WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.480 Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today we are immersing 00:00:03.480 --> 00:00:05.940 ourselves in the life and world of an artist 00:00:05.940 --> 00:00:09.300 whose career, well it didn't just span decades. 00:00:09.640 --> 00:00:12.320 No, it's fundamentally shaped and you could argue 00:00:12.320 --> 00:00:15.640 defined American modernism. Exactly. Georgia 00:00:15.640 --> 00:00:17.899 O 'Keeffe. She gets this title, you know, the 00:00:17.899 --> 00:00:20.100 mother of American modernism and I think for 00:00:20.100 --> 00:00:23.000 a lot of people her work is just instantly recognizable. 00:00:23.480 --> 00:00:25.260 Oh absolutely, but it's often misunderstood. 00:00:25.460 --> 00:00:27.710 Right. and that's our mission today we are going 00:00:27.710 --> 00:00:30.789 to try and unpack her monumental seven decade 00:00:30.789 --> 00:00:33.549 long career and what's so remarkable really is 00:00:33.549 --> 00:00:36.539 that her work always remains so fiercely independent. 00:00:36.840 --> 00:00:39.820 She resisted being put into any box, you know, 00:00:39.820 --> 00:00:41.479 even when she was surrounded by these huge art 00:00:41.479 --> 00:00:44.280 movements like cubism or surrealism. So the goal 00:00:44.280 --> 00:00:46.820 is to get past the, let's be honest, the famous 00:00:46.820 --> 00:00:48.899 flower paintings that everyone knows. Exactly. 00:00:48.899 --> 00:00:51.539 To blast past that immediate, sometimes kind 00:00:51.539 --> 00:00:53.579 of reductive association and really dig into 00:00:53.579 --> 00:00:56.219 the foundational shifts, the complex relationships 00:00:56.219 --> 00:00:59.100 and the deep geographical influences that shaped 00:00:59.100 --> 00:01:01.659 everything she created. And before we even get 00:01:01.659 --> 00:01:03.640 into the art itself, we have to talk about her 00:01:03.640 --> 00:01:06.459 status, not just as an artistic titan, but a 00:01:06.459 --> 00:01:08.659 commercial one. Oh, for sure. I mean, this is 00:01:08.659 --> 00:01:12.769 the immediate. hook the aha moment that just 00:01:12.769 --> 00:01:15.969 puts her legacy into perspective for anyone in 00:01:15.969 --> 00:01:19.489 2014 one of her paintings from 1932 jimson weed 00:01:19.489 --> 00:01:21.989 white flower number one that's the one it sold 00:01:21.989 --> 00:01:25.609 for an incredible 44 .4 million dollars at auction 00:01:25.609 --> 00:01:28.150 which at the time was a staggering historic record 00:01:28.150 --> 00:01:31.670 for any painting sold by a female artist I mean, 00:01:31.689 --> 00:01:33.629 that kind of number, that kind of valuation, 00:01:33.750 --> 00:01:36.450 it just shows you the sheer cultural weight she 00:01:36.450 --> 00:01:38.609 carries. It's immense. It absolutely is. And, 00:01:38.670 --> 00:01:41.090 you know, her status as a legend was already 00:01:41.090 --> 00:01:44.530 cemented, arguably, way back in the 1920s. But 00:01:44.530 --> 00:01:46.609 if we look at the whole scope of her work, from 00:01:46.609 --> 00:01:48.629 those first radical charcoal sketches to her 00:01:48.629 --> 00:01:51.510 very last landscapes, what's fascinating is this. 00:01:51.980 --> 00:01:54.299 This constant tension. A tension between what? 00:01:54.459 --> 00:01:56.299 Between moments of total abstraction, talking 00:01:56.299 --> 00:01:58.640 about those really early drawings, and then these 00:01:58.640 --> 00:02:01.640 incredibly powerful, almost architecturally precise 00:02:01.640 --> 00:02:04.620 representational forms. So a flower, a skull, 00:02:04.859 --> 00:02:08.159 a skyscraper. Exactly. All of it. But here's 00:02:08.159 --> 00:02:11.780 the key. Every single shift in style was drawn 00:02:11.780 --> 00:02:13.840 directly from the sensory environment she was 00:02:13.840 --> 00:02:16.479 living in. And that's what makes her work feel 00:02:16.479 --> 00:02:20.259 both universal and, at the same time, intensely 00:02:20.259 --> 00:02:22.879 personal. Okay, let's unpack this journey. I 00:02:22.879 --> 00:02:24.780 think we have to start with the origins of that 00:02:24.780 --> 00:02:27.080 fierce independence you mentioned. Right. This 00:02:27.080 --> 00:02:29.039 is our first segment, the foundational break. 00:02:29.460 --> 00:02:31.740 We're looking at how O 'Keeffe moves from academic 00:02:31.740 --> 00:02:34.780 realism, which she had totally mastered, to this 00:02:34.780 --> 00:02:37.439 new world of abstract sensation. This is all 00:02:37.439 --> 00:02:39.780 happening in the years leading up to about 1916. 00:02:40.099 --> 00:02:42.039 So she begins her life in Sun Prairie, Wisconsin 00:02:42.039 --> 00:02:45.879 in 1887. She was the second of seven kids. And 00:02:45.879 --> 00:02:47.439 she knew she wanted to be an artist really early 00:02:47.439 --> 00:02:50.080 on, right? Famously. By age 10, she had decided. 00:02:50.490 --> 00:02:54.389 But her early training was, well, it was anything 00:02:54.389 --> 00:02:56.590 but revolutionary. It was academically rigorous, 00:02:56.870 --> 00:02:59.530 it was demanding, and it was purely traditional. 00:02:59.789 --> 00:03:01.530 So she starts at the School of the Art Institute 00:03:01.530 --> 00:03:04.110 of Chicago in 1905. And we know from the records 00:03:04.110 --> 00:03:07.449 she wasn't just good, she excelled. She ranked 00:03:07.449 --> 00:03:10.229 at the very top of her class. So wait, if she's 00:03:10.229 --> 00:03:12.289 mastering this traditional style so successfully, 00:03:12.569 --> 00:03:15.009 what makes her abandon it? That's what's so striking. 00:03:15.129 --> 00:03:17.990 She's literally winning prizes for realism. Precisely. 00:03:18.009 --> 00:03:21.039 That's the core of the drama. After Chicago, 00:03:21.280 --> 00:03:23.360 she moves on to the Art Students League in New 00:03:23.360 --> 00:03:25.460 York City. And she's studying under some really 00:03:25.460 --> 00:03:28.479 big names. Huge names, like William Merritt Chase. 00:03:28.900 --> 00:03:31.539 And in 1908, she wins the league's prestigious 00:03:31.539 --> 00:03:35.280 still -life prize for an oil painting. It's called 00:03:35.280 --> 00:03:38.159 Dead Rabbit with Copper Pot. A classic academic 00:03:38.159 --> 00:03:40.780 subject. A very classic subject. And this win 00:03:40.780 --> 00:03:44.080 proves she wasn't just proficient in the established 00:03:44.080 --> 00:03:46.840 style, she was dominant. She was mastering what 00:03:46.840 --> 00:03:49.240 they called the mimetic tradition. And for our 00:03:49.240 --> 00:03:50.939 listeners, let's just break that down. What does 00:03:50.939 --> 00:03:53.400 mimetic tradition really mean in simple terms? 00:03:53.659 --> 00:03:56.340 It just means the imitation of nature, painting 00:03:56.340 --> 00:03:58.960 exactly what you see, striving for a realism 00:03:58.960 --> 00:04:00.860 that's almost photographic. You know, that was 00:04:00.860 --> 00:04:02.979 the gold standard of high art in the academies 00:04:02.979 --> 00:04:05.120 at the time. But then right after the success, 00:04:05.419 --> 00:04:08.740 she hits a wall. A huge wall. This is that four 00:04:08.740 --> 00:04:10.819 year hiatus period, right? The financial and 00:04:10.819 --> 00:04:14.229 personal crisis. Yes. Her father went bankrupt, 00:04:14.449 --> 00:04:17.110 her mother became seriously ill, and O 'Keefe 00:04:17.110 --> 00:04:19.029 suddenly has to take on commercial art jobs in 00:04:19.029 --> 00:04:21.990 Chicago just to get by. But the crisis wasn't 00:04:21.990 --> 00:04:25.720 just about money. It was artistic. It was existential. 