I really enjoyed the art talk today at the Blake Library. A great group of students very well prepared with questions. I got over my false modesty in short order and I’m afraid my ham-bone became too evident. Kinda wished I spent the time just on the questions. As I think back I didn’t give due credit to my mother’s creativity. She would be considered a fiber-artist if she accepted a title like that or wanted to move in the art-world circles. Like most old guys, I undervalue women’s work. I struggle to raise my consciousness and will try do better. Hopefully we’ll be replaced with a wiser generation with a better sense of fairness.
(100612 random thoughts)
I also remember my mother being the family photographer. She had an old box camera that took 120 film that made huge negatives.
(I think I have them in a box somewhere. There could be an art project in that collection of negatives.) I’ll have to think about how her work might have influenced me.
It seems that documenting family history is the work of the mother/wife. (is Mary Kelly an example?) My wife, Jean, and I have done quite a bit of genealogy and family history.
Here’s a thought on why I see women being more interested in family history. Historically, most women give up their family name and over several generations these names are often lost. It seems genealogy becomes a search for lost grandmothers and, I suppose, their fathers also.
My dad got a nice (Kodak?) camera in 1955, the year I was born. It was a “super” 35mm format–35mm film with just one sprocket hole per frame so the image was perhaps 25-35% larger than standard 35mm. He also had a 8mm movie camera.