Using Game Theory As A Metaphor Through Which
To View The Male Gaze
INTRODUCTION
From theVenus of Willendorf all the way through renaissance
painting and into contemporary art, the female form has been the most
widely used and reoccurring subject in art. Since the rise of the feminist
movement in the 1960s, women have become more and more conscious
of the use of the female form as an object within the painting rather than
the subject of the painting. In reaction, a “sense of conscious feminine
identification has become a more dominant factor in the work of many
women artists” (Nochlin, 1989, p. 87) and has brought about a
discussion of exactly how the female body should be represented in art in
such a way as to provide it the power it had previously been lacking.
This paper will address three main goals: briefly present the
history of the male gaze, cover the concept of ‘game theory’ and use it as
a metaphor to discuss the choices being made by artists while trying to
re-humanize the female form in their artwork, and discuss, using game
theory strategies, which variables have been changed by artists using the
1
female body in their work. These game theory strategies will also help us
investigate whether those changes were successful or unsuccessful in
allowing the female in the artwork to be viewed as a human with a story
and emotion rather than an object to merely be regarded.
HISTORY OF THE MALE GAZE
The introduction of the term “the male gaze” arose in 1975 from
Laura Mulvey’s essay, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, in which
she states that, in film, women are seen as the object of the gaze because
the audience is assumed to be masculine. “In a world ordered by sexual
imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and
passive/female. The determining male gaze projects its phantasy on to
the female form which is styled accordingly” (Mulvey, 1975, p. 6).
Because of the unspoken rules of society, women are inherently passively
sexual creatures; “In their traditional exhibitionist role women are
simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for
strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-belooked-at-ness” (Mulvey, 1975, p. 6). And, because of this, the male
figure is inherently an active sexual creature; the man is in control of his
sexual power. “According to the principles of the ruling ideology and the
psychical structures that back it up, the male figure cannot bear the
burden of sexual objectification” (Mulvey, 1975, p. 7). Because of this
2
ideal, if a man in an image is nude, this nudity will project strength or
power while, when a female in an image is nude, she is merely nude for
the enjoyment and/or appreciation of the man. She is there to be had by
him while he is there to have her.
Though Mulvey’s essay was published in 1975, these societal
beliefs and ideals have held tight and continue to prevail, despite how far
the women’s movement has come. Linda Nochlin, among others, speaks
eloquently of her concern about this issue:
Assumptions about women’s weakness and passivity; her sexual
availability for men’s needs; her defining domestic and nurturing
function; her identity with the realm of nature; her existence as
object rather than creator of art; the patent ridiculousness of her
attempts to insert herself actively into the realm of history by
means of work or engagement in political struggle…all of these
notions were shared, if not uncontestedly, to a greater or lesser
degree by most people of our period, and as such constitute an
ongoing subtext underlying almost all individual images involving
women. (Nochlin, 1989, p. 2)
In contemporary society, from television shows and movies to magazines
and advertisements, the involvement of the female is used merely as a
pretty object or a selling point. It seems to be an understanding among
3
most people in our society that women are creatures of beauty and sex
appeal.
While Mulvey is speaking specifically to the film genre, the male
gaze, as John Berger points out in his book, Ways of Seeing, translates
to the art world as well. Berger speaks of the male gaze in traditional
painting as a calculated placement of the female as an object within the
canvas meant to be looked at by the inherent male viewer. Her facial
expression, body positioning, and placement within the pictorial space all
are choices made by the (typically male) artist to present the woman as a
sexually alluring and coy object for the (typically male) viewer to enjoy.
“She is offering up her femininity as the surveyed” (Berger, 1990, p. 55).
Much like Mulvey pointed out, the female has a sole purpose- to be
looked at by a man, “…she turns herself into an object – and most
particularly an object of vision: a sight”(Berger, 1990, p. 47).
While the male in painting is meant to tell a story of triumph,
strength, or power, the woman becomes a gentle, passive, pretty object in
the painting, much like a flower or a piece of fruit in a still life; put
simply: “…men act and women appear” (Berger, 1990, p. 47). If the
woman in the painting did have a story or a life outside of the frame, it
certainly doesn’t show; the only thing of importance is her beauty. “She
has to survey everything she is and everything she does because how she
appears to others, and ultimately how she appears to men, is of crucial
4
importance for what is normally thought of as the success of her life”
(Berger, 1990, p. 46).
