Hubbry Logo
WomanhouseWomanhouseMain
Open search
Womanhouse
Community hub
Womanhouse
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Womanhouse
Womanhouse
from Wikipedia

Womanhouse (January 30 – February 28, 1972) was a feminist art installation and performance space organized by Judy Chicago and Miriam Schapiro, co-founders of the California Institute of the Arts (CalArts) Feminist Art Program, and was the first public exhibition of art centered upon female empowerment. Chicago, Schapiro, their students, and women artists from the local community, including Faith Wilding, participated.[1] Chicago and Schapiro encouraged their students to use consciousness-raising techniques to generate the content of the exhibition.[2] Together, the students and professors worked to build an environment where women's conventional social roles could be shown, exaggerated, and subverted.[3]

Only women were allowed to view the exhibition on its first day, after which the exhibition was open to all viewers. During the exhibition's duration, it received approximately 10,000 visitors.[4]

Origins

[edit]

The Feminist Art Program began at the California Institute of the Arts in 1971 after an experimental year at Fresno State College under the name 'Women's Art Program'. The students in the program were admitted as a group when Chicago and Schapiro were hired at Cal Arts after Chicago found that the Fresno State College Art department was reluctant to embrace her vision of a new kind of female-centered art. It was their intention to teach without the use of authoritarian rules or a unilateral flow of power from teacher to student.[5]

In 1971, the Feminist Art Program was slated to occupy a new building but found itself without adequate space at the start of the school year. The lack of appropriate studio space paved the way for a collaborative group project set to highlight the ideological and symbolic conflation of women and houses. The result of this project was the Womanhouse installation, built by the students in an abandoned Victorian house in Hollywood.[6]

The program utilized a method of teaching that relied on group cooperation. Students would sit in a circle and share their thoughts on a selected topic of discussion. The circular teaching method was intended to provide a "nourishing environment for growth" and to promote a "circular, more womb-like" atmosphere.[5] The goal of these discussions was for each woman to reach a higher level of self-perception, to validate their experiences, as well as the "search for subject matter" to incorporate into artwork and to address their individual aesthetic needs.[7] However, many students fostered resentments towards Chicago and Schapiro, claiming they were suffering from their own power trips. Chicago insisted her students feelings were the result of their own internalized sexism and unconscious manifestations of their difficulties dealing with female authority figures.[8]

The project's goals, as professed by Schapiro and Chicago, were to help students overcome some of the problems associated with being a woman. Many of the issues Chicago believed that the students needed to overcome were centered upon their lack of ability to perform traditionally masculine skills. Chicago pushed students to become familiar using equipment such as various tools, to become comfortable in their ability to be assertive, and to view themselves as a part of the work force not defined by their domestic roles.[9] It was thought that by teaching women to use power tools and proper building techniques, they would gain confidence and subsequently challenge the gendered expectations. Schapiro and Chicago believed that women could achieve more if society did not limit them and expect less from women than men.

These techniques were to result in an "exclusively female environment" that included a greater community of female artists. The goal of this community was to expose the students to credited female artists not limited to Schapiro and Chicago.[10]

Paula Harper, an art historian for the California Institute of Arts Feminist Art Program, is credited for suggesting the idea for Womanhouse.[11] Schapiro supervised Womanhouse's dramatic works, while Chicago focused on other media.[2] Their intention was to transform a domestic environment into one that fully expressed the experiences of women.[12]

Womanhouse began in an old deserted mansion on a residential street in Hollywood and became an environment in which: “The age-old female activity of homemaking was taken to fantasy proportions. Womanhouse became the repository of the daydreams women have as they wash, bake, cook, sew, clean and iron their lives away." Before creating the art environments and pieces, the students had to do extensive reconstruction on the house, which had been empty for many years. They had to fix broken windows and furniture.[13]

Construction and process

[edit]

The group broke into teams in order to find a suitable location for their "dreams and fantasies".[2] They found a 17-room,[14] 75-year-old dilapidated mansion at 533 N. Mariposa Ave. in a rundown section of Hollywood. Members of the group knocked on doors to find the owner of the house, who one neighbor remarked would "certainly not be interested in the project."

After a visit to the Hall of Records, they found the owner to be Amanda Psalter. The group described their intentions for the house in a letter to the Psalter family. In response, the house was granted through a special lease agreement[12] for the three-month duration of the project, after which it would be demolished.[2] Construction spanned from November 1971 to January 1972.[12]

The renovation included cleaning, painting, sanding floors, replacing windows, installing lights, and sanding, scraping, and wallpapering walls. New walls were built for practical and aesthetic reasons and women learned wallpapering techniques to refurbish one of the rooms. Eventually a crew was needed to paint the exterior of the house, install locks and advise the women on basic electrical wiring.[5]

The women struggled as they began renovating the mansion during the winter, as the building did not have hot water, heat, or plumbing.[15] Renovations included replacing 25 windows and replacing banisters that had been pulled out by vandals. They worked eight-hour days.[12] To many of the women, these tasks were new and unfamiliar which resulted in a discontentment for many of the students. The women felt as though they were not presented with a program in which they could succeed.[10] To cope with the frustration of learning new techniques while meeting stringent deadlines, the group held meetings to deal with any problems that arouse and sessions to raise group consciousness.[15] Some former students now see this tension as a result of Chicago's authoritarian presence, feeling that she imposed her own goals on the group.[12]

Here are some perspectives from participators when they recall the struggles of Womanhouse after 25 years later.[16]

Camille Grey : “Put 30 women together and see what happens. A nightmare.”

Robin Mitchell: "It was simultaneously one of the best and worst experiences of my life.”

Mira Schor: "I left the Program after one year, because of my disagreements, and because I wanted to experience the school outside the confines of the Program. I have avoided group feminism since then. ... However it was a unique privilege to attend feminist boot camp, it was a privilege to participate in the Feminist Program. I consider it a major formative experience in my development as an artist, teacher, and writer/editor.”

