women's work mean to you? What associations does it inspire? This can have to do with your life, your art, everything in between. 

 

SB: Since I've been involved with a feminist gallery, and also ran a magazine for 30 years, with another woman, I've been very immersed since undergraduate days and since the 60s, in the feminist art movement. I worked for Women Artists News as an editor. When I finished college, so I became very involved with feminist art issues and craft was always a big part of that. Talking about craft was very important, during the Judy Chicago period, but there's always been a division between craft and fine arts that a lot of people don't want to bridge, because they don't want their work to be considered crafts, they consider it a lower form. I'm not saying that I consider it a lower form. I'm just talking about how a lot of this stuff is viewed. A great person for you to consider, is Joyce Kozloff. She's somebody I've known for years. And her work bridges many of those gaps because she does mosaics, and she does a lot of public art projects. I've always sort of considered doing public art projects, but I've submitted a few things, but I'm not that kind of artist. You have to have a bigger vision if you're going to do public art. But Nancy Spero has a beautiful mosaic and she was one of A.I.R.’s members and it's at the Lincoln Center subway stop. There are people who are doing more public art projects and then craft. I go to the Museum of Arts and Design and I'm very interested in what's being shown there and a lot of it is sort of on the edge between fine art and craft.

 

So, but in terms of craft, I feel like women and men do craft, I don't think it's gender specific. Honestly, I think it's something that is like painting, a lot of people can do it and do it well. For a while, something like quilting was relegated to women. And that made it a lesser art form in terms of the bigger art world, but now it's become more accepted and people pay more for it. That's the difference in a way, it’s also monetary. You can get a lot more money for something like a painting. I can do well with a limited edition book, which is also a craft. But I would say, you know, in terms of who we take into the gallery, for instance, most of those people are either painters or sculptors, some kind of performance and video people. That craft per se that we've had....we have Sylvia Netzer, who is a potter and does clay but I don't know what her relation to craft is actually, you could ask her. She teaches at CUNY. She teaches clay sculptures and vessels and installations. Craft is very valuable. And I believe the new book that looks really interesting that Glenn Adamson published about Craft in America tries to take a bigger view, and includes a lot of indigenous artists who do these incredible pots. And those are mostly women, for instance. And I totally admire that work. I have some of that work myself, which I've collected. 

 

TH: That was such a dynamic response. I also appreciate you mentioning different people I can look at more. Something I'd really like to do with this independent study is create like a database or network of people I can look at and contact. I appreciate you looping in other resources, it seems like you're very well read and well informed. 

 

So when you were starting out as an artist, did you feel like there was a dichotomy between fine art and what is considered craft art? Did you feel like there was an interpersonal dichotomy between yourself as a painter and craft artists? Did you have any perceptions of craft artists that have since changed or anything like that?

 

SB: The feminist art movement tried to validate craft as an important women's choice for women. It was during the time when I was learning my craft, which was painting. And within the history that I was very much interested in at the time, Western art history, we were not really allowed to even consider women's work and craft work as important. So I'd say since 1968, that has changed. In other words, now craft is given more validity. In fact, I'm just now remembering that I showed A Girl’s Life, my first collaboration with Johanna Drucker, which was done in 2000 at the triennial of the Craft’s Museum. I showed a number of the original drawings for the book at the Museum of Art and Design, which was known as the craft museum. And there's a catalog to that show. So we were included as book artists, and they don't do very many book arts shows at the museum, but it was interesting that they included our work as part of this triennial. So there's this gap between what's considered fine art and what's considered craft that hasn't totally been papered over. In other words, I think now it's more fluid because a lot of galleries show things that used to be maybe considered more craft-oriented as fine art, but there are more porous borders between these two things. But when I was studying in a more conventional time, Western fine art would not really consider craft as part of the study of high art. So the high and the low is a very important concept to whatever you're studying. 

 

TH: Yeah, absolutely. High, low, everything in between. I appreciate you mentioning the fluidity. I feel like what happens, perhaps a lot, and maybe you can speak to this, is that fine artists even may end up doing crafts, almost despite themselves, but perhaps they come across it in one way or another. 

