From being the object of art to being the producer of the ımage The case of women in art history

Abstract

Keywords: Feminism; fine arts; gender; painting; women artists

Introduction

The renowned discourse about woman rights ‘A Vindication of the Rights of Woman’ by Mary Wollstonecraft dates back 1792 and considered the earliest treatise advocating gender equality. The book is a classic reference book for rational feminism. In the book Wollstonecraft suggests that there is no inferiority between men and women. The rigths of women which was not questioned in writing during the 18th century, started to be questioned during the 20th century and the studies on it began to increase and diversify. The famous French writer and philosopher Simone de Beauvoir’s 1949 study ‘Le Deuxième Sexe’ (The Second Sex )forms the basis of modern feminism. The name of the book comes from the inferior position of women to men. ‘One is not born but becomes a woman” is the most popular line of the book and summarise the situation of woman. It is very well mentioned in the book that becoming a woman is a think that comes after learning the existance of culturel codes. With the Women Movement in 1960’s new compartments of the argument gets on the stage. When it comes to the course of art, women started to dig art history inorder to bring women artists to light. But in 1971 American art historian and writer Linda Nochlin bring a new perspective to the discussion with her famous study ‘Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?’ In this paper in order to discuss the evolution of women artists in art history Nochlins’s pioneering essay was the right approach to begin the article, also Griselda Pollock ‘s ‘’Women, Art and Ideology: Questions for Feminist Art Historians’ is an other primary refferance for the article, and then as the second part, the subject is supported by visual examples from the examples of earliest recorded works of women artists who have worked in different eras, also at the same time, the determinations of different women theorists on the subject was included. In the conclusion part, it is aimed to understand with which variables it is possible to increase the visibility of women artists in the field of art and that the subject is based on culturel codes, not a matter of talent. The study tries to explain how and why women artists remained secondary in the historical process despite their talents and competencies and how much effort was spent to reach an equal level with mens’s birthrights. Due to social roles and duties, only very few women have had the chance to produce art. Undoubtedly, their existance was also very limited and was only possible with the support of a man. With the famous essay of Linda Nochlin Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists? published in 1971, the question of what is the place of women in art has turned into an element that the world societies, which have become increasingly different in the last fifty years, have discused, evaluated and questioned from different perspectives.

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

Since the late 1960’s there has been a significant transformation in the context of women’s phenomenon in all representation aresa of art, from its history to the present. The effects of this transition have become more visible day by day. Untill the end of the 20th century, a social order by the male-dominated masculine culture is seen. And in the art practice that Works in accordance with this order, women have always been left secondary even ignored throughout history. When it comes to art and production, it would not be wrong to talk about a unity of order in which it cannot go beyond being an object. For centuries, woman has existed in its artistic context only as the subject or the model of an artwork. In the production of the work of art women, has become the counterpart of the aesthetic figüre with her body and its visual appealing to male taste and desires. In other words in the male-dominated world, woman was left as an object of art production and she was not allowed to go beyond being an object in this field. As it can be easily understood that, the order of cultural prejudices and steriotyepes deprived women of important institutions, opportunities and social roles, whether by conscious definition or not. Rather than just being the object of art to be the producer of an art piece was only possible with the feminist criticism of the 1970’s and the methodologies of feminist art history to reveal the power of creation with its specific difference.

Understanding The Situation Of Women In ART

Until recently, it was thougt that women were not very active in art, or in other words, they could not achieve significant success in the field of art. However, after the last quarter of the twentieth century, the studies of various theoreticians, writers and researchers are on the contarary. These studies show that the common belief is not true. And today in the light of these studies, we know that women have taken an active role in all areas of cultural production in the past, despite all the negativities they have faced. Contrary to the popular belief, scientific studies shows that in last five hundred years, it is possible to talk about the success of many female artists in western culture and their products that can compete with their contemporaries. The first and the popular example that comes to mind in this field is, the Italian Baroque painter Artemisa Gentileschi. The artist lived between 1593-1653 and Gentileschi is the first female member admitted to the Florentine Accademia del Design. The artists chance to paint at that time depends on the fact that her father, Orazio Genthileschi was a painter. The artist was both the daughter and the student of her father. The artists work Judith Behading Holofernes (image 1) is undoubtedly under the influance of Caravaggio (image 2), and this effect is so obvious that in the 19th century, the painting was thought to belong to Caravaggio. Of course it is very well known that this effect is also seen in the works