Nancy Youdelman: "Looking back 25 years later, I have mixed feeling about the Feminist Art Program – We had something really incredible and unique and somehow we could not get beyond personalities and create a lasting support system."

Participating artists

[edit]

Chicago and Schapiro invited other local artists Sherry Brody, Carol Edison Mitchell and Wanda Westcoast to participate and to hang their work alongside that of the other women.[10]

Among the artists and CalArts students that collaborated were:[1][17]

  • Beth Bachenheimer (Shoe Closet, Dining Room)
  • Sherry Brody (Lingerie Pillows, The Dollhouse, Dining Room)
  • Judy Chicago (Menstruation Bathroom, Cock and Cunt Play)
  • Susan Frazier (Nurturant Kitchen/Aprons in Kitchen)
  • Camille Grey (Lipstick Bathroom)
  • Paula Harper (suggested project, Art Historian)
  • Vicky Hodgetts (Nurturant Kitchen/Eggs to Breasts)
  • Kathy Huberland (Bridal Staircase)
  • Judy Huddleston (Personal Environment)
  • Janice Johnson
  • Karen LeCocq (Leah's Room, Dining Room)
  • Janice Lester (Personal Space, Cock and Cunt Play)
  • Paula Longendyke (Garden Jungle)
  • Ann Mills (Leaf Room)
  • Carol Edison Mitchell (Quilts)
  • Robin Mitchell (Painted Room, Dining Room)
  • Sandra (Sandy) Orgel ("Ironing", Linen Closet)
  • Jan Oxenberg (Three Women)
  • Christine (Chris) Rush ("Scrubbing", Necco Wafers)
  • Marsha Salisbury
  • Miriam Schapiro (The Dollhouse, Dining Room)
  • Robin Schiff (Nightmare Bathroom)
  • Mira Schor (Red Moon Room)
  • Robin Weltsch (Nurturant Kitchen/Eggs to Breasts)
  • Wanda Westcoast (Curtains in Nurturant Kitchen)
  • Faith Wilding (Womb Room & Waiting, Cock and Cunt Play, Dining Room, Crocheted Environment)
  • Shawnee Wollenmann (The Nursery, Three Women)
  • Nancy Youdelman (Leah's Room, Three Women)

In the journal Signs, Paula Harper says, "the young students did not have much personal experience of traditional marriage and homemaking roles of women. Nonetheless, the ideas of all were influenced by the general aim of feminists in the late 1960s to revise women's position in society by bringing attention to their oppression, and this ideology clearly shared by the many individuals involved gave Womanhouse its impact.[12]

Working collaboratively on Womanhouse, the students gained new skills while developing a deeper understanding of human and personal experiences. The students also provided tours of the exhibition, which gave them the opportunity to articulate their artwork while maintaining their personal vision when faced with criticism. Even though the exhibition provided the students with great satisfaction and team effort some of the artists didn’t feel any personal accomplishment, and were looking forward to going back to work on their individual projects.[15]

The mansion contained a variety feminist installations, sculptures, performances and other forms of art. The artists creating Womanhouse did so, centralizing a white, cisgender, heterosexual and middle-class experience of womanhood in the early 70s.[18] By transforming a "woman's space" (such as a kitchen) into a radical feminist art, the artists truly made a statement.[19] Here they spoke out about women's issues, as well as criticizing the patriarchy. This helped women artists and architects in the pursuit of recognition and acknowledgement on the same level as men. Using a mansion as their chosen setting furthered their statement.[20]

Rooms and installations

[edit]

Womanhouse displayed the conventions of women through artistic spaces and experiences. Rooms included a pink kitchen, a bride thrown against a wall, a closet with sheets, and a bathroom for menstruation.

Nurturant Kitchenby Susan Frazier, Vicki Hodgetts, Robin Weltsch. Present in the kitchen are plates of food under a line of light bulbs, resembling it to a factory worker's assembly line. This highlights the dehumanizing aspects of a woman's role as nurturer.

Aprons in Kitchenby Susan Frazier A display in Nurturant Kitchen. Aprons are fashioned with breasts and other female body parts. This allows the female to remove her bodily features when she is done with housework, implying that her physical body is inextricably linked to her societal role.

Eggs to Breasts – Forms cover the ceilings and walls, starting as eggs on the ceiling and gradually transforming into breasts as the pattern continues down. Underscores the woman's traditional role as a nurturer by combining images of the kitchen and of a woman's sagging breasts.[1]

Dining Roomby Beth Bachenheimer, Sherry Brody, Karen LeCocq, Robin Mitchell, Miriam Schapiro, Faith Wilding. The Dining Room features a crown molding of lifelike painted fruit. A mural, based on a 19th-century still life by Anna Peale, is displayed on a wall behind the dining room table. The table itself features a bread dough sculpture, turkey, ham, pecan pie, vinyl salad bowl, vinyl wine glasses and a wine bottle. A chandelier hangs above the table. Below the table, a stenciled-rug is painted directly onto the floor. Dining Room is the most collaborative project in Womanhouse, utilizing the efforts of seven women to complete. It is meant to express a generous, bountiful and romantic aura.[21]

Bridal Staircaseby Kathy Huberland. Features a life-size doll replica of a bride, complete with veil and wedding dress, descending the stairs. She is fixed against the wall on the landing. Gauzy fabric adorns the walls and garlands of green and flowers encircle the bannister.[21]

Personal Environmentby Judy Huddleston. Intended by the artist to be "an entirely different world" that transcends the "established plane".[1][17]

Crocheted Environmentby Faith Wilding. Resembling a "primitive womb shelter", the room is painted black. Crocheted thread covers the wall, and a single light bulb illuminates from the ceiling.[21]

Leaf Roomby Ann Mills. A room with painted leaves. The leaves represent cycles; of seasons, life and feelings. They also functioned as symbolic “shields” for the artist, allowing her to both expose herself and hide at the same time.[1][21]