GAME THEORY in ART TERMS
While there is much information regarding historical examples of
the male gaze and there have been many discussions concerning the
feminist movement’s recognition of and battle against the use of the
female form as an object to be regarded by male viewers, there is very
little information concerning the specific methods/styles/themes that
artists have used to successfully re-humanized the female figure. When
using the female form in an artwork, certain variables need to be
modified from what has been done in the past in order to allow the figure
to act as the subject of the artwork rather than the object in the artwork.
This is where game theory, because of its analytical nature, can help us
look at these modifications strategically.
Game theory, while normally and most commonly used for
mathematical and scientific studies, can be utilized as a metaphor to
view and study these variables and the resulting relationships between
artists and viewers. As the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines
it, “Game theory is the study of the ways in which strategic interactions
among economic agents produce outcomes with respect to the preferences
(or utilities) of those agents, where the outcomes in question might have
5
been intended by none of the agents.” Let’s look more closely at this
definition, piece by piece and re-name some of the terms used to better
suit our needs. The first term, “strategic interactions”, can be renamed
‘artistic choices’; “economic agents” is now ‘artists’ or ‘viewers’;
“outcomes” can remain as ‘outcomes’; and “preferences (or utilities)” will
become ‘intentions’. When stated with our new terms, game theory all of
a sudden is speaking art world language: “Game theory is the study of
the ways in which [artistic choices] among [artists] produce outcomes
with respect to the [intentions] of those [artists], where the outcomes in
question might have been intended by none of the [viewers].” Essentially,
what this new and very wordy definition means for us is that the artist is
trying to manipulate the outcome of an artwork by taking into account
the way the viewer interprets certain variables; the female object has a
possibility of being the female subject if x, y, and/or z changes. In this
sense, we can look at art making as a game.
A game is defined as “All situations in which at least one agent can
only act to maximize his utility through anticipating (either consciously,
or just implicitly in his behavior) the responses to his actions by one or
more other agents” (“Game Theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy),” n.d.). If we remember that, for the sake of this paper,
“agent” means ‘artist and/or viewer’ and “utility” means ‘intention’, what
this definition is telling us is that the game of art involves situations in
which artists are attempting to make the best use of their intentions by
6
expecting how the viewer(s) will respond to the outcomes of the artistic
choices made.
“Sometimes game theory is used to figure out what it is likely to
happen in a strategic interaction, so a person or company can then try to
change the game to their advantage” (Camerer, 2003). Once the artist
knows what response he/she can expect from the viewer, certain
strategies need to be employed to change that response. “Each player in
a game faces a choice among two or more possible strategies. A strategy
is a predetermined ‘programme of play’ that tells her what actions to take
in response to every possible strategy other players might use” (“Game
Theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy),” n.d.). Artists must make
very conscious choices to achieve a specific outcome whether or not that
outcome feels natural or rational to the viewer. It is the strategies that
the artist chooses that dictate whether they win or loose the game (in
other words whether they succeed or not in obtaining the
outcome/response intended from the viewer). We can analytically look at
these strategies by studying some of what game theorists would call
“controlled experiments” or “field observations” (Camerer, 2003).
GAME THEORY STRATEGIES IN ART
Perhaps the best way to start is by looking at the most obvious
strategy: clothing. Though this strategy may not necessarily an have
7
been an ‘experiment’ by female artists, nor even an effort to dispel the
oppressive expectations of male gaze, it still seems a good starting point
to discuss the strategies or changes that can create clear differences in
viewer interpretations, or, going
back to game theory terminology,
‘outcomes’. There is an important
distinction between looking at a
female and looking at a nude
female. Let’s take Mary Cassatt’s
The Bath and Auguste Renoir’s
Seated Bather as our examples.
These two paintings were both
created roughly around the same
time (The Bath in 1891 and Seated
Bather in 1884) both involve a bath, both involve the female figure, and
both involve cloth in some form (as clothing in one painting and as a
prop in the other). However, there is a very clear division between these
two women. The woman in the Cassatt is a mother, and a busy one at
that. She is actively engaged in her task, completely unaware that
anyone, no less a man, may be watching her during her task. She is too
busy to notice us looking at her; has things to do, a child to bathe, and
probably dinner to get on the table; this woman has a life and a story
outside of this painting.
