NOREEN MCGONIGLE NOREEN MCGONIGLE NOREEN MCGONIGLE NOREEN MCGONIGLE NOREEN MCGONIGLE 51

Judy Chicago’s Dinner Party: Contextualizing the Critical Reaction

Cohen. At the age of five, her passion for the he Dinner Party [fig. 1], the arts was sparked through art classes she took Tground-breaking, feminist, over-life- at the Art Institute of Chicago. From then size installation sculpture, is a monumental on, she embraced a life devoted to the arts. fusion of decorative and fine arts, operat- She would continue her training at the Art ing as a symbolic tribute to the history of Institute of Chicago but would complete her women completed in 1979 by the artist Judy Bachelor of Arts at the University of Califor- Chicago and her collaborative team. Since nia, Los Angeles (UCLA) in 1962. She went its conception, The Dinner Party sparked on to earn her Master of Fine Arts from controversy across the nation. It was first UCLA in 1964. She married Jerry Gerowitz exhibited at the San Francisco Museum of in 1961, but their marriage was short lived Modern Art (S.F.M.O.M.A) in 1979 and its due to a fatal car accident in 1963, resulting subsequent history has been chockfull of re- in his death. After receiving her masters, she jection and condemnation. These sentiments began to establish herself in the art world would remain largely unchanged in the crit- under her married name, Judy Gerowitz. ical literature until 2002, when The Dinner Her early works consisted of practicing typ- Party was included in a special exhibition ical styles of the time, which included spray at the of Art. During its painting and minimalist painting along with re-exhibition, The Dinner Party was over- various sculpting techniques. whelmingly embraced by critics and viewers around the globe. This shift in critical reac- Feeling unfulfilled and underwhelmed by tion experienced by The Dinner Party from her works and the path her career was tak- 1979 and 2002 can be traced and understood ing, she began making changes. By 1969, she through historical contextualization and the joined the faculty at California State Univer- reviews of art critics. sity in Fresno where she established the first Education Program. In 1970, , artist, educator, feminist, and she changed her name to Judy Chicago as intellectual, was born in Chicago, Illinois on an overt act against the traditional western July 20, 1939 under the name Judy Sylvia naming culture, in which a woman was ex- 52 pected to take the last name of her husband.1 porcelain with the names of 999 women from mythology to history inscribed in gold Chicago and, Miriam Schapiro, another art- luster. Chicago says that “the floor is the ist, elected to relocate the Feminist Art Pro- foundation of the piece, a re-creation of the gram to the California Institute of the Arts fragmented parts of our heritage, and, like in Valencia, California where they would the place settings themselves, a statement also join the faculty. The new program about the condition of women”.5 The names launched many interesting projects. Wom- were selected to represent a range of nation- anhouse (1972), the most prominent of all of alities, experiences, and accomplishments. the projects, was a series of installations that The floor acts as a structural and metaphori- “explored the postwar ideal of feminine do- cal support for the table. mesticity” in fantasy-like environments.2 A year later, Chicago, along with art historian The three wings of the table form an equilat- Arlene Raven and designer Sheila de Brette- eral triangle, with thirty-nine place settings ville, co-founded the Women’s Building in intended to represent thirty-nine individual Los Angeles.3 She established an organiza- women of history evenly distributed across tion called Through the Flower in 1978 as the wings. Each wing includes thirteen place a way to help enable the completion of her settings as a reference to the thirteen attend- most ambitious work to that point, The Din- ees at the Last Supper. The thirty-nine wom- ner Party. She went on to create several more en included were selected based on their works of art, including Birth Project (1980- actual accomplishments and their spiritual/ 1985) and the Holocaust Project (1985-1993), legendary powers. The place settings are the which similarly use art to analyze and inter- most significant component of The Dinner rogate history. Furthermore, she has written Party. The tables are covered with linens and several books including Through the Flower meet at each corner with an embroidered and The Dinner Party: From Creation to Pres- cloth. They are all set on an embroidered ervation. She and her career are still thriving runner with a ceramic gold chalice, utensils, in 2018 and she continues to be a champion embroidered napkin, and a china-paint- of women’s rights. ed plate. Each wing is separated into three categories based on historical time periods. Chicago began work on The Dinner Party in Wing one encompasses prehistory, starting 1974 after attending a real-life dinner party with the Primordial Goddess, continuing where it occurred to her that women had onto the development of Judaism, moving never had a Last Supper, like the one Jesus onto the societies of the early Greeks, and and his disciples celebrated.4 This evolved ending with the Roman Empire; wing two into a massive multi-media installation includes females who existed from early consisting of a three-winged, open, trian- Christianity to the Reformation; and finally, gular-shaped table, set within a dark room, wing three embodies strong figures from the amid six colorful tapestry banners [fig. 2]. American Revolution through the Women’s Each side spans forty-eight feet in length. Revolution, starting with The table is resting on top of a raised floor, and ending with Georgia O’Keeffe. Every known as the “Heritage Floor,” [fig. 3] com- place setting is executed within the charac- prised of 2,300 tiles made of hand-cast teristics of the guest’s specific historical 53