Leah's Roomby Karen LeCocq, Nancy Youdelman. Lea, a character based on the aging courtesan from Colette's novel Chéri, sits in a watermelon pink bedroom. The performance (performed by LeCocq) occurred continuously on a daily basis, and involved Lea applying makeup meticulously, then removing it, in an endless cycle to illustrate the pain of aging and the desperate process of trying to restore one's beauty. The performance illustrates the high standards of beauty levied by the pressure of society for women to maintain at all cost. Léa makes continual efforts to keep the attention of a man as her beauty deteriorates with age.[1]

Personal Spaceby Janice Lester. A bedroom that serves as the artist's personal fantasy, a room that only she can enter. The secret room acts as both a sanctuary and a trap.[21]

Painted Roomby Robin Mitchell. An otherwise white bedroom with painterly splashes of color on the walls and floor.[21]

Red Moon Roomby Mira Schor. A painting features a self-portrait of the artist and a rising red moon over rolling hills.[21]

Shoe Closetby Beth Bachenheimer. Hundreds of pairs of shoes were collected, painted and treated for this installation. A 'spike heel' features real spikes driven from the bottom of the shoe.[21] A closet with a comically extravagant number of shoes conveys the desperate attempt of women to be fashionable.[1]

Linen Closetby Sandy Orgel. A female mannequin is installed in the closet, with shelves and drawers bisecting her body parts. Folded towels sit on the shelves.[21]

Lipstick Bathroomby Camille Grey. A bathroom where every fixture is painted bright, 'Lipstick' red.[1] The room features 200 plastic lipsticks, a fur-lined bathtub, and a female figure painted entirely red. Stage lights were used to light the bathroom.[21]

Menstruation Bathroomby Judy Chicago. The bathroom is painted a stark white, and a layer of gauze covers the shelves. A single trashcan is overflowing with what appear to be used tampons, a woman's "hidden secret" that cannot be covered up.[21]

Nightmare Bathroomby Robbin Schiff. A bathtub hosts a woman's figure with most of her body obscured in water, made entirely from loose sand.[21]

The Dollhouse Roomby Sherry Brody, Miriam Schapiro. According to Schapiro, The Dollhouse Room juxtaposes themes of "supposed safety and comfort in the home" with "terrors existing within its walls".[21]

  • The DollhouseThe Dollhouse serves as the centerpiece of The Dollhouse Room. It is a six-room miniature house. The artist's studio room contains a miniature nude man atop a pedestal, with an erect penis and bananas at his feet. Downstairs, a miniature woman sits at her dressing table. There are many monsters present in the dollhouse, despite its familiar domestic aspects. To the left of the artist's studio is a nursery with a baby replaced by a monster. Outside the window, peering in, is a grizzly bear. Downstairs, a group of ten men stare in through the kitchen window. A rattlesnake is curled on the parlor floor.[21] The Dollhouse was acquired by the Smithsonian Institution in 1995 and is the only publicly available piece of Womanhouse.[1]
  • Lingerie Pillows – created by Sherry Brody. The pillows were sewn from underwear and bras and displayed on a small tabletop. Miriam Schapiro related a story that the curator of LACMA came to have a tour of Womanhouse. In the Dollhouse Room, he picked up one of the pillows and when he realized that he was holding, he was embarrassed.[5] Schapiro recalled that everyone in the room had laughed, but upon reflection she wished that she had questioned his aversion to something delicate, intimate, and feminine.[5]

The Nurseryby Shawnee Wollenman. Oversized furniture and toys simulate the feeling of being young, a small person in a big room. Special attention was made to make the space an androgynous, ideal living space for a child.[21]

Garden Jungleby Paula Longendyke. What resembles the skeletal forms of dead animals is present in the garden area. This is meant to convey the weakness and vulnerability of such animals.[21]

Necco Wafersby Christine Rush. Pastel colors contrast the otherwise organic colors of the garden. The ground is painted, and "fanciful clouds" create a "fantasy sky".[21]

Performances

[edit]

Workshops led by Judy Chicago were held in the Living Room of the house. Ideas for pieces were derived from "informal working sessions", in which the women acted out aspects of their lives.[21]

  • Three Women – Three 'types' of women are represented; the hustler, the hippie, and the mother. They wear exaggerated makeup are initially meant to be comical. They tell the stories, all 'trapped' in some aspect of being a woman.[21]
  • Maintenance Pieces: Scrubbing, performed by Christine Rush, and Ironing, performed by Sandra Orgel – Two performance pieces pertaining to maintenance. A woman scrubs the floor on all fours with a brush in a continuous, repetitive motion. Another woman irons identical sheets over and over. This isolated monotonous tasks for an audience to highlight their performative nature, and how these performances play a role in the construction of gender roles.[1]
  • Cock and Cunt playWritten by Judy Chicago, performed by Janice Lester and Faith Wilding. Two characters wearing costumes featuring comically large genitalia converse as "She" and "He", each acting out the roles of their designated sex. "He" argues that her lack of a penis justifies having to do the dishes. This is meant to show how exaggerated essentialist notions about the female body contribute to her role in the domestic sphere and to reveal the consequences of stereotyping.[1]
  • WaitingWritten by Faith Wilding. The actress sits in a rocking chair and slowly recounts how her days were structured around 'waiting' for things to happen; her husband to give her pleasure, her kids to leave home, and waiting for some time for herself.[21]
  • The Birth Trilogy – In the first section, a group of women stands in a line as they symbolically 'give birth' to one another. The 'babies' in this scenario lay on the ground until their 'mothers' come to hold and nurture them. In the end, all of the women gather in a circle as they chant and sing with heads bowed. The chant grows louder with time, ending in a "peak of ecstatic sound".[21]

Reception

[edit]

Womanhouse was the first feminist art project to receive attention on a national scale following its review by Time (magazine). Womanhouse exhibition served as an introduction of feminism to the general public a revolutionary act for the early 1970s, and it sparked many debates. One year after Womanhouse closed, in an article published by Ms. Magazine: "Many women artists have organized, are shedding their shackles, proudly untying the apron strings--and, in some cases, keeping the apron on, flaunting it, turning it into art."[22][23]

