A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST COLLEGE OF ART

“Yea Right, and the Emperor’s Fully Clothed.”

The New Rhetoric of Identity Art in an Era of Color-Blind Prejudice

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE MASTERS OF FINE ARTS DEGREE

Gia Goodrich

2011
 APPROVED BY

_______________________________________________
Chas Bowie
Research and Writing Faculty

______________________________________________
Julie Perini
MFA Thesis Mentor

_____________________________________________
Arnold J. Kemp
MFA Chair
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section I:

No One Burns Bras Anymore

The Shift of Identity Art From Strategies to Tactics pg.03

Section II:

Relating Race
Adrian Piper & Mark Bradford pg.11

Just Us Girls
Judy Chicago & Kate Gilmore pg.17

Depicting Deviants
David Wojnarowicz & Taylor Mac pg.23

Section III:

The Color-Coded Society of Our Parents

The Ideological Oppression of Minorities and the Dominance of the Strategic Model pg.31

Our Colorblind Culture

The Ideological Oppression of Minorities and the Dominance of the Tactical Model pg.39

Irony is Integrity
Kara Walker and the Contemporary Criticism of the Tactical Model pg.50
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figures

1. Shigeko Kubota, Vagina Painting, 1965 pg.10

2. Adrian Piper, My Calling Card (Card) #1, 1986 pg.16

3. Mark Bradford, Practice, 200 pg.17

4. Judy Chicago, Fed Flag,1971 pg.22

5. Kate Gilmore, With Open Arms, 2005 pg.23

6. David Wojnarowicz, Untitled “One day this kid…” 1990 pg.29

7. Taylor Mac, the Revolution Won’t be Masculinized, 2010pg.30

8. Carolee Schneemann, Interior Scroll, 1975 pg.39

9. Patty Chang, Contortion, 1999-2000 pg.50

10. Kara Walker, Exhibition at the Renaissance Society, 1997 pg.58

11. Kara Walker, No Place (Like Home), 1997 pg.59

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank program chair Arnold J. Kemp; mentors Julie Perini, Wei Hsueh, and

Holly Andres; faculty MK Guth, Emily Ginsburg, Anne‐Marie Oliver, Linda Kliewer,

Stephen Slappe, Tracey Cockrell, Sean Carney; fellow MFA students from classes 2010,

2011, and 2012; all other PNCA faculty, staff and students; and my family. Lastly, I wish

to thank Shaun for her unrelenting support and encouragement.

 PACIFIC NORTHWEST COLLEGE OF ART
ABSTRACT

Yea Right, and the Emperor’s Fully Clothed

The New Face of Identity Art in an Era of Color-Blind Prejudice

In this paper I will discuss the inter-generational change in the style of identity art

produced over the last fifty years. I will provide a critical analysis of the shift to the new

ideological structure of prejudice and demonstrate how it has resulted in a new form of

identity art. The shift from overt to covert discriminatory practices will be discussed as

they relate to cultural attitudes regarding race, gender, and sexual orientation. As a result,

I will argue that the predominant modes of making identity art have shifted from direct

strategies: transgression, confrontation, mobilization to indirect tactics: irony, absurdity,

intersectionality, Signification. The work of Judy Chicago, David Wojnarowicz, and

Adrian Piper will be compared to that of Kate Gilmore, Mark Bradford, Taylor Mac, and

Kara Walker.

The following ideas are a culmination of research related to my visual work

during my studies in the MFA Visual Studies program: expanding on my explorations of
identity.
These thoughts form the impetus behind the project for the
thesis exhibition.

1
 Section I

In this section I will discuss the inter-generational shift in the type of identity art

produced over the last fifty years. In this chapter, I will frame this change in a larger

socio-political context in order to suggest a relationship between cultural climates and the

work created within them. Lastly, I will introduce key concepts, which are central to the

theoretical basis of the paper: the “post-ing” effect of minority related discourse and the

distinction between strategies and tactics.

2
 No One Burns Bras Anymore!

The shift of Identity Art From Strategies to Tactics

My intent with this paper is to explore the ways in which the dominant model for

creating visual art concerning identity has dramatically shifted. Within the last twenty or

so years, the direct and confrontational strategies that had prevailed in the decades before

have evolved into indirect tactics which dominate our contemporary landscape. It is my

argument that this change is emblematic of a larger societal shift in cultural attitudes

toward minorities.

Throughout the twenty-first century, works of art addressing issues of identity

have had a pervasive effect on social consciousness. During the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s

politically motivated art in the United States reflected social injustices experienced by

marginalized minority groups, and in so doing, provided alternate representations of the

American experience. Feminist, Civil Rights, and Gay Rights movements ushered in

radical changes in social reform.1 The visual art produced by, and in response to, the fight

for social equality often employed activist strategies of transgression, mobilization, and

confrontation.

Subsequent generations, having inherited the fruits of their predecessor’s social

labor, have come into the cultural climate of the “post.” “(P)ostfeminism,” as Angela

McRobbie suggests, “is the active process by which feminist gains of the 1970s and

1980s come to be undermined.”2 McRobbie, a leading authority in postfeminist

1
Obvious examples include, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the decriminalization of homosexual acts, and the American
Psychiatric Association’s removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.
2
Angela McRobbie, “Postfeminism and Popular Culture,” in Interrogating Postfeminism, ed. Yvonne Tasker and
Diane Negra (London: Duke University Press, 2007), 28.
3
discourse, argues that postfeminism suggests that feminism has been “taken in to

account” and in so doing, implies that equality has been achieved and that feminism is

“no longer needed.”3 McRobbie’s definition is supported by Sarah Banet-Weiser,

professor in gender studies at the University of Southern California who states that

postfeminism is predicated upon “a general assumption that the goals of feminism have

been accomplished and are now history, rendering it unnecessary to continue rehashing

old political issues.”4

Carrying the notion further, I would posit that “post-Civil Rights” and “post-Gay

Rights” also declare that Civil Rights and Gay Rights discourse lack contemporary

relevance and is no longer required. This “posting” results from a larger cultural

assumption that our society has evolved to a point where previously marginalized groups

are now on equal footing with mainstream culture. The myth is perpetuated by politics

and contemporary media culture. Such fantasies of equality are discussed by sociologists

as being part of a newer ideological framework, which maintains heterosexual-white-

male privilege through abstract liberalist attitudes, and casts minorities as the “cultural

architects of their own disadvantage.”5 Therefore, the predominant reception for works

addressing social injustice is one of dismissal. As a result, artistic strategies of

transgression, mobilization, and confrontation —as well as the strategic model itself—

have become ineffective. The majority of contemporary artists addressing similar

3
Ibid.
4
Sarah Banet-Weiser, “What's Your Flava? Race and Postfeminism in Media Culture,” in Interrogating
Postfeminism: Gender and the Politics of Popular Culture, ed. Diane Negra and Yvonne Tasker (Duke
University Press Books, 2007), 204.  
5
I will address this theory in depth in Section III. For further reading see Charles A. Callagher, “Color Blindness: An
Obstacle to Racial Justice?,” in Mixed Messages: Multiracial Identities in the "Color-Blind" Era (London: Lyne
Rienner Publishers, 2006): 103-116 ;  Lawrence Bobo and Ryan A. Smith, “From Jim Crow Racism to Laissez Faire
Racism: The Transformation of Racial Attitudes,” in Beyond Pluralism: the Conception of Groups and Group
Identities in America, ed. Wendy Katkin, Ned Landsman, and Andrea Tyree (Chicago: University of Illinois Press,
1998) 212.  
4
concerns have turned to the tactical model; specifically, tactics of irony, absurdity, and

Signification.6

To address this turn, it is imperative to differentiate between strategies and tactics

as articulated by French philosopher Michel De Certeau. The distinction is critical in this

analysis, as the strategic and the tactical will be examined as two distinct models for

addressing identity within artistic works. I will argue that the effectiveness of each

approach is predicated on the cultural and societal conditions of the maker.

In The Practice of Everyday Life, Michel De Certeau defines a strategy as being

possible:

as soon as a subject with will and power…can be isolated. It postulates a place

that can be delimited as its own and serve as the base from which relations with an
exteriority composed of targets or threats… can be man-aged. As in management, every
“strategic” rationalization seeks first of all to distinguish its “own” place, that is, the place
of its own power and will, from an “environment.” 7

Strategies are direct. They rely on a separation between them and us in order to foster

power by mobilizing individuals around an identity that exists in opposition to the other.

To draw a comparison to militaristic strategies, the ability to plan coordinated attacks

relies on knowing the location of the enemy. If that location is unknown, or ever worse,

the enemies are unidentifiable, then it becomes impossible to devise plans of attack.

One well-known implementation of the strategic model occurred at the 1968 Miss

America Pageant. This protest would yield the label of feminists as bra burners, as

6
Capitalizing the word is to differentiate between sussurian signification—symbols having one intended meaning—
and Signification as described by Henry Gates— as the use of symbols to evoke multiple meanings, which leave
meaning indeterminate. I will discuss Signification in the chapter,“Irony is Integrity.” See also, Elizabethada A.
Wright, “‘Joking Isn’t Safe’: Fanny Fern, Irony, and Signifyin(g),” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 31, no. 2 (April 1,
2001): 91-111.
7
Michel De Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkley: University of California Press, 1984): 36.  
5
women threw bras, girdles, high heels, and cosmetics in the trash.8 By staging the protest

outside of the event the delineation between protestor and pageant participant were clear.

Activists directly attacked the core values of the Miss America pageant by staging an

iconoclastic revolt against the symbols revered by the institution. This provocative

gesture was an attempt to literally and figuratively dispose of the constraints imposed

upon women.