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

of many male artists of his contemporary or follower. For his reason, it would be a mistake to evaluate it as a copy. It is known that Judith Behading Holofernes was a commision of the Grand Duke of Tuscany. This can be also seen as a proof of the artist’s competence in her period. Although the painting was a commissioned one- even in this condition it is very open to autobiographical and feminist readings. It can be said that this feature is the common point of many works of the artist. ‘’The bloody scene dramatically depicts Judith beheading in a dark room the Assyrian commander Holofernes, who invades the city of Bethulia. Gentileschi’s bloody scene was actually commissioned by the Tuscany grand duke Cosimo Il de’ Medici. This composition also reflects the rape of Artemisia Gentileschi- daughter and student of Orazio Gentileschi and (…) the first member of Florentine Accademia de Design- by her mentor Antonio Tassi at the age of eighteen, and the difficult judicial process that followed. Here, as in many of Gentileschi’s paintings, she embodies female anger in her role as Judith.’1 (Sanat Atak: 2020) (Figs. 1, 2) As in the example of Artemisia Gentileschi, it can be seen that despite all the difficulties that women artists have experienced and humiliation that no male artist has ever experienced, women artists historical heritage and the fame they bring with them are extremley pale when compared with their male colleagues.

Figure 1. Artemisia Gentileschi, Judith Behading Holofernes, 1620, The Uffizi Museum, Oil on Canvas, 146,5x108cm. Antonio Tassi: 1578-1644 Italian painter.

Figure 2. Caravaggio, Judith Beheading Holofernes, 1599, Palazzo Barberini, Oil on Canvas, 145x195 cm. Despite all the difficulties in the the past, today Gentileschi acceped as an important painter of her era. Also the painting (Judith Behading Holofernes) became an iconic work of an undauntable woman. ‘’(…)this painting also represents the human and the Professional tale of a woman who chose to be an artist in an era dominated by men; in this she succeeded, working in the courts of Rome, Florence and Naples, travelling to England and finally becoming the first woman to enter the Academy of Art and Design in Florence.’’ (Uffizi: D.29 Caravaggio and Artemisia) Despite many talented women in arts why women artist are so pale in the scene of art history? Why has it been excluded from historical documentation and ignored? Undoubtedly, the answer to this question is hidden in the conditions and parameters that produce definitiıons such as art-artist that have existed for centuries. In order to examine the existance of women, it is necessary to look at history in general and the history of art in particular. Before moving on to historical analysis, it will be quite explanatory to look at the root of the word ‘history’ in English. The roots of the word ‘history’ emerged with the words ‘his’ which is a pronoun used to describe men in English, and the Word ‘story’. In other words, as the Word suggests, written history tells us the story of men. Therefore, art history, which is a part of the same history, also serves the same masculine ideologies. In this context, it is not enough to look at the work of women artists to examine the existance of women. As in all social-cultural fields, the existance of women in the artistic platform requires a full understanding of the social system and ideological schema created by various power centers that embrace the existance of men over women and also support racial-social class discrimination. The feminist movement, which sets out with a manifesto rejecting this social system and ideological schema, criticizes the general order that ignores women and their

products. In a sense, women wrote her own alternative art history over time. At this point, the following question immediately comes to mind. Is it the same to form a feminist art history with involving women in art history? The answer is precisely no but it should not be forgotten that feminist art was born and developed within the history. The argument put forward by Linda Nochlin, one of the most important representatives of this enlightenment, in 1971, saves us from the discomfort of trying to find a woman Michelangelo by entering a race that can never be won. According to Nochlin it is impossible to find a woman Michelangelo because the criteria of perfection mentioned here were also created by men. At this point, art history should be perceived as a representative practice that actively produces definitions of gender difference and contrubutes to the existing gender politics and power relations configuration. The existing art history has not only been indifferent to women, but has also become a part of the social structuring of concept of gender discrimination. It would be appropriate to say that the concept of ‘artist’ constructed by such an art history is a result of masculine and bourgeois ideals. ‘’The fact is that there have been no great women artists, so far as we know, although there have been many interesting and good ones who have not been suffeciently investigated or appreciated-nor have been any great Lithuanian jazz pianists or Eskimo tennis players. That this should be the case is regrettable, but no amount of manuplating the historical or critical evidence will alter the situation. There are no women equivalents for Michelangelo or Rembrant, Delaxroix or Cezanne, Picasso or Matisse, or even, in very recent times, for Willem de Kooning or Warhol, any more than there are black American equivalents fort he same. If there were actually were large numbers of ‘hidden’ great women artists, or if there really should be different standarts for women’s art as opposed to men’s-and logically, one can’t have it both waysthen what are feminists fighting for? If women have in fact achieved the same status as men in the arts, then the status que is fine.’’ (Nochlin,1989:p.3) Also it must be understood from her argument that, having the same educational and social opportunities will accomplish the superiority of men to women. ‘’Structural gender discrimination, which exists in many academic disciplines, also has an active contribution to the formation of gender hierarchy at some point. At this point, it should be noted that, unlike the concept of gender, which describes the physiological differences between men and women, the concept of gender is defined as a set of rule-determining culrural behaviors attributed to both genus. ‘’Gender differences stem from the roles that women and men have to play in various institutional structures. Division of labor according to gender, which is seen as the main determinant of differece, connects men to the public space, and women to the private space of the family as a wife, mother, domestic worker and thus, the series of events they encounter throughout their life-long expe-