context. resemble the traditional mosaic designs of the Byzantine era, in particular, this design One of the most discussed place settings alludes to the famous mosaic of “Theodora at the table is the Empress Theodora’s, the and Her Attendants” from 547 CE located in famous Byzantine empress and advocate of Ravenna, Italy in the Basilica of San Vitale. women. She was raised by her father, a train- They both use a gold, green, and purple er of animals, on the fringes of the Byzantine color scheme, which are traditionally im- Empire. After his passing, in order to sup- perial colors. The imagery on the plate “is port her family Theodora became an actress, a symmetrical abstract butterfly form, each a profession synonymous with prostitution wing stretching to the edge of the plate.”7 and highly reviled by Byzantine society. The wide stretching wings are representative Later she found Christianity and abandoned of her wide acceptance of women and all her former career as an actress.6 She met Jus- oppressed people. A basilica plan was the tinian I, the nephew of the Emperor Justin traditional architectural plan for churches in I and heir of the Byzantine Empire in 522. the Byzantine era; this plan is reflected in the Shortly after, they decided they wanted to get symmetry of the plate imagery along with married, but the laws prohibited him to mar- the Roman arch colonnade imbedded in ry an actress, even a former one. Justinian the upper wings. The plate rests on a runner had the law repealed and they were married embroidered with “a mosaic like halo.”8 A in 525. Theodora was crowned empress similar halo can be found in “Theodora and alongside Justinian in 527. Historically, it is Her Attendants” which creates a distinct known that Theodora and Justinian ruled parallel between the two works. Finally, her together as political and intellectual equals. name is embroidered in gold and the letter Theodora was a champion of women’s rights “T” portrays the dome of the Hagia Sophia as a result of the humiliation of women from 530 CE, one of Theodora’s most promi- she witnessed and experienced first-hand nent and celebrated architectural feats. during her career as an actress. As a result, she fought for the rights of all women. A few The cornerstone of each place setting is the of her undertakings, intended specifically painted china plates. Every plate is fourteen to improve the lives of prostitutes included inches in diameter and contains a central closing the brothels, establishing safe houses motif based on the butterfly and/or the for protection, and passing laws forbidding . These forms are described by Chi- forced prostitution. Her other endeavors cago as central core imagery. This central for all women included passing laws to give motif was a critical aspect in the piece itself women more rights in divorce cases and and contributed directly to the reception of abolishing the law that allowed women to be the piece. Chicago explained her intentions killed for adultery. for this in her memoir Through the Flower: “I wanted to express what it was like to be Her exemplary life and achievements are organized around a central core, my vagina, represented by her place setting. The Byzan- that which made me a woman.”9 Thus for tine era is known for their intricate mosaic Chicago, central core imagery is the mak- designs, which can be found in Theodora’s ing of images that depict female sex organs. place setting [fig. 4]. The plate is painted to These motifs were intended to symbolize 54 pride in female identity.10 Her objective, at The concept of The Dinner Party was one that time, in depicting the vagina was two- that evolved over time. It began with the idea fold: first, to show that the one thing uniting of creating one hundred abstract portrait these forgotten women of history was their plates. This developed into the thought of shared genitalia and second, to reclaim and creating a series of “Twenty-Five Women celebrate the vagina. The vagina has been Who Were Eaten Alive” in order to sym- used for centuries by men as a way to en- bolize the “women who had been left out of force an “otherness,” degrade women, and h i s t or y.” 12 Gradually, the idea evolved into had rarely been represented in imagery out- The Dinner Party, as it exists today. Chica- side of pornography. She wanted to change go describes it as, “a reinterpretation of the its meaning to be emblematic of female Last Supper from the point of view of wom- heroines throughout history.11 en, who, throughout history, had prepared the meals and set the table.”13 Historically, The year 1970 was a crucial turning point of women have been confined solely to the do- the Women’s Liberation Movement. Second mestic domains of cooking, cleaning, raising wave had been initiated by Sim- children, and pleasing their husbands. The one de Beauvoir in her 1949 publication, art women could produce had been defined The Second Sex, but did not take off until and restricted by their gender. Women were the late 1960s. For , the 1950s confined to working with “feminine” arts, and 1960s mark a difficult time, as there was which in a visual context, include embroi- no place for women in the especially macho dery, china painting, quilting, and pottery.14 art narrative of Abstract Expressionism. By As arts typically produced by women, these 1971, Linda Nochlin had published her fa- media were not considered “high art,” which mous essay “Why Have There Been No Great is why they, along with their female creators, Women Artists?” in which she argues that were not included in the canon of art history. women were undervalued and strategically The main reason Chicago employed these excluded from the art canon by patriarchal media in The Dinner Party was to use these art institutions. In the 1970s, the women’s historically feminine, low-grade media in a movement spilled into the art world, ignit- way that challenged gender roles and elevat- ing a new era of feminist art. Women artists ed them to the realm of “high art.” were tired of being isolated from one an- other and suffering professionally. They had As her ideas grew, Chicago realized she been left out of history long enough, so they needed to assemble a team to assist her in began to change the art world by exploring the creative process. Five years later, with female experience and identity through their a team of almost five-hundred men and art. In the wake of feminism, women also women, most of whom were volunteers, The began to redefine their relationships with Dinner Party was complete and ready for ex- one another and society. It was an era of “re- hibition. The first opening was on March 15, branding,” so to speak. Artists began taking 1979 at the San Francisco Museum of Mod- traditional women’s crafts like needlepoint, ern Art. It remained there for three months, embroidery, and quilting, and incorporated during which it had over ninety thousand them into their work, as we see Chicago do visitors. The attendance for this show broke in The Dinner Party. all of the Museum’s previous attendance 55