00:04:26.100 --> 00:04:28.800 Completely. She stops painting for four whole 00:04:28.800 --> 00:04:31.240 years. She doesn't pick up a brush for fine art. 00:04:31.379 --> 00:04:33.579 And she later said that she looked at the entire 00:04:33.579 --> 00:04:36.139 career track she had been mastering this mimetic 00:04:36.139 --> 00:04:39.079 tradition and just realized she had no interest 00:04:39.079 --> 00:04:41.720 in pursuing it. She found it intellectually bankrupt. 00:04:42.100 --> 00:04:45.379 That's the word. She even expressed this physical 00:04:45.379 --> 00:04:48.120 rejection of it. She claimed that the smell of 00:04:48.120 --> 00:04:50.360 turpentine, you know, the oil painter's classic 00:04:50.360 --> 00:04:54.000 medium, literally made her feel ill. Wow. That 00:04:54.000 --> 00:04:56.759 is a potent rejection of the old ways. It's visceral, 00:04:56.759 --> 00:04:59.019 isn't it? It's not just an idea. Her body is 00:04:59.019 --> 00:05:00.980 rejecting it. The break wasn't practical. It 00:05:00.980 --> 00:05:03.360 was a deep ideological statement against the 00:05:03.360 --> 00:05:06.439 rigidity of realism. She needed a whole new vocabulary. 00:05:06.759 --> 00:05:09.180 And she finds it in 1912. She does. The pivotal 00:05:09.180 --> 00:05:11.660 shift comes to the ideas of Arthur Wesley Dow. 00:05:11.959 --> 00:05:14.000 She took a summer class at the University of 00:05:14.000 --> 00:05:16.139 Virginia, and the instructor introduced her to 00:05:16.139 --> 00:05:18.759 Dow's really innovative teaching methods. So 00:05:18.759 --> 00:05:21.259 what was so revolutionary about Dow's approach? 00:05:21.579 --> 00:05:24.660 Dow's whole approach shifted the focus. It moved 00:05:24.660 --> 00:05:27.060 away from just imitating nature, from what you 00:05:27.060 --> 00:05:29.759 paint, to the principles of design, composition, 00:05:29.980 --> 00:05:32.699 and personal expression. It was all about how 00:05:32.699 --> 00:05:34.980 you structure your feelings on the canvas. And 00:05:34.980 --> 00:05:36.779 how did he teach that? What was the framework? 00:05:37.500 --> 00:05:39.480 Well, his structure was heavily rooted in the 00:05:39.480 --> 00:05:41.819 study of Japanese art, which focuses on flat 00:05:41.819 --> 00:05:44.980 planes, on spatial organization, finding beauty 00:05:44.980 --> 00:05:47.759 in simplified forms instead of three -dimensional 00:05:47.759 --> 00:05:50.439 realistic modeling. So it's about using the tools 00:05:50.439 --> 00:05:53.060 of art for expression, not just for copying. 00:05:53.399 --> 00:05:56.500 Exactly. He taught artists to use line, color, 00:05:56.620 --> 00:05:59.839 and mass as purely expressive tools, completely 00:05:59.839 --> 00:06:02.139 detached from the need to just reproduce reality. 00:06:02.519 --> 00:06:05.100 And for O 'Keefe, This was the conceptual key 00:06:05.100 --> 00:06:06.860 that unlocked everything. It was a permission 00:06:06.860 --> 00:06:09.779 slip to feel. And you see the impact almost immediately. 00:06:09.819 --> 00:06:12.699 It's explosive. In 1915, while she was teaching 00:06:12.699 --> 00:06:14.980 down in Columbia, South Carolina. That is the 00:06:14.980 --> 00:06:17.579 moment of her artistic birth, really. She produces 00:06:17.579 --> 00:06:20.699 this seminal series of highly innovative charcoal 00:06:20.699 --> 00:06:22.860 abstractions. And these aren't just sketches 00:06:22.860 --> 00:06:25.740 for later paintings. No, not at all. They were 00:06:25.740 --> 00:06:28.079 fully formed pieces in their own right, created 00:06:28.079 --> 00:06:30.720 purely from what she called her personal sensations. 00:06:31.520 --> 00:06:34.579 She started creating designs without any preliminary 00:06:34.579 --> 00:06:37.980 sketching, just drawing directly from her internal 00:06:37.980 --> 00:06:40.540 emotional landscape. She's finally using art 00:06:40.540 --> 00:06:43.040 to express her most private sensations and feelings. 00:06:43.339 --> 00:06:45.220 Something the academic tradition would never 00:06:45.220 --> 00:06:48.319 have allowed. It was a radical act. And this 00:06:48.319 --> 00:06:50.459 is where the legendary connection with Alfred 00:06:50.459 --> 00:06:53.199 Stieglitz begins. She's in South Carolina and 00:06:53.199 --> 00:06:55.779 he's in New York, basically the gatekeeper of 00:06:55.779 --> 00:06:58.199 the American avant -garde. It's a fantastic story. 00:06:58.439 --> 00:07:02.889 In early 1916, She mails these radical charcoal 00:07:02.889 --> 00:07:06.050 drawings to her friend, Anita Politzer. But she 00:07:06.050 --> 00:07:07.709 doesn't tell her to do anything with them. No. 00:07:08.050 --> 00:07:10.269 Politzer, completely without O 'Keeffe's permission, 00:07:10.550 --> 00:07:12.990 takes them to Alfred Stieglitz at his famous 00:07:12.990 --> 00:07:16.269 291 Gallery in Manhattan. And Stieglitz was the 00:07:16.269 --> 00:07:18.829 guy. The most influential art dealer and photographer 00:07:18.829 --> 00:07:21.750 championing modernism in America. He was it. 00:07:21.930 --> 00:07:24.370 And he was immediately floored by them. He said 00:07:24.370 --> 00:07:26.850 they were the purest, finest, sincerest things 00:07:26.850 --> 00:07:29.529 that had entered 291 in a long while. And he 00:07:29.529 --> 00:07:32.040 puts them in a show. He exhibits 10 of them that 00:07:32.040 --> 00:07:35.480 April. This gives O 'Keeffe instant major exposure 00:07:35.480 --> 00:07:38.319 to the New York art world before she and Stieglitz 00:07:38.319 --> 00:07:40.879 had even met in person. That's incredible. So 00:07:40.879 --> 00:07:42.560 that validation must have just propelled her 00:07:42.560 --> 00:07:45.180 forward. It did. It propelled her right into 00:07:45.180 --> 00:07:47.920 the Texas years. She moves to Canyon, Texas in 00:07:47.920 --> 00:07:50.720 the fall of 1916. She becomes the chair of the 00:07:50.720 --> 00:07:52.939 art department at West Texas State Normal College. 00:07:53.060 --> 00:07:56.500 And the Texas landscape, the panhandle. It changes 00:07:56.500 --> 00:07:59.300 everything for her visually. The scale of it, 00:07:59.339 --> 00:08:02.519 this immense vast space, completely transformed 00:08:02.519 --> 00:08:05.279 her vision and her medium. She started focusing 00:08:05.279 --> 00:08:08.620 on these expansive views, the intense, almost 00:08:08.620 --> 00:08:11.220 spiritual colors of the plains at night. So how 00:08:11.220 --> 00:08:13.279 did that scale and that light actually change 00:08:13.279 --> 00:08:15.620 the look of her work? Well, the Texas environment 00:08:15.620 --> 00:08:18.220 led her to shift heavily into watercolor. Because 00:08:18.220 --> 00:08:21.170 it's faster, more immediate. Exactly. It allows 00:08:21.170 --> 00:08:23.449 for speed and these beautiful translucent effects. 