As you said, book arts are considered craft. But I don't know if you set out to specifically do craft. Because these things are actually fluid, but they are not considered as such by the fine arts world. And then also, as you said, now, craft arts are entering the fine arts sphere, which is so interesting, because like you see materials that are pushed in a different way and are used non traditionally, and that it's all very interesting, what is appearing these days.

 

SB: I think Victoria Manganiello is a very good example of that kind of fluidity. And also there was that show at the Whitney, which I don't assume you saw “Craft in America,” and I know a lot of those artists who are in that show, and some of them would not necessarily consider themselves to be involved with craft per se. So, I think the borders of all of those things have become much more fluid. And that there's more people doing work; a lot of men doing work, like Mike Kelly when he did his quilt pieces that are more involved with craft. And, book arts happens to be one field that's very contested between craft and high art. So there's a lot written about this, and there's meetings. I'm on the border of it, but Johanna Drucker, who I work with, is actually one of the main people who's defined that field. So

it's clear that there's a lot of borders between what is just more of a craft approach to book arts, and what is more of a fine arts approach to book arts. And I think it's true in every field. In other words, if you look at clay, or if you look at mosaics, or at, all these different fields, there's a kind of range of what goes on.

 

TH: Yeah, that's totally true. And also, you mentioned taking a craft approach. I think that's a great phrase, there's a span of values within mediums as well. Some people may take a fine arts approach to craft and they are extremely fine tuned and using art historical resources whereas other people may be creating craft in a more domestic setting, using traditions that were passed down. There's all sorts of interpretations that are now existing in the same space, which can create fluidity as you said, but also some friction, which is why I am so interested.

 

SB: I don't know if Victoria suggested you talk to this woman. But Laura Petrovich-Cheney, who was part of A.I.R, and did a quilt show at the gallery. It was really interesting, including Faith Ringgold. She does quilts that are made out of wood. And she's very involved with the whole idea of how craft and fine art intersect, what the borders are and who she put into that show was very interesting. It was a really good group show, which I imagine is documented somewhere on our website. But it was very interesting because she found people with different approaches to quilting, per se, and some were more sculptural, and some were more political. And so I think this is a very open-ended topic right now that you've hit upon.

 

TH: I'm so happy to have so many different voices. Thank you for that suggestion, I would also love to talk to her. I love the idea of talking about a show of Faith Ringgold’s work. 

 

SB: You should  ask her about that show and also about what she's doing, because her work very much straddles the borders and she was a gallery member, she's now moved away, she lives up in Massachusetts. She was a fellow like Victoria. And her work has always dealt with the quilt as more sculptural.  All her quilts are made out of found wood. 

 

TH: Well, thank you for that. But back to you. So I was interested in just the concept of collaboration. I watched your talk in early February where you focused primarily on collaboration. I was interested in how the collaborative nature of A.I.R. relates to your feminist values on a personal scale, or I guess a larger scale, and then how it relates to your art practice, if it’s impacted how you make work, or if it's impacted how you think about being in a community of women. 

 

SB: It's been a big thing in my life. I really became aware of it in the 70s, when I was at Hunter getting my MA, which is now an MFA. But there were no women faculty, and there was no place for women students where they really felt accepted there. So A.I.R. was a place where I could come and listen to older women artists talk. And that really was very influential on me, even though my mother was a painter. So I already had role models. But I didn't have a community per se that would support what I was doing. And it took me a long time to become a member. Actually, I applied three times, and I was turned down twice. But I'm a very persistent person. And so I got in. And it's been an interesting ride to be involved for so long since 1996. I had my first show there in 1997, and since then I've had nine solo shows just at that space. But meanwhile I've been doing all these other things, the book arts and showing other places and giving talks at other places. It's been very helpful, I think, to have a community that I can come back to. In other words, I could go out into the world, but there's still this place for me. And commercial galleries, I've been in and out of them, and they fold often. And also you're not allowed to do what you want in commercial galleries. And I seem to have to do what I want. They decide what you're going to show or how you're going to show it and so on. I really like the freedom of having a space where the director does have some input but I still have more freedom to do what I want. 