A 1972 review in the Los Angeles Times by William Wilson described Womanhouse as a "lair of female creativity" that "reminds us that the female is our only direct link with the forces of nature".[24] Though he remarks that "man's greatest creative acts may be but envious shadowings of her fecundity",[24] this review may have also highlighted stereotypical patriarchal attitudes surrounding connections between women's bodies, the domestic, and nature that Womanhouse attempted to critique. Paula Harper argued that such language is an attempt by critics to soften the impact of Womanhouse by assimilating it according to conventions of femininity.[14]

Some individuals strongly opposed this exhibition. Some critics claimed that radical feminist art projects such as Womanhouse "undermined aesthetic standards" in the 1970s. Others claimed that it was more therapy than art. Paula Harper challenged this critique, arguing that challenging the definition of art is a "function of the avant-garde”.

Lack of scholarly attention paid to Womanhouse is attributed to its very early production in the context of feminist art, its lack of controversiality in relation to other installations of the time (most notably Chicago's own The Dinner Party), and some accusations of essentialism. However, it is also argued that the piece illustrates, complicates and subverts a "false binary" of essential and constructed identity which enhances its value and relevancy.

Influence

[edit]

Artists, artworks, and institutions have been inspired by Womanhouse. The Womanhouse exhibition cannot be rebuilt, but a few of the rooms have been recreated for special exhibitions. In 1995, for example, the Bronx Museum of the Arts exhibited The Dollhouse by Sherry Brody and Miriam Schapiro, along with Faith Wilding's Womb Room, a recreation of Judy Chicago's Menstruation Bathroom, and Beth Bachenheimer's Shoe Closet, among others.”[23]

The feminist spirit of Womanhouse lives on through the website Womenhouse, which was inspired by the groundbreaking 1972 exhibition. Faith Wilding is among the participants in this collaborative site featuring virtual rooms and domestic spaces. Womenhouse catapults the issues raised by the original exhibition into the 21st century, within "a cyber-politics that addresses the multivalent vicissitudes of identity formation and domesticity.”

Womanhouse was cited in 2019 by The New York Times as one of the 25 works of art that defined the contemporary age.[25]

Films

[edit]

Womanhouse was produced by Johanna Demetrakas. Miriam Schapiro arranged for a 47-minute documentary film to be made about the project and released in the summer of 1972. The project was produced by Johanna Demetrakas under the auspices of the American Film Society and is a part of Women Make Movies and was released in 1974.[26] Demetrakas was said to be "impressed" and "inspired" by the project.[10] [27] Its European distribution is assured by le peuple qui manque.[26]

Womanhouse is Not a Home was a film produced by Lynne Littman and directed by Parke Perine. It aired during February 1972 on the local KCET PBS channel.[17] The film showed the installations, had the women artists speak about their work, and featured a consciousness raising session with Gloria Steinem.

Woman's House was an experimental film by Mako Idemitsu.[28] It is a 13-minute film that provides close up details of various installations.

50th Anniversary in 2022

[edit]

In 2022 on the 50th anniversary of Womanhouse Chicago led the installation of Wo/Manhouse 2022 in a house in Belen, New Mexico. The installation was in place for a 5-month period from June though October 2022. The event was led by Chicago's non-profit organisation Through The Flower (TTF), which is located in Belen. Megan Malcom-Morgan, was executive director of TTF at that time.[29] The anniversary installation included works by New Mexico artists.[30][31][32]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Womanhouse was a collaborative feminist art installation and performance space organized by artists Judy Chicago and Miriam Schapiro, presented from January 30 to February 28, 1972, in an abandoned Hollywood mansion in Los Angeles as part of the Feminist Art Program at the California Institute of the Arts. Over 20 women artists and students transformed the dilapidated structure's rooms into site-specific environments that critiqued and reimagined domestic roles traditionally assigned to women, featuring installations such as the Nurturant Kitchen with its symbolic food forms, the Nightmare Bathroom evoking menstrual distress, and the Bridal Staircase draped in veils to symbolize entrapment in marriage. The project involved intensive physical labor by the participants to renovate the house, enabling them to produce ambitious works that elevated their artistic practice beyond conventional gallery constraints. During its month-long run, Womanhouse drew approximately 10,000 visitors, marking it as a pioneering effort in feminist art that challenged male-dominated art institutions and emphasized women's lived experiences through exaggerated, dream-like domestic spaces. Its legacy endures as a foundational model for site-specific, collaborative feminist interventions, influencing subsequent exhibitions and scholarship on gender in art, though its focus on collective female creativity has been analyzed primarily through art-historical lenses tied to second-wave feminism.

Historical Context and Origins

Feminist Art Program Foundations

In 1970, artist initiated the Feminist Art Program at , enrolling fifteen female students in an experimental studio course designed to challenge the male-dominated art education system and encourage women to explore their personal experiences through art. The program emphasized consciousness-raising techniques borrowed from contemporary women's liberation groups, prompting participants to discuss and depict themes of female identity, sexuality, and domesticity using materials associated with traditional women's crafts, such as needles and thread. This foundational effort addressed the historical underrepresentation of women in art curricula and professional spheres, with Chicago drawing from her own frustrations as a female artist navigating institutional barriers. By 1971, relocated and expanded the program to the (CalArts) in , at the invitation of fellow Schapiro, who co-directed it thereafter. The CalArts iteration formalized the Feminist Art Program as a dedicated with allocated classrooms, supplies, and enrolled students, building directly on Fresno's model but scaling it within a more experimental institution founded by and . Schapiro's involvement introduced collaborative elements influenced by her "femmage" technique, which repurposed fabric and to elevate women's domestic labor as valid artistic practice, complementing Chicago's focus on psychological and bodily themes. The program operated from 1971 to 1974, fostering a cohort of participants who would contribute to Womanhouse the following year. Core to the program's foundations was a pedagogy rooted in experiential learning and critique of gendered societal roles, rejecting abstract formalism in favor of content-driven works that interrogated women's lived realities. Sessions involved group critiques, fieldwork examining female spaces like kitchens and nurseries, and skill-building in media overlooked by traditional academies, aiming to build technical proficiency alongside self-awareness. While innovative, the program's separatist structure drew from broader second-wave feminist strategies but prioritized empirical exploration over ideological conformity, producing early installations that tested collaborative models later realized on a larger scale.