records, including those reached during the fails to acquire any independent artistic life shows of the two famous male artists, Jas- of its own. To this male observer, it looks like per Johns and Robert Rauschenberg. Even an outrageous libel on the female imagina- though, Johns’ and Rauschenberg’s exhibits tion.”17 were regarded as the Museum’s “most pop- ular” shows at that time, The Dinner Party’s Kramer’s critical reaction to The Dinner attendance records were double the amount Party is a clear rejection of the piece in its to- of both of theirs.15 Following the SFMOMA, tality. Kitsch art was a term used to criticize The Dinner Party was scheduled for a na- art that was perceived as lacking taste and tion-wide tour. or attempting to copy high art but failing to do so. He used this term on multiple occa- Upon opening in San Francisco, The Dinner sions to describe The Dinner Party, which Party sent shockwaves across America and bolstered his conclusion that it is, in fact, not people were at the ready to share their opin- only bad art, but failed art. Many art critics, ions. Most of the reviews were negative and primarily male, did not understand or accept illustrated how disturbed viewers had been. the fundamental premise of the work. Chi- In particular, one of the most infamous cago was using female genitalia to metapho- negative reviews of The Dinner Party was rize female heroines throughout history and written by Hilton Kramer, a male American their gender-based exclusion from history. art critic for described as The art community refused to except this one of “the most influential critics of his era.” because it was in their eyes, “pornograph- In October of 1980, he wrote a review of The ic.” Chicago was pushing the boundaries of Dinner Party before it opened at its second accepted artistic iconography and Kramer, stop on its nation-wide tour, the Brooklyn along with many other critics of his time, Museum. He wrote, “The Dinner Party reit- rejected it. erates its theme- the celebration of women, both real and mythological throughout Maureen Mullarkey, an art critic for the the ages – with an insistence and vulgarity American-Catholic magazine, Common- more appropriate, perhaps, to an advertising weal, also wrote a negative review of The campaign than to a work of art.”16 He be- Dinner Party in 1981. Her review attacked lieved that Chicago exploited and vulgarized almost every aspect of The Dinner Party. She imagery of female sexuality with “abysmal analogized the imagery of the exhibition to taste” arguing that even advertising compa- the images found in Playboy Magazine. She nies working in “these liberated times” and wrote, “It shares with the air-brushed nudes with no boundaries when marketing a prod- in center-fold displays a dogged refusal to uct, would not dare to do what Chicago did regard the real thing. Substituting titillation in their advertisements. He described her for discernment, The Dinner Party distorts attempt at using “sex organs” to represent the women it pretends to commemorate.”18 women’s achievements throughout history as “crass, solemn, and single minded.” He critic, Marla Donato, wrote concluded his review by saying, “it is very a well-known negative review of The Dinner bad art, it is failed art, it is art so mired in Party, but on decidedly different grounds. the pieties of a political cause that it quite She claimed that she understood and agreed 56 with many of the negative reviews previously “central core” imagery, was no longer an ac- put forth, that this was not a work of art, but ceptable signifier of the feminist movement. rather, a platform for Chicago to launch her- The feminist movement of the 1980s was self to celebrity level status. Donato claims “committed to multiculturalism” in order to that Chicago used this work as an attempt to be fully inclusive. As a result, Chicago was play the role of God. She said that “evidence attacked with charges of racism by several of her massive ego” can be found in her au- feminists of color and others due to her sup- tobiography Through the Flower, solidifying posed lack of inclusivity in The Dinner Party. the arguments that this entire installation The most outspoken review that became the was to boost her ego.19 touchstone of further critiques was by the author of The Color Purple, Alice Walker. Donato’s review, unlike Kramer’s and Mul- She was extremely critical of Chicago for not larkey’s, focuses less on the actual work of representing the genitals of , art and more on Judy Chicago as a person the only black woman at the table, in the and artist. Her criticisms promote the idea same way she depicted all of the white wom- that Chicago was misrepresenting herself en. Rather than genitalia, Truth had faces and her intentions in The Dinner Party for inscribed on her plate22 [fig. 6]. Feminist the sake of fame and in doing so, was not scholar, Hortense Spillers, wrote that “the producing art at all. Donato’s argument that excision of the genitalia here is a symbolic this piece is “self-aggrandizement: a giant ex- castration. By effacing the genitals, Chicago travaganza to feed what has been described not only abrogates the disturbing sexuality as the massive ego of Judy Chicago” takes on of her subject, but also hopes to suggest that a distinctly personal standing that seems to her sexual being did not exist to be denied in have more to do with politics, and identity the first place.”23 politics in particular, than it has to do with art.20 It also coincides with the long-held 1990 was the year Chicago and her Dinner notion that women are least supportive of Party would receive the most publicized other women who are direct, aggressive, and condemnation. It began when Chicago self-confident. entered negotiations with the University of the District of Columbia in Washington, Between 1979 and 1996, The Dinner Par- D.C. (UDC) regarding her interest in donat- ty toured seven states within the United ing The Dinner Party to the predominately States and six international cities until it African-American school. She had been ap- was retired to storage from wear and tear. proached by Pat Mathis, a “former assistant Throughout those years, the controversy of secretary of the treasury under President The Dinner Party seemed to skyrocket. Crit- Carter, who had been a longtime support- icism began to grow and was now coming er of Chicago, and was a current board from several fronts. The years between 1980 member of the University of the District of and 1989 witnessed critical debates around Columbia (UDC).”24 Mathis wanted to create the poles of multiculturalism and essential- a permanent exhibition space exclusively for ism as limiting factors of The Dinner Party The Dinner Party. At the beginning of the within the feminist movement.21 Essential- Summer, Chicago had decided to donate her ism, otherwise referred to by Chicago as work to UDC, a notoriously underfunded 57

