Why the Great Masters of Art History are White Men and Why This is Dangerous
A Rant About the Art History Field and the Narrative it Supports
If you have ever walked through Target, watched the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, or watched a Disney movie then you have become acquainted with the “great masters” of art history. Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Van Gogh, Salvador Dali, Picasso, Andy Warhol; all names that have become part of the global common vernacular and names that many can easily point to as quintessential creators within the art field. This is not a mistake. Years of academic and media representation have ensured that these are the names associated with art. Why is that? What do these artists all have in common?
They are all white males.
It is easy to rebuke this statement with the argument of, “Yes, but they were masters of their craft.” While this statement is indisputable, the question has nothing to do with the talent that these artists possess. Clearly, the masters are masters for a reason. No, the issue of their race and gender has nothing to do with talent. The questions that the issues of idolizing only white males as the great masters of art history are these: Are they truly the best representations of the genres that their oeuvre embodies? And, more importantly, why do we only hear these names and no others?
There is a common misconception about the field of art history that even exists among art historians. This is the idea that history, and therefore art history, is a static field. It is the idea that what is written about the past is set in stone because the past definitively happened in the past tense. It will always be.
This is a dangerous train of thought to subscribe to. It encourages researchers in the present to stop questioning the legitimacy of history. It perpetuates a very black and white, two-dimensional perspective of reality. The fact of the matter is that it is the job of historians to constantly reexamine what we previously thought to be true and challenge it. For instance: the idea that only white males built the art field.
Many would retort that, while yes there have been female artists active throughout history, female artists only created recreationally, alongside their husbands, or were otherwise a rare acceptation to the rule. Upon reexamination, this is entirely false.
Throughout history, female artists have worked independently of a male presence, been professional masters of their craft, and more plentiful than the common narrative would have one believe. They are often independently successful, key contributors to the conception of artistic movements, and surpass the abilities of their male counterparts. However, many of these female artists are described in history books as protégés, jilted lovers, or lesbian hermits.
By shrugging off female artists as being famous solely due to their affiliation with male artists, it is not only female artists and their legacies that are injured. It also hurts contemporary researchers, students, artists, and society.
The narrative that only male artists can be successful at their craft fosters the common understanding that women have always been subordinate to and dependent on their male counterparts. This is a lie that has been carefully fabricated for centuries in order to ensure the continued success of white male artist in several ways: it eliminates a vast majority of economic competition; it perpetuates the myth that only white males are capable of making new, creative strides that shape the world; and it encourages patrons to disregard works of art that do not depict the white male gaze.
Tackling the problematic nature of the male gaze is an entire conversation in and of itself. However, focusing solely on the male gaze controls the version of history that is accepted as true. Without considering multiple points of view, multiple stories, and a variety of story tellers from different backgrounds, there will never be growth. By believing the lies that are systematically fed through society and historical narrative, the myth that it is this one group of creators who know the human condition is perpetuated. The suppression of those who do not fit the identity of those whom the narrative favors continues, the participation of the public continues, and those who challenge the narrative are resigned to the darkest corners of history where they are then forgotten.
It is essential to challenge this narrative. Yes, the great masters of art history are masters for a reason. They are not, however, the only masters and more often than not they are also not the true masters. Their titles are stolen and invented. Challenging the existent narrative is the only way that a more accurate version of history can appear. It is the only way that the stories and voices that have been suppressed can come to light. And through art and revealing previously silenced artists the success, the highs, the lows, the emotions, the experiences, the lives, the times, and the people who captured them become clear. Their voices are valid, their stories enthralling, and the lessons that they teach us important.
For more in-depth examinations of the artists mentioned in this article and more (male, female, non-white, LGBTQ+ and otherwise), please visit my profile to read more.