00:08:23.689 --> 00:08:25.850 Her watercolors from this period, like light 00:08:25.850 --> 00:08:29.230 coming on the planes, no. From 1917, they're 00:08:29.230 --> 00:08:31.569 incredibly atmospheric. She's not painting defined 00:08:31.569 --> 00:08:33.549 objects anymore. She's painting light itself. 00:08:33.950 --> 00:08:36.029 She's trying to capture those expansive views 00:08:36.029 --> 00:08:41.210 using almost indistinct tonal gradations. She 00:08:41.210 --> 00:08:43.190 was simulating the pulsating effect of light 00:08:43.190 --> 00:08:45.889 on the horizon, creating these vast, almost celestial 00:08:45.889 --> 00:08:49.159 circles of color. It's the synthesis of her new 00:08:49.159 --> 00:08:52.019 design principles, the abstraction with the sheer 00:08:52.019 --> 00:08:55.379 sensory intensity of the natural world. So by 00:08:55.379 --> 00:08:58.740 1918, O 'Keeffe has found her voice. She's established 00:08:58.740 --> 00:09:01.620 this artistic language based on internal sensation 00:09:01.620 --> 00:09:04.200 and the external environment, mostly in Texas. 00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:07.019 But that independence she found was about to 00:09:07.019 --> 00:09:09.279 be immediately tested. She moves directly into 00:09:09.279 --> 00:09:11.519 the center of the American art world. Which brings 00:09:11.519 --> 00:09:14.559 us to segment two, New York, the Stieglitz Nexus, 00:09:14.700 --> 00:09:18.379 and the sexuality debate. really both define 00:09:18.379 --> 00:09:20.820 and plague her career for the next 50 years. 00:09:20.940 --> 00:09:23.399 And her move to Manhattan in 1918, it's directly 00:09:23.399 --> 00:09:25.600 at the request of Stieglitz. He makes her an 00:09:25.600 --> 00:09:27.580 offer she can't refuse. He offers her crucial 00:09:27.580 --> 00:09:30.039 support, financial backing, a place to live, 00:09:30.039 --> 00:09:31.860 and most importantly, a dedicated space where 00:09:31.860 --> 00:09:34.120 she could just paint uninterrupted. But this 00:09:34.120 --> 00:09:36.259 transition immediately becomes complicated. There's 00:09:36.259 --> 00:09:39.240 artistic pressure. Immense pressure. The sources 00:09:39.240 --> 00:09:41.980 suggest that Stieglitz discouraged her from continuing 00:09:41.980 --> 00:09:45.220 with watercolor. Why? He saw it as a medium for 00:09:45.220 --> 00:09:48.600 amateurs, specifically for amateur women artists. 00:09:49.200 --> 00:09:52.159 It was a subtle but, you know, a very significant 00:09:52.159 --> 00:09:55.039 push for her to adopt the more serious medium 00:09:55.039 --> 00:09:57.360 of oil paint. To align her with the professional 00:09:57.360 --> 00:09:59.960 male -dominated art world he was part of. Yeah, 00:09:59.960 --> 00:10:02.440 exactly. And she did. She quickly became a central 00:10:02.440 --> 00:10:04.539 figure among the early American modernists of 00:10:04.539 --> 00:10:07.570 the 1920s. totally integrated into Stieglitz's 00:10:07.570 --> 00:10:09.289 celebrated circle. We're talking about people 00:10:09.289 --> 00:10:11.990 like Paul Strand, Charles Dumuth, Arthur Dove. 00:10:12.049 --> 00:10:14.110 And of course, their personal relationship evolves 00:10:14.110 --> 00:10:16.929 just as quickly. They get married in 1924, but 00:10:16.929 --> 00:10:19.169 the private life of this artistic power couple 00:10:19.169 --> 00:10:22.350 becomes a very public spectacle. A huge spectacle. 00:10:22.490 --> 00:10:24.450 And it's all because of the infamous photographs. 00:10:24.909 --> 00:10:28.289 The ones Stieglitz took of her. Yes. His 1921 00:10:28.289 --> 00:10:31.009 exhibit of these photographs caused a seismic 00:10:31.009 --> 00:10:34.009 public sensation. Stieglitz was obsessed with 00:10:34.009 --> 00:10:37.210 documenting her. Starting in 1917, he produced 00:10:37.210 --> 00:10:40.029 this staggering body of work over 350 portraits 00:10:40.029 --> 00:10:42.830 and more than 200 nude photos. And he kept shooting 00:10:42.830 --> 00:10:45.429 her for years. Right up until he retired from 00:10:45.429 --> 00:10:49.409 photography in 1937. He saw her body as a living 00:10:49.409 --> 00:10:52.570 work of art, a symbol of modern American womanhood. 00:10:52.889 --> 00:10:55.250 And it's really hard to overstate the impact 00:10:55.250 --> 00:10:57.909 of these images. They essentially created this 00:10:57.909 --> 00:11:01.090 unavoidable public framework through which every 00:11:01.090 --> 00:11:03.889 single piece of her artwork would then be interpreted. 00:11:04.029 --> 00:11:06.710 For the rest of her life, regardless of her actual 00:11:06.710 --> 00:11:09.009 subject matter. The photos were explicit. They 00:11:09.009 --> 00:11:11.509 were sensual. And the critics and the public, 00:11:11.669 --> 00:11:13.870 they just immediately made a link. A direct link. 00:11:14.539 --> 00:11:16.860 Between the forms in the photos, the curves, 00:11:17.100 --> 00:11:19.419 the folds of her body, and the abstract shapes 00:11:19.419 --> 00:11:22.360 in her paintings, it created this persona that 00:11:22.360 --> 00:11:24.480 was completely imposed on her. A persona she 00:11:24.480 --> 00:11:27.360 didn't seem to recognize. Not at all. O 'Keeffe, 00:11:27.480 --> 00:11:29.700 realizing this disconnect, famously reflected 00:11:29.700 --> 00:11:32.220 on the photos much later in life, saying, I wonder 00:11:32.220 --> 00:11:34.779 who that person is. She felt so distant from 00:11:34.779 --> 00:11:37.690 the erotic public icon. that Stieglitz had constructed. 00:11:37.970 --> 00:11:39.990 And meanwhile, while this whole controversy is 00:11:39.990 --> 00:11:42.090 raging, she's developing the work that she becomes 00:11:42.090 --> 00:11:44.769 most famous for. The magnified flower series 00:11:44.769 --> 00:11:47.730 of the 1920s. She painted around 200 of them, 00:11:47.830 --> 00:11:50.409 specializing in those massive close -up depictions. 00:11:50.629 --> 00:11:53.149 Her approach was just radical in its scale. These 00:11:53.149 --> 00:11:56.929 huge works like Petunia No. 2 or the Red Can 00:11:56.929 --> 00:11:59.710 of Paintings, they're meant to just overwhelm 00:11:59.710 --> 00:12:02.210 you. Her stated goal was never botanical. It 00:12:02.210 --> 00:12:05.370 was to create a sense of awe and emotional intensity. 00:12:06.509 --> 00:12:10.009 By magnifying a small natural object so much 00:12:10.009 --> 00:12:11.730 as if you're looking at it through a magnifying 00:12:11.730 --> 00:12:15.009 lens, she forced the viewer to slow down and 00:12:15.009 --> 00:12:17.590 confront its internal structure, its colors, 00:12:17.730 --> 00:12:21.149 its forms in a totally new, intensely designed 00:12:21.149 --> 00:12:24.370 way. And this focus on clean lines, on clarity, 00:12:24.570 --> 00:12:27.450 on eliminating unnecessary detail, it connects 00:12:27.450 --> 00:12:29.490 directly to that movement called precisionism, 00:12:29.509 --> 00:12:32.110 doesn't it? It really does. Precisionism was 00:12:32.110 --> 00:12:34.909 an American modernist movement all about clean 00:12:34.909 --> 00:12:37.549 lines and clear composition. O 'Keeffe embraced 00:12:37.549 --> 00:12:40.710 its core tenets. She emphasized selection, elimination, 00:12:40.990 --> 00:12:43.350 and emphasis to get at what she called the real 00:12:43.350 --> 00:12:45.210 meaning of things. She wasn't trying to paint 00:12:45.210 --> 00:12:46.889 a flower. She was trying to paint the experience 00:12:46.889 --> 00:12:48.850 of the flower. But the public and the critics 00:12:48.850 --> 00:12:51.029 completely ignored her artistic intent. Completely. 