Conceptual Development

The concept of Womanhouse emerged from the Feminist Art Program (FAP), which founded at in 1970 to counter the underrepresentation of women in and professional practice by providing female students with a segregated space for self-examination and creative output. Upon Chicago's relocation to the (CalArts) in 1971, where she co-directed the FAP with Miriam Schapiro, the program incorporated consciousness-raising sessions that encouraged participants to articulate personal experiences related to gender roles, influencing the shift toward a collective installation project. These sessions, modeled on therapeutic , prioritized excavating women's subjective realities over abstract formalism, laying the groundwork for site-specific works rooted in lived domesticity. Chicago and Schapiro developed Womanhouse as a transformative environment critiquing the home as a confining of female existence, drawing on second-wave feminist analyses of enforced domestic labor and psychological constraints, such as those outlined in Betty Friedan's (1963). The core idea envisioned an abandoned house repurposed into interconnected rooms, each embodying phases of women's lives—from infancy to aging—through handmade alterations that subverted utilitarian spaces into symbolic critiques of roles like bride, mother, and nurturer. This framework rejected hierarchical studio models, promoting instead non-specialized collaboration among approximately 24 female participants, including CalArts students and affiliates, to generate authentic expressions unfiltered by or institutional precedent. Practical exigencies at CalArts, including the unfinished Valencia campus, necessitated off-site production, leading to the selection of a derelict 17-room Hollywood mansion scheduled for demolition in late 1971. Chicago and Schapiro framed the project as a pedagogical experiment to elevate participants' technical and conceptual ambitions, with Chicago stating it would enable "new subject matter, new techniques, new ideas and a new way of looking at art." The emphasis on material transformation—such as lining interiors with fabric, crochet, and clay to evoke bodily and emotive resonances—stemmed from a deliberate fusion of craft traditions stereotyped as feminine with ambitions, aiming to validate such media as vehicles for serious inquiry into female and societal positioning. While the conception prioritized empowerment through shared authorship, execution revealed tensions between egalitarian ideals and directive leadership by the program's founders.

Creation and Production

Site Acquisition and Renovation

The site for Womanhouse was an abandoned, 75-year-old house at 533 North Mariposa Avenue in , which had been repeatedly vandalized and was scheduled for demolition due to its advanced state of disrepair, including broken windows, clogged toilets, missing stair railings, and lack of basic utilities. The property was identified by a group of students from the Feminist Art Program and secured through rental arrangements suggested by art historian Paula Harper, with owner Amanda Psalter providing access—described variably as a for three months or a nominal —allowing the project to proceed without immediate cost barriers given the building's impending destruction. Renovation commenced on November 8, 1971, under the direction of and Miriam Schapiro, involving 21 female students from the Feminist Art Program who committed to manual labor as a core component of their artistic training. Over 11 weeks, the participants addressed foundational repairs such as installing lights, repairing windows, and clearing plumbing blockages, while also constructing interior partitions, painting and wallpapering surfaces, and refinishing floors to create functional exhibition spaces. This process equipped the women with practical skills, including the use of power tools, challenging traditional expectations around manual labor, and transformed the derelict structure into a viable site for installations and performances by late January 1972.

Organizational Structure and Collaboration

Womanhouse emerged from the Feminist Art Program (FAP) at the , co-directed by artists and Miriam Schapiro, who established the program in 1971 to foster female artistic expression through collective exploration of women's experiences. Under their leadership, approximately 23 female students and local artists formed the core group, engaging in intensive collaboration from November 1971 through the project's public opening on January 30, 1972. The structure emphasized directed teamwork, with Chicago and Schapiro setting the overarching vision and assigning specific rooms or spaces to small teams or individuals based on thematic relevance to domesticity and roles. Collaboration occurred through structured group processes, including "going around the circle" brainstorming sessions for ideas and performance scripts, alongside shared physical labor in renovating the dilapidated Hollywood mansion—such as learning to use power tools and restoring interiors over eight-hour daily shifts. Certain installations, like , exemplified multi-artist efforts involving figures such as Beth Bachenheimer, Sherry Brody, Karen LeCoq, Robin Mitchell, Miriam Schapiro, and Faith Wilding, who collectively addressed themes of communal female labor. While the project aimed for a nonhierarchical, feminist that rejected traditional art-world power dynamics, participants reported tensions arising from and Schapiro's imposition of rigorous work ethics and artistic agendas, which some viewed as contradictory to egalitarian ideals and constraining to individual creativity. This dynamic reflected broader challenges in balancing with , as the directors functioned as both educators and overseers, guiding the transformation of personal narratives into public installations amid an exhaustive schedule that left little time for external life.

