painting of a figure on such a large scale can be read George’s ‘rather androgynous’ in relation to Judith gender theory as a subtly yet radically subversive statement Butler’s about traditional concepts of sex and gender. The figure is an of binary ‘amalgamation opposites, a particular configuration and conflation of male and female’, deconstructing distinctions between the sexes and defying the strongly polarised sex/gender system of the Victorian period. The figure, conceived the confines of socialized, rigidified sexual ‘outside seems to expose the of that binary system; it confuses and difference’, fictitious ‘univocity’ even transcends sex, arguably representing from the shackles of ‘“the person” freed sex’. This figure can thus be seen to transcend the and of the of ‘limits regulatory aims’ ‘matrix and to up [...] subversive matrices of gender The claim that intelligibility’ ‘open disorder’. art the undertones of sexual entrapment, misogyny and androgyny which George’s ‘eschews pervade much symbolist seems to align androgyny with misogyny and sexual art’ entrapment, and yet the androgyny of the figure in defies the traditional All-Pervading’ ‘The gender binary which has historically been used to legitimise and enforce misogyny and sexual entrapment. The painting portrays a vision of gender and sexuality that surpasses heteronormativity and subverts male hegemony. The blurring and breaking down of the apparently rigid and impermeable sex/gender binary boundaries forces viewers of the painting into a radical reassessment of traditional notions of God, man and woman, because, as Butler argues, and usual cultural ‘one’s staid perceptions fail, when one cannot with surety read the body that one sees when one is no […] longer sure whether the body encountered is that of a man or a This illuminates the woman.’ subversive implications of painting that calls categories into question. Indeed, George’s Butler suggests that a radical shift in perception and notion of the always one’s ‘real’ precedes political revolution. artwork which induces this shift partly demonstrates George’s theory in the sense that it prompts (and reflects) a radical rethinking of basic Butler’s
George’s painting of a ‘rather androgynous’ figure on such a large scale can be read in relation to Judith Butler’s gender theory as a subtly yet radically subversive statement about traditional concepts of sex and gender. The figure is an ‘amalgamation of binary opposites, a particular configuration and conflation of male and female’, deconstructing distinctions between the sexes and defying the strongly polarised sex/gender system of the Victorian period. The figure, conceived ‘outside the confines of socialized, rigidified sexual difference’, seems to expose the fictitious ‘univocity’ of that binary system; it confuses and even transcends sex, arguably representing ‘“the person” freed from the shackles of sex’. This figure can thus be seen to transcend the ‘limits and regulatory aims’ of the ‘matrix of intelligibility’ and to ‘open up [...] subversive matrices of gender disorder’. The claim that George’s art ‘eschews the undertones of sexual entrapment, misogyny and androgyny which pervade much symbolist art’ seems to align androgyny with misogyny and sexual entrapment, and yet the androgyny of the figure in ‘The All-Pervading’ defies the traditional gender binary which has historically been used to legitimise and enforce misogyny and sexual entrapment. The painting portrays a vision of gender and sexuality that surpasses heteronormativity and subverts male hegemony. The blurring and breaking down of the apparently rigid and impermeable sex/gender binary boundaries forces viewers of the painting into a radical reassessment of traditional notions of God, man and woman, because, as Butler argues, ‘one’s staid and usual cultural perceptions fail, when one cannot with surety read the body that one sees […] when one is no longer sure whether the body encountered is that of a man or a woman.’ This illuminates the subversive implications of George’s painting that calls categories into question. Indeed, Butler suggests that a radical shift in one’s perception and notion of the ‘real’ always precedes political revolution. George’s artwork which induces this shift partly demonstrates Butler’s theory in the sense that it prompts (and reflects) a radical rethinking of basic
AAWattses%2C%20Women%20and%20Death%20Journal%20Article.docx