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

riences are quite differentiated and enable them to form a seperate social category’’ (Çelebi, 1990:4) As a part of this holistic system, women has lived confined to their home for centuries, and her life, which has been transferred from the dominance of the father to the dominance of the husband over time with the valalue judgments of the society, is stuck in vicious circle of the house-child-wife triangle. Although this situation may differ in different cultures, in essence, women in all cultures of the world have shared approximately the same fate throughout the ages. Thus, unless belonging to a different class or hs the support of a strong male figure, women’s creativity has been damaged and her chance to be productive has been taken away. With the libertarian and democratic discourses of the Age of Enlightenment, the issue of women, which started to be brought to the agenda with the secondary classes that came into an awarness, began to became more visible with the access of women into working life as a result of the Industrial Revolution. Despite all kinds of negativities, women artists are mentioned in various sources starting from the Antiquity albeit in small numbers. For example Roman Historian Pliny (M.S 23/24-79) in his work (Natural History) mentions six female artists who lived in ancient times. Some of the names also can be found in the book of Italian poet and writer Bocaccio’s book written in Latin; De Claris Mulieribus/De Mulieribus Claris (Concerning Famous Women) a collection of biographies of women in western literature. During reneissance period, Giorgio Vasari’s famous book (1511-74) ‘Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects’ (Fig. 3) mentions the names of some women artists. E.g. Artemisia Gentileschi, Properzia de Rossi (Figs. 4, 5), Elisabetta Sirani (Fig. 7), Lavinia Fontana (Fig. 6). The common point of these women is that all their fathers were painters. Despite such a privilege, all of these names suffered many difficulties and all their works attributed either with the name of their father or husband. Marietta Robusti (Fig. 8) (1560?-90) is a16th century painter and the daughter of famous Tintoretto. She worked with his father for many years but all her work attributed with the name of an other male artist. ‘Marietta Robusti painted in her father’s studio for 15 years while simultaneously completing her portrait commissions. She won great popularity during her lifetime as a portratist and had many comissions, although few survive or have been attributed to her father or another artist. She could have become quite famous and herwork well known by becoming a court painter for either Emperor Maximillian or King Philip II of Spain, but her father would not let her leave his side. Women during this time were subject to the desires of their fathers or husbands. Her career was thus always under the control of her father, and did not have the opportunity to develop broadly. As she worked alongside her father, his work and hers became indistinguishable and they worked on many paintings

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

Figure 3. Giorgio Vasari, Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, 1550. together. (…)Her life and its lack of freedom was typical of sixteenth century women’ (NEW WORLD ENCYCLOPEDIA) During Reneissance era it is also known that Flaman painters Levinia Teerlinc and Caterina Van Hermessen are active. Levinia Teerlinc (Fig. 9) was a very popular miniaturist of her time and she was commissioned many paintings from the court. ‘’Levinia Teerlinc (1510-1576) was a highly-paid member of Tudor court. Monarchs Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary Tudor, and Elisabeth I commissioned works, including miniatures, from her.’’ (Woodville: 2020) Caterina Van Hermessen (Fig. 10) is another renaissance Flemish painter, she was known as the first woman artist created a self portait. ‘’Caterina van Hemessen (1528–after 1565) defied tremendous odds by becoming a professional painter in the sixteenth century. In a Self Portrait now at the Öffentliche Kunstsammlung, Basel (1548,(...) she displays her skills, appearing seated before an easel holding a small, framed oak panel. Her left hand holds a wooden palette dotted with oil paint, a collection of delicate brushes, and her maulstick, while the right gently holds a paintbrush to the work in progress. The text in the upper left of the panel reads: EGO CATERINA DE / HEMESSEN ME / PINXI / 1548. With this work, Caterina further challenged convention by creating both the earliest known self portrait

Figure 5. Properizia de Rossi, Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife-Basilica di San Petronio Museum Bolognia. by a woman artist and the first self portrait at an easel in northern Europe. Caterina also appears to have received an exceptional humanist education, as is suggested by the Latin signature on the Self Portrait.’’(Courts,2021:71) For this painting it is also thought to be the first self-portrait

Figure 6. Lavinia Fontana, 1552-1614. Self-portrait at the Clavichord with a Servant, 1577, Accademia Nazionale di San Luca, Rome.

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

Figure 8. Marietta Robusti (1560?-90), Venetian Lady, oil on canvas, XVI century, Museo Nacional Del Prado.

Figure 7. Elisabetta Sirani, 1638-1665 Self Portrait, ca. 1660, P.S.A.E di Bologna, Archivio Pinacoteca Nazionale. without gender discrimination. ‘’(...)as art historians have, that an absorbing self-portrait by a gifted young flemish Renaissance painter by the name of Caterina van Hