David Reisman's The Lonely Crowd, a sociological analysis focusing primarily on 1950s American society, is often seen (a) as a pivotal if not revolutionary declaration of the modern, middle-class American character and (b) the framework for understanding various postwar social and cultural phenomenon, including literary works like Sloan Wilson's novel (subsequently made into a film of the same name) The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1955) and this short instructional video "Cindy Goes to a Party" (1955).
How does these examples provide (or not provide) a framework for discussing ideas of gender and sexuality related to those historically represented by the Abstract Expressionists?
David Riesman’s The Lonely Crowd paints a picture of America in the 50s as a time of transition (a transition focused mainly in the “art” centers of America’s major cities). Riesman argues that America is moving away from “inner-direction” as a means of establishing societal ‘norms.’ Technological advancements and access to information serve to undermine the individual-as-island attitudes of the “inner-directed” individual. Riesman points to media culture and growing ‘free time’ as reasons to look beyond the self (and familial teaching) in determining one’s place in the world. Riesman calls this type of personal identification “other-directed.” The “other-directed” individual’s sense of self is governed by the world around them. Most importantly, the relationships with the people they consider to be their peer group. This shift could be explained as a move from an internal moral compass to a socially directed personal compass.
ReplyDeleteThe problem here is the idea that these “other-directed” individuals are socially governed. The “other-directed” individual takes behavioral cues from established social norms. This does not imply that meaningful discussions regarding gender and sexuality were considered ‘norms’ in 50s America. I would argue that the social flexibility afforded the “other-directed” individual would make meaningful discussion regarding gender or sexuality all but impossible at the time. It is, however important to note the softening of the fixed sexual and gender ideas exhibited by the “inner-directed” individual. It is this softening that allows the Abex gender discussion to gain traction now, not as a historical event, but through a ‘re-reading’ of the ‘images’ made under these conditions.
This seems to be one of the main arguments of the Griselda Pollock article, Cockfights and Other Parades. Pollock argues the masculine/feminine binary is not sufficient to explain the Abex creative process. What exactly makes Pollock’s paintings “masculine?” If we return to Riesman’s “other-directed” individual, peer consensus makes Pollock’s paintings masculine. Fast forwarding these images through time, introducing them to a new ‘peer group’ for another look, might be the only way to get a real glimpse at the complex relationships at work beneath their ‘macho’ surface.
When considering the abstract expressionist of the post-war era it is acceptable to assume David Reisman would place them in the category of the “other-directed” person. He would argue that their way of thinking was driven by a response to and a living against “the social norms”. The “other-directed” person lives out their life not according to the “social norms”, but in response to them. They are told that acting one way produces one result and acting in another produces a different result. Just as the fairy-god mother told Cindy in the short film, that she should act “polite” and “be considerate of others”, Cindy then is faced with the decision of rather or not she wants to follow these widely accepted social guidelines. The other-directed person decides which they want to be or not be and act accordingly.
ReplyDeleteI think this is an important point, because I feel that the “social norm” served as the basis for the abstract expressionists’ work. They went against what they felt was the “social norm.” Exuding masculine qualities in their work (or what they were told was masculine), the abstract expressionists were the first of their kind and therefore many felt uncomfortable by their work. Was it okay to admire this work that was so masculine and violent in its gesture? What makes the work of Pollock and the other abstract expressionist so masculine in the first place? Was it because they painted their work with gesture and violent motions? Resiman’s article leaves us with the pertinent point that ideas behind artistic movements, in this case the ideas of gender and sexuality imbedded in the work of the abstract expressionist, comes about and is determined by what others say, and how it in turn falls in the “social norm.”
After our discussions of Mad Men and watching the wonderful instructional film, "Cindy goes to a party," I thought this SNL skit featuring January Jones relevant...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hulu.com/watch/109030/saturday-night-live-a-ladies-guide-to-party-planning
and even though funny--I think it is an interesting a pop culture topic--maybe more present in contemporary conscience since the advent of Mad Men?