 

And so it has its ups and downs. The community changes over time because people leave, people come, people die, you know, they leave art or art making entirely.There's been a lot of fluidity in that situation. And the gallery has moved; even since I've been a member, it's moved five times, maybe four times since I've been a member. So, you know, real estate has changed. There's so many things going on now with questions of gender and how are we going to balance that out in the gallery and questions of race. So all along, there's been quite a tug of war between different elements that have come and gone with the gallery. So I just keep involved. I'm on the governing committee of the gallery, which is the executive committee, and there's five people on it. And we meet with the directors. So I have more of a role in the governance of the gallery than I did when I was a younger member. When I first joined, I didn't know anything about any of this. And the gallery was much simpler, we didn't have fellows, we had one director, a very part time director. And the gallery was really run by the artists. Now, we have major funding, we have a big budget, it's become an institution that is larger than any one member at the moment. But in the earlier years, it really was more member oriented, I would say, and it was more about the women who joined and the women who kept it running. So the institution has become more institutionalized. And feminism has become maybe more institutionalized, too. I don't know for sure. But I think it's the case. 

 

TH: I feel like that's a really good point when it comes to how feminism has progressed from a personal choice to a movement with a history and values that have changed over time and have concrete effects on policy. Obviously, when you're starting out, there was already an extremely strong feminist movement that was quite clearly defined, but I do agree with you, it seems like as the gallery and other feminist art spaces have become ingrained in its community, so has the feminist movement settled into our society in a particular way. That's a really interesting connection to draw, when it comes to the progression of your work and your career.

 

SB: Well, it becomes more clear over time that institutions change if they're going to survive.

And most of the other feminist galleries started at the same time as A.I.R., in 1972, have not survived. And it's very hard to keep a nonprofit going of any kind, especially with the pandemic and everything, and we've had a lot of crises. So keeping a nonprofit going is a big job, as well as being part of a cooperative, because I was part of a co-op building too. So I have a little sense of other co-ps. Being a part of a co-op is always a chore, because you always have certain things you have to do like committees work. If I was just with a commercial gallery they don't really expect you to do anything but just do your work and then show up for openings, but you don't have a job, your job is to just create work. So it's always very different.

 

I would say in terms of craft, I'm sure it's the same in terms of my artist’s books. If I'm working for a publisher, it's different than working for myself. So there's a difference between making something for a particular dealer or a particular publisher or a store. That is a very different thing than if you're creating something that might go to a private collection and might be one of a kind. So I think when you consider craft, you have to actually consider the commercial aspects of craft, which doesn't have that much to do with feminism per se, except that women are always paid less, generally speaking for everything. But even having somebody like Betty Woodman finally having a show at the Met was a big step for craft in a way because she was considered on the border of ceramics and craft. And the fact that she was given a solo show as an artist more than a craftsperson, I think, was very important, also, that she was an important woman artist doing craft. It would be something to examine, the attitudes towards her.

 

TH:  I think there's this idea of artists graduating from craft, which is so interesting, like they've like been accepted or even institutionalized, as you might say, when they are considered as perhaps crossing over or welcomed into the fine arts world. It is really interesting, because of course, all that work remains craft, and continues to invoke tradition, and invoke history. And I think that that whole concept is really interesting to me. Thank you, again, for a great recommendation and other things to look into. I'm so excited to go back to look into a bunch of stuff. 

 

SB: Yes, the other person that I was reading up on, and I think is very interesting in this regard, is El Anatsui, who makes works that are sort of like quilts, but they're made out of bottle caps, and they're on the wall. And there was a very interesting interview with him in The New Yorker about how he views his process, and the question of it came up: is he a craftsperson or not, because of how he makes it? Of course, he has a huge amount of employees doing the work. And that I don't have, I'm a mostly a lone person over here. I mean, yes, I have my collaborators. I have publishers and binders and printers, you use all of those things. You're never really that alone in your work. Nobody really is. I mean, it's hard to be solitary. Even though actually I am very solitary because of the epidemic, the solitary nature of art making hasn't really been my experience. 

