For centuries, women have created art, literature and knowledge, but history has not given them the same place as men. It’s not that they weren’t there: it’s that they were often invisible, or rather, made invisible. Throughout history, women artists have faced many barriers. Access to training, creative spaces, salons, exhibitions or public recognition was conditional on being a woman. And, when they managed to make their way, they still had to overcome another frontier: to be considered artists and not simply women who painted, wrote or created.
Numerous artists hid behind a male name so that their work would be accepted in exhibitions, contests or contests. For example, the writer Caterina Albert (Solitud, Rural Dramas, Contrallums…), who signed as Víctor Català, among other reasons, to avoid the prejudices generated by a woman writing about some realities that were disturbing to the society of the time.
Talent has never had a gender, recognition has
At the same time, there is also another issue that raises questions: the economic value of the works. The art market has historically valued the works of men over those of women, and this difference is not solely due to artistic value. The name or genre behind a work also builds expectations, reputation and price. Perhaps this is why we should ask ourselves what we are buying when we buy art: a work, a trajectory or also the prestige that for centuries we have associated, without questioning it, with male talent? In this sense, revising the history of art does not consist of replacing some names with others or distributing merits with current criteria. It consists of observing again and under an egalitarian criterion. It consists of asking ourselves who had the opportunity to learn, to create, to be able to sign, who was heard and who was recognized.
Because talent has never had a gender. Recognition, yes.