school, to be a part of the University’s newly Susan Faludi published her nonfiction book, anticipated multicultural center for the arts. Backlash chronicling the recent losses of the However, newspaper articles containing feminist advances of the 1970s. false information regarding the donation were published in local newspapers through- The tide turned in 2002, when the Elizabeth out the Washington D.C. area, igniting the A. Sackler Foundation, under the guidance United States government, who funded the of Dr. Elizabeth A. Sackler, chair of the foun- school, to intervene. dation and board member of the Brooklyn Museum, at last purchased The Dinner Party. On July 26, 1990, the debate was brought The foundation then gifted it to the Brook- to the House of Representatives under the lyn Museum for a special exhibition that pretense of discussing the UDC budget would take place in 2002. After viewing the and was centered around an amendment exhibition, co-chief art critic of the New York that would deduct $1.6 million of the UDC Times and art historian, Roberta Smith gave budget request. A Republican representa- a glowing review of The Dinner Party. “As tive from California, Robert Dornan, gave a with most works of such prominence, its his- three-minute speech regarding his opinion torical import and social significance may be of The Dinner Party, using words like “dis- greater than its aesthetic value, but the three gusting” and “garbage.” He was shocked that are so intricately and distinctly enmeshed it had received partial funding in 1979 from that an altogether different kind of weight the National Endowment of the Arts because results.”26 Smith equated The Dinner Party in his opinion, it was “ceramic three-dimen- with various aspects within American cul- sional pornography” and “you would not let ture that were equally debated, but still of a your children near it.”25 Representative Stan distinctly significant importance. They were Parris introduced a bill that would penalize “Norman Rockwell, Walt Disney, W.P.A. the University and withhold all federal fund- murals and the AIDS quilt.”27 She posed her- ing if it accepted Chicago’s donation. As a self the question, “Is The Dinner Party good result, Chicago had to pull her offer, leaving or bad art?,” resulting in her response, “it’s The Dinner Party homeless again. more than good enough, and getting better all the time.”28