 

TH: Yeah, I think that I think that makes a lot of sense. And it's funny, because I feel like solitude is romanticized in the art world, and I would say perhaps affiliated with the concept of the tortured artist, which is then often affiliated with, this specifically male genius. So I'm really interested in the concept of  marginalized artists wanting to be together as well as needing to be together. Forming a community not only helps you advocate for each other, but it's also something natural and exciting and something that can be enduring, even as it changes. 

 

SB: I think A.I.R. is an unusual example. The fact that we're almost getting to year 50 of the institution is very unusual, because, it's not all smooth sailing with collaborations and with co-ops. People have different points of view, but I think you're right about the idea of the tortured genius, a person who never really interacts with anybody else. There are examples of such people, but even those people had their supporters. You know, even Van Gogh had his brother. So I mean, it's pretty hard to be totally solitary right now. I don't think I'm sure who would be a totally isolated artist, but perhaps the fully naive folk artists who are creating in a shed or something. For women, it's not that likely, especially if they've had children or if they have a family or a partner, it's not that likely that they are completely isolated. And people like Judy Chicago used a lot of other people, women, mostly, to make her work. And that's a disputed thing, too. I don't know how much you know about that history. But there was a lot of outrage actually. And there still is some outrage about her taking credit, basically, for the work of a lot of other women artists. So I would say there's always a sense of, ‘is the person exploiting other people to do their work?’ You know, there's a lot of stuff that comes up about hierarchy. For instance El Anatsui has a huge factory, basically, where he makes these works. And he has a lot of employees. A lot of more successful artists employ assistants to do the work, but those assistants are usually not credited. With craft, often, there is a lot of assistance doing the work. So the question of credit comes up. 

 

TH: I appreciate that train of thought, because I think it relates a lot to what I'm talking about with who gets the consideration, who earns it, who is able to keep it within the art world, and then asking what is perhaps lost along the way. Because often you have a lot of artists creating wonderful work in the domestic setting, maybe for their families or it's in their community. And then if it is elevated, sometimes meaning and credit is lost. What comes to mind is the quilters of Gee's Bend, these women in Alabama who made their amazing quilts, which were acquired by the Smithsonian. But we watched a video on it last semester about how a lot of the women were talking about how they couldn't afford to go see them, and some women talked about not knowing where the quilts were. They were acquired by the art world, and elevated to the status of fine art, but then the people themselves were left behind. So it's a question of what is gained, what is lost, as you said, in the hierarchy of makers. And that all has to do with collaboration and community. As you said, the ups and downs of A.I.R. signifies that you can have a community of people, but that community is still composed of individuals, it's by no means monolithic. And it's by no means completely steady all the time. And I think what you touched upon is really essential to the concept of craft and also women's art.

 

SB: And it also depends how much your paid. And, of course, a lot of these things have become more valuable over time. But some of them are still not valued, and generally speaking, women's work is worth less than that of a male artist, that's like a rule of law pretty much in the auction world anyway. And in general, in galleries, you can't sell your work for as much money. So that affects everything, because if you can't really make a living, so you have to come from like a fairly well to do background to even be an artist, it becomes an issue. So the question of class and race and gender all play a role, and you have to consider that when you're looking at craft, because some of the people making the craft may be quite poor. And with the people from Gee’s Bend, and their relation to what's when their work is showing, they may not have that much relation to the institution that's showing their work. So that's, that's always been a question with craft. 

 

TH: That actually really segues quite well into one of my questions. Obviously I don't expect you to be the complete authority on this. I just would love to know what you think. So what practices do you think are necessary for institutions to responsibly display and support the art of marginalized artists? 