It seems farfetched to imagine a similar act taking place today, when the majority

of the institutionalized support for discrimination of women in our country has been

overturned, and many of the goals of feminism have been achieved. Would Shigeko

Kubota’s Vagina Painting (Fig.1) feel subversive and challenging as it did in 1965, or

would her strategies feel overwrought and unnecessary?9

If McRobbie and Weiser are correct in surmising that our “post” culture views

identity-discourse as being unnecessary, then strategic gestures that rely on confrontation

have, in essence, nothing to confront. As a result, artistic work that overtly addresses

prejudice and discrimination by employing the strategic model is mostly unsuccessful.

This is not to suggest that the problems of social injustice have been adequately

resolved. Many artists continue to make work that addresses these concerns. That said,

the way in which they approach the subject matter is very different. In order to

circumvent immediate dismissal on grounds of irrelevance or the “its been said before”

argument, artists utilize tactics instead of strategies.

8
According to Carol Hanisch, one of the protest’s organizers, protesters had intended to burn bras but were
prohibited from doing so by the police department. Nell Greenfieldboyce, “Pageant Protest Sparked Bra-Burning
Myth,” Morning Edition (National Public Radio, September 5, 2008),
9
Shigeko Kubota’s action painting referred to and subverted Jackson Pollock’s method of drip paintings. By attaching
a paintbrush to the crotch of her underwear, she, challenged the ‘ejaculation’ of dripped, thrown and scattered paint by
providing what she referred to as the ‘feminine’ process of having the paint ‘flow from the creative core of the female
body’. Helena Reckitt and Peggy Phelan, Art and Feminism (Phaidon Press, 2001).  
6
 In defining tactics, De Certeau states that unlike strategies, “(T)actic(s) are a

calculus, (which) insinuates itself into the other’s place…it can capitalize on its

advantages, prepare its expansions, and secure independence.”10 Tactics exploit pre-

existing frameworks, with the intent of using what is already there in order to transform

it.

The use of irony, absurdity, intersectionality, and Signification11 has become the

pervasive cultural method for addressing identity since the mid 1990s. Tactics such as

these rely on an indirect projection of the artist’s political views, as they are not to be

taken at face value. In so doing, these tactics exploit contemporary society’s discursive

malaise by way of distraction and obfuscation. This sleight of hand has the advantage of

rhetorically sneaking past the ubiquitous antagonism surrounding the representation of

identity-related oppression in our contemporary world.

Despite the intrinsic identity politics, contemporary artists working within the

tactical model are better equip to avoid criticism pertaining to irrelevance, which has

plagued work of strategic directness operating in the twenty-first century. Elizabethada

A. Wright author of “Joking Isn’t Safe” asserts, that for “those who do not have white

[heterosexual] privilege…irony allows these people an essential form of protection, to

say what they otherwise could not.”12 Irony also provides points of entry into a discourse

that would otherwise be met with a general disregard. Some advocate for this

transformation while others lament the pervasiveness of irony, absurdity, and

Signification in art. Often posing irony and integrity as being diametrically opposed,
10
Michel De Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (London: University of California Press, 1984).  
11
Through the use of capitalization I wish to differentiate Saussurian signification,… from Henry Louis Gates
Signification. Elizabethada A. Wright, “"Joking Isn't Safe": Fanny Fern, Irony, and Signifyin(g),” Rhetoric Society
Quarterly 31, no. 2 (April 1, 2001): 91-111.  
12
Elizabethada A. Wright, “Joking Isn’t Safe”, 95.
7
many critics such as Jedediah Pudy believe that a lack of directness is used to protect the

author from fear, betrayal, and humiliation.13

Throughout this paper I will examine artists addressing three identity categories:

gender, race, and sexual orientation. For the sake of clarity, I will limit my scope to

artist’s work within the United States over the last fifty years. This is not to say that

international artists and those of preceding generations are not relevant to this line of

inquiry. Rather, they present additional variables that, although intriguing, are beyond the

scope of this thesis.

Through this analysis I will call attention to the use of both the tactical and

strategic models within specific art works, investigating how each approach operates

within its respective cultural climate. I will also give an in depth account of the ways in

which the dominant ideology has changed in order to maintain systemic oppression. I will

argue that as a result of the ideological shift it has made it virtually impossible to directly

critique these systems. Therefore, I will suggest that the tactics employed by

contemporary artists are just as sincere as the strategies of the generations before. They

exist as the result of an evolution that reflects the changes in contemporary society. It is

my belief that without this adaptation, artists would not be successful in creating

meaningful identity-related discourse because the current socio-politic environment is

uninterested. Thus, the strategies of yesterday are the tactics of today.

13
Raczka, R. Post-irony and Other Drivel. New Art Examiner v. 25 no. 10 (July/August 1998): 16 ; and Jedediah
Purdy, For Common Things: Irony, Trust, and Commitment in America Today, 1st ed. (Knopf, 1999).  
8
Figure 1, Shigeko Kubota, Vagina Painting, 1965.

9
 Section II

In this section I will present case studies of specific artistic works, to better articulate the

difference between strategies and tactics in identity art. Each artist can be interpreted as

being a representative of a range of makers within a larger movement. For the sake of

clarity, the majority of emphasis within the following chapters is dedicated to the

delimitation of the strategic and tactical model in specific art works. This section is

divided into three chapters, reflecting three identity categories: gender, race, and sexual

orientation.

10
 Relating Race

Adrian Piper & Mark Bradford

In My Calling Card (Card) #1, (Figure 2) Adrian Piper utilizes strategies of

confrontation, transgression, and mobilization as a way to effectively “showcase how

racism and sexism are intrinsically harmful.”14 In the piece she recontextualized the

nineteenth-century social convention of calling cards to directly address her experience of

race-relations at the time.15 Piper, who is a light-skinned African American, distributed

these cards to individuals who had mistakenly assumed that she was white and expressed

their prejudice in her presence. The card reads:

Dear Friend,
I am black.
I am sure you did not realize this when you made/laughed at/agreed with
that racist remark. In the past, I have attempted to alert white people to my racial
identity in advance. Unfortunately, this invariably causes them to react to me as
pushy, manipulative, or socially inappropriate. Therefore, my policy is to assume
that white people do not make these remarks, even when they believe there are no
black people present, and to distribute this card when they do.
I regret any discomfort my presence is causing you, just as I am sure you
regret the discomfort your racism is causing me. (Figure 2)

The work is inherently confrontational. In fact, the polite tone of the statement

amplifies this aspect because the letter cannot be discounted for being agressive or

irrational. Instead, the clear explication of both the problem and solution reflect Piper’s

ability to implicate the perpetrator while describing the effects of their actions. The piece

works within the framework of opposition. Piper inserted herself as the interventionist

14
University of Indiana Art Museum, “Adrian Piper”, 2006,
http://www.iub.edu/~iuam/online_modules/aaa/artists/piper.html.
15
Ibid.
11
allowing for an interaction that directly addresses the problematic behavior.

Transgression works here, as this type of encounter, which scolds another adult is

considered to be socially taboo. By addressing the perpetrator Piper subverted social

etiquette, which would have had the remark go ignored. However, Piper counterbalanced

the subversive quality of this interaction by having her response delivered on paper. This

gesture allowed for the interaction to remain private, therefore circumventing the

embarrassment of a verbal altercation.

Mobilization worked through the distribution of the cards as well as the statement

itself. Each card given, served as an invitation to consider the assumptions made about

Piper’s race. The card also asked for an extra level of awareness of the effects racist

remarks can had on others. This strategy engaged the recipient in a more tolerant

understanding of the identity politics at the time.

In contrast to this mode of working, which employs strategies such as:

transgression, confrontation, and mobilization, many contemporary artists utilize tactics

such as: irony, absurdity, intersectionality, and Signification to broach the subject of

racial politics.16

In the video Practice, (Figure 2) Mark Bradford repeatedly stumbles and falls, in

an attempt to score while playing basketball. He does so while donning a Lakers’ jersey

amended to incorporate an antebellum hoop skirt. Upon first glance, the juxtaposition of

a familiar image — a muscular black man in a basketball uniform playing basketball—

with the image of a man in a skirt proves both absurd and entertaining. This lure provides

an opportunity for closer inspection, where absurdity yields to Signification and

16
Kara Walker, Jayson Musson (Hennessy Youngman), Maya Escobar, and Nikki S. Lee are examples of other artists
utilizing the tactical model in their work today.
12
intersectionality.

Here, Signification works, as it is defined by professor Geneva Smitherman as, “a

means to say something without saying it, (a way to) leave meaning indeterminate.”17 The

content of the work is not basketball. Instead, the scenario serves as an allegory for

“roadblocks,” as Bradford explains, “on every level: cultural, (those related to) gender,

(and) racial.”18

Multiple aspects of Bradford are explored simultaneously: the queer, male, and

African American identities. This demonstrates intersectionality through the

acknowledgement of the confluence of identity categories, which comprise Bradford’s

experience. By depicting the interrelated nature of these identity categories, Bradford

affronts clear delimitations, which make identity art easier to digest.

Practice challenges the limits of appropriate gender performativity as the

depiction of a masculine man in a skirt is only so funny as long as it is culturally taboo.

Through the use of an antebellum hoop skirt, Bradford speaks to Civil War era fashion of

plantation owners, which connotes the indelible history of race relations between black

and white America.

