The past is often a point of inspiration for artists. Art programs, exhibitions, and
countless publications attach great importance to it. Artists respond to art history,
but are also often critical of it and the places that tell these stories to a larger audience
(such as museums or galleries). A certain awareness and self-reflection can
come to manifest itself within their art. The term institutional critique is used to
point to the evolution of this idea since the late 1980s. However, it references a very
specific type of critique and often excludes artworks made by women from this narrative.
And if art is a point of inspiration, it is essential to tell a diverse set of art historical
stories. To do this, considerable research is being done to give women their
rightful place within (art) history. But these necessary steps alone are not enough to
question the exclusions of everyone who is considered other. As long as stories are
told within the same framework—being a hegemonic chronological story—diversity
will always be the exception to the rule. This research does not historicize an
intersectional feminist institutional critique but questions the existing framework
from this perspective. This critique is posed through an analysis of the work of female
artists: Theresa Hak Kyung Cha, Ren e Green, Louise Lawler, Lea Lublin, and
Jo lle Tuerlinckx. Besides this, as a theoretical framework, the ecofeminist writings
of Anna L. Tsing and Donna Haraway are used to define a set of characteristics that
disrupt the borders of a hegemonic chronological narrative structure.
4 –
Date of Award24 Apr 2021
Original languageEnglish

Cite this