Largely mocked as the pinnacle of Female vanity and frivolityThe imported porcelain fever of early 18th-century Europe laid the framework for chinoiserie, a Western imitation and interpretation of Chinese culture and aesthetics in manufactured wares. An upcoming exhibition in the Metropolitan Museum of Art is investigating the obsessive collection symbol of Houses van de Houderechelon and identified how perceptions of the art form focused on the financial autonomy of European women and contributed to the exotative objectification of Asian women and cultures.
Compiled by Iris Moon, who supervises the Ceramics and Glass Collection in the Museum Department of European Sculpture and Decorative Arts, Monstrous beauty: a feminist revision of chinoiserie Applying around 200 objects from the collections of the with and internationally on loan in a critical investigation into gender autonomy and racial stereotypes. In an interview with HyperallergicMoon said that her most important access point in the collection of the department was like an Asian American woman via chinoiserie. She tried to reveal the history that were embedded in the style and inheritance by the Monstrous beauty Show, opening on March 26.
“The other starting point for this exhibition was an object that we acquired, a reverse painted mirror of a woman in a Manchu dress around 1760,” Moon explained. The generic commercial trade object had noticed because the image of the woman seemed to be staring directly at her. “She is supposed to be a decoration on the surface of the mirror, not someone you have to confront, and I found that incredibly intriguing.”
Moon has determined the timeline and acquisition trends of imported porcelain HyperallergicState that although the earliest presence of the material in Europe dates from the medieval period, it was primarily available for princely collectors as a rare and appreciated object or set.
“The association with women and frivolousness really comes with the consumer revolution in the 18th century,” she went out. “It is precisely at the moment, when women get power as consumers, that makes public discourse from the new power of women and the fact that no one could control their taste.”
“Suddenly porcelain of this rare, precious raw material objects to this explosion of uncontrolled desire,” continued Moon, “and that sexualized language is imposed on these women when they develop a taste for these objects.”
Moon stated that one of the Primary criticism Buying porcelain was that you couldn’t only have one set – “You have to catch them all, they were like Pokémon.” Female collectors filled compulsive rows of boards throughout the rooms with their acquisitions. Note that decorative art was often rejected from both an aesthetic and political point of view compared to what was considered high art, Moon said that porcelain was more accessible when it flew under the radar.
When it comes to the role of porcelain as an object of inheritance, the curator explained that historically: “Rights to land and property service all go to the male line, while women have inherited the movable property.” She quoted Amalia from Solms-Braunfels, Princess of Orange, who left her tasteful and influential collection of decorative art and jewelry her four daughters – each of whom devoted a room in her house to show and build her mother’s inheritance.
But what did women particularly attracted to this art form? Was it the fragile, milky white material and the delicate decorations? Was it the action of hosting and presenting the goods and associated fine teas for guests?
“We tend not to consider the decoration so important because you see the same figures in all these objects – the pavilions and pagodas, trees and women in silk dresses,” said Moon. “But if this is your only access to a world outside of yourself, porcelain really becomes a tool to feed the imagination and fantasy and projections.”
Right: Medici Porcelain Manufactory (Italian, Florence, c. 1575–87), Ewer (Brocca) (c. 1575 – 80)
(© The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
And in it, Chinoiserie took the presented aesthetics of Chinese porcelain and other decorative goods and ran with it, which led to fetished renders of the “Orient“ As told by the imagination of European producers who depend on their interpretations of previously imported and authentic commercial goods.
“Chinoi series crushed and serialized fixed images of a culture that Europe knew nothing about, and it was designed to fit the European taste,” Moon explained. “The imagined story of what they think China has become a structure that does not necessarily disappear; It comes back when it is necessary. The idea that these lifeless objects first determine your relationships with a person or a country is the complexity of chinoiserie. “
Right: Yeesookyung, “Vaase_2017 TVBGJW1_Nine Dragons in Wonderland” (2017) (© Archivio Storico della Biennale di Venezia Asac, photo by Andrea Avezzù)
Het gesprek om af te ronden over stereotypen en autonomie met historische werken, zal de tentoonstelling van Moon hedendaagse Aziatische vrouwelijke kunstenaars, waaronder Candice Lin, Lee Bul, Yee Sooo-Kyung en Patty Chang, opnemen, als een soort ‘tonisch’ om de sierlijke verleiding van Chinoiserie en Call in het heden en de toekomst van het materiaal en de mensen die het te vertegenwoordigen, te snijden.
“Hopefully different storylines can open people for new perceptions and new ways of thinking about not only history, but about the way we live today,” said Moon van Monstrous beautyFeminist lens.
“I hope that when viewers come, they will first look and think second.”