Using Signification, artists such as Bradford evoke critical subject matter while

avoiding an explicit oppositional political stance. Although Bradford’s position may be

insinuated within the context of the piece, the work skirts strategic assertion. The artist is

thus able to conjure themes, which promote discourse, while avoiding the trappings of

didacticism, a didacticism, which is easily rejected of the basis of a Gramscian common

17
Elizabethada A. Wright, “‘Joking Isn’t Safe’: Fanny Fern, Irony, and Signifyin(g),” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 31,
no. 2 (April 1, 2001): 91-111. Quoted in, Geneva Smitherman in, Talkin and Testifyin’: The Language of Black
America (Houghton Mifflin, 1977), 97 .  
18
“Paradox,” Art:21 (Public Broadcasting Station), http://video.pbs.org/video/1239798931.
13
sense.19

19
Antonio Gramsci et al., Selections from Prison Notebooks, (Lawrence & Wishart, 1971), 326.  I will discuss
common sense as it relates to Gramsci’s analysis of power and control in Chaper 5.
14
15
Figure 2, Adrian Piper, My Calling Card (Card) #1, 1986.

Figure 3, Mark Bradford, Practice, Video stills, 2003.

16
 Just Us Girls

Judy Chicago & Kate Gilmore

The piece Red Flag (Figure 4) Judy Chicago directly attacked the social

expectations of females at the time by confronting the cultural aversion to menstrual

blood. The image is closely cropped displaying Chicago’s pubic region as she pulls out a

used tampon from her vagina. Chicago saw the work as playing a part in her aim to

destroy femininity and female beauty through “offensiveness.”20

The work uses both transgression and confrontation to relay the message.

Chicago chose to highlight the part of female anatomy that had been almost exclusively

depicted throughout art history in a sexualized way by male artists. She did so to subvert

the sexualized representation of the vagina by “pointedly showing women’s desire for

sexual and cultural power.”21 Chicago’s use of her anatomy is provocative. The

representation of a bloody tampon being removed elicited disgust and challenged the

viewer. In so doing, Chicago illuminated the stigma attached to non-sexualized female

bodies.

According to feminist blogger Ivana Podnar, “Red flag, associated with worker’s

liberation, (was) put here in a position of liberated femininity, freed from lady-like

refinement and given the power of body and mind.”22 The association drawn between

labor unions and the women’s movement illustrates how mobilization functions within

the work. Similar to many feminist artists of the time, Chicago’s work was meant to

20
Helena Reckitt and Peggy Phelan, Art and Feminism (Phaidon Press, 2001), 97.
21
Ibid.
22
Ivana Podnar, “Judy Chicago: When Women Rule the World,” Body Pixel, 2010, http://www.body-
pixel.com/2010/07/26/judy-chicago-%e2%80%93-when-women-rule-the-world/.
17
further a discourse in Women’s Rights. The title, Red Flag brings into light the history of

left-wing politics. Dating back to the French Revolution, historically a red flag has

indicated socialism, communism and anti-governmental parties.23 Appropriating the

symbolic power of the red flag, Chicago infused the piece with a modern history of

liberation movements. And example of the degree to which the red flag served to unify

political ideals is in the song of the British Labour Party:

The workers' flag is deepest red,

It shrouded oft our martyred dead;
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold
Their life-blood dyed its every fold.
Then raise the scarlet standard high;
Beneath its folds we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here.24

Chicago used the symbol in a determinate way. By asserting that the red flag is a bloody

tampon she literalized the feminist slogan “the personal is political.”25 The phrase was

originally written by Carol Hanisch and was used throughout the 1960s and 1970s

worked to unify women to exert their political presence in order to ratify discriminatory

practices. To the same end, Red Flag served as an emblem for this struggle to promulgate

equal rights for women. Also, the tampon suggests that everywoman is inherently a

member of the movement by virtue of her bodily fluids.

Over thrity years later, artist Kate Gilmore has approached feminine discourse in

a very different way. In the video With open Arms, the artist wears purple dress with an

23
24
Paul Halsall, “Modern History Sourcebook: The Red Flag,” Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 1998,
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/redflag.html.
25
Carol Hanisch, “The Personal is Political,” ed. Anne Koedt and Shulamith Firestone, Notes from the Second Year:
Women’s Liberation (1970), http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PIP.html.

18
accompanying flower in her hair. She kneels, smiling at the viewer while off camera

someone throws tomatoes as her. Her smiling outstretched arms speak to an absurdist

perseverance as she struggles to maintain her composure. Simultaneously, the violent

aspects that relate to targeting and shaming are addressed by the act of throwing

tomatoes.

Absurdity manifests in the piece, as the staged scene is ridiculous. Although the

work connotes a history of performance wherein unsatisfied audiences would express

their displeasure by throwing tomatoes, With Open Arms has no preceding performance.

Instead the character’s determination to withstand the abuse becomes the focus of the

work. This leaves the viewer wondering what the character has done to deserve this

punishment. In leaving the source of the tomato throwing ambiguous the artist allows for

any number of associations to penetrate the work. The artists persistence in maintaining

her posture serves as an allegory for all struggles related to identity.

Through her use of Signification Gilmore explores the symbols associated with

femininity. “The clothing that I wear in the videos,” she says, “is a very important aspect

of each piece.” The outfits she wears exaggerate the femininity and sexuality of the

character. Through the use of high-heeled shoes, long manicured nails, and dresses,

Gilmore toys with a female archetype, which her second-wave feminist predecessors

sought to destroy. For Gilmore the contrast between the character and her environment

(the two extremes) is something that is very important in her work.26

26
Katherine C. Ebner, “Kate Gilmore” (Art Real Ways, 2010), 2,
www.kategilmore.com/press/documents/realartways.pdf.

19
 In With Open Arms the feminine presentation is juxtaposed with the violent

situations that the character finds herself in. This incongruous relationship highlights the

limitations of femininity. By both appropriating iconographic representations of the

feminine while demonstrating the boundaries placed on such representations, Gilmore

suggests the dangers of seeking to either fully subscribe to or fully dismantle

constructions of femininity.

20
Figure 4, Judy Chicago, Red Flag, 1971.

21
Figure 5, Kate Gilmore, With Open Arms, video Stills, 2005.

22
 Depicting Deviants

David Wojnarowicz & Taylor Mac

I have described the era of Civil Rights, Gay Rights, and Women’s Rights as

having extending into the 1990s. I have done so in order to include the identity category,

which relates to sexual orientation. Civil Rights and Women’s rights exist on similar

timelines. The activist groups taking direct political action swelled during the 1960s and

1970s and subsequently, waned during the 1980s. This outcome is mostly attributed to

the successes in instituting federal policies, which protected individuals from overt

discrimination based on race and sex during that period.

In contrast, the Gay Rights movement functions on a different timeline. The Stone

Wall riot of 1969 established the beginning of the Gay Liberation Movement, occurring

five years after race and sex became protected classes in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. To

this day, sexual orientation is not among the protected classes of a federal level.

Therefore, discrimination based on sexual orientation has been more socially acceptable

for a longer period of time. To add to this, the major set back felt within the Gay Rights

movement occurred in 1981 when the first report of deaths due to AIDS was released.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s AIDS was closely associated with the Lesbian, Gay,

Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community, which resulted in widespread panic. As a

result, discrimination based on sexual orientation flourished throughout those decades.

Whereas most race and sex based discrimination has been ratified on a legal level,

the LGBT community currently does not have equal rights and is not legally protected

23
from discrimination in all states. As a result, there are fewer stigmas associated with

being homophobic than racist or misogynistic. That said the shift from strategies to

tactics has occurred within the fifteen years or so, which indicates a stigma associated

with overt expressions of anti-LGBT rhetoric.

In 1990, during the AIDS crisis, artist David Wojnarowicz created work in a

range of mediums that reflected his reality as a gay man living with the disease. Two

years before his death, the artist made an untitled image. (Figure 6)The work is often

referred to as “One day this kid.” It is an image of a young “Norman Rockwell-like boy,”

surrounded by text listing abuses that he will endure “in one or two years when he

discovers he desires to place his naked body on a naked body of another boy.”27

The juxtaposition of the image of young boy, —the type of which we normally

associate with puritanical family life of the 1950s and 1960s—with text that clearly

explicates the institutional and social abuses he will endure for being homosexual, work

to confront homophobic attitudes and outcomes. This straightforward approach leaved

little chance to misunderstand the intent: to draw awareness to the abuses and injustices

inflicted upon homosexuals of that time. The piece soberly reflected the inarguable

outcomes of homophobia while creating a sympathetic relationship between the viewer

and image.

Transgression works here in the pairing of the image and text. Through the use of

the figure Wojnarowicz connoted the imagery used in anti-gay propaganda depicting

“family values” as something threatened by homosexuals. In juxtaposing that reference

with the text Wojnarowicz subverted the familiar context of the image by positioning

27
Robert Sember, “Untitled (One Day This Kid . . .), by David Wojnarowicz,” American Journal of Public Health 91,
no. 6 (June 2001): 859-860; David Wojnarowicz, Untitled (One Day This Kid…),” 1990.
24
“that boy”—an image of a young Wojnarowicz— as both being emblematic of family

values and homosexual, which was argued to be antithetical according to the anti-gay

rhetoric of the time.

Since the text refers to the experiences the boy will have, the future tense implies

room for intervention and creates an effect of mobilization. As Robert Sember put so

eloquently in his description of the work:

It is difficult to justify inaction when we are moved to rage and tenderness

simultaneously… This is where the use of the future tense establishes the final
force of the piece. We live in the aftermath of the violence described in the text,
and we end our encounter with the work as we begin it. “This Kid” still looks out
as us, only now he is representative not of the innocent your of days gone by but
of gay youths who have already confronted or will one day confront the same list
of abuses. As we face the future beyond the image, we must consider our
response.28

This interplay between past and future tense challenged the viewer to confront their

position as bystander, implicating the viewer as perpetrator by means of inaction.