8
On the other hand, the woman in the Renoir painting seems to
have all the time in the world to longingly gaze off into the distance.
Though she, too, is actively engaged in her task (of pondering), we get the
sense that this task is merely happening for us to view. We get no sense
of time lapse with this image, no desire to wonder what she was doing
prior to this moment or what she plans on doing afterward; she is a
perfectly posed object within the
frame of the canvas; she is there for
us to view. Renoir was well known as
being very fond of the female nude as
well as flowers, and serene scenery
because, as he said himself, “Why
shouldn’t art be pretty,” (Branin,
1998, p. 85) which tells us, quite
blatantly, that the female form gets
lumped into the “pretty” category
along with such inanimate objects as flowers and bowls of fruit. He was
also quoted as saying, “I never think I have finished a nude until I think I
could pinch it,” (Chilvers, 2004, p. 587) which only alludes to his
conception of the female as a sexual and erotic object.
Some of you may be thinking that clothing is not the operative
strategy used in these paintings, rather, it is the baby in the Cassatt that
acts as the strategy. To dispel that argument, we can look at a painting
9
involving both lack of clothing and motherhood: Giorgione’s Tempest. If
we look at a close up of the woman in this painting, we see that she has
very little in common with the woman in the Cassatt other than the fact
that she, too, is holding a child. Her position and gaze suggest that, even
though she is nursing her baby, she is far more invested in what we, the
viewer, think of her action
rather than the motherly
concern. Or, as Berger puts
it, “this nakedness is
not…an expression of her
own feelings; it is a sign of
her submission to the
owner’s feelings and
demands” (p. 52). Her
nudity makes little sense in
this setting, especially taking into consideration the complete painting in
which a fully clothed male looks on from a distance. This additional
character within the scene and her complete ignorance of his gaze in
favor of the unknown male viewer’s gaze solidifies her presence as an
object. “The principal protagonist is never painted. He is the spectator in
front of the picture and he is presumed to be a man” (Berger, 1990, p.
54). While there may be men within the paintings, the nude female gaze
is always trained on the viewer.
10
THE GAME OF SUBJECT/OBJECT
As the previous
paragraphs show, the strategic
use of a clothed female by the
artist does, in fact, create a
different interaction with the
viewer than that of a nude
female and, thus, changes the
outcome of the game in favor of
the woman as subject.
However, it also proves, quite
definitively, that the real and
more challenging game we must look at is that of removing the nude
female from the prying eyes of the male gaze and re-humanizing her in
spite of the historical context of the nude in painting. Taking this, more
specific game into account, we can start looking at more specific
strategies employed by artists using the female nude in their artwork.
Tit for Tat: The Female Replaces the Male Artist
The first strategy, in game theory terms, involves one player
responding to a loss of the game by using the same strategy their
opponent used previously that caused them to win, which is called “tit
11
for tat” (“Game Theory,” n.d.). In art terms, this strategy involves the
female artist painting the female nude just as the male artists of the past
have. “For centuries the cultural record of our experiences has been a
record of male experience. It is the male sensibility that has
apprehended and described our life” (Gouma-Peterson & Mathews, 1987,
p. 334). Because of this fact, when a male artist painted a female nude,
there were certain connotations connected to the image, namely, the
ideas of the male gaze, and women have responded to those connotations
by feeling and acting like the object they were being presented as. Over
the past fifty years, “we have come a long way from the stereotype of the
active male artist and the passive female muse—men looking at women
and women looking at themselves being looked at” (“ARTnews,” n.d.).
So, does replacing the male artist with that of a female artist while
still using the female nude in the work change the outcome of the status
of the nude within the work? Because the female nude holds so much
historical weight, “…the body was a crucial site for feminist intervention
in art practice because it represented all that was perceived to be
degrading in the erotic tradition of western art and yet, at the same time,
it offered a means of articulating a specifically female experience”
(Betterton, 1996, p. 9). For this fact, there are quite a few female artists
who have made a career of portraying women, such as Lisa Yuskavage,
Jenny Saville, Joan Semmel, Vanessa Beecroft, Marlene Dumas, and
many others. For the purpose of this paper, we will narrow down the
12
very long list and focus only on the work of Lisa Yuskavage and Jenny
Saville.
