Being seven months pregnant now, this is more difficult to accomplish. A man looks down five times a day to direct his hunka-hunka towards the cistern, and though I need not look, my parts are certainly felt in a big way, with each step up the stairs increasingly heavy, and the belly become a real structure that heaves up the boobs and pushes down into the pelvis. From an aesthetic point of view, I look ridiculous as a pregnant woman: I’m a curve-less straw with this amazingly spherical growth attached. It’s so round, and just like a ball, it gets kicked and thrown, but from within. There is some amazing, unpredictable footwork going on in there.
This time around I am not as enthralled about being occupied, and I have to raise some semblance of excitement by pretending that because 2012 is the Year of the Dragon, my baby boy is going to save the world. I didn’t have a real job when I had my daughter, and those first months were still stressful and difficult. I’m very much dreading lugging in a breast pump and taking twenty minute breaks to be sucked by a buzzing machine while the baby without his mother sucks instead on bottles and pacifiers and his thumb. So what if other mothers have to do this, and this is the new reality for women who have fought an uphill battle to be admitted into the workforce? I think it’s tragic.
There’s a verse in the slave’s lullaby that most people leave out:
Down in the meadow,
lies my poor little baby.
Bees and butterflies pickin’ at his eyes,
poor little thing is crying Mammy.
I would say a majority of American female artists, at least those whose work we know, did not have children. (I’m just saying this, without any real research. Who has time for research?) And yet the philosophical claim of women who have banked (as in ka-ching) on having a distinctly feminine output is that artwork by women has a different set of aesthetics by which merit can by judged than the usual, more conventional and historically entrenched standards of the males who have been accepted as standard museum or literary fare. If you have birds flying into vaginas in your painting, you can be a great female artist, even if a look at the work without any gender-based reference point reveals that it is a piece of crap, i.e. Georgia O’Keefe, Frida Kahlo and the recently deceased Helen Frankenthaler. Those three belong to what I think of as a dreary set of mustachioed, unsmiling crones, with quite ugly paintings. If you say what you really think of their work, you get stoned for being a misogynist. (Of the three, Frida was the most original.)
So there are famous male artists too, who by force of personality rather than talent have made it into the more rarified upper stratospheres of the art world, but I would hesitate to say that any of them are leaning on the “singularly male” point of view, or on what comes of seeing the world through the one-eyed member, as the crux of their style. Too many penises to compete with–it ceases to become a political statement, or even an interesting one.
Isn’t there any way to escape being a woman artist, a female poet, a woman writer, or a woman composer? The gender is imposed as if it is miraculous to be both a woman and anything else creative.