Participating Artists and Roles

Womanhouse was collaboratively produced by and Miriam Schapiro as co-directors of the Feminist Art Program, alongside approximately 24 participants, primarily students from , and later the , with additional local artists. These women undertook physical renovations of the abandoned Hollywood while developing 21 site-specific installations and performances that examined themes of domesticity, , and bodily experience. Roles ranged from individual room creators to group efforts on shared spaces, emphasizing collective labor over hierarchical authorship. Key contributions included:
Artist(s)Contribution
Judy ChicagoCo-director; designed and executed the Bathroom, an installation with red-stained towels, sanitary pads, and tampons to confront societal taboos around .
Miriam SchapiroCo-director; collaborated on the installation, a miniature domestic scene critiquing idealized , and contributed to the dining room setup involving and table construction.
Faith WildingCreated the Crocheted Environment (Womb Room), a large-scale and web evoking organic, uterine forms; also performed Waiting, a ritualistic piece on women's repetitive labors.
Kathy HuberlandInstalled the Bridal Staircase, featuring a white-gowned figure ascending lined with bridal imagery to symbolize marriage as entrapment.
Sandra OrgelPerformed , an endurance piece involving repetitive ironing of a massive sheet to highlight women's unpaid domestic drudgery.
Chris RushContributed to performance by scrubbing floors, underscoring endless household chores.
Robin Weltsch and Vicki HodgettsCo-created the installation Eggs to Breasts, stenciling progressing forms from eggs to breasts on walls to trace female bodily development.
Karen LeCocq and Nancy YoudelmanDeveloped Leah's Room from Colette's Chéri, a evoking literary themes of female desire and aging.
Sherry Brody, Beth Bachenheimer, Karen LeCoq, Robin MitchellGroup work on the dining room, including , painting, baking props, and building a table to parody women's roles in food preparation and social hosting.
Additional participants, such as Suzanne Lacy (involved in Ablutions, a on ) and others like Ann Mills and Mira Schor, supported overall construction, performances, and lesser-documented room elements, reflecting the project's emphasis on communal feminist practice. The distribution of roles fostered skill-sharing, with artists learning trades like and wiring alongside artistic expression.

Core Artistic Elements

Room Installations and Themes

The room installations in Womanhouse transformed the abandoned mansion at 669 North Formosa Avenue into a series of site-specific environments that interrogated women's experiences within domestic spaces, bodily functions, and gendered roles. Organized collaboratively by approximately 24 and students from the Feminist Art Program, the installations repurposed everyday rooms—kitchens, bathrooms, closets, and hallways—into surreal, symbolic critiques of patriarchal expectations, emphasizing themes of labor, nurture, sexuality, and taboo bodily processes. Each space incorporated craft techniques like , , and , traditionally associated with women's domestic work, to subvert their marginalization in . The Nurturant Kitchen, created by Susan Frazier, Vicki Hodgetts, and Robin Weltsch, occupied the main kitchen area and exemplified the project's exploration of food preparation as a for maternal and wifely nurturing. Walls and appliances were coated in raised bread-dough reliefs mimicking female anatomy, such as breasts and , while breast-shaped pies were and displayed in an oven redesigned with vulvar forms; visitors could smell the baking but not consume the items, underscoring the performative yet unfulfilled nature of women's domestic output. This installation highlighted the centrality of women's reproductive and caregiving roles in sustaining family life, while critiquing their confinement to such repetitive, undervalued tasks. In contrast, Judy Chicago's Menstruation Bathroom addressed menstrual shame through and stark realism. The room featured immaculate white porcelain fixtures—bathtub, , —and shelves of pristine products, disrupted only by a single bloody visibly staining a wastebasket; no other color intruded, amplifying the tampon's visceral impact. Opened on January 30, 1972, this piece confronted the cultural silencing of female physiology, using the bathroom's intimacy to evoke discomfort and provoke reflection on bodily taboos excluded from public discourse. Faith Wilding's Cock and Cunt extended themes of sexuality and embodiment into a hallway transformed by crocheted and knitted forms: oversized phalluses and vulvas dangled from the ceiling like playground equipment, inviting visitors to crawl through a tunnel-like structure evoking birth canals or phallic dominance. Installed as both static and performative , it parodied Freudian symbolism and playground innocence to reclaim and exaggerate genital , challenging visitors to navigate forms without . Other notable installations included the Bridal Staircase, a collaborative piece featuring a life-sized bride figure ascending steps lined with embroidered wedding veils, symbolizing the entrapment of as a domestic , and the Linen Closet by Nancy Youdelman, where altered garments bore stitched of personal trauma and resilience, transforming storage into a archive of women's hidden . Collectively, these works rejected abstract formalism in favor of , experiential environments that drew from the artists' consciousness-raising discussions, though limited primarily to heterosexual, middle-class perspectives on .

Performances and Live Elements

The performances at Womanhouse, staged primarily in the during the exhibition's run from January 30 to February 28, 1972, extended the project's critique of domesticity and gender roles beyond static installations into live, audience-facing enactments. Developed through collaborative workshops led by , these pieces drew on group-drafted scripts to exaggerate female stereotypes, domestic tedium, and bodily experiences, often performed by participants including Faith Wilding and Sherry Brody. Waiting, performed by Faith Wilding, depicted a woman seated and rocking in a chair while crocheting and intoning a repetitive cataloging life's interminable waits—from prenatal dependency and menstrual cycles to , , , and —emphasizing enforced passivity and anticipation in women's existence. First enacted at Womanhouse, the 10-minute piece used cyclical motion and vocal monotony to evoke isolation and ritualized endurance. Cock and Cunt Play, directed by and performed by Faith Wilding and Jan Lester, contrasted phallic and vulvar symbolism through two figures: the "cock" as thrusting and ejaculatory, versus the "cunt" as enveloping and menstrual, enacted via stylized gestures, sounds, and to highlight divergent sexual dynamics and cultural valuations of male versus female . This short play, part of the Womanhouse program, aimed to reclaim and reframe explicit female physiology against objectifying norms. Additional live elements involved performers from the dining room cohort, including Sherry Brody, Karen LeCoq, and Robin Mitchell, who integrated gestural and vocal explorations of communal female rituals into the space, blurring lines between installation and action to underscore shared labor and relationality. These performances, viewed by public visitors, amplified Womanhouse's emphasis on experiential confrontation over passive observation.