00:12:51.330 --> 00:12:53.570 They focused instead on the inevitable vulva 00:12:53.570 --> 00:12:55.750 controversy. It was immediate and it was relentless, 00:12:55.889 --> 00:12:58.570 right? And fueled by Stiglitz's photos. Absolutely. 00:12:59.039 --> 00:13:01.779 The critics just immediately sexualized her work. 00:13:02.100 --> 00:13:05.620 In 1922, for example, the critic Paul Rosenfeld 00:13:05.620 --> 00:13:09.580 wrote that the essence of very womanhood permeates 00:13:09.580 --> 00:13:13.039 her pictures, citing her colors and shapes as 00:13:13.039 --> 00:13:15.360 direct metaphors for the female body. And that 00:13:15.360 --> 00:13:17.720 interpretation just stuck. It was pervasive. 00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:20.759 Even critics who admired her, like Samuel Kutz, 00:13:20.899 --> 00:13:24.320 worried that this assertion of sex in her work 00:13:24.320 --> 00:13:27.669 was overshadowing her genuine talent. She was 00:13:27.669 --> 00:13:30.289 trapped by the interpretation, not by her own 00:13:30.289 --> 00:13:33.490 creation. And for 50 years, she fought back against 00:13:33.490 --> 00:13:36.490 it. What was her enduring, powerful refutation? 00:13:36.889 --> 00:13:39.769 She spent half a century just denying any connection 00:13:39.769 --> 00:13:42.169 between vulvas and her art. She made it crystal 00:13:42.169 --> 00:13:44.289 clear that the interpretation lay entirely with 00:13:44.289 --> 00:13:45.909 the viewer. And she had that famous quote about 00:13:45.909 --> 00:13:47.649 it. The one that defines the whole struggle. 00:13:47.909 --> 00:13:50.230 When people read erotic symbols into my paintings, 00:13:50.389 --> 00:13:51.950 they're really talking about their own affairs. 00:13:52.230 --> 00:13:54.789 She saw it as a massive psychological projection. 00:13:55.190 --> 00:13:57.090 Exactly. The public was revealing more about 00:13:57.090 --> 00:13:59.090 their own anxieties and desires than they were 00:13:59.090 --> 00:14:02.070 about her brushwork. But during the mid -1920s, 00:14:02.070 --> 00:14:04.889 she made this fascinating, if brief, stylistic 00:14:04.889 --> 00:14:08.470 detour. She moves away from nature and body parts 00:14:08.470 --> 00:14:11.309 altogether and starts painting the urban environment. 00:14:11.610 --> 00:14:14.789 It's a major experiment, and it's often overshadowed 00:14:14.789 --> 00:14:17.769 by the flowers and the skulls. But it's so important. 00:14:18.070 --> 00:14:20.970 After she and Stieglitz moved into a 30th floor 00:14:20.970 --> 00:14:24.289 apartment in the Shelton Hotel in 1925, she applied 00:14:24.289 --> 00:14:27.769 that same precisionist sensibility to the vertical 00:14:27.769 --> 00:14:31.090 industrial themes of New York City. She was fascinated 00:14:31.090 --> 00:14:33.649 by the power and scale of it all. The new urban 00:14:33.649 --> 00:14:36.230 landscape. Absolutely. So what did these paintings 00:14:36.230 --> 00:14:38.549 look like? How did they compare to the magnified 00:14:38.549 --> 00:14:40.710 flowers? Well, the flowers are organic. They're 00:14:40.710 --> 00:14:42.789 flowing. They're deeply saturated with color. 00:14:43.210 --> 00:14:46.250 The cityscapes, by contrast, are stark. They're 00:14:46.250 --> 00:14:48.450 geometric and often monumental. You're talking 00:14:48.450 --> 00:14:50.269 about works like Radiator Building Night in New 00:14:50.269 --> 00:14:52.649 York. Exactly, or the Shelton with Sunspots in 00:14:52.649 --> 00:14:55.330 New York from 1926. She wasn't painting the bustling 00:14:55.330 --> 00:14:57.549 streets, you know, the people. She was capturing 00:14:57.549 --> 00:14:59.950 the rigid architectural skeleton of the city. 00:15:00.070 --> 00:15:03.029 Focusing on light reflecting off glass, the powerful 00:15:03.029 --> 00:15:06.509 geometric shapes rising into the sky. It showcased 00:15:06.509 --> 00:15:08.960 her incredible skill. at depicting architectural 00:15:08.960 --> 00:15:12.620 forms using these clean lines and often dark 00:15:12.620 --> 00:15:15.860 dramatic contrasts it was a very conscious attempt 00:15:15.860 --> 00:15:19.000 to prove her range beyond the biological and 00:15:19.000 --> 00:15:21.340 the sensual but the phase was short -lived very 00:15:21.799 --> 00:15:24.279 By 1929, she had completed her final New York 00:15:24.279 --> 00:15:26.539 cityscape paintings just before she traveled 00:15:26.539 --> 00:15:28.600 to New Mexico for the first time. And that move 00:15:28.600 --> 00:15:31.860 west, it marks a huge turning point, both professionally 00:15:31.860 --> 00:15:34.220 and personally. Why did she leave New York so 00:15:34.220 --> 00:15:36.559 abruptly in 29? She was desperate for an escape. 00:15:36.799 --> 00:15:38.799 The domestic environment in New York had become, 00:15:39.000 --> 00:15:42.700 well, toxic. The marriage was collapsing. This 00:15:42.700 --> 00:15:45.139 is when Stieglitz begins his affair. Yes. In 00:15:45.139 --> 00:15:48.120 1928, Stieglitz began a very long -term, very 00:15:48.120 --> 00:15:50.779 public affair with a woman named Dorothy Norman. 00:15:51.599 --> 00:15:54.279 And this marital betrayal, combined with the 00:15:54.279 --> 00:15:56.679 relentless critical focus on the sexuality of 00:15:56.679 --> 00:15:59.179 her work, it just led to a period of intense 00:15:59.179 --> 00:16:01.419 distress for O 'Keeffe. The sources indicate 00:16:01.419 --> 00:16:03.759 this stress actually culminated in a nervous 00:16:03.759 --> 00:16:06.379 breakdown. It was severe. She had a nervous breakdown 00:16:06.379 --> 00:16:08.759 and was hospitalized for depression in 1933. 00:16:09.360 --> 00:16:11.820 And it's largely attributed to the emotional 00:16:11.820 --> 00:16:14.240 fallout from Stieglitz's affair. And this was 00:16:14.240 --> 00:16:17.009 so debilitating, she just stopped painting. She 00:16:17.009 --> 00:16:19.950 stopped completely for over a year from late 00:16:19.950 --> 00:16:24.070 1932 until early 1934. So those initial trips 00:16:24.070 --> 00:16:26.850 to the Southwest starting in 1929, they were 00:16:26.850 --> 00:16:29.409 fundamentally a form of recuperation, an escape 00:16:29.409 --> 00:16:31.610 from the intense physical and emotional constraints 00:16:31.610 --> 00:16:34.289 of New York and the suffocating presence of that 00:16:34.289 --> 00:16:37.710 whole Stieglitz nexus. And that painful turning 00:16:37.710 --> 00:16:40.389 point, it transports us directly to our third 00:16:40.389 --> 00:16:43.789 segment, the Ghost Ranch aesthetic. This is the 00:16:43.789 --> 00:16:46.779 period where O 'Keeffe finds the isolation. the 00:16:46.779 --> 00:16:48.879 unique landscape, and the subjects that would 00:16:48.879 --> 00:16:51.019 define the rest of her long career, stretching 00:16:51.019 --> 00:16:54.240 all the way from 1929 to her death in 1986. Right. 