Since the 1990s, Lisa Yuskavage has become very well known for
her rather shocking and in-your-face images of sexually charged females.
With Yuskavage’s work, there is an interesting discussion of whether her
images are empowering or sexist. Because she is a female painter, her
use of the female body in such a provocative manner can be seen as
taking control of her body and her sexuality and, in that sense, she is not
paying homage to but rather
manipulating the cannons used in
the past by male artists to objectify
the female. But there are also quite
a few people who have difficulty
accepting her work because of her
use of the female body in such a
confrontational pin-up sort of way.
“Some critics refer to great painters
-- Rembrandt, Goya, Rothko -- in
discussing Yuskavage's appeal; others mention kitsch, Walter Keene's
kids, Playboy and pornography” (“Lisa Yuskavage,” 2007). Yuskavage
has spoken of her work both as "painting paintings that take the point of
view of a man" as well as stating that her paintings are “really not about
the "male gaze" but about my own gaze” (“Gadfly Online.,” n.d.). Either
13
way, Yuskavage is having a conversation with the history of painting and
the representation of the female nude and it is pretty obvious that her
paintings are meant to evoke a reaction.
When speaking about her artwork, Rorschach Blot, she says, “It's
not a passive object. It's an active object and made active by the viewer”
(“Gadfly Online.,” n.d.). She also speaks of her desire for her paintings “to
seem powerful and women are really powerful in some way. I want them
to be powerful rather than victimized” (“Gadfly Online.,” n.d.). In that
case, it would seem that the “tit for tat” strategy is working to her benefit,
especially considering the huge amount of popularity and recognition she
and her work have received from the art world over the past 20 years.
However, as one critic pointed out, “It's hard to assess where their power
lies when they are so readily consumed by the market. Is it because they
are titillating?” (“Lisa
Yuskavage,” 2007). If this is the
case, then, has Yuskavage really
won the game?
Jenny Saville tends to be
(as she is even within this
QuickTime™ and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
paper) lumped in with
Yuskavage’s work because of the
subject matter. However, Saville
works in a bit of a different
14
direction. While she, like Yuskavage, is utilizing the female nude in her
paintings, the women used in her images are much more realistic and do
not carry the sexual weight of Yuskavage’s work. Rather than making
statements about the ‘male gaze’ specifically, Saville is speaking to the
broader issue of contemporary expectations of female bodies and the
limits that those expectations create. Saville, more often than not, uses
herself as a model, considering her body to be outside of the ideal
expectations. She sees this as an integral choice in her work “Because
women have been so involved in being the subject-object, it's quite
important to take that on board and not be just the person looking and
examining…I want it to be a consistent exchange all the time” (“ART /
Areas of flesh - Arts & Entertainment - The Independent,” n.d.)
A lot of her work is based on plastic surgery and the concept that
there is an “ideal” body that must be attained by any possible measure.
Saville speaks to this fascination with beauty, saying, “I'm not painting
disgusting, big women. I'm painting women who've been made to think
they're big and disgusting”. With her work, she is not making a
statement about not being pretty or thin or perfect, rather, she is making
the statement that all women are beautiful as they are.
This concept of beauty is limited to the female form. Though
Yuskavage is not working with this theme, she has bee quoted as saying,
15
How many women do you know that love their bodies openly? They
don't. Men don't think about it as much. When they get a tire they
just go to a gym. There's no self-flagellation. Women flagellate
themselves something fierce. I think that's internalized misogyny, a
self-hatred.” (“Gadfly Online.,” n.d.)
This is an interesting thing to bring up when speaking about Saville’s
work. Her work is inherently feminine because a male would never feel
the need to create paintings about his ‘imperfect’ body simply because
the ideal of a perfect body is specific to women.
There is a thing about beauty, beauty is always associated with the
male fantasy of what the female body is. I don’t think there is
anything wrong with beauty. It’s just what women think is
beautiful can be different. And there can be beauty in
individualism. If there is a wart or a scar, this can be beautiful, in
a sense, when you paint it. It’s part of your identity. Individual
things are seeping out, leaking out. (“ART / Areas of flesh: - Arts &
Entertainment - The Independent,” n.d.)
