<p> There comes a time in any culture where the introduction of new technologies affect the role of known traditional systems of making or producing. The act of producing cloth is among one of many traditions affected by new technologies. </p><p> It is apparent that since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, technologies have gone through many changes. All traditional methods of manufacturing goods and objects have been mechanized and become mass-produced. This has had a profound impact not only on American culture, but global culture and economies. As an artist who has discovered a passion for the process of making itself, and esteems the value of the handmade object, I have become increasingly aware that the handmade tradition is quickly being eliminated from our lives. Therefore, in my work I address these issues. I depict the impact of technology on tradition and consider the role of craft by combining digitally produced and manufactured cloth pieces with handmade elements. This is done using the tools and materials for the production of cloth as the subject matter of this body of work to discuss the loss of the tradition of the handmade in our culture.</p><p> In this body of work I bring to the forefront of our attention the fact that the tradition of the handmade, in this instance the hand-woven object, is disappearing through the technical advances seen in digitally designed and manufactured cloth.</p><p>

<p> <i>Furnishing Gender</i> is a collection of furniture and objects of the home that have been deliberately altered to explore and expose pervasive aspects of toxic masculinity. The work within examines aspects of rape culture, queer culture, and hetero-normal constructs that link our realities to the lies of masculinity and gender difference. It is my intent that the viewer become uncomfortable and my hope that they not shy away from this discomfort, but accept the exhibition&rsquo;s challenge to be vulnerable, genuine, and to engage in conversations that confront the conventions of traditional gender roles and biases.</p><p>

The Biblical Judith was written over 2,000 years ago and has become elemental material for artists and writers who struggle with male and female identity. Questions about how beauty has been defined, and who has defined it, as well as the subject of violence as gender-specific territory arise out of the intertextual study of the many re-workings of Judith and Holofernes' "romance."^ A rich array of Judith characters are developed by artists and writers that reveal cultural values about women. Judith as chaste widow is visually presented in the stone archivolt of the Chartres Cathedral and in Alfred Stevens Victorian painting. She is present in the literature by way of the Old English epic; through Christine de Pizan's allusion in The Book of the City of Ladies and Guillaume Salluste du Bartas' epic, La Judit (1574). Christina of Markyate's chaste sexuality is due to her reverence for Mary and Judith articulated in her twelfth century autobiography. In some of Chaucer's Canterbury tales, Judith, like Custance is upheld as the essence of virtue and purity, while in other tales, she appears suspect.^ In the tradition of the "woman worthy" or femme forte there is Donatello's statue (ca. 1456-60), Giorgione's sixteenth century painting, and a multitude of works by Botticelli, Mantegna and Cranach. But the strength of the artist and her figures are felt in Artemisia Gentileschi's five paintings of Judith and her cohort, Abra. In studying Artemisia I found myself standing with Mary Garrard, Artemisia, Judith and the Handmaid in a newly formed collage of strength. And soon Shelley Reed, a Cambridge artist, joined us with her revision of Hans Baldung's sixteenth century painting in which she again removes the head and leaves the figure of a woman defending her right to bodily integrity.^ Judith's sexual provocativeness is a favorite image in art as she becomes stereotyped as the femme fatale. Hans Baldung (1525), Saraceni (1615-20), Valentin de Boulogne (ca. 1626), Vouet (1621), Caravaggio (1598-99), Rubens (1630s), Correggio (1512-14), Vernet (1831) and Klimt (1901, 1909) present us with a riveting portfolio on this theme.^ Contemporary literature is saturated with the sexual nature of power provoked by Judith and Holofernes. Plays by Hebbel, Giraudoux and Barker provide Judith with a far from heroic finish. But Nicholas Mosley's Judith finds a way to survive with Holofernes: heads do not roll, they connect.^ Such deep and moving dialogs are formed between art and literature in the study of Judith that I hope the annotated bibliography of 480 works of literature, art and music included in the Appendix invites further study. ^