00:16:54.539 --> 00:16:57.639 She first traveled to Santa Fe in 1929. She stayed 00:16:57.639 --> 00:17:00.139 with the wealthy arts patron Mabel Dodge Lujan 00:17:00.139 --> 00:17:02.279 in Tels, and she went with her close friend, 00:17:02.360 --> 00:17:04.539 the painter Rebecca Scrant. And from that very 00:17:04.539 --> 00:17:06.900 first visit, the geography of New Mexico just 00:17:06.900 --> 00:17:09.119 seized her imagination. Completely. She would 00:17:09.119 --> 00:17:11.779 visit almost every year from 1929 onward, often 00:17:11.779 --> 00:17:14.099 staying for months at a time. This became her 00:17:14.099 --> 00:17:16.299 place of profound artistic and personal freedom. 00:17:16.440 --> 00:17:18.819 And to really explore, she needed a car. She 00:17:18.819 --> 00:17:21.740 did. To facilitate her exploration, she bought 00:17:21.740 --> 00:17:24.839 and learned to drive a Ford Model A in 1929, 00:17:25.140 --> 00:17:27.640 specifically so she could drive deep into the 00:17:27.640 --> 00:17:30.220 rugged mountains and deserts on her own. And 00:17:30.220 --> 00:17:32.859 that freedom of movement, it allowed her to collect 00:17:32.859 --> 00:17:35.039 the very things that would become her most famous 00:17:35.039 --> 00:17:38.299 motifs. Sun bleached animal bones, distinctive 00:17:38.299 --> 00:17:41.880 rocks, specific landscape forms. She was a collector 00:17:41.880 --> 00:17:44.160 of the desert. And she developed this incredibly 00:17:44.160 --> 00:17:46.920 intense connection to the area around Ghost Ranch 00:17:46.920 --> 00:17:49.480 in northern New Mexico, a place she called... 00:17:49.789 --> 00:17:52.170 The Far Away. The name itself tells you everything, 00:17:52.309 --> 00:17:54.390 doesn't it? It speaks to the psychological distance 00:17:54.390 --> 00:17:57.849 she craved from New York. In 1943, she described 00:17:57.849 --> 00:18:00.390 it saying, such a beautiful, untouched, lonely 00:18:00.390 --> 00:18:03.009 feeling place, such a fine part of what I call 00:18:03.009 --> 00:18:05.309 the far away. And her obsession with the local 00:18:05.309 --> 00:18:07.970 geography, it was almost proprietary. It was. 00:18:08.150 --> 00:18:11.170 She famously claimed the flat top mountain, Sarah 00:18:11.170 --> 00:18:13.950 Padernal, belongs to me. God told me if I painted 00:18:13.950 --> 00:18:16.130 it enough, I could have it. That image of her 00:18:16.130 --> 00:18:18.349 claiming the mountain is so striking. Did she 00:18:18.349 --> 00:18:20.309 ever talk about why she felt she had to earn 00:18:20.309 --> 00:18:22.910 the right to paint it? Or why she needed that 00:18:22.910 --> 00:18:25.470 isolated relationship with the landscape? I think 00:18:25.470 --> 00:18:27.950 it speaks to her deep need for artistic control 00:18:27.950 --> 00:18:31.069 and connection. For O 'Keeffe, the landscape 00:18:31.069 --> 00:18:33.410 wasn't just pretty scenery. It was a character. 00:18:33.670 --> 00:18:36.970 It was a fixed point of immense power. So painting 00:18:36.970 --> 00:18:39.329 it over and over was a way of knowing it? Of 00:18:39.329 --> 00:18:42.089 mastering its essence and ultimately owning the 00:18:42.089 --> 00:18:44.319 vision of it. which is such a stark contrast 00:18:44.319 --> 00:18:46.720 to the chaotic, overwhelming environment of New 00:18:46.720 --> 00:18:49.039 York and the loss of control she felt in her 00:18:49.039 --> 00:18:51.059 personal life there. So after she recuperates 00:18:51.059 --> 00:18:52.940 from her breakdown, she just immerses herself 00:18:52.940 --> 00:18:55.220 in these incredible skull and desert motifs. 00:18:55.380 --> 00:19:00.119 Between 1934 and 1936, this is her focus. And 00:19:00.119 --> 00:19:01.980 this period results in some of her most iconic 00:19:01.980 --> 00:19:05.359 images. She's taking the bleak, startling reality 00:19:05.359 --> 00:19:07.910 of the desert. the decay and death represented 00:19:07.910 --> 00:19:10.549 by the bones she collected, and blending it with 00:19:10.549 --> 00:19:12.809 her flair for dramatic composition and vibrant 00:19:12.809 --> 00:19:15.390 color. Creating the quintessential Ghost Ranch 00:19:15.390 --> 00:19:18.349 aesthetic. That's it. Can you explain how the 00:19:18.349 --> 00:19:21.250 skull motif really acts as a synthesis of her 00:19:21.250 --> 00:19:24.009 style? It seems to bridge that gap between the 00:19:24.009 --> 00:19:26.430 realism she rejected and the abstraction she 00:19:26.430 --> 00:19:29.789 embraced. It's the perfect synthesis. A skull 00:19:29.789 --> 00:19:32.869 is a realistic object, obviously, but by floating 00:19:32.869 --> 00:19:35.009 it against a simplified, abstracted background 00:19:35.009 --> 00:19:38.289 of pure color, or by magnifying it, she turns 00:19:38.289 --> 00:19:41.029 it into a geometric symbol of the landscape itself. 00:19:41.369 --> 00:19:45.250 Stark, enduring, and beautiful. Exactly. Think 00:19:45.250 --> 00:19:47.829 of Ram's head, white hollyhock hills from 1935, 00:19:47.869 --> 00:19:50.690 or the famous cow's skull, red, white, and blue 00:19:50.690 --> 00:19:53.990 from 1931. By juxtaposing the bleached reality 00:19:53.990 --> 00:19:56.809 of death with the vibrant life of flowers or 00:19:56.809 --> 00:19:59.690 the intense colors of the desert, she's not creating 00:19:59.690 --> 00:20:01.910 a morbid image. No, it's about something else 00:20:01.910 --> 00:20:03.890 entirely. It's a composition about the elemental 00:20:03.890 --> 00:20:06.430 cycle of life and death and the stark beauty 00:20:06.430 --> 00:20:08.769 of the Southwest's permanence. The public certainly 00:20:08.769 --> 00:20:10.890 loved these images, but apparently some critics 00:20:10.890 --> 00:20:13.589 were getting tired of them. In 1939, her career 00:20:13.589 --> 00:20:16.230 takes this really strange detour with the Hawaii 00:20:16.230 --> 00:20:19.170 Commission. This anecdote is perfect. It showcases 00:20:19.170 --> 00:20:21.990 both her commercial standing and her uncompromising 00:20:21.990 --> 00:20:25.130 artistic attitude. Her reputation was so huge 00:20:25.130 --> 00:20:27.829 that N .W. Aaron's son, the advertising agency, 00:20:28.170 --> 00:20:30.289 approached her to create two paintings for the 00:20:30.289 --> 00:20:32.660 Hawaiian Pineapple Company. You know, dull. And 00:20:32.660 --> 00:20:34.779 the sources note this offer came when some critics 00:20:34.779 --> 00:20:37.859 were calling her New Mexico focus limited. Yes, 00:20:37.900 --> 00:20:40.720 suggesting her desert images were becoming mass 00:20:40.720 --> 00:20:43.460 production. So this was an opportunity, maybe 00:20:43.460 --> 00:20:45.160 a challenge, for her to prove she could evolve 00:20:45.160 --> 00:20:47.819 and paint new subjects successfully. And she 00:20:47.819 --> 00:20:50.259 took it. She did. She spent nine weeks traveling 00:20:50.259 --> 00:20:52.380 all across the Hawaiian islands. She visited 00:20:52.380 --> 00:20:56.079 rainforests, valleys, beaches. And the trip yielded 00:20:56.079 --> 00:21:00.279 a series of 20 sensual verdant paintings of flowers. 00:21:00.990 --> 00:21:03.650 lush landscapes, even things like fishhooks. 00:21:03.670 --> 00:21:06.309 The colors must have been a huge departure. A 00:21:06.309 --> 00:21:08.509 drastic departure from the bleached tones of 00:21:08.509 --> 00:21:12.829 New Mexico. They were verdant, wet, rich. But 00:21:12.829 --> 00:21:16.309 she famously refused to paint the actual pineapple. 