Eighteen years later, performance artist Taylor Mac performed The Revolution

Won’t be Masculinized for audiences in the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

(Figure 7) The piece is taken from the well-known song written by Gil Scott Heron in

1974 entitled, The Revolution Won’t be Televised. In Mac’s interpretation, he recalls

iconic representations of masculinity in media culture and highlights the absurd nature of

the hyper-masculine butch aesthetic in the United States.

You will not be able to ride bare back

through the Wild West, brother.
You will not have an Indian sidekick
named Tanto,
to show you’re cool, liberal panache…

28
Robert Sember, “Untitled,” 860.
25
 The revolution won’t drive sports cars, jeeps, tanks.
It will not parade a b52 bomber,
but a b52 bombshell— love shack!29

Mac juxtaposes the pervasive macho archetype with a similarly pervasive representation

of queer stereotypes. This use of Signification allows the artist to evoke the essentialized

representations of queers throughout popular culture as being sequined-glittered powder

puffs. He does so in an act of reclamation, simultaneously poking fun at the stereotypes

and promoting and taking ownership of them.

The artist plays his song on a ukulele while donning sequined-embellished chiffon

drapery. His glittered white face-makeup evokes the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,”

the long-time, gender-fucking nuns and social activist group whose mission is to

“promulgate universal joy, expiate stigmatic guilt, and serve the community.”30

This appearance reflects the activist history of drag performance and exploits the

exotic appearance associated with it. Through the use of camp, both lyrically and

performatively—alternating between operatic vocals and character voices— Mac utilizes

absurdity to both entertain the audience and infuse the work with meaning. He does so by

using absurdity to create irony within the performance. The irony stems from the

ostensibly absurd, funny, and campy performance. This presentation of stereotypical

queer behavior and dress points to the lens with which gay culture is perceived by others,

viewing gay culture as being exotic and frivolous. While at first glance Mac promotes

this viewpoint, the political magnitude is addressed in the story the artist tells.

29
Taylor Mac, The Revolution Won’t be Masculinized, Performed at San Fransisco Museum of Modern Art, 2008.
30
More information can be obtained on their website: http://www.thesisters.org/content/world-orders.
26
 In the beginning of the performance when Mac tells the story of Lawrence King, a

boy in Oxnard California who was shot and killed the day before the performance for

dressing in an effeminate manner. As a result of his exorbitant costuming and comedic

timing, audiences vacillate between awkward laughs and silence as the story is relayed.

Through this tactic, the artist indirectly conveys the severity of violence against LGBT

youth, while keeping audiences engaged through his ridiculous presentation. For this

reason, Halton Als of the New Yorker has called his work “intellectually arduous and

beautifully realized,” because it speaks to the “dangers of homogeneity, and what

happens to the soul when it forgoes the richness of the imagination (emphasis mine).”31

The last verse of the song demonstrates the levity Mac craftily maintains while

addressing the concrete reality of contemporary LGBT discrimination:

The revolution won’t be masculinized!

it won’t be played by a rock star in a stadium
to an audience of thousands on an electric guitar,
because,
it will be played by a drag queen.
in a museum.
on a ukulele.
It will be a fifteen year old boy in Oxnard California
Who was brave enough
to dress up in high heels and make up.32

31
Hilton Als, “Critic’s Notebook: Big Mac,” The New Yorker, February 2010,
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/notebook/2010/02/01/100201gonb_GOAT_notebook_als.
32
Mac, “The Revolution”.
27
28
 Figure 6, David Wojnarowicz, Untitled “One day this kid,” 1990.

Figure 7, Taylor Mac, The Revolution Won’t be Masculinized, performed at San Fransisco

Museum of Modern Art, 2010.

29
 Section III

In this section I will provide a critical analysis of ideological structures, which

maintain discrimination. The shift from overt to covert discriminatory practices will be

discussed as they relate to cultural attitudes regarding race, gender, and sexual

orientation. Also, I will examine the necessary conditions for both the strategic model

and the tactical model and socio-politics condition, which account for shift. Finally, I will

address the contemporary criticism of the tactical model as it functions in the work of

Kara Walker.

30
The Color-Coded Society of Our Parents

The Ideological Oppression of Minorities and the Dominance of the Strategic Model

Having examined art works utilizing both the strategic and tactical models,

I wish to now consider the societal conditions within which these differing approaches

operate. By providing a historical perspective of identity politics, I will illustrate the

driving forces that have shaped minority-related discourse in art.

There is extensive documentation of the political climate of the movements for

Civil Rights, Gay Rights, and Women’s Rights, during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s in

the United States.33 In relation to the present struggles of minorities, this previous era

may be rightfully characterized as one exhibiting overt forms of prejudice. Throughout

this period, racist, sexist, and homophobic attitudes were supported by state and federal

policies. Rhetorical strategies appealing to “common sense” upheld legislative disparities

between the privileged heterosexual-white male and the rest of society.34

For example, anti-miscegenation laws criminalized interracial marriage in the

majority of states, until Loving vs. The State of Virginia in 1967. Prior to this ruling, such

laws were rationalized by the belief that interracial unions were a result of seeking race

and class advantages, or were a form of “acting-out” due to “neurotic conflict”.35 The

underlying assumption fueling these theories was that people who were moral and
33
Therefore, I will dedicate the majority of my attention to the proceeding generation, as information regarding
those pivotal decades is easily attainable. That said, my brief depiction of the civil right’s era functions to provide
contrast for our current cultural moment.
34
Which are ironically referred to as minorities, despite comprising the majority of the population.
35
Thomas L. Brayboy, “Interracial Sexuality as an Expression of Neurotic Conflict,” The Journal of Sex Research 2,
no. 3 (November 1, 1966): 179-184; David M. Heer, “Negro-White Marriage in the United States,” Journal of
Marriage and Family 28, no. 3 (1966): 262-273. Heer discusses interracial marriage as, “Negro males of high social
status and white women of low social status, then the groom could trade his class advantage for the racial caste
advantage of the bride..” ; Peter Wallenstein, “The Right to Marry: Loving v. Virginia,” OAH Magazine of History 9,
no. 2 (January 1, 1995): 37- 41.   
31
healthy only married members of their respective race.

Similar rhetoric was used to justify compulsory sterilizations of women according

to race and or mental capacity.36 Beginning in 1907, eugenically motivated sterilizations

of women deemed “mentally deficient” or “feeble minded” were government sanctioned

in many states. From 1964 to 1976, “more than one thousand American women, most of

them black and all of them poor, [were] forced to submit to involuntary sterilization.” 37

In the case of Buck vs. Bell, that found compulsory sterilization constitutional, Justice

Holmes presented the opinion of the court:

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best
citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who
already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be
such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with
incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute
degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society
can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The
principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting
the Fallopian tubes. . . . Three generations of imbeciles are enough.38

The tacit “common sense” argument of the statement is that the life of someone who is

mentally fit had more value then the life of a person with a mental disability. So much so,

that the government sanctioned invasive procedures on many unconsenting adults to

eliminate the potential of giving birth, in order to safeguard the State’s resources.

Such examples provide justifications for blatant discriminatory practices,

revealing the prevailing ideology of Heterosexual-White-Male (HWM) supremacy at the

36
Philip R. Reilly, “Involuntary Sterilization in the United States: A Surgical Solution,” The Quarterly Review of
Biology 62, no. 2 (June 1, 1987): 153-170. See Also, Suzanne Tessler, “Compulsory Sterilization Practices,” Frontiers:
A Journal of Women Studies 1, no. 2 (April 1, 1976): 52-66
37
Suzanne Tessler, “Compulsory Sterilization Practices,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 1, no. 2 (April 1,
1976): 52-66.  
38
Philip R. Reilly, “Involuntary Sterilization in the United States: A Surgical Solution,”
32
time.39 Ideology, according to John C. Oliga, author of Power, Ideology, and Control,

acts:

(first) to conceal the essential aspects of sociopolitical reality. Second, such

concealment … relates systematically to some set of social, psychological, and
cognitive interests within a determinate historical context. Third, because
ideologies relate systematically to interests and historical realities, they can be
criticized so as to provide knowledge about those interests and realities.40

In this case, the HWM ideology sought to conceal the motivator of legal, economic, and

social inequalities of minorities: to maintain HWM privilege and perpetuate the historic

social hierarchy. This racist, sexist, and homophobic ideology supported a perception of

the world that maintained historic HWM privilege. Arguments for the unequal treatment

of minority groups were based on the “common sense” assumption that HWMs were

inherently better than women, homosexuals, or people of other races.

The use of common sense as a means of coercive power was examined thoroughly

by Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci. According to his analysis, common sense

functioned in close relation to hegemony as a manner of maintaining power. For Gramsci,

hegemony describes the means of control exercised by a dominant group through the

organization of consent.41 Hegemony can be understood as one of the “practical and

theoretical activities with which the ruling class not only justifies and maintains its

dominance, but manages to win the active consent of those over whom it rules.”42 The

power of hegemony resides in the ability to garner consent by making the ideology of the

ruling class appear to be the only one. Therefore, marginalized groups become active

39
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva discusses racial ideology. “If the ultimate goal of the dominant race is to defend its collective
interests (i.e., the perpetuation of systemic white privilege), it should surprise no one that this group develops
rationalizations to account for the status of the various races.”
40
John C. Oliga, “Power-Ideology Matrix in Social Systems Control,” Systems Practice 3, no. 1 (2, 1990): 31-49.  
41
Kate Crehan, Gramsci, Culture and Anthropology, 1st ed. (University of California Press, 2002).
42
Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks (International Publishers Co, 1971).
33
participants in their own subjugation.