This is not entirely surprising in the context Art is often determined to be either good of the times. The eighties and early nineties or bad based on societal values at a specific were a period of deep conservatism. Ronald moment in time. As a result, opinions of Reagan was elected President of the Unit art shift over time. Since society’s norms 1980, marking the beginning of an especial- and beliefs are always changing, could this ly conservative era. Within his first year as explain Smith’s statement that The Dinner President, he announced sweeping rollbacks Party is continuously getting better? She on federal anti-discrimination regulations believed that seeing The Dinner Party again and endorsed the Human Life Bill that twenty-three years later was like seeing it for would prohibit all abortions and all contra- the first time in a new light, and she came to ceptives. He won re-election in 1984, giving different conclusions accordingly. him four more years as President. In 1991, 58

Stevenson Swanson, an editor for the Chi- Ensler wanted women to reconnect with cago Tribune, also published a review of their vaginas and mend the fragmented The Dinner Party when it was shown at the relationship they have as a result of society’s Brooklyn Museum in 2002. He wrote, “With proscriptions.31 She addressed the societal the passage of time and the rise of women connotations that have been projected onto in politics, business and the arts, it can be vaginas. That the word automatically insin- difficult to understand why so many people uates pornography, Ensler has attempted to turned out to see a work whose point might correct by reminding us that the word is a seem obvious now—to give women a place medical term and society has appropriated it at the table by proclaiming their contri- into something unspeakably shameful. Like butions through the ages.”29 Swanson and Chicago’s Dinner Party, The Vagina Mono- Smith shared a similar understanding of how logues is now regarded as an important work and why the reception of The Dinner Party of art and socio-politics. shifted so drastically from 1979. Both femi- nism and vaginas were no longer as contro- The gradient shift in opinions of The Dinner versial and, in fact, had become popularized Party can be attributed to several changes in American culture. within society. In 1979 through 1981, Chi- cago’s use of vaginal motifs on the plates The Dinner Party is now one of the major caused apprehension among countless cornerstones of the Brooklyn Museum of viewers and institutions, as highlighted in Art. As of November 7, 2017, 1.5 million the grand condemnation of the House of people have attended The Dinner Party, as it Representatives. The Brooklyn Museum’s ac- is housed and contextualized in the world’s quisition of the work allowed for The Dinner only center for Feminist Art, the Elizabeth Party to be revisited in a new social context A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art in Brook- and receive the praise that is now so freely lyn, New York.30 It is often described as the given. most pivotal feminist work of art of the cen- tury, and the first full articulation of feminist art in history.