00:21:16.569 --> 00:21:18.589 The central subject of the commission. The one 00:21:18.589 --> 00:21:21.130 thing they asked for. For the entire nine weeks 00:21:21.130 --> 00:21:23.529 she was there, she just didn't paint it. She 00:21:23.529 --> 00:21:25.670 simply refused to deliver the requested product. 00:21:25.809 --> 00:21:28.049 She did. She was Georgia O 'Keeffe. She would 00:21:28.049 --> 00:21:30.329 not paint the corporate product on demand. She 00:21:30.329 --> 00:21:32.210 only delivered the pineapple painting after she 00:21:32.210 --> 00:21:34.089 got back to New York. How did that happen? The 00:21:34.089 --> 00:21:36.910 company was forced to physically ship a living 00:21:36.910 --> 00:21:40.349 pineapple plant to her studio. Only then did 00:21:40.349 --> 00:21:43.369 she paint this hyper -realistic, majestic depiction 00:21:43.369 --> 00:21:46.029 of it. But the delay was a defiant statement. 00:21:46.670 --> 00:21:48.950 It underlines her fierce independence. She would 00:21:48.950 --> 00:21:51.730 paint the subject when she was ready. Not just 00:21:51.730 --> 00:21:54.029 because a corporate client requested it. That 00:21:54.029 --> 00:21:56.009 defiance is certainly a thread running through 00:21:56.009 --> 00:21:58.430 her entire life. So moving past those commercial 00:21:58.430 --> 00:22:01.069 breaks, she eventually makes New Mexico her permanent 00:22:01.069 --> 00:22:05.130 home after Stieglitz dies in 1946. Yes, she spent 00:22:05.130 --> 00:22:08.349 three long years meticulously settling his complex 00:22:08.349 --> 00:22:12.390 estate in New York. But in 1949, she moved for 00:22:12.390 --> 00:22:15.859 good. She acquired and renovated her Abiquio 00:22:15.859 --> 00:22:18.119 Hacienda, which became her year -round studio, 00:22:18.380 --> 00:22:20.740 and she used Ghost Ranch as her summer home. 00:22:20.859 --> 00:22:23.299 And this permanent relocation, this physical 00:22:23.299 --> 00:22:25.519 distance from the art center of the world, it 00:22:25.519 --> 00:22:28.000 solidifies her complete creative isolation and 00:22:28.000 --> 00:22:30.420 control. And it introduces new kinds of landscapes 00:22:30.420 --> 00:22:33.119 into her work, architectural and monochromatic 00:22:33.119 --> 00:22:34.859 landscapes that were almost totally abstract 00:22:34.859 --> 00:22:36.940 in their simplicity. She started going further 00:22:36.940 --> 00:22:40.599 afield. She did. She began painting the Black 00:22:40.599 --> 00:22:44.099 Place, a desolate area about 150 miles west of 00:22:44.099 --> 00:22:46.420 Ghost Ranch, which she described so evocatively 00:22:46.420 --> 00:22:49.859 as resembling a mile of elephants. And she also 00:22:49.859 --> 00:22:53.019 painted the White Place. Yes, a distinctive white 00:22:53.019 --> 00:22:56.369 rock formation near Abiquio. These works are 00:22:56.369 --> 00:22:58.930 less about realistic representation and more 00:22:58.930 --> 00:23:01.529 about using black, white, and gray to capture 00:23:01.529 --> 00:23:03.849 these monumental forms and atmospheric effects. 00:23:04.250 --> 00:23:07.569 But the shift wasn't only to these grand monochromatic 00:23:07.569 --> 00:23:10.190 landscapes. She also famously turned inward, 00:23:10.349 --> 00:23:12.809 focusing intensely on the specific architectural 00:23:12.809 --> 00:23:15.490 forms of her own home. Right, turning a simple 00:23:15.490 --> 00:23:17.710 door into a masterpiece. This is a significant 00:23:17.710 --> 00:23:20.089 moment. It shows her abstraction moving from 00:23:20.089 --> 00:23:22.970 the macro, the vast canyon, to the micro, her 00:23:22.970 --> 00:23:26.869 own walls. she began a famous series focusing 00:23:26.869 --> 00:23:29.910 on the patio wall and the black door of her Ebikryu 00:23:29.910 --> 00:23:33.049 house. She eliminated almost all context, turning 00:23:33.049 --> 00:23:35.349 the architectural elements, the curve of the 00:23:35.349 --> 00:23:37.230 adobe wall, the stark shadow from the frame, 00:23:37.390 --> 00:23:39.829 the deep black rectangle of the door, into these 00:23:39.829 --> 00:23:42.390 abstract studies of light, form, and shadow. 00:23:42.529 --> 00:23:45.250 It really speaks to her need for total control 00:23:45.250 --> 00:23:47.690 over her environment. Making the familiar sacred 00:23:47.690 --> 00:23:50.460 and abstract. And something that's often overlooked 00:23:50.460 --> 00:23:53.180 during this period is her own serious engagement 00:23:53.180 --> 00:23:56.579 with photography. That's right. While she's painting 00:23:56.579 --> 00:23:58.940 these architectural studies, she's also working 00:23:58.940 --> 00:24:01.839 seriously with photography herself. She's creating 00:24:01.839 --> 00:24:05.019 these striking photographic counterparts to the 00:24:05.019 --> 00:24:08.240 patio paintings. So for decades, Stieglitz had 00:24:08.240 --> 00:24:11.460 controlled her photographic image. And now she 00:24:11.460 --> 00:24:14.200 was behind the lens. She was using the camera 00:24:14.200 --> 00:24:16.779 to further study light and form in her own architecture, 00:24:17.119 --> 00:24:19.819 demonstrating her mastery across multiple mediums, 00:24:19.819 --> 00:24:22.119 and finally taking control of her own visual 00:24:22.119 --> 00:24:25.130 output. This intense engagement continued well 00:24:25.130 --> 00:24:27.890 into her later years, but it was challenged significantly 00:24:27.890 --> 00:24:31.690 by her health, by her sight. By 1972, O 'Keeffe 00:24:31.690 --> 00:24:34.049 suffered a massive blow. She lost most of her 00:24:34.049 --> 00:24:36.250 central eyesight due to macular degeneration, 00:24:36.569 --> 00:24:39.289 which left her with only peripheral vision. So 00:24:39.289 --> 00:24:41.450 she had to stop painting with oils. She made 00:24:41.450 --> 00:24:43.670 the difficult decision to stop oil painting without 00:24:43.670 --> 00:24:46.349 assistance that year, but her artistic impulse 00:24:46.349 --> 00:24:49.569 was just too strong to be extinguished. She continued 00:24:49.569 --> 00:24:52.269 working unassisted in charcoal and pencil, focusing 00:24:52.269 --> 00:24:55.769 on form and line, all the way until 1984. And 00:24:55.769 --> 00:24:58.289 this later period introduces John Bruce Juan 00:24:58.289 --> 00:25:00.819 Hamilton into her life. He seems to have played 00:25:00.819 --> 00:25:03.140 a critical role in her final creative chapter. 00:25:03.339 --> 00:25:06.099 He did. Hamilton, who was a potter, was hired 00:25:06.099 --> 00:25:09.259 in 1973 as her live -in assistant and caretaker. 00:25:09.440 --> 00:25:12.019 He was much, much younger than O 'Keefe, and 00:25:12.019 --> 00:25:14.400 he was really instrumental in renewing her creative 00:25:14.400 --> 00:25:17.339 energy. So despite her vision loss, he encouraged 00:25:17.339 --> 00:25:20.099 her to keep creating. He did. He encouraged her 00:25:20.099 --> 00:25:22.440 to resume painting and even taught her to work 00:25:22.440 --> 00:25:25.279 with clay, introducing her to sculpture. He worked 00:25:25.279 --> 00:25:27.500 for her for 13 years and helped her write her 00:25:27.500 --> 00:25:30.839 best -selling 1976 autobiography, Georgia O 'Keeffe. 