Eye-catching title of documentarian Sarah Vos’ culture-wars arts feature comes from a 1995 protest by the ape-masked feminist artist-activists “the Guerrilla Girls,” as they picketed the cherished Stedelijk modern-art museum in Amsterdam, angry that more than 90 percent of its exhibitions were works almost exclusively by white males. The main crusader is earnest-seeming museum director Rein Wolfs, sure enough, a 60ish white male, with a snowy beard and hair.
Alongside a corps of largely female diversity professionals and consultants, Wolfs secures a new curator, Charl Landvreugd, an artist from the former Dutch South American territorial possession of Suriname. Even a strident Black critic of the Stedelijk, Vincent van Velsen, is hired for photography collections.
Wolfs and his pack, in tedious meetings, strive to determine who should merit more attention as a person of color and which titles of artwork should be censored, Orwell-style, banishing bad words such as “imbecile” or “prostitute." Amidst all the talking heads spouting ideology, it is a revelation, though, when vast archives of the Stedelijk are opened for the cameras, disclosing the women artists whose canvases are rarely seen.
The documentary assumes—maybe far too much—that viewers are intimately familiar with key artists. The loose storyline climaxes with a revisionist display of works of German Expressionists Emil Nolde and Ernest Kirchner, who drew inspiration from folk art in Africa and New Guinea. Only here they are judged imperialists and exploiters (and, possibly, pedophiles). Filmmaker Vos does not spell out for watchers that Nolde and Kirchner were among those painters condemned by the Third Reich, their work shown by 1930s Nazis as examples of “degenerate art.”
No wonder art journalists react negatively to the exhibit, though Reins Wolf and his cohorts (the filmmaker included, maybe?) seem to take the criticism only as validation of their righteous cause. And they get into another intense discussion as to whether 1995 news photos they are using of the Guerrilla Girls depict the true, original Guerrilla Girls (who always wore masks) or wannabe impersonators. Because to misrepresent would be offensive…or racist…or sexist…or counter-revolutionaryist…or Disumbrationist…or…something double-plus ungood.
What public library shelves would this title be on?
Art (and arts administration) collections make a proper gallery setting.
What academic subjects would this film be suitable for?
Art, modern art history, and courses that address museum policies and collection-building could take an interest. There is tangential interest in the studies of racial and sexual politics.
What type of classroom would this documentary resource be suitable for?
College-age intellects and attention spans are the best fit. The artwork shown is largely in the abstract end of the scale in depicting male and female nudity (with the exception of “problematic” child nude); characters on screen would doubtless call many of the images racist or sexist (the reaction of others would likely be “huh?”).