Documentation and Archival Records

Films and Photographic Documentation

The primary cinematic record of Womanhouse is the 1974 documentary film Womanhouse, directed by Johanna Demetrakas, which chronicles the Feminist Art Program's collaborative process, site renovation, room installations, and live performances at the 1972 exhibition. Running 43 minutes, the film features interviews with organizers and Miriam Schapiro, as well as footage of participating artists constructing environments like the Nurturant Kitchen and enacting pieces such as Faith Wilding's Waiting, emphasizing the project's exploration of domesticity and gender roles through unscripted, process-oriented visuals. Distributed by Women Make Movies, it serves as an archival testament to the event's immediacy, capturing both the physical transformations of the dilapidated mansion at 553 North Mariposa Avenue and the interpersonal dynamics among the 24 women artists involved. Photographic documentation supplemented the film's efforts to preserve Womanhouse's ephemeral elements, with images taken by participants and invited photographers during the to , 1972, run, when over 10,000 visitors toured the site before its demolition. Key photographs include Lloyd Hamrol's black-and-white shots of performances, such as Wilding's crocheted Waiting piece in the Possession Room, which depict performers in states of ritualized waiting to evoke women's historical subjugation. These images, alongside others by artists like Robin Mitchell, focused on installation details—e.g., Sandra Orgel's Devils Doorway or the communal Triangular Dining Room—providing static records of site-specific works that combined , , and domestic artifacts. Archival collections preserve much of this visual material; the Getty Research Institute's Woman's Building records include a dedicated series of photographs from 1972, documenting rooms like the Lipstick Bathroom and Cock and Cunt Playground alongside promotional ephemera. State University's Art Education Collection holds oversize panel photographs and exhibition-related visuals, while CalArts libraries maintain digitized outlines and images tied to the original project documentation. These resources, prioritized for their institutional rigor over anecdotal accounts, ensure that Womanhouse's spatial and performative innovations remain accessible, though gaps persist due to the original's handmade, non-commercial nature and limited on-site recording equipment.

Reception and Critiques

Initial Public and Critical Response

Womanhouse, open to the public from January 30 to February 28, 1972, drew approximately 10,000 visitors during its run in a renovated Hollywood mansion. The exhibition marked the first major collaborative feminist art project to gain national visibility, serving as an early survey of addressing themes of domesticity, corporeality, and amid limited institutional support for such work. Critical reception was mixed, with mainstream outlets often responding with condescension or unease toward its explicit explorations of female experience. A March 20, 1972, Time magazine review titled "Art: Bad-Dream House" characterized the installations as deliberately unpleasing, stating that they conveyed "very clear images of woman's situation expressed as works of art" through provocative domestic scenes. Local coverage in the Los Angeles Times similarly dismissed the project as "cheerful and disarming as a pack of laughing schoolgirls under a porcelain sky," reflecting broader skepticism toward its collaborative, nonhierarchical approach and focus on women's personal narratives. Public reactions varied, with many attendees—particularly women—finding the work empowering for validating shared experiences of patriarchy and confinement to household roles, though the graphic depictions of menstruation, birth, and sexuality provoked discomfort or repulsion among others, including male visitors and even some filmmakers documenting the event. This visceral response underscored Womanhouse's role as an avant-garde intervention in 1972's art scene, where feminist expressions were fringe and often met with resistance from established critics accustomed to abstracted or male-centric modernism.

Internal Controversies and Participant Perspectives

Despite the project's stated aim of fostering a nonhierarchical, collaborative environment, several participants later expressed resentment toward the leadership style of and Miriam Schapiro, who were perceived as exerting significant control over the process. Students were required to adhere to strict schedules, including arriving at 8 a.m. for manual labor on the dilapidated house renovation, followed by consciousness-raising sessions or discussions, often leading to heated arguments. Faith Wilding, a key participant, described the routine as grueling, involving work until evening with frequent "big fights" during breaks. Chicago acknowledged this friction, noting that students "resented me and they resented Mimi [Schapiro]" for enforcing regular hours, which clashed with their preference for more flexible, self-directed work. Mira Schor, another artist involved, retrospectively characterized the experience as a "boot camp of ," highlighting the imposed structure over pure autonomy. These tensions stemmed from inherent power imbalances in the teacher-student dynamic at the , which undermined the rhetoric of full ; Chicago and Schapiro, as instructors, directed priorities toward collective restoration and thematic cohesion rather than individual artistic pursuits, leading some to feel their personal agendas were subordinated. Participants from more privileged backgrounds reportedly chafed at the physical demands of the labor-intensive renovation, revealing underlying class differences within the group. While Chicago defended the approach as necessary to instill professional work ethics absent in traditional art education for women, it fostered perceptions of that contradicted the project's feminist ideals of equality. Additional internal perspectives emerged regarding representational gaps, particularly for non-heterosexual women. Lesbians in the Feminist Art Program reported a lack of dedicated spaces to express their sexuality or experiences, with no installations explicitly addressing lesbian themes amid the focus on domesticity and heterosexual norms. Faith Wilding noted in reflections that while at least two participants were openly lesbian, their perspectives were not prominently integrated into the house's rooms or performances. Later participant accounts, including from Wilding, emphasized the program's predominantly white, middle-class composition—all women were white attendees from the private CalArts institution—which limited diverse viewpoints on gender roles and overlooked intersections of race and class. These omissions were not overtly contested during production but surfaced in subsequent critiques by participants, underscoring how the project's emphasis on universal female domesticity inadvertently marginalized subgroup experiences.

