Contesting Authority: The Role of Art within Gender Representation and Protest

​

Throughout history and to the present day, women have been the victims of censorship in order to protect men in authoritative positions. In 2023, we are aware of and still affected by issues surrounding the safety of women, as well as how women are perceived within society. A prominent militant suffrage event in 1913, Manchester, led to the development of what we know today as ‘surveillance’ photography, and the altering of images. Thus intruding on women’s privacy and rights, whilst fighting for the right to vote. This essay is written in conjunction with the ‘In/Tangible’ exhibition, based around the theme of ‘Contested Territories’ and featuring work from MA Fine Art, Painting, Fashion, Filmmaking, and curated by the MA Contemporary Curating course, all from Manchester School of Art. Through the case of Manchester Art Gallery attacker Evelyn Manesta’s police surveillance image, and the analysis of how authoritative roles have been abused throughout history, this essay will consider gender representation as a contested territory, with the use of ‘In/Tangible’ exhibitor Lou Blakeway’s practice as a painter, and what it means to be a working class, female artist depicting other women. 

 

The Suffrage movement initially began as early as 1832(1), of which Emmeline Pankhurst from Moss Side, Manchester, got involved in 1872 when her mother took her to her first Suffrage meeting at fourteen years of age(2). Frustrated with the lack of progression, the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) was formed by Emmeline Pankhurst and her eldest daughter Christabel in 1903(3). In comparison to the pre- existing Suffrage union, ‘National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies’ (NUWSS) led by Millicent Fawcett(4), the WSPU had more of a milltant approach, stating ‘Deeds not Words’(5). 

 

On April Fool’s Day, 1913, Emmeline Pankhurst was found guilty of ‘feloniously procuring and inciting persons unknown to commit felony’(6), following the discovery of planted bombs on the property of chancellor David Lloyd, who would later become prime minister. Taking responsibility for this, Pankhurst was sentenced to three years in prison. In retaliation, two days following Pankhurst’s sentencing, suffrage supporters Annie Briggs, Lillian Forrester and Evelyn Manesta struck the protective glass of thirteen paintings within Manchester Art Gallery with a hammer(7). The women targeted the largest and most valuable paintings within the exhibits, including the works of Pre-Raphaelite and late Victorian artists Gabriel Rossetti and George Frederic Watts(8). Some paintings did result in damages to the physical work, meaning they had to be 

retouched and revarnished(9) at a cost to the gallery. During the sentencing of the three following their arrest at the scene, twenty- five year old governess Evelyn Manesta deemed herself as a ‘political offender’(10), and stated how the laws between men and women, especially divorce laws, were unequal(11).

 

In an attempt to hinder any similar attacks by the militant suffragettes, police created the first form of surveillance imagery to circulate across UK galleries in warning of the seemingly ‘dangerous’ women(12). Images taken without the knowledge of the women was the preferred technique to gain identification of the women, as many would distort their faces by scrunching up their eyes, or putting their heads down in effort to remain unidentifiable(13). The intrusive act of surveillance itself is a questionable means used by the police at the time, however treatment of the Manchester Art Gallery attacker Evelyn Manesta demonstrates the aggressive attitudes of the police towards the female protesters, and the abuse of authoritative power the police held. 

 

In order to be unrecognisable, Manesta’s eyes are pressed tightly shut and her face distorted through the expression, however the image circulated doesn’t show the entire truth, as a result of ‘image doctoring’(14), similar to what we know as ‘photoshopping’ today. In 2003, the release of Home Office files revealed that Manesta was the victim of Britain’s first known police- manipulated image(15).  The real image reveals a policeman's arm around the neck of Manesta, attempting to hold her chin up so that she was unable to bow her head in defiance. In light of the police treatment shared across the public through ‘the Suffragette’ newspaper, edited by Christabel Pankhurst, it is no shock to see the act in image proof. However it is striking, as the image has an essence of modernity to it, as many other surveillance images of the women had, possibly due to the fact images were often posed for. To see movement captured in these unknowing images, it adds humanity to the image subject. 