This idea of individualism being beautiful is what helps Saville’s
work be so successful in presenting her nudes as subjects. The
objectified female nudes have no individualism because they are not
16
painted to act as people; one nude can easily be interchanged with the
next because it is the ideal that is important, not the woman herself.
People are individuals, objects cannot be.
Also, the concept of painting an ‘undesirable’ nude, because it
pulls away from the idea that the female nude is there to be presented to
the viewer as a beautiful and sexy object, allows the nude to be viewed as
a subject rather than an object. When looking back to our game of
object/subject, Saville’s work seems to be more successful than
Yuskavage’s simply because the body she is presenting is not an
idealized female, she is showing us every imperfection of the real female.
Trigger Strategy: The Male Nude Replaces The Female
The next strategy worth discussing is that of flipping the
male/subject, female/object ideal of the male gaze on its head by
replacing the female nude with the male nude. In game theory, this
strategy is known as a “trigger strategy” (“Game Theory,” n.d.). A trigger
strategy is defined as “A strategy…in which a player begins by
cooperating but defects to cheating for a predefined period of time as a
response to a defection by the opponent” (Ross, n.d.). If we think of this
in art terms, “cheating” refers to the female artist not painting what she
is expected to paint and the “defection by the opponent” could be seen as
(from a feminist point of view) the male artist creating paintings of
objectified women. So, what the trigger strategy means for this paper is
17
that it is a strategic play by female artists in which they stop ‘playing
nice’ so to speak and start painting images of nude men in response to
having been painted as an object for so many years.
Interestingly, very few female painters have utilized this strategy.
The most well known artist from this incredibly small group is Sylvia
Sleigh. Not only
does Sleigh create
paintings of nude
men, but “many [of
the paintings] invert
famous examples of
the female nude –
such as Botticelli’s
Venus and Mars
(October); Ingres’ Turkish Bath; and Velazquez’ Rokeby Venus (Philip
Golub Reclining)” (Parker & Pollock, 1987, p. 267). Sleigh, who is
considered to be one of the forerunners of the feminist art movement
during the 1960s and 70s, meant not to replace the objectification of the
female nude by objectifying the male nude instead. Rather, Sleigh’s
paintings are meant to re-humanize both sexes. She has made it clear in
her interviews that she does not hate men, she merely wants to be
considered equal to men and she makes this happen in her paintings. “I
wanted to give my perspective; portraying both sexes with dignity and
18
humanism. It was very necessary to do this because women had often
been painted as objects of desire in humiliating poses. I don’t mind the
‘desire’ part, it’s the ‘object’ that’s not very nice” (Grimes, 2010). The fact
that she often used friends and family as models for her paintings helps
solidify her intention of providing the figures in her paintings, whether
male or female, with a sense of personality and humanness. Sleigh’s
clever ability to ground her subjects in reality by holding onto the
qualities of real humans, such as body hair, is what helps to balance
both sexes.
The question of why Sleigh is in such a small minority of women
who paint the male nude brings up some interesting questions.
According to game theory, the trigger strategy is a logistical one, yet, with
this specific circumstance, it is rare to see. Perhaps it is because we have
been raised in such a way as to believe that the naked male body is not
as aesthetically enjoyable as that of a female. We are so used to seeing
the ‘perfect’ female nude in so many different situations that elude to
sexiness and fragility but men have never been put in that role so, to
start now proves difficult.
Alice Neel’s work, John Perreault, illustrates this idea. In this
work, we see poet John Perreault in a very typical odalisque pose with
his body displayed for all to see. Being the notorious “collector of souls”
(“1stdibs Introspective - Alice Neel,” n.d.), Neel painted Perreault in
merciless intimate detail. There is very little about Perreault that
19
reminds us of the smooth, soft, rounded forms of the female odalisque
who usually strikes this pose. Very little aside from the sex of the model
in this image has changed from what we know of the odalisque, yet it
holds none of the titillation of the originals. There is a certain beauty
and romance to the female body that is lost in the male body. There is
also the underlying connotation of vulnerability that is connected with
being the sexual object of the gaze that men simply resist. Men have
always been considered the dominant of our species so to place them in
the submissive role, especially in sexual terms, seems almost feminine.