00:25:30.980 --> 00:25:33.339 Which further cemented her legend just as she 00:25:33.339 --> 00:25:35.539 was losing her ability to paint. Exactly. She 00:25:35.539 --> 00:25:39.339 died in Santa Fe in 1986 at the age of 98. And 00:25:39.339 --> 00:25:41.720 fittingly, her ashes were scattered on the land 00:25:41.720 --> 00:25:43.920 around Ghost Ranch, the place she had claimed 00:25:43.920 --> 00:25:46.480 as her own. O 'Keeffe's legacy is just immense. 00:25:46.619 --> 00:25:48.900 It's enduring. And as we've seen, it's deeply 00:25:48.900 --> 00:25:51.480 complicated, especially when we talk about her 00:25:51.480 --> 00:25:53.779 identity as a woman artist. So let's move to 00:25:53.779 --> 00:25:57.279 our final segment, art, identity and legacy, 00:25:57.559 --> 00:26:00.539 focusing on her very deliberate rejection of 00:26:00.539 --> 00:26:03.180 the feminist label, even as that movement sought 00:26:03.180 --> 00:26:05.319 to champion her. But before we get into that 00:26:05.319 --> 00:26:07.839 contradiction, we have to acknowledge her formal 00:26:07.839 --> 00:26:09.859 acceptance into the upper echelons of American 00:26:09.859 --> 00:26:13.380 culture. It was unprecedented for a woman in 00:26:13.380 --> 00:26:15.769 the fine art world. She received the Presidential 00:26:15.769 --> 00:26:18.769 Medal of Freedom in 1977 from President Gerald 00:26:18.769 --> 00:26:22.250 Ford and the National Medal of Arts in 1985 from 00:26:22.250 --> 00:26:24.890 President Ronald Reagan. She was also inducted 00:26:24.890 --> 00:26:27.089 into the National Women's Hall of Fame in 1993. 00:26:27.630 --> 00:26:30.289 Her commercial and institutional acceptance was 00:26:30.289 --> 00:26:33.500 absolute. I mean, within a decade of moving to 00:26:33.500 --> 00:26:35.440 New York, she was the highest paid American woman 00:26:35.440 --> 00:26:38.440 artist. And that high profile was inextricably 00:26:38.440 --> 00:26:41.079 linked to the intense sexualized interpretation 00:26:41.079 --> 00:26:43.200 of her work that we discussed. Which naturally 00:26:43.200 --> 00:26:45.440 spurred the feminist art movement of the 70s 00:26:45.440 --> 00:26:48.359 to embrace her as this revolutionary figure who 00:26:48.359 --> 00:26:51.079 introduced female iconography into the art world. 00:26:51.220 --> 00:26:53.319 The feminists just adopted her wholeheartedly. 00:26:53.460 --> 00:26:56.660 They did. They saw her work as this premeditated 00:26:56.660 --> 00:26:59.950 statement of female power. For example, the noted 00:26:59.950 --> 00:27:02.529 feminist art historian Linda Nochlin interpreted 00:27:02.529 --> 00:27:06.650 Black Iris III from 1926 as a definitive vulva 00:27:06.650 --> 00:27:09.250 metaphor, a subversive act of visual language. 00:27:09.490 --> 00:27:12.670 And you see her celebrated in canonical feminist 00:27:12.670 --> 00:27:14.930 works. Like Judy Shikato's The Dinner Party in 00:27:14.930 --> 00:27:17.549 1979, where O 'Keeffe gets a prominent place 00:27:17.549 --> 00:27:21.349 setting. Or Mary Beth Edelson's 1972 Last Supper 00:27:21.349 --> 00:27:23.990 collage, where she literally replaces Christ's 00:27:23.990 --> 00:27:26.829 head. with O 'Keeffe's. She was viewed as the 00:27:26.829 --> 00:27:29.269 ultimate symbol of female artistic authority. 00:27:29.470 --> 00:27:31.789 But despite all this high profile embrace, O 00:27:31.789 --> 00:27:34.430 'Keeffe consistently and explicitly rejected 00:27:34.430 --> 00:27:36.750 these labels. This is the great contradiction 00:27:36.750 --> 00:27:39.250 of her life. It is the core conflict. She was 00:27:39.250 --> 00:27:41.529 adamant about it. She stated flatly that she 00:27:41.529 --> 00:27:43.750 did not consider herself a feminist. She actively 00:27:43.750 --> 00:27:45.849 disliked being called a woman artist, and she 00:27:45.849 --> 00:27:48.380 maintained that femaleness is irrelevant. to 00:27:48.380 --> 00:27:50.099 the quality of art making or accomplishment. 00:27:50.380 --> 00:27:52.980 So why the staunch refusal? It seems contradictory. 00:27:53.319 --> 00:27:55.299 Why would she push away a movement that was trying 00:27:55.299 --> 00:27:57.579 to celebrate her unique achievement? Well, the 00:27:57.579 --> 00:28:01.160 refusal stems from her lifelong fierce individualism. 00:28:01.720 --> 00:28:04.640 O 'Keeffe wanted to be judged only as an artist 00:28:04.640 --> 00:28:07.740 with a capital A whose work transcended gender. 00:28:07.980 --> 00:28:11.420 So calling her a woman artist was to her diminishing. 00:28:11.460 --> 00:28:14.180 Exactly. She felt it was automatically diminishing 00:28:14.180 --> 00:28:16.539 her achievement, implying that she was only good 00:28:16.539 --> 00:28:19.410 for a woman. She saw group identity as restrictive. 00:28:19.710 --> 00:28:22.910 For her, the art was universal, and the identity 00:28:22.910 --> 00:28:25.130 of the maker was secondary to the result. It 00:28:25.130 --> 00:28:26.869 is important to note, though, that while she 00:28:26.869 --> 00:28:29.430 rejected the later feminist label, she wasn't 00:28:29.430 --> 00:28:31.910 ignorant of gender politics earlier in her life. 00:28:32.029 --> 00:28:34.390 That is a crucial distinction. The records show 00:28:34.390 --> 00:28:36.710 she was actively reading books and articles on 00:28:36.710 --> 00:28:39.309 women's suffrage and cultural politics as early 00:28:39.309 --> 00:28:43.230 as 1915. She was reading things like Floyd Dell's 00:28:43.230 --> 00:28:45.809 Women as World Builders. And her friend Anita 00:28:45.809 --> 00:28:48.049 Politzer was a suffragist. Right, they were in 00:28:48.049 --> 00:28:50.950 dialogue about it. In 1930, she even spoke publicly 00:28:50.950 --> 00:28:53.549 about gender discrimination, saying she was interested 00:28:53.549 --> 00:28:55.910 in the oppression of women of all classes. So 00:28:55.910 --> 00:28:57.769 she understood and she cared about the issues. 00:28:58.009 --> 00:29:00.609 She just refused to let her art be categorized 00:29:00.609 --> 00:29:03.309 or defined by those issues. Precisely. Okay, 00:29:03.390 --> 00:29:05.710 moving away from the political aspects, let's 00:29:05.710 --> 00:29:08.009 touch on the wider connections and friendships 00:29:08.009 --> 00:29:10.369 that provided her support outside of all the 00:29:10.369 --> 00:29:12.789 Stieglitz drama. Her relationship with Stieglitz 00:29:12.789 --> 00:29:15.269 was often painful, we know that, especially because 00:29:15.269 --> 00:29:18.170 of his affair with Dorothy Norman, which contributed 00:29:18.170 --> 00:29:21.769 to her breakdown. But her friendship with Rebecca 00:29:21.769 --> 00:29:25.690 Strand was incredibly supportive. They traveled 00:29:25.690 --> 00:29:28.049 to Taos together and lived with what was described 00:29:28.049 --> 00:29:31.309 as glee. And while she kept her distance from 00:29:31.309 --> 00:29:34.250 the lesbian community in Santa Fe, she did embrace 00:29:34.250 --> 00:29:36.779 the general atmosphere there. She definitely 00:29:36.779 --> 00:29:39.779 embraced the psychological space and sexual freedom 00:29:39.779 --> 00:29:42.579 that Santa Fe entails offered. She adopted what 00:29:42.579 --> 00:29:45.480 she called gender neutral clothing. She carved 00:29:45.480 --> 00:29:47.740 out her own space. And she also had a lesser 00:29:47.740 --> 00:29:49.819 known but historically significant friendship 00:29:49.819 --> 00:29:52.759 with the Mexican painter Frida Kahlo. They met 00:29:52.759 --> 00:29:55.779 in New York City in 1931 at the opening of Diego 00:29:55.779 --> 00:29:58.519 Rivera's exhibition. They remained friends and 00:29:58.519 --> 00:30:01.319 stayed in touch, even while O 'Keeffe was recuperating 00:30:01.319 --> 00:30:03.299 from her nervous breakdown. And you can see the 00:30:03.299 --> 00:30:06.009 influence in Kahlo's work. You can. It's tangible 00:30:06.009 --> 00:30:08.829 and it's beautiful. If you look at Kahlo's painting, 00:30:09.069 --> 00:30:11.710 Self -Portrait on the Borderline Between Mexico 00:30:11.710 --> 00:30:14.309 and the United States, you'll see Jack -in -the 00:30:14.309 --> 00:30:16.769 -Pulpit flowers on the Mexican side of the border. 