 

SB: I don't know if I can answer that question. Because I'm not a curator. I know that there's a lot of curators trying to join these groups to try to discuss how to best approach artists of color, and how to be more sensitive, because there've been a lot of incidents of bad things that have gone on. I don't think it's that easy to know how to incorporate work that falls outside the boundary of fine art. I saw a very interesting show this weekend at MoMA PS1 about the work of incarcerated people. There's a show that's really a quite amazing show of work by prisoners in different institutions in America. And some of the work is on the border of folk art, I would say, or amateur art, but it is very well developed. And the curator really went all out looking for very interesting things to prove in this show. And it's a very impressive and disturbing show, because you realize how much talent there is out there. And these people are mostly incarcerated for a very long time, some of them are still there, and they are very limited in the materials they can use. So it's a very interesting display of what can be done in a very limited circumstance. So that is art that's made outside the boundaries of the art world; some of the best art I've ever seen has been in the Folk Art Museum in New York, which I think is a fantastic place to see work that’s outside the bounds of the art world. So right now, there's a lot of interest in incorporating these kinds of outsider perspectives. And some of that has to do with women, some of it has to do with men, it's not necessarily a gender thing per se. It just occurred to me that having seen this show, which would never have been shown at the main MoMA, it's at the PS1 MoMA, because it really is kind of outsider art in a way. And it's also work that's done under a very difficult circumstance.

 

TH: I think you make a good point.I really appreciate your trains of thought and the connections you're making. I think you make a good point about institutions being kind of halfway ready, but not quite ready. Like as he said, it wouldn't be like fully at the MoMA. But I think you're speaking to a good point, which is that institutions just need to start a search for people, they find somebody they commit to creating a show about this. And then they see where it goes from there.

 

I was wondering; A.I.R. is founded on displaying the work of marginalized artists. Do you feel like there's been extra kind of advocacy work involved framing and thinking about women's work, about the work of artists of color and about the work of all sorts of artists with marginalized identities in the trajectory of A.I.R. that you could perhaps speak to? 

 

SB: Well, I think it was a hope of the founders from the beginning. But there is a kind of a vexed relation to race, which, people like Howardena Pindell, and Ana Mendieta, who are both early A.I.R. artists, and also Kazuko Miyamoto, who had a show at Zurcher Gallery that I would suggest you go see because it's sort of the border of crafts. And her work is made out of paper, but it looks like a rope sculpture. She could show that work in our space. And it couldn't have been shown somewhere else. So there were people doing things like Mary Beth Edelson, and Ana Mendieta, and so forth that couldn’t have been shown elsewhere. There was no place for them to show this work. So I know over the years, a lot of work has been shown like Sylvia Netzer, who does the clay installations. Those are not really commercial propositions and they wouldn't necessarily be accepted by the larger art world. So it's been a space where people could try things out. Because you're not worried about if you're going to sell it. Or is the dealer going to like it, or you know, all these things that make the commercial setting very important. And of course, now historically, these things are considered very important. But at the time they were shown, they were not. They were not supported at all, by the larger art world or the art market. So it's been an important place for somebody to try something out, that may or may not have lasting value. But experimentation is very important. And for women's work, and for artwork in general, I don't want to make that distinction just because I think there are experimental artists of all genders and races. But the ones that were shown in our gallery were pioneers, because they were making the shows themselves, they were making the space themselves. Judith Bernstein's another one that's very interesting. Her work is painting, but it was so explicit, sexually, that she couldn't get it shown and she would never have gotten in shown anywhere else. And it was the kind of work that was really frowned upon in terms of what was in the work, the content of the work, rather than how it was done, because they were big drawings. But you know, I think that's another thing. Now she has a very commercial gallery, and she has a presence in some museums. The New Museum, for instance, is more open to that kind of work. 

 

TH: I mean, I feel like space is just one of the most important things for artists who would struggle to gain traction in the art world. Just providing space, as you said, to experiment in that and experimentation is where the art world can change, because people come in and see the show and realize that this is something new, this is something essential to propelling the art world forward. And I think it's so fascinating and exciting how the context of community and collaboration created that space.