This effect is achieved through a perpetuation of common sense derived from

Gentile thought, which suggests that common sense is a truth that is “natural,” and

therefore, should not be challenged.43 Historically, this common sense rhetoric was used

to justify a belief in HWM superiority over all else.

However, Gramsci argues that common sense cannot be natural and is not related

to an intrinsic and ahistorical human nature44. Instead, it is “ambiguous, contradictory,

and multiform,” and although it positions itself as truth, it is “the folklore of

philosophy.”45 Thus, common sense can be understood as “an element of cohesive force

exercised by the ruling classes and therefore an element of subordination.”46

The rhetoric suggesting that prejudice was common sense illustrates both the

Gentile and Gramscian definitions as they relate to HWM ideology. Linking prejudice to

a universal truth, —as was consistent with the Gentile application of the term—

highlights the justification of assumptions that supported HWM supremacy, regarding it

as natural and inarguable. Applying the Gramscian analysis reveals the motivating factors

behind promoting prejudice as common sense. The perpetuation of this ideology worked

as a form of hegemony,—a way of garnering consent— which furthered HWM privilege

through the oppression of minorities.

Thus, during the pre-Civil-Rights era and after, HWM ideology rationalized overt

prejudice in the form of segregation, job discrimination, and lack of reproductive and

marriage rights. As discussed above, this non-factual ideology functioned as a means of

43
Robert S. Dombrowski, Antonio Gramsci (Twayne Publishers, 1989).
44
Ibid.
45
Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebook.
46
Ibid, .
34
social control, which maintained HWM privilege and economic dominance. It did so by

asserting that HWM superiority was “common sense” which, according to Gramsci, was

a means of force through coercion. Minorities became unwilling participants in their own

oppression by believing what they were socialized to believe: that they were inferior.

However, during the 1950s and 1960s the pervasive ideology gave rise to a

formidable oppositional stance. This anti-hegemonic view challenged the assumption that

those who were not HWMs were inherently inferior. Therefore, the fight over equality

began in a public arena. Comprised of two distinct entities, the proponents of HWM

ideology and those against it, this dichotomous positioning proves to be integral to

understanding the success of the strategic model during that era.

As mentioned before, De Certeau argues that, unlike tactics, strategy requires a

distinct place of power and will separate from its environment.47 Although applicable to

literal interpretations, “place” and “environment” work, in this context, as conceptual

sites. For instance, the “environment” can be understood as mainstream society, whose

objection to equal rights was fueled by HWM ideology and “common sense.” “Place,”

which made strategy possible, was the separate ideological stance, giving a collective

identity to those who opposed the predominant beliefs of HWM superiority. “Strategy is

organized by the postulation of power,” which was gained through the organization of

individuals against discrimination.48

Strategy also requires that the exteriority of which the strategist wants to separate

him or herself present perceivable “targets” and “threats.”49 That is to say, in order to

create an identity in opposition there must be something to oppose. These threats were
47
Michel De Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (London: University of California Press, 1984), 36.  
48
Ibid.
49
Ibid.
35
easily discernable as being legal inequalities, social inequalities, and violence against

minorities.

As a result, the Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, and Gay Rights movements

attacked preexisting rhetorical strategies that had been used to sustain discrimination, to

directly confront systemic oppression. They did so through the use of the strategic model,

and specifically, strategies of mobilization, transgression, and confrontation.

Politically, events such as the Stone Wall Riot of 1969, the March on Washington

of 1963, and Act Up Wall Street Protest of 1987 evidence the implementation of these

strategies to directly challenge overt forms of discrimination resulting from HWM

ideology.50 The impact of these demonstrations stemmed from the number of individuals

who joined together to assert their beliefs—mobilization— as well as the direct assertion

of those beliefs—confrontation.

Similarly, artists utilized the strategic model to confront the same issues through

their work. Carolee Schneemann, Robert Mapplethorpe, and Ana Mandietta among many

others, addressed the oppression resulting from HWM ideology in a direct fashion. They

did so through strategies of transgression, confrontation, and mobilization.

The success of the strategic model was reliant upon two factors: the first was the

ability for those against HWM ideology to create an identity separate from mainstream

society. This enabled movements to form in opposition to HWM ideology that could then

directly confront it. The second factor was the practice of overt discrimination on a state

and federal level, which provided clear evidence of systemic oppression. Discriminatory

laws and policies could be directly addressed as well as provide measurable benchmarks

50
Josh Gamson, “Silence, Death, and the Invisible Enemy: AIDS Activism and Social Movement ‘Newness’,” Social
Problems 36, no. 4 (October 1, 1989): 351-367.
36
for success when overturned.

Over time, what were once legal and social obstructions proved to be measurable

outcomes indicating achievement. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act outlawed major forms of

discrimination based on race and sex. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association

declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1973, Roe vs. Wade established

women’s right to legal abortion.

Due to the persistence of these activists over many decades, the majority of

discriminatory legislation has been amended. What’s more, policies have been created to

safeguard individuals from many overt forms of discrimination. As a result, the United

States has experienced a dramatic paradigmatic shift. Whereas in previous decades the

predominant ideology was one of HWM supremacy, currently, the pervasive ideology is

one of imagined equality.

37
Figure 8, Carolee Schneemann, Interior Scroll, 1975.

38
 Our Color-Blind Culture

The Ideological Oppression of Minorities and the Dominance of the Tactical Model

Pervasive cultural attitudes, which had previously justified the practice of

discrimination, now find it inappropriate and punishable. With the ushering in of political

correctness in the 1990s, public expressions of HWM ideology have become socially

taboo. In 2006, after a media backlash, Seinfeld star Michael Richards apologized on

national television for the racist tirade he gave to a black audience member. Within

twenty-four hours of the incident: the story made international headlines, Civil Rights

activists called for reparations, the Laugh Factory comedy club stated that he would never

again be welcome, and Richards publically denounced his behavior and stated

emphatically, “I am not a racist.”

In the contemporary social climate, attitudes of racism, sexism, and homophobia

are stigmatized to such a degree that even being accused of such is unsettling. Activists

groups, who struggled in decades past, function today as cultural watchdogs that are

ready to hold those who express HWM attitudes accountable for their words and actions.

Groups such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against

Deformation (GLAAD) are among those that actively enforce tolerance in the public

sphere. As a result, people like Michael Richards pay a steep price for not adhering to the

ideological shift toward equality. In a time when social media networking and the

Internet can make cell phone videos visible on a global stage, one bigoted remark can

bring a twenty-five year career to a screeching halt.

39
 That is not to say that we are without discrimination and prejudice. Estimates of

pay dispersion in academia suggest that in 1999 male faculty made 20.7% more than

comparable female colleagues. Similar gaps in access to housing and wages provide

evidence of the continuing effect of discrimination today. 51

This is due to the fact that HWM ideology has not vanished, but rather, it has

changed forms. In decades past, HWM superiority was the predominant belief that

allowed for bigoted attitudes to be explicit and socially acceptable. In contrast, for the last

twenty years or so, it has become a belief, which is stigmatized and for the most part is

only expressed in a latent manner. As such, we can define the current era as one

exhibiting covert forms of prejudice rather than the overt expression of previous

generations. To put it sociological terms, we currently live in a “color-blind era.”52

Medically speaking, colorblindness is an inability to perceive differences in color

often resulting from eye, brain, or nerve damage. As a colloquial term, being colorblind is

an assertion of the inability to see difference in skin color. To follow this logic, one

would then be incapable of prejudice or discrimination. Although typically discussed as

such, colorblindness need not be solely race referential. Instead, the applicability of such

a phenomenon can extend to gender and sexuality as an inability to see difference, and

therefore, an inability to discriminate based on such a difference. Although it is

paradoxical in nature, the assertion of colorblindness reflects the degree to which the

social stigma associated with bigotry functions today. 53 In our contemporary culture

51
Debra A. Barbezat and James W. Hughes, “Salary Structure Effects and the Gender Pay Gap in
Academia,” Research in Higher Education 46, no. 6 (2005): 621-640.
52
Charles A. Callagher, “Color Blindness: An Obstacle to Racial Justice?,” in Mixed Messages: Multiracial Identities
in the "Color-Blind" Era (London: Lyne Rienner Publishers, 2006).  
53
Used in this context, “colorblind” is an impossible state. Heuristics is a necessary strategy to cognitive functioning,
by which the brain categorizes and interprets difference in order to make decisions. Thus, seeing difference is an
inherent component of processing information.
40
being perceived as homophobic, racist, or sexist brings such negative implications that

fear of being perceived as such has lead to a feigned disability to discern the differences,

which prejudice is predicated on.

As a sociological theory, color-blind racism refers to a new racial ideology.

Instead of explaining lower social standings on moral and biological inferiority, color-

blind racism points to natural occurrences, market dynamics and cultural limitations.54

For example, interracial marriage is no longer opposed on the grounds of neurotic

conflict or class advantage but instead, it is discussed as being “problematic” because it

poses an extra burden on the couples and their children.55 Here, the issue is not directly

opposed; instead, negative effects are suggested. The underlying assumption remains the

same, that mono-racial marriages are better than their interracial counterparts. However,

this assumption in color-blind prejudice is imbedded within sophistry and is difficult to

pinpoint, as it is not being directly asserted. Therefore, color-blind prejudice can be

understood as the contemporary rhetorical tactic for justifying and maintaining HWM

privilege through covert methods. Color-blind prejudice is the expression of Color-Blind

ideology, which is the contemporary manifestation of HWM ideology.

Color-Blind ideology (C-B), is the reason for the previously described “post-ing”

effect where identity-discourse is treated as irrelevant and is subsequently dismissed.

Through the use of rhetorical tactics, C-B ideology infers that equality has been achieved.