 

The skill of image doctoring was used for a wide range of reasons, from political (in the case of Manesta’s image protecting the police and their actions), to propaganda; for example it is known that Stalin favoured the technique to erase political opponents from historical records, and fabricate meetings that never existed(16). Images doctored between 1850-1950 were often retouched through the use of paint and ink, as well as combining pieces of separate photographs in a dark room(17). In the case of Manesta’s image, although the original photographer and editor is not known, it can be assumed that the figure of Manesta was removed from the original image, and ink used to darken and conceal the policeman’s arm into a shadow. The method of image doctoring seemingly proves that photography cannot be trusted to recall historical events, as people’s motives come into play and can be altered to suit ulterior motives. Many authors have written about investigating untruthful photography. Film historian Tom Gunning writes about the ‘indexicality’(18) of photography; the physical relation between what is photographed and the image finally created(19). When using traditional film photography, it is also possible to ‘edit’ an image as we would alter the data on a digital camera today, by using different angles, exposure time, or specific chemicals during the developing stage(20). Due to this, images to be used in trials as evidence must be rigorously checked for how the image was created, like exposure, developing and printing, integrated with a statement(21). However, people can be untruthful, therefore Gunning concludes that photography can only be true, when a truthful claim supports it(22). 

 

In comparison to the police treatment of Evelyn Manesta, there still isn’t much resolved. The case of Sarah Everard, where vigils were held in support of the death of Everard at the hands of a plain clothed officer, Wayne Couzens(23), resulted in police resorting to violent means to ‘control’ crowds of women, stating to be breaching COVID-19 lockdown rules(24). The original vigil was cancelled by police, being stated ‘unlawful’,  however activist group ‘Sisters Uncut’ stated they would still be attending regardless, in memory of Sarah and those killed by gendered and state violence(25). Reports from the activist group stated that police waited until the sun had gone down, before manhandling women in the crowd(26). Following the event the police had been criticised for the lack of compassion, and not acting out of safety, but rather control. When considering the treatment of the Suffragettes by police, it is apparent that gender still plays a role in how authoritative positions treat members of the public. 

 

The use of image editing with the development of technology is somewhat at its peak, where ‘photoshopping’ is used to portray a more conventionally attractive appearance or unattainable lifestyle. This follows a rich history of oppression against women, however as women are beginning to acknowledge that these expectations aren’t sustainable, as did the Suffragettes and their desire for women’s rights, a wave of diversification within consumerism is confronting these topics and embracing the natural, rather than editing to implausible standards. 

 

Art’s involvement in protests is apparent, and the targeting of art galleries as a political protest is still used as a means to be heard, utilising the ‘shock factor’ of well known, expensive artworks at risk of being damaged. The activist group ‘Just Stop Oil’ has recently come under scrutiny after gluing themselves to a wall in the National Gallery, London, after throwing soup at the protective glass of Vincent Van Gogh’s ‘Sunflowers’ painting(27). In doing so, the pair asked what was more important, the protection of a painting, or protection of the planet and people(28), and the act resulted in their arrest for criminal damage and aggravated trespass(29). From the Suffragette supporters' attack on Manchester Art Gallery in 1913, to Just Stop Oil’s protest in 2022, it can be concluded that art can be used as a medium to be heard, and threatening the antiquity and high monetary value of artworks can force people to listen.

 

Painter Lou Blakeway’s piece ‘The walls are permanent and pink. See how she sits on her knees all day’ is an ambiguous piece, portraying a woman dressed in a bikini, either cleaning, or putting her head inside an oven. The title of the work is taken from a poem by one of Blakeway’s favourite poets, Ann Sexton, and the imagery is worked from a photograph of a model named Anna, who posts these images onto the Instagram platform. The symbolism of the oven reminds Blakeway of Sylvia Plath, and the prescribed roles women have throughout history. Blakeway resonates with anything to do with the female body, especially how they are perceived and treated by men through the ‘male gaze’(30).  Poet Kim Moore is an example of inspiration to the painter, in which her work speaks about the experience of being within a female body, and how men will reduce women to their looks in order to gain power(31). 

 

In terms of contested territories, Blakeway feels that art is a contested site itself, and that as a working- class mother, being a painter isn’t somewhere she feels supposed to belong. Looking throughout the history of art, most successful women artists are middle class, as they have the means to support themselves financially, as well as having the access to knowledge through schooling and connections within the art world. Blakeway states that the female body is constantly a contested territory, and by painting women, Blakeway continues to contest the patriarchal society, and depicts powerful and confident women that do not conform to the control of men. This piece specifically challenges the representation of women within a domestic sphere. There has always been some form of societal expectation of women to be the multitasker, and be able to manage the multiple roles of housewife and mother, regardless of whether they have a working job, alongside keeping up their appearence. All whilst men are able to end their day at their place of work. 