For example, the normalization of vaginas in American culture can be tied to Eve Ensler’s Vagina Monologues. Published in 1996, The Vagina Monologues is a stage show based on numerous interviews Ensler conducted with women around the world regarding their specific relationships with their vaginas. When it was first written and performed, the play sent shockwaves across the world. Ens- ler covers a wide variety of topics regarding the vagina, demystifying a number of topics, including smell, pubic hair, periods, sex, masturbation, rape, and birth. Like Chicago, 59

Notes 21 Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1 Deborah Johnson, “The Secularization of the Sacred: Judy 1970-2007, 131. 22 Lorraine O’Grady, “Olympia’s Maid: Reclaiming Black Female Chicago’s Dinner Party and Feminist Spirituality (1977- Subjectivity” in New Feminist Criticism: Art, Identity, Action (New 1979),” in Women Making Art: Women in the Visual, York: IconEditions, 1994), 154. Literary, and Performing Arts since 1960. New York: Peter 23 Lorraine O’Grady, “Olympia’s Maid: Reclaiming Black Female Lang, 2001). Subjectivity” in New Feminist Criticism: Art, Identity, Action (New 2 Laura Meyer, “Constructing a New Paradigm: European York: IconEditions, 1994), 154. American Women Artists in California, 1950-2000” in Art, 24 Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, Women, California: Parallels and Intersections, 1950-2000 1970-2007, 199. 25 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, Robert Dornan. “Congressman Discussing the Dinner Party.” C-SPAN video, 4:33. June 14, 2016. https://www.c-span.org/vid- 2002), 103. eo/?c4603955/congressman-dicussing-dinner-party. 26 Roberta 3 Lauren O’Neill-Butler, “Party Line: 30 Years Later, Judy Smith, “For a Paean to Heroic Women, a Place at History’s Chicago’s Dinner Party Has Enough to Go Around,” Bitch Table,” New York Times, 2002, E.34. Magazine, April 2007, 36. 27 Ibid. 4 The Attic (online). 28 Ibid. 5 Judy Chicago, “The Dinner Party: A Symbol of Our Her- 29 Stevenson Swanson, “Feminist ‘Dinner Party’ Finds Per- itage,” in Theories and Documents of Contemporary Art: manent Setting,” Chicago Tribune, September 22, 2002. A Sourcebook of Artists Writings (California: University of 30 Sarah Cascone, “How and Why ‘The Dinner Party’ California Press, 2012), 410. Became the Most Famous Feminist Artwork of All Time,” 6 The Dinner Party. The Brooklyn Museum. Nov. 4, 2018. Artnet News, November 7, 2017. https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/eascfa/dinner_party/ 31 Eve Ensler, The Vagina Monologues, New York: Ballantine place_settings/theodora. Books, 2018. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Judy Chicago, Through the Flower: My Struggle as a Woman Artist. 1st ed. (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1975), quoted in Jane F. Gerhard, Dinner Party: Judy Chica- go and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970-2007 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2013), 13. 10 Laura Meyer, “Constructing a New Paradigm: European American Women Artists in California, 1950-2000”, 103. 11 Lisa E. Bloom, Jewish Identities in American Feminist Art: Ghosts of Ethnicity (New York: Routledge, 2006), 40. 12 Judith E. Stein, “Collaboration” in The Power of Feminist Art (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc, 1994), 228. 13 Judith E. Stein, “Collaboration” in The Power of Feminist Art, 228. 14 Phyllis Rosser, “There is No Place Like Home” in New Feminist Criticism: Art, Identity, Action (New York: IconEditions, 1994), 64. 15 Jane F. Gerhard, Dinner Party: Judy Chicago and the Power of Popular Feminism, 1970-2007 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2013), 137. 16 Hilton Kramer, “Art: Judy Chicago’s ‘Dinner Party’ Comes to Brooklyn Museum: Review,” New York Times, October 1980, C.1. 17 Hilton Kramer, “Art: Judy Chicago’s ‘Dinner Party’ Comes to Brooklyn Museum: Review,” New York Times, October 1980, C.1. 18 Maureen Mullarkey, “The Dinner Party is a Church Sup- per,” Commonweal, 1981, http://www.maureenmullarkey. com/essays/dinnerparty.html (accessed Nov. 4, 2018). 19 Marla Donato, “Judy Chicago’s ‘Dinner Party’ stirs controversy in art world.” UPI NewsTrack,Nov. 16, 1981, NewsBank. 20 Ibid. 60

Images

Figure 1: Judy Chicago, The Dinner Party, 1970 Figure 2: The Dinner Party Entry Banners

Figure 3: Partial View of "The Heritage Floor"

Figure 4: Detailed Image of Theodora's Place Setting