It also perpetuates the cultural myth that “equality of opportunity” has evolved into an

“equality of results.”56 That is to say, that the gains made by social movements for
54
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the
United States (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003).
55
Ibid. 3.
56
David L. Brunsma, Mixed Messages: Multiracial Identities in the "Color-Blind" Era (Lynne Rienner Publishers,
2005).  
41
equality have been effective to such a degree that they are no longer needed in

contemporary society because everyone is now on an equal playing field. It is taken to be

“common sense” that discrimination is a thing of the past.

It is important to note that what is being considered common sense has shifted

from HWM supremacy to an assertion that discrimination is a nonfactor. However, the

use of common sense in both cases is hegemonic. That is to say, it is a means of

maintaining dominance by positioning the common sense rhetoric as “natural” and

inarguable. Although there have been many gains made moving toward the direction of

equality, this belief is completely false.

Incarceration rates clearly illustrate this preposterous nature of this myth. For

those men born between 1965 and 1969, an astounding 20 percent of African American

males have served time in prison by their early thirties; this is compared to a measly 3

percent of white American males.57 Many similar disparities highlight the degree to

which systemic oppression continues to function today. In light of such evidence it seems

inconceivable that 71 percent of the white population believes that African Americans

have “more” or “about the same opportunities in life” as whites.58 This attests to the

pervasiveness of this myth, which is perpetuated in large part by a popular culture —

especially television— that “reflects” our current climate through affluent NBA stars and

gay, black, and Chicano sitcoms where everyone is middle class and happy.59

As a result of this fictitious tale, evidence of discrimination is attributed to

57
Becky Pettit and Bruce Western, “Mass Imprisonment and the Life Course: Race and Class Inequality in U.S.
Incarceration,” American Sociological Review 69, no. 2 (April 1, 2004): 151.
58
Kaiser Family Foundation, “Race and Ethnicity in 2001: Attitudes, Perceptions and Experiences” (Kaiser Family
Foundation, 2001): 32, quoted in Charles A. Callagher, “Color Blindness: An Obstacle to Racial Justice?,” in Mixed
Messages: Multiracial Identities in the “Color-Blind” Era, ed. David L. Brunsma (London: Lyne Rienner Publishers,
2006), 105.
59
Examples of sitcoms, which portray middle-class individuals who do not struggle as a result of their minority status
include: Will and Grace, George Lopez, Bernie Mac Show.
42
virtually anything else other than prejudice. This misrepresentation asserts that equality

has been achieved; therefore individuals are accountable for their respective economic

and social standing. This focus on the individual allows the culpability to be placed on

those who are disenfranchised, citing minorities as being the perpetrators of their own

subjugation. The danger of C-B ideology can be likened to a description of the devil

given by poet Pierre Baudelaire, “The loveliest trick of the devil is to persuade you that

he does not exist.”60 Similarly, C-B ideology preserves HWM privilege by safeguarding

structural oppression while denying its existence. It discredits those who experience

prejudice while allowing discrimination to function unaddressed.

To accomplish this, C-B ideology utilizes four central rhetorical tactics. In his

seminal book Racism Without Racists, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva— leading authority on

color-blind theory—identifies these tactics as: “abstract liberalism, naturalization,

cultural [prejudice], and minimization of [prejudice].” He refers to these four tactics as

“frames,” which he defines as being “set paths for interpreting information” that

misrepresent the world in order to maintain HWM privilege.61 Each of these central

frames provides insight in to the contemporary rhetoric that justifies and maintains HWM

privilege today.

The first and most important of these frames is abstract liberalism. This way of

framing issues applies political and economic liberalist concerns of equal opportunity,

choice, and individualism in an abstract manner. 62 For example, affirmative action can be
60
Charles Pierre Baudelaire, “The Generous Gambler,” in Devil Stories: An Anthology, ed. Maximilian J. Rudwin
(Kessinger Publishing, 2006), 164.
61
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the
United States, 26. In his description the author refers to these strategies as “frames.” Also, For the purpose of this
chapter I will refer to what Bonilla-Silva describes as color-blind racism as CB ideology. This decision is predicated on
the focus of the book, which only discusses race relations. As mentioned before, this concept can easily extend to
gender and sexual orientation and will be discussed as such through the term Color-Blind ideology.
62
Bonilla-Silva, 26.
43
criticized on nonracist grounds by claiming it is “reverse discrimination” by giving

“preferential treatment” to minorities. This argument suggests that affirmative action is

an unfair practice because it does not give everyone equal opportunity. However, “equal

opportunity” is applied loosely in this context as this rationale ignores the gross

underrepresentation of minorities in desirable jobs.63 If the concept of equal opportunity

is applied concretely, then affirmative is necessary for creating similar opportunities for

minorities that are enjoyed by HWMs.

The most detrimental facet of the abstract liberalist frame is the focus on

individualism. This argument works to completely negate all societal factors —especially

systemic oppression— that influence an individual’s ability to succeed. For example, a

woman would not hear that she has been consistently denied promotions because she is

female. Instead, she would most likely be told that her lesser-qualified male counterparts

were “better suited for the position” or that she wasn’t a “right fit.” This rhetoric

personalizes the impetus for discriminatory outcomes by pointing to something that stems

from the individual and not the individual’s identity categories. This type of blaming

redirects attention from societal factors to individual “shortcomings.” The underlying

objective is the same. It is an attempt to maintain HWM superiority. However in this case

it does so by instilling a sense of inferiority through the targeting of individuals instead of

their group.

Naturalization and cultural prejudice frame issues in biology or tradition. For

example, contemporary segregation is often justified as being “natural gravitation toward

similarity.”64 This implies that segregation is biologically rooted. To follow this logic

63
Ibid.
64
Bonilla-Silva, 28.
44
segregation would have to be something that children engage in before socialization.

However, this can be easily disputed by one trip to a pre-kindergarten classroom where

children who lack the mental capacity to conceptualize race play together without

question. Similarly, the underrepresentation of Latinos in desirable employment is often

attributed to a “relaxed” work ethic that is a “part of their culture.”65 This argument relies

on sweeping generalizations. The implicit argument that is racist. That said the explicit

argument is professedly culturally tolerant.

The final frame is the minimization of prejudice. This tactic discounts prejudice in

contemporary society by downplaying its effects. For example, the suggestion that

someone is “playing the race card” or being “hypersensitive” works to both minimize the

severity of a situation and discredit the complainant. 66 The additional repercussion of

minimizing prejudice is that only overt expressions of prejudice are recognized.

Therefore, the majority of C-B prejudice is not only ignored but also vehemently

repudiated.

These four frames comprise C-B prejudice and function as the contemporary

counterpart to the overt claims of HWM supremacy in previous decades. The frank

“common sense” rhetoric of the past has grown to be nuanced and full of sophistry and

allusion. By framing issues in equal opportunity and individualism one can oppose

policies that would threaten HWM privilege while appearing egalitarian. The

naturalization and cultural prejudice frames conceal stereotyping and protect

exclusionary practices. Through minimizing prejudice all together, one can discredit the

accuser and apostatize the existence of C-B prejudice.

65
Ibid.
66
Ibid., 29.
45
 Though the aim remains unchanged, —to uphold systems of oppression and

maintain HWM privilege— the approach has shifted dramatically. C-B ideology is in

many ways so covert that many individuals who subscribe to it do so unwittingly.

As a result, contemporary prejudice has become very difficult to pinpoint because there is

no one to point the preverbal figure at. It is sexism without misogynists, homophobia

without homophobes, and racism without racists.67

This ideological shift precludes the effective use of the Strategic model. This is

because the two necessary conditions, described of De Certeau as: having a “place”

separate from one’s “environment” and having an “environment,” which presents

“targets” and “threats” are not present in our Color-blind era.

There is no “place” or ideological stance opposing C-B ideology because it is

cloaked within the larger —albeit feigned— promotion of equality. That is to say, on the

surface it appears as though both bigoted HWMs and minorities are on the same side:

those for the equal treatment of everyone. This leaves the few remaining extremists on

the opposing team as the only groups against equality. Therefore, direct strategies have

little chance of forming an identity with an oppositional ideology to mobilize around due

to the fact that C-B ideology is completely decentralized.

To add to this predicament, the shift from overt discrimination has lessened the

ability to articulate “targets” and “threats”. The rhetoric of C-B ideology has become so

indirect that prejudiced attitudes exist only as the subtext, and can only be inferred. This

is a way of leaving a backdoor where a prejudiced “interpretation” can be seen as more

reflective of those being discriminated against —having a chip on their shoulder— then

67
Bonilla-Silva, “Racism Without Racists,” 4.
46
those who are making indirect prejudicial remarks. In short, there is no way to postulate

power if there is no clear phenomena to fight against.

Therefore, the tactical model has become the predominate mode of identity

discourse. De Certeau states that tactics are “the art of the weak.” They take place when

there is no delimitation of an environment. The location of the tactical model is in the

space of the other:

[I]t must play on and with a terrain imposed on it and organized by the law of a
foreign power…It must vigilantly make use of the cracks that particular
conjunctions open in the surveil-lance of the proprietary powers. It poaches in
them. It creates surprises in them. It can be where it is least expected. It is a
guileful ruse.68

It is important to note that in our contemporary culture the “foreign power” is not C-B

ideology. As discussed earlier, the dominant ideology is one of equality. This ideology is

enforced through activist groups, supported by governmental sanctions. In our society,

the only acceptable attitudes are anti-prejudicial. This is why C-B ideology employs

rhetorical tactics in order to utilize the frame of “equality” to exploit the unresolved

systemic oppression within it. C-B ideology is “weak” in the sense that it cannot function

in the open. This is not to say that C-B ideology does not have pervasive effects, it has

many. However, the tactics utilized by C-B ideology allow it to function in the shadows

while being ostensibly egalitarian.