“Does the mere fact of being depicted naked feminize the male body?”
(“ARTnews,” n.d.)
Going back to Sleigh, we have to wonder if exploring the idea of the
“female gaze” doesn’t help women win the subject/object game because it
actually keeps the whole concept of the gaze going. What Sylvia Sleigh is
20
doing in her work is not trying to morph the male gaze to the female gaze
but to erase the idea of the gaze all-together. For this reason, the
strategy works.
CONCLUSION
While male artists such as Will Cotton and John Currin are still
making a living objectifying women and meaning to be “deliberately
sexist” (“A Closer Look at John Currin,” n.d.), it is important to be
reminded that the game is not over. Female artists are finding new
strategies to overcome the historical ideologies of the male gaze. Aside
from the strategies previously discussed, there have been (and will surely
continue to be) numerous methods with which to re-humanize the female
form. Especially in the contemporary moment where figure painting, in
general, is conspicuously absent, finding ways to portray the female
nude within a painting while allowing the figure to hold on to the subject
position is not only difficult but praise-worthy and forward-moving.
CITATIONS
1stdibs Introspective - Alice Neel. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 4,
2011, from
http://www.1stdibs.com/introspective/creators/alice_ne
21
el/
A Closer Look at John Currin. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 4, 2011,
from
http://www.slate.com/id/2093020/slideshow/2093150/
fs/0//entry/2093134/
ART / Areas of flesh - Arts & Entertainment - The
Independent. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 4, 2011, from
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art-areas-of-flesh-when-jenny-saville-then-aged-22-finishedher-course-at-glasgow-school-of-art-in-the-summer-of1992-the-british-art-collector-charles-saatchi-offeredher-an-exhibition-at-his-gallery-in-london-some-of-heroverlifesized-paintings-went-on-show-there-last-fridayshe-talked-to-david-sylvester-about-two-of-them-firstplan-the-nude-and-interfacing-1410394.html
ARTnews. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 4, 2011, from
http://artnews.com/issues/article.asp?art_id=3133
Berger, J. (1990). Ways of Seeing: Based on the BBC Television
Series (1st ed.). Penguin (Non-Classics).
Betterton, R. (1996). An Intimate Distance: Women, Artists and
22
the Body. Routledge.
Branin, L. (1998). Great Artists of the World. New Line Books.
Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: experiments in
strategic interaction. Russell Sage Foundation.
Chilvers, I. (2004). The Oxford dictionary of art. Oxford
University Press US.
Gadfly Online. (n.d.). . Retrieved from
http://www.gadflyonline.com/archive/April98/archiveyuskavage.html
Gadfly Online. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 4, 2011, from
http://www.gadflyonline.com/archive/April98/archiveyuskavage.html
Game Theory. (n.d.). . Retrieved from
http://faculty.lebow.drexel.edu/mccainr/top/eco/game/
game-toc.html
Game Theory. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 26, 2011, from
http://faculty.lebow.drexel.edu/mccainr/top/eco/game/
game-toc.html
Game Theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). (n.d.). .
Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game23
theory/
Gouma-Peterson, T., & Mathews, P. (1987). The Feminist
Critique of Art History. The Art Bulletin, 69(3), 326-357.
doi:10.2307/3051059
Grimes, W. (2010, October 25). Sylvia Sleigh, Provocative
Portraitist and Feminist Artist, Dies at 94. The New York
Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/arts/design/26sl
eigh.html
Lisa Yuskavage: Critiquing Prurient Sexuality, or
Disingenuously Peddling a Soft-Porn Aesthetic? washingtonpost.com. (2007, April 22). . Retrieved April
28, 2011, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/04/20/AR2007042000406_2.
html
Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.
Screen, 16(3), 6 -18. doi:10.1093/screen/16.3.6
Nochlin, L. (1989). Women, Art, And Power And Other Essays.
Westview Press.
Parker, R., & Pollock, G. (1987). Framing Feminism: Art and
24
the Women's Movement 1970-1985. Pandora Press.
Ross, D. (n.d.). Game Theory. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game-theory/
25