00:30:16.950 --> 00:30:19.829 And that specific flower was a subject O 'Keefe 00:30:19.829 --> 00:30:22.069 had just painted. In a famous series showing 00:30:22.069 --> 00:30:24.609 their growth stages. It's this wonderful, subtle, 00:30:24.730 --> 00:30:27.609 visual dialogue, kind of Easter egg reflecting 00:30:27.609 --> 00:30:30.490 their mutual admiration and friendship between 00:30:30.490 --> 00:30:33.460 two giants of modern art. Finally, we have to 00:30:33.460 --> 00:30:35.640 mention the contested will. It's a fascinating 00:30:35.640 --> 00:30:38.640 footnote to her life's ambition for control and 00:30:38.640 --> 00:30:41.500 its legal legacy. O 'Keeffe was meticulous about 00:30:41.500 --> 00:30:43.980 control her whole life, but her final wishes 00:30:43.980 --> 00:30:47.180 were immediately controversial. Quotasils that 00:30:47.180 --> 00:30:49.039 were added late in her life left most of her 00:30:49.039 --> 00:30:52.559 substantial $65 million estate, including her 00:30:52.559 --> 00:30:55.079 own work and Stieglitz's photography, to her 00:30:55.079 --> 00:30:57.480 assistant, Juan Hamilton. And her family naturally 00:30:57.480 --> 00:31:00.539 contested this. They did, arguing Hamilton had 00:31:00.539 --> 00:31:03.359 exercised undue influence over the ailing, nearly 00:31:03.359 --> 00:31:05.940 blind artist. So what was the result of that 00:31:05.940 --> 00:31:08.460 legal battle? The legal fallout was immense. 00:31:08.799 --> 00:31:11.140 The case was eventually settled out of court, 00:31:11.279 --> 00:31:13.519 which ensured that institutions like the Met 00:31:13.519 --> 00:31:15.920 and the National Gallery received significant 00:31:15.920 --> 00:31:19.200 portions of her collection. But crucially, the 00:31:19.200 --> 00:31:22.039 highly publicized legal fight established a famous 00:31:22.039 --> 00:31:25.029 legal precedent in estate planning law. Regarding 00:31:25.029 --> 00:31:28.470 the quests to non -family caregivers. Yes, and 00:31:28.470 --> 00:31:30.609 it continues to be cited today. And as a final 00:31:30.609 --> 00:31:33.029 note on her enduring presence, her legacy is 00:31:33.029 --> 00:31:35.009 protected through the Georgia O 'Keeffe Museum, 00:31:35.130 --> 00:31:38.690 which opened in Santa Fe in 1997. It manages 00:31:38.690 --> 00:31:41.630 her collection, her archives, and her Abiquio 00:31:41.630 --> 00:31:44.349 home and studio. And her connection to the landscape 00:31:44.349 --> 00:31:47.190 was so profound that even the scientific community 00:31:47.190 --> 00:31:50.289 recognized it. In 2006, a fossilized species 00:31:50.289 --> 00:31:54.140 of archosaur an extinct reptile, was named Ephigia 00:31:54.140 --> 00:31:56.799 O 'Keefe. Literally, O 'Keefe's ghost. O 'Keefe's 00:31:56.799 --> 00:31:58.859 ghost, in honor of her iconic paintings of the 00:31:58.859 --> 00:32:00.930 Badlands at Ghost Ranch. I mean, that is the 00:32:00.930 --> 00:32:03.029 definition of a legacy that penetrates far beyond 00:32:03.029 --> 00:32:04.950 the confines of the art world. So if we look 00:32:04.950 --> 00:32:07.049 back at this incredible seven decade trajectory, 00:32:07.329 --> 00:32:10.289 we see a story of just relentless artistic evolution. 00:32:10.549 --> 00:32:13.009 It really is. She starts by mastering the restrictive 00:32:13.009 --> 00:32:16.049 rules of academic realism, suffers this crisis 00:32:16.049 --> 00:32:18.450 of purpose, and then finds her footing in the 00:32:18.450 --> 00:32:22.009 revolutionary ideas of Arthur Wesley Dow. She 00:32:22.009 --> 00:32:24.990 synthesizes total abstraction, the geometric 00:32:24.990 --> 00:32:27.809 clarity of precisionism, and the dramatic, stark 00:32:27.809 --> 00:32:33.450 landscape of the American South. Her journey 00:32:33.450 --> 00:32:36.869 is one of relentless self -definition. She chose 00:32:36.869 --> 00:32:39.690 independence and control above everything else. 00:32:39.869 --> 00:32:42.289 She actively defined herself as an artist first, 00:32:42.470 --> 00:32:44.670 insisting that her gender was irrelevant to her 00:32:44.670 --> 00:32:46.809 contribution and demanding that her work be judged 00:32:46.809 --> 00:32:49.509 on universal artistic merit. And in doing so, 00:32:49.509 --> 00:32:52.450 she creates a paradox. She paves the way for 00:32:52.450 --> 00:32:54.829 future generations of women artists by achieving 00:32:54.829 --> 00:32:56.990 this unprecedented acceptance and recognition. 00:32:57.369 --> 00:32:59.430 Yet she firmly rejected the very label that the 00:32:59.430 --> 00:33:05.119 movement later sought to impose upon her. early 00:33:05.119 --> 00:33:08.099 abstractions and her sustained ability to capture 00:33:08.099 --> 00:33:10.480 that deep intense feeling her personal sensations 00:33:10.480 --> 00:33:12.799 through these highly simplified forms whether 00:33:12.799 --> 00:33:15.180 they were the curve of a skull the geometric 00:33:15.180 --> 00:33:18.240 shadow of an adobe wall or the magnified curve 00:33:18.240 --> 00:33:21.099 of a flower petal which brings us back full circle 00:33:21.099 --> 00:33:24.299 to the central contradiction of her fame and 00:33:24.299 --> 00:33:27.279 our final provocative thought for you the listener 00:33:27.279 --> 00:33:30.660 o 'keefe sought to express her most private sensations 00:33:30.660 --> 00:33:34.000 and feelings, through total abstraction and these 00:33:34.000 --> 00:33:37.220 intensely designed compositions. She became famous, 00:33:37.259 --> 00:33:39.940 however, precisely because the public and critics, 00:33:40.119 --> 00:33:43.279 fueled by Stieglitz's explicit photography, insisted 00:33:43.279 --> 00:33:45.759 on reading those images sexually and symbolically 00:33:45.759 --> 00:33:48.619 as metaphors for female identity. Regardless 00:33:48.619 --> 00:33:51.359 of her lifelong protests. Exactly. So the provocative 00:33:51.359 --> 00:33:54.240 question here is, does great art, once it leaves 00:33:54.240 --> 00:33:56.259 the isolation of the studio and enters the public 00:33:56.259 --> 00:33:58.779 gallery, ultimately belong to the artist as a 00:33:58.779 --> 00:34:01.569 real? stated intention? Or does it belong instead 00:34:01.569 --> 00:34:03.970 to the cultural consciousness that redefines 00:34:03.970 --> 00:34:05.809 and reinterprets it, regardless of what the artist 00:34:05.809 --> 00:34:08.349 says? It's something to consider the next time 00:34:08.349 --> 00:34:10.130 you encounter one of her flowers or skulls.