For artists who illuminate the effects of C-B ideology and dismantle the myth of

egalitarianism, the tactical model is similarly employed. For them, the “foreign power” is

the hidden C-B ideology within Equality (E) ideology. Artists such as Patty Chang, Kara

Walker, K8 Hardy, Glen Ligon and Allora & Calzadilla, appropriate the methodologies
68
De Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, 37.
47
of this framework in order to indirectly convey their position. Through tactics of irony,

absurdity, intersectionality, and Signification, artists shift the context of familiar rhetoric

in ways that highlight the criticality of identity discourse today.

48
.
Figure 9, Pattie Chang, Contortion, 1999-2000.

49
 Irony is Integrity
Kara Walker and the Contemporary Criticism of the Tactical Model

“Irony, humor, and subversion are the most common guises and disguises of those artists leaping
out of the melting pot into the fire. They hold mirrors up to the dominant culture, slyly infiltrating
mainstream art with alternative experiences—inverse, reverse, perverse” 69

As I suggested previously, contemporary artists employing the tactical model in

their work have been heavily criticized. Much of the criticism comes from older artists

and critics who view the shift as indicating a loss of integrity. Much of the criticism

stems from a literal interpretation of the work, misconstruing the rhetorical tactics used.

Kara Walker is a contemporary artist who exemplifies the extreme reactions generated

from her use of irony, absurdity, intersectionality and Signification in her work.

Walker cuts figures out of black paper to create complex allegories for

contemporary audiences. Her silhouettes are often identifiable as either black slaves or

white slave owners during the Antebellum South of the United States. Often engaged in

sexual, violent, or otherwise explicit acts, Walker’s stories present historical fiction

reflecting primal fantasies and atrocities embedded within our cultural psyche. Walker’s

provocative imagery jabs at the core of C-B ideology, which seeks to perpetuate the myth

that racism is no longer an issue. However the polarized receptions that the works

inspires clearly evidence the degree to which racism and sexism continue to manifest in

social consciousness.

Critics such as Betye Saar take issue with the work because of its unflattering

depiction of African Americans. “I have nothing against Kara except that I think she is
69
Lucy Lippard, Mixed Blessings: New Art in a Multicultural America (Pantheon, 1990), 199.
50
young and foolish,” Saar stated in an interview discussing the work. “Here we are at the

end of the millennium seeing work that is very sexist and derogatory.”70

Hamza Walker, director of education of the Renaissance Society at the University

of Chicago professed the work to be shameless three times over in that it “abandon(ed)

the historical shame surrounding slavery, the social shame surrounding stereotypes, and

finally a bodily shame regarding sexual and excretory functions.”71 This assumption that

the artist is somehow undermining history of slavery by “shamelessly” exploring its

iconography illustrates the power that these icons continue to wield today.

Similarly, Howardena Pindell who could be described as one of Walker’s most

scathing critics furthers this argument, claiming that the artist exploits her contemporary

privilege to undermine equality. Pindell refers to Walker’s work as “visual terrorism,”

lamenting what she claims to be a tragic occurrence, “when black artists further

‘invigorate’ the stereotype.” She continues that the work of these artists is “catering to

racism, misogynistic at times and self-loathing in both its subtle and more gross forms….

(Walker) consciously or unconsciously seems to be catering to the bestial fantasies about

blacks created by white supremacy and racism”72

All of these responses are predicated on two assumptions. The first of these is that

it is unacceptable for African American artists to make work that does not ennoble their

race. This assertion is understandable as it arises from artists and activists of the previous

generation. Living in an era of overt discrimination, these individuals labored intensely to

combat the pervasive HWM ideology of the time. In so doing, artists and activists had to
70
Betye Saar quoted in Juliette Bowles, “Extreme Times Call for Extreme Heroes,” International Review of African
American Art 14 no.3 (1997) 3. Online version.
71
Hamza Walker, “Kara Walker: Cut it Out," Journal of Contemporary African Art (Fall/Winter, 2000).
72
Howardena Pindell “Diaspora/ Realities/ Strategies,” n. paradoxa no.7 (August 1998) Online Version.

51
directly confront racist depictions of African Americans and struggle to promote

representation that was not based in negative stereotypes.

However this assumption does not take into account the ways in which bigotry

functions in our contemporary culture. Racism in C-B ideology does not rely on

arguments of inferiority, which would necessitate a wholly positive representation of

African Americans. Instead, C-B ideology works to deny the existence of contemporary

prejudice and assert that negative stereotypes that fuel discrimination are obsolete.

In this respect Walker’s work functions in a similar way to the direct ennobling

approach of preceding artists in that it addresses the persistence of racial stereotypes

today. That said the way in which Walker does so is very different. Instead of opposing

these stereotypes Walker reflects them back to the audience. In so doing, Walker

generates heightened reactions, which evidence the power these stereotypes continue to

have in our current moment.

The second assumption made in these critiques is that the imagery is

representational and to be taken literally or that the literal interpretation outweighs the

ironic. This misconception is closely tied to the strategies employed by the previous

generation. In this way, the work is interpreted according to the strategic model with the

expectation that the artist is representing these images for with a didactic intent. This is a

clear misunderstanding of the way irony, absurdity, intersectionality, and Signification

function within the work.

In the case where the literal implications are believed to be more important than

the ironic, the value system is clearly evidenced. Artists of previous generations prefer

the strategic model; direct confrontation is the approach that has worked in decades past.

52
However, these artists fail to recognize the degree to which societal conditions have

changed. Prejudice has transformed from the overt assertions of HWM supremacy in

previous decades to the nuanced allusions of C-B rhetoric. Although understood, the

preference for direct strategies is unwarranted. Our cultural climate is no longer

conducive to overt gestures of protest because—as explained in the previous chapter— it

can be argued that there is nothing to protest against.

Cultural critic and Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates disputes claims based on

the literal interpretation stating that the purpose of Walker’s work:

Is not to not to glorify and perpetuate these images; rather, they have done so to
critique the racist impulses that manifested themselves in bizarrely heinous
representations such as Sambos, Coons, Mammies, and Jigaboos. ….No one
could mistake the images of Kara Walker… as realistic images! Only the visually
illiterate could mistake this post-modern critique as a realistic portrayals, and that
is the difference between the racist original and the postmodern, signifying, anti-
racist parody that characterizes this genre of artist expression.73

The irony within the work resides in Walker’s elegant rendering of the imagery. This

presentation ostensibly elevates the figures depicted in a manner that is congruent with

promoting the imagery itself. However, the exaggeration and absurdity of the

iconography—both in the actions depicted and the characterization of the figures— prove

to be indicators of Walker’s ironic stance. Gwendolyn Shaw, author of Seeing the

Unspeakable: the Art of Kara Walker observed that:

Cultural constructions of the African American imago as hypersexual, lazy, and

brutal subhuman creatures still permeate racial discourse in the United States, and
Kara Walker’s representation in her work of these stereotypical signs of corrupt
blackness couples with images of perverted whiteness challenges the limits of
what is tolerable to a community striving to overcome the impact of two centuries
of negative imagery.74

73
Henry Louis Gates quoted in Juliette Bowles, “Extreme Times Call for Extreme Heroes,” International Review of
African American Art 14 no.3 (1997) 3. Online version.
53
In this regard Walker is signifyin(g). She uses the symbols of antebellum slavery, sexual

deviation, and violence to evoke the complex network of associations. This indeterminate

use of symbols as discussed by Gates, has historic roots in African American history of

servitude and oppression. Playing with symbols in this way, which both relies on and

subverts literal meaning has been used by African Americans to misdirect their

oppressors so that “their discussion of experiences or plans to overthrow domination are

(were) not heard.”75 In the same vein, Walker uses Signification to address her experience

and contemporary racism by presenting icons from America’s history of slavery.

The work of Kara Walker is polarizing. Yet, there can be no denial of the

discourse the work conjures. In this respect, Walker’s ability to generate meaningful

conversations between cultural critics, artists, and audiences about racism, desire,

sexuality, gender, and power attest to the efficacy of the tactics she employs.

Despite the difference in form, contemporary artists such as Walker promote

representations of minorities that promote understanding and tolerance. Opposing

stereotypes—Judy Chicago’s Red Flag— and utilizing stereotypes—Kara Walker’s

silhouettes— work toward the same ends. Whether meaning is made through assertion or

irony both models address the ramifications of prejudice.

The shift from direct strategies to indirect tactics results from a cultural shift

from overt discrimination to covert discrimination. Thus, lamenting the direction that

contemporary identity art has taken is to yearn for the days of good ol’ boys and separate

bathrooms. Color-Blind ideology is a far cry from its Jim Crow roots. There is no doubt
74
Gwendolyn Dubois Shaw, Seeing the Unspeakable: The Art of Kara Walker (Duke University Press Books, 2004),
105. Quoted in Gwendolyn Dubois Shaw, Seeing the Unspeakable: The Art of Kara Walker (Duke University Press
Books, 2004), 105. Quoted in Catherine Harrington, “Considering the Grotesque in Response To Contemporary
Critique of Kara Walker’s Silhouette Art” (Simmons College, 2009), http://hdl.handle.net/10090/9664.
75
Elizabethada A. Wright, “Joking Isn’t Safe,” 97.
54
that prejudice continues to function today, but the way it is expressed is subtle and sly.

Color-Blind ideology is shrouded in the cultural myth that our society has evolved past

issues of prejudice and discrimination. Rhetorical tactics such as abstract liberalism,

naturalization, cultural prejudice, and minimization of prejudice ensure that evidence of

systemic oppression can be reasoned away to safeguard Heterosexual-White-Male

privilege.