 

TH: I'd love to ask you just one question about your work that really interested me. We talked a lot about A.I.R and kind of your experience with leadership and involvement there, which I really appreciate. But I also really am really interested in your painting. So in my study I'm really interested in the multiplicity and contrast of craft art, and the concept of reconciling traditional roles with this contemporary radical practice. Because, obviously, a lot of women were told they needed to knit or sew. And now there's people who are radically knitting and radically sewing. And that's very exciting. And I feel like you kind of reconcile with a similar dynamic in your painting. In your last show you replaced the subjects of a lot of famous paintings made by male painters with yourself. So do you feel like there's elements of the traditional and the radical that you can celebrate in your work? Do you feel like work like that is kind of a pushback or response? Or is it you connecting to tradition? I'm kind of interested in the nature of your interaction with patriarchy.

 

SB: Well, I think it's all three that you mentioned, I thought you, you put it really well, actually, I think it's partially push-back and is partially homage. And it's partially taking something that I love. I love these paintings by Chagall, by Ensor and Marsden Hartley, all these male painters who I really admire, and I’m sort of entering into their work. So it is an homage, it's also in a way a send up because I put myself in their place, but it's lovingly done. I don't totally reject their work at all. In fact, I am actually up in my studio now working on a whole bunch of new paintings. I'm working on revisiting some Ensors and some Chagall's that are very interesting. When I actually repaint something that has been painted before,it's always going to be my own painting. It's always mine, you know, even though it could be a version of theirs. And I just find appropriating the work of these male artists very gratifying, actually. And it could be viewed as such a radical gesture, but it's not really, done more to understand what they did. I mean, I was reading about, just recently, an early Cubist painting from 1911 that Chagall did. And I found all these interesting things when I was working on it, like how he took the figure and he put the head upside down, and how he approached things. In a way I find it very educational. And I like it, because it's a bit of a challenge, also, because it's not that easy to take somebody else's work and make it your own. I think it's been really helpful for me. 

 

TH: Yeah, I really appreciate that. Because I feel like this is something  I struggle with, especially when you come out of higher education with this love for art. It's like, you learn who you learn about and you like who you like, and obviously, the art world is very much upheld by patriarchy, but you're also allowed to love art and connect with painters. In your last talk about your latest show you said something that I liked: about how ‘I don't know if these artists would give me the time of day but I appreciate them.’ And I feel like that seems productive. To me the idea that this is my own, I am creating something new, but I'm also allowing myself to, I think that in essence could be a radical concept. You know, just allowing yourself to learn and progress as a woman artist and kind of letting yourself breathe when it comes to reconciling with your influences. I really like that concept.

 

TH: Do you have time for one more question before we sign off? And this is a big question. So you're allowed to take this just however you want. I was interested in what do you feel is the future of A.I.R. and spaces like that? And what are some artists or shows you feel represent that future?

 

SB: I think the thing that we've done that's been most different over the time since I've been a member is that we have more curated shows with outside curators, and the fellowship program is very, very important. We have 400 applicants for six places, it's really hard to get into. And it's always judged by outside curators. I think the future is really in these shows where we incorporate a different group of people than would normally be part of the membership. And we also have the national members, which are from all over the city, all over the states. So I would say that’s the future, if we can keep all of these programs going, and keep having enough income, and grants and enough personnel to keep all of this afloat. I'm involved with the finances of the gallery. I know how difficult it is, like Soho 20, which was a very long standing feminist gallery, almost as long as ours, just closed this year, and Art in General closed. It’s very, very hard to keep these non-profits afloat, and the pandemic has made it worse. So I'm just hoping that we can get to our 50th anniversary. And the future will be more inclusive, I think we are now changing our mission statement to include more genders, including non binary people. So in other words, the future is going to be changed based on how feminism has changed, women’s spaces have to be more inclusive, and they have to take a more radical approach. I think especially some of the older members are not thrilled with this new direction. But it's important that the institution keeps up with the times and changes to fit what is being thought about by younger artists, and what is being thought about in the culture in general. And, you know, the culture is changing, so we have to change. 

 

TH: I think that's a fantastic summary. I really appreciate that. I think that's a pretty good place to stop. So thank you so much for your time.