Broader Criticisms of Feminist Framing

Critics of Womanhouse have contended that its feminist framing embodied by universalizing women's experiences around domestic roles, bodily processes, and , thereby marginalizing variations shaped by race, class, and sexuality. This perspective, rooted in second-wave feminism's emphasis on shared , often portrayed a homogenized "womanhood" that aligned closely with white, middle-class domesticity, as evidenced by installations fixated on kitchens, nurseries, and menstrual themes drawn from participants' primarily suburban upbringings. Such framing, while intended to subvert stereotypes through exaggeration, risked reinforcing them by confining critique to the without addressing intersecting economic or racial hierarchies that causally underpin dynamics. The project's separatist , excluding male involvement in creation and initial access, drew broader reproach for fostering an insular that prioritized gender antagonism over collaborative societal . Proponents of this approach argued it enabled unfiltered of female subjectivity, yet detractors, including later feminist scholars, highlighted how it impeded of by avoiding mixed-gender dialogue and real-world application, potentially entrenching division rather than dismantling it. This women-only model, emblematic of radical feminist experiments in the early , has been faulted for underemphasizing class resentments—such as students' labor in renovating the derelict mansion—thus revealing tensions between aspirational and practical hierarchies imposed by leaders like . Additional critiques target the framing's victimhood motif, where rooms like the "Menstruation Bathroom" and "Cock and Cunt Play" graphically depicted pain, rejection, and cyclical suffering, which some viewed as pathologizing and limiting agency to cathartic expression rather than proactive transcendence. Attributed to therapeutic influences from consciousness-raising sessions, this emphasis has been argued to essentialize women as perpetual sufferers, sidelining of diverse female resilience across cultures and eras, and reflecting a in feminist art discourse toward emotional interiority over structural intervention. Academic reception, often from institutionally left-leaning sources, has tended to mitigate these flaws by recasting them as period-specific innovations, yet independent analyses underscore how such framing constrained feminism's scope, prioritizing symbolic reclamation of the home over broader causal challenges to labor markets or .

Legacy and Influence

Impact on Feminist Art Movement

Womanhouse, organized by and Miriam Schapiro in 1972, served as a foundational model for collaborative, site-specific installations within the , emphasizing themes of domesticity, gender roles, and women's labor through room-based environments. This approach integrated everyday household spaces with artistic intervention, parodying and subverting stereotypes of feminine domestic confinement, such as in the Nurturant Kitchen installation featuring breast-shaped plates and egg motifs. The project's national media coverage and public accessibility amplified the visibility of feminist art practices, signaling their emergence as a distinct institutional force. Its methods directly influenced subsequent feminist works, including the South London Art Group's A Woman’s Place (1974), which echoed Womanhouse's use of derelict domestic settings to critique housework's toll, as presented by Lucy Lippard following her 1973 exposure to the project. Chicago's own (1974–1979) extended Womanhouse's repurposing of dining spaces to honor women's historical contributions via techniques, building on the collaborative and body-linked established earlier. These examples demonstrate how Womanhouse promoted performative, labor-intensive processes that linked women's bodily experiences to cultural critique, fostering a template for group-led feminist interventions. In the longer term, Womanhouse emboldened emerging women artists by providing experiential training through the Feminist Art Program, influencing educational models and paving the way for female-centered subject matter in exhibitions. Its legacy persisted in later surveys like the National Museum of Women in the Arts' Women House (2018), which included Chicago and Schapiro alongside 36 international artists revisiting domestic-gender dynamics, underscoring Womanhouse's role in sustaining thematic continuity amid evolving feminist discourse. Despite limited early scholarly scrutiny due to nascent critical frameworks, the project remains emblematic of second-wave feminist art's methodological innovations.

Long-Term Cultural and Academic Reception

Womanhouse has been canonized in feminist art history as a pioneering collaborative installation that critiqued domesticity and female stereotypes through site-specific interventions, influencing analyses of gender in spatial practice. Scholars have examined its role in early second-wave feminism, highlighting how its exaggerated domestic motifs parodied societal expectations, though later critiques identified essentialist imagery—such as vulva-like forms—in works like the Nurturant Kitchen as reinforcing biological determinism rather than transcending it. Despite generating less scholarly attention than Judy Chicago's subsequent The Dinner Party (1979), it remains a key case study in art history courses on 1970s performance and installation art, underscoring tensions between collective authorship and individual vision. In cultural contexts, Womanhouse's legacy manifests in retrospective exhibitions and media that revisit its experiential format, such as the 2018 "Women House" show at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, which drew directly from its domestic reimaginings to feature global artists challenging home-based gender norms. Documentaries like Faith Wilding's 1974 film have preserved its performative elements, sustaining interest in feminist pedagogy and labor critiques, with revivals emphasizing its foundational status for immersive, body-centered works. However, its influence has been confined largely to feminist and niches, described as a "matrix" for installation and but not a transformative force in the broader . Academic and cultural discussions have increasingly noted Womanhouse's limitations, including its predominantly white, middle-class participant base—24 women students from CalArts—and exclusion of intersectional perspectives on race and class, which later feminist scholars argue constrained its universality. Critiques of aesthetic rigor, such as perceived amateurism in craft elements, have persisted, with some viewing its radicalism as prioritizing ideology over formal innovation, though proponents counter that this reflected deliberate rejection of male-dominated standards. These evaluations reflect evolving feminist theory, balancing its empowerment of female agency against charges of homogeneity and essentialism.

Commemorative Projects

50th Anniversary Initiatives in 2022

In 2022, Through the Flower, the nonprofit founded by , commemorated the 50th anniversary of Womanhouse with Wo/Manhouse 2022, a dual-component project in . It included a historical of original Womanhouse materials at the Through the Flower Art Space and a contemporary site-specific installation in a renovated house at 107 Becker Street, where 19 New Mexico-based artists transformed individual rooms into immersive works addressing domesticity, gender roles, and inclusivity across the gender spectrum. The contemporary installation previewed on and opened to the public on , running through the summer with guided tours emphasizing evolving interpretations of the original feminist themes. Separate gallery exhibitions also marked the anniversary. Anat Ebgi Gallery in Los Angeles mounted WOMANHOUSE from February 18 to April 16, featuring contemporary artists who revisited and expanded the environmental and performative elements of the 1972 installation, incorporating diverse media to reflect on its historical significance. Concurrently, Turner Carroll Gallery in Santa Fe presented Women in the House 2022, opening June 3, which highlighted works by original Womanhouse collaborators and Nancy Youdelman alongside artists such as Mildred Howard, , and Caledonia Curry (Swoon), focusing on feminist perspectives in . These initiatives collectively aimed to contextualize Womanhouse's influence while adapting its collaborative model to current artistic practices.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.