Creating art in a color-blind era has challenged artists to adapt and reflect the

ways in which identity politics has changed over time. Artists have left behind the direct

strategies of transgression, confrontation, and mobilization, which challenged the overt

expressions of HWM supremacy in the past. By reflecting the sophistry used to maintain

HWM privilege today, artists use tactics of obfuscation such as irony, absurdity,

intersectionality, and Signification to continue discourse in an environment where it is

thought to be unnecessary.

55
 Despite the outward appearance, artists of both generations are virtually

indistinguishable. The way in which both models function within their respective socio-

political conditions remain the same: challenging pervasive ideology, instigating

discourse, and providing alternate representations of minorities. Contemporary artists

have grown out of their predecessors adapting to the new ideological framework of

HWM supremacy. Therefore, the strategists of yesterday are the tacticians of today.

Figure 10, Kara Walker, Exhibition at the Renaissance Society, 1997.

56
Figure 11, Kara Walker, No Place (Like Home), at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, 1997.

57
 Bibliography

Als, Hilton. “Critic’s Notebook: Big Mac.” The New Yorker, February 2010.

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/notebook/2010/02/01/100201gonb_GOAT_noteb

ook_als.

———. “The Shadow Act: Kara Walker’s Vision.” The New Yorker, October 8, 2007.

Banet-Weiser, Sarah. “What’s Your Flava? Race and Postfeminism in Media Culture.” In

Interrogating Postfeminism: Gender and the Politics of Popular Culture, edited by Diane

Negra and Yvonne Tasker. Duke University Press Books, 2007.

Barbezat, Debra A., and James W. Hughes. “Salary Structure Effects and the Gender Pay Gap

in Academia.” Research in Higher Education 46, no. 6 (2005): 621-640.

Barnett, Larry D. “Attitudes toward Interracial Dating.” The Family Life Coordinator 12, no.

3/4 (July 1, 1963): 88-90.

Baudelaire, Charles Pierre. “The Generous Gambler.” In Devil Stories: An Anthology, edited

by Maximilian J. Rudwin. Kessinger Publishing, 2006.

Bobo, Lawrence, and Ryan A. Smith. “From Jim Crow Racism to Laissez Faire Racism: The

Transformation of Racial Attitudes.” In Beyond Pluralism: the Conception of Groups

and Group Identities in America, edited by Wendy Katkin, Ned Landsman, and Andrea

Tyree. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1998.

Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of

Racial Inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003.

Bowles, Juliette. “Extreme Times Call For Extreme Heroes.” International Review of African

American Art, 1997.

58
Brayboy, Thomas L. “Interracial Sexuality as an Expression of Neurotic Conflict.” The

Journal of Sex Research 2, no. 3 (November 1, 1966): 179-184.

Brunsma, David L. Mixed Messages: Multiracial Identities in the “Color-Blind” Era. Lynne

Rienner Publishers, 2005.

Callagher, Charles A. “Color Blindness: An Obstacle to Racial Justice?” In Mixed Messages:

Multiracial Identities in the “Color-Blind” Era, edited by David L. Brunsma, 103-116.

London: Lyne Rienner Publishers, 2006.

Crehan, Kate. Gramsci, Culture and Anthropology. 1st ed. University of California Press,

2002.

De Certeau, Michel. The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkley: University of California Press,

1984.

Dombrowski, Robert S. Antonio Gramsci. Twayne Publishers, 1989.

Ebner, Katherine C. “Kate Gilmore”. Art Real Ways, 2010.

www.kategilmore.com/press/documents/realartways.pdf.

Gamson, Josh. “Silence, Death, and the Invisible Enemy: AIDS Activism and Social

Movement ‘Newness’.” Social Problems 36, no. 4 (October 1, 1989): 351-367.

Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers Co, 1971.

Greenfieldboyce, Nell. “Pageant Protest Sparked Bra-Burning Myth.” Morning Edition.

National Public Radio, September 5, 2008. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?

storyId=94240375.

“Gunnar Myrdal’s an American Dilemma: Do Whites Still Wish That Blacks Would Simply

Go Away?” The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, no. 42 (December 1, 2003): 71-

80.

59
Halsall, Paul. “Modern History Sourcebook: The Red Flag.” Internet Modern History

Sourcebook, 1998. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/redflag.html.

Hanisch, Carol. “The Personal is Political.” Edited by Anne Koedt and Shulamith Firestone.

Notes from the Second Year: Women’s Liberation (1970).

http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PIP.html.

Hardy, Ernest. “The Eye of L.A.: Mark Bradford.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, June 13,

2006. http://www.sikkemajenkinsco.com/markbradford_press.html.

Harrington, Catherine. “Considering the Grotesque in Response To Contemporary Critique of

Kara Walker’s Silhouette Art”. Simmons College, 2009.

http://hdl.handle.net/10090/9664.

Harris, Angela P. “Equality Trouble: Sameness and Difference in Twentieth-Century Race

Law.” California Law Review 88, no. 6 (December 1, 2000): 1923-2015.

Harris, Michael D. Colored Pictures: Race and Visual Representation. The University of

North Carolina Press, 2003.

Heer, David M. “Negro-White Marriage in the United States.” Journal of Marriage and

Family 28, no. 3 (1966): 262-273.

Hicks, Stephen. “Why Art Became Ugly.” Navigator Magazine, no. 2004 (2004).

http://www.atlassociety.org/why_art_became_ugly.

Lewis, Amanda E., Mark Chesler, and Tyrone A. Forman. “The Impact of ‘Colorblind’

Ideologies on Students of Color: Intergroup Relations at a Predominantly White

University.” The Journal of Negro Education 69, no. 1/2 (January 1, 2000): 74-91.

Lippard, Lucy. Mixed Blessings: New Art in a Multicultural America. Pantheon, 1990.

60
McRobbie, Angela. “Postfeminism and Popular Culture.” In Interrogating Postfeminism,

edited by Yvonne Tasker and Diane Negra. London: Duke University Press, 2007.

Oswald, Frances. “Eugenical Sterilization in the United States.” The American Journal of

Sociology 36, no. 1 (July 1, 1930): 65-73.

Pettit, Becky, and Bruce Western. “Mass Imprisonment and the Life Course: Race and Class

Inequality in U.S. Incarceration.” American Sociological Review 69, no. 2 (April 1,

2004): 151-169.

Pindell, Howardena. “Diaspora/ Realities/ Strategies.” n. Paradox no. 7 (August 1998).

Podnar, Ivana. “Judy Chicago: When Women Rule the World.” Body Pixel, 2010.

http://www.body-pixel.com/2010/07/26/judy-chicago-%e2%80%93-when-women-rule-

the-world/.

Raczka, Robert. “Post-irony and other drivel.” New Art Examiner 25 no. 10 (August 1998).

http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com/hww/jumpstart.jhtml?

recid=0bc05f7a67b1790e81fdff66b2b9b1d56dc4419e2ded3c1c38b0cde69726d8574dafd

b0ff3b9df4b&fmt=H Raczka, R. Post-irony and other drivel. New Art Examiner v. 25 no.

10 (July/August 1998) p. 16.

Reckitt, Helena, and Peggy Phelan. Art and Feminism. Phaidon Press, 2001.

Reilly, Philip R. “Involuntary Sterilization in the United States: A Surgical Solution.” The

Quarterly Review of Biology 62, no. 2 (June 1, 1987): 153-170.

Schur, Richard. “Post-Soul Aesthetics in Contemporary African American Art.” African

American Review 41, no. 4 (December 1, 2007): 641-654.

61
Shanklin, Eugenia. “The Profession of the Color Blind: Sociocultural Anthropology and

Racism in the 21st Century.” American Anthropologist 100, no. 3. New Series (1998):

669-679.

Shaw, Gwendolyn Dubois. Seeing the Unspeakable: The Art of Kara Walker. Duke University

Press Books, 2004.

Smitherman, Geneva. Talkin and Testifyin:The Language of Black America. Houghton

Mifflin, 1977.

Spencer, Rainier. “New Racial Identities, Old Arguments: Continuing Biological Reificaiton.”

In Mixed Messages: Multiracial Identities in the “Color-Blind” Era, edited by David L.

Brunsma. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006.

Tessler, Suzanne. “Compulsory Sterilization Practices.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women

Studies 1, no. 2 (April 1, 1976): 52-66.

University of Indiana Art Museum. “Adrian Piper”, 2006.

http://www.iub.edu/~iuam/online_modules/aaa/artists/piper.html.

“Untitled (One Day This Kid . . .), by David Wojnarowicz.” American Journal of Public

Health 91, no. 6 (June 2001): 859-860.

Walker, Hamza. “Kara Walker: Cut it Out.” Journal of Contemporary African Art, no.

Fall/Winter (2000).

Wallenstein, Peter. “The Right to Marry: Loving v. Virginia.” OAH Magazine of History 9,

no. 2 (January 1, 1995): 37-41.

Weinberg, Martin S. “The Male Homosexual: Age-Related Variations in Social and

Psychological Characteristics.” Social Problems 17, no. 4 (April 1, 1970): 527-537.

62
Wright, Elizabethada A. “‘Joking Isn’t Safe’: Fanny Fern, Irony, and Signifyin(g).” Rhetoric

Society Quarterly 31, no. 2 (April 1, 2001): 91-111.

Zamudio, Margaret M., and Francisco Rios. “From Traditional to Liberal Rarcism: Living

Racism in the Everyday.” Sociological Perspectives 49, no. 4 (December 1, 2006): 483-

501.

63