 

There are prominent connections to be made through the depictions of Blakeway, and to how the Suffragettes were treated as women in a society where women had little rights compared to today. However, as we are beginning to progress as a society, there are still elements that hinder women's equality; for example ‘the pink tax’, where products that have a target audience of women such as period products and razors, have a higher cost in comparison to male products(32). There is still the prevalent issue of the gender pay gap, which in the UK in 2023, is at a mean of 5.45% difference in hourly rates(33). We have progressed as a society in that women are now able to work, have rights to an education and vote, yet there are still plentiful reasons for artists such as Blakeway to create feminist driven work. 

 

The female body as a contested territory is seen in the example of treatment towards Evelyn Manesta. The policemen in the image used their authoritative powers in order to physically restrain, then cleared the evidence through image doctoring to protect their roles and behaviours. The truth surrounding the original image came to light in 2003, taking 90 years for the image doctoring to become known to the public(34). Scenarios like this are what the millitant Suffragettes stood for, and artists like Lou Blakeway depict the many years of collective struggles through the experiences of women, often at the hands of men within society and the unreasonable standards women are to be held to. 

 

The unwarranted treatment of Evelyn Manesta was a result of the Suffragette supporter’s attack on Manchester Art Gallery, which activist groups today have adopted the idea of using arts involvement within protest. Art has always been impactful on society, whether it be physically depicted within the imagery of the artwork, such as in Lou Blakeway’s work, or through acts of protests surrounding art and within galleries; art can be used as a medium to be heard. 

 

Lou Blakeway’s work can be seen in the ‘In/Tangible’ exhibition, held at SeeSaw in Manchester on the 12th-14th of April, 2023. 

 

 

 

1 British Learning Library (2018) Women’s Suffrage Timeline. Available At: https://www.bl.uk/votes-for-women/articles/womens-suffrage-timeline

2 Atkinson, D (2018) Rise Up, Women! The Remarkable Lives of the Suffragettes. London: Bloomsbury, pp 13.

3 UK Parliment (n.d) Start of the Suffrage Movement. Available At: https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/overview/startsuffragette-/#:~:text=In%201903%20Emmeline%20Pankhurst%20and,motto%20'Deeds%20not%20words

4 Biography Online (n.d) Millicent Fawcett. Available At: https://www.biographyonline.net/politicians/uk/millicent-fawcett.html

5 Lucy (2019) 6 Quotations that Define the Suffrage Movement. Available At: https://radicalteatowel.co.uk/radical-history-blog/6-quotations-that-define-the-suffragette-movement/#:~:text=Do%20not%20appeal%2C%20do%20notbust%20traditional%20stereotypes%20of%20women

6 Maidment, A (2021) The hammer- wielding suffragettes who attacked 13 paintings in Manchester Art Gallery 108 years ago today. Available At: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/hammer-wielding-suffragettes-who-attacked-20298622

7 Maidment, A (2021) The hammer- wielding suffragettes who attacked 13 paintings in Manchester Art Gallery 108 years ago today. Available At:https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/hammer-wielding-suffragettes-who-attacked-20298622

8 Maidment, A (2021) The hammer- wielding suffragettes who attacked 13 paintings in Manchester Art Gallery 108 years ago today. Available At: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/hammer-wielding-suffragettes-who-attacked-20298622

9 Irving, S (2011) The Suffrage Attack on Manchester Art Gallery, April 1913. Available At: https://radicalmanchester.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/the-suffragette-attack-on-manchester-art-gallery-april-1913/

10 Irving, S (2011) The Suffrage Attack on Manchester Art Gallery, April 1913. Available At:  https://radicalmanchester.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/the-suffragette-attack-on-manchester-art-gallery-april-1913/

11 Irving, S (2011) The Suffrage Attack on Manchester Art Gallery, April 1913. Available At:  https://radicalmanchester.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/the-suffragette-attack-on-manchester-art-gallery-april-1913/

