Hello everyone, my name is Olivia Ortega-Cooney, I am a Chicano & Chicana Studies major, minoring in Food Studies. I am in my fourth year, and I transferred to UCLA last year from Berkeley City College. My preferred pronouns are she/her/hers. I haven't participated in any research, besides papers I have done for other classes. I am looking forward to researching Chicana artists, who I know many I have not heard of. In addition, I do not consider myself as an artist but, I have never questioned why I am not. Cant anyone be? I beleive that there is no parameters of art/ their shouldn't be. I am excited to explore this area especially related to dope Chicana Women.
I thought the article by Sybil Venegas “Conditions for producing Chicana Art”, gave an interesting perspective on economic conditions of the emerging Chicana artists in the 1970s. She states that, Chicana artists are overlooked. Within a culture the artist can only exist once the culture has achieved the social and economic stability necessary to produce artists. Thus, socio-economic conditions are crucial elements in the appearance of specific art movements and/or classes of artists. I believe art has always been associated with those of the elite and upper class. It makes complete sense that artists of lower class, gender, and race are so often overlooked. The dominant Anglo-American society has placed women in general in lower class which has impacted every aspect of our society. Is there a way that we can change the current narrative for these artists?
No comments:
Post a Comment