12 Travis, A (2003) Big Brother and the sisters. Available At: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/oct/10/gender.humanrights

13 Travis, A (2003) Big Brother and the sisters. Available At: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/oct/10/gender.humanrights

14 Rare Historical Photos (n.d) How people manipulated photos before Photoshop, 1850-1950. Available At: https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/history-photo-manipulation-1850-1950/

15 Sawer, P (2018) How police manipulated photographs of the suffragettes during vote campaign. Available At: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/12/police-manipulated-photographs-suffragettes-vote-campaign/

16 Rare Historical Photos (n.d) How people manipulated photos before Photoshop, 1850-1950. Available At:  https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/history-photo-manipulation-1850-1950/

17 Rare Historical Photos (n.d) How people manipulated photos before Photoshop, 1850-1950. Available At: https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/history-photo-manipulation-1850-1950/

18 Gunning, T (n.d) What’s the point of an Index? Or, faking photographs. Available At: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/157_039-050.pdf

19 Gunning, T (n.d) What’s the point of an Index? Or, faking photographs. Available At: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/157_039-050.pdf

20 Gunning, T (n.d) What’s the point of an Index? Or, faking photographs. Available At: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/157_039-050.pdf

21 Gunning, T (n.d) What’s the point of an Index? Or, faking photographs. Available At: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/157_039-050.pdf

22 Gunning, T (n.d) What’s the point of an Index? Or, faking photographs. Available At: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/157_039-050.pdf

23 Cummings, J (2021) Police Criticised for ‘Unacceptable’ Shutdown of Sarah Everard Vigil. Available At: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3angqk/police-criticised-for-unacceptable-shutdown-of-sarah-everard-vigil

24 Cummings, J (2021) Police Criticised for ‘Unacceptable’ Shutdown of Sarah Everard Vigil. Available At:  https://www.vice.com/en/article/3angqk/police-criticised-for-unacceptable-shutdown-of-sarah-everard-vigil

25 Cummings, J (2021) Police Criticised for ‘Unacceptable’ Shutdown of Sarah Everard Vigil. Available At: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3angqk/police-criticised-for-unacceptable-shutdown-of-sarah-everard-vigil

26 Cummings, J (2021) Police Criticised for ‘Unacceptable’ Shutdown of Sarah Everard Vigil. Available At:  https://www.vice.com/en/article/3angqk/police-criticised-for-unacceptable-shutdown-of-sarah-everard-vigil

27 Gayle, D (2022) Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers. Available At: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers

28 Gayle, D (2022) Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers. Available At:  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers

29 Gayle, D (2022) Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers. Available At:  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers

30 Vanbuskirk, S (2022) What is the Male Gaze? Available At:  https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-male-gaze-5118422

31 Phipps, C-L (2023) Are You Judging Me Yet? By Kim Moore| Review. Available At: https://www.walesartsreview.org/are-you-judging-me-yet-by-kim-moore-review/

32 Wakeman, J (2020) Pink Tax: The Real Cost of Gender Based Pricing. Available At:  https://www.healthline.com/health/the-real-cost-of-pink-tax#The-pink-tax

33 Gov.uk (2022) DIT gender pay gap report 2021 to 2022. Available At:  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dit-gender-pay-gap-report-and-data-2021-to-2022/dit-gender-pay-gap-report-2021-to-2022

34 Irving, S (2011) The Suffrage Attack on Manchester Art Gallery, April 1913. Available At:  https://radicalmanchester.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/the-suffragette-attack-on-manchester-art-gallery-april-1913/

 

Figures: 

 

Figure 1: National Archives (1913) Evelyn Manesta’s Distributed Surveillance Image. Available At: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/AR1-528-Suffragettes-1-10.jpg

 

Figure 2: Manchester Art Gallery Archives (n.d) Manchester Art Gallery in 1900s. Courtesy of Manchester Art Gallery

 

Figure 3: Bethell, C (2021) Sarah Everard Vigil, Protesters Shirt Reads ‘Abuse of Power Comes as No Surprise’ Available At: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3angqk/police-criticised-for-unacceptable-shutdown-of-sarah-everard-vigil

 

Figure 4: Blakeway, L (2023) ‘The walls are permanent and pink. See how she sits on her knees all day’ Oil Painting by Lou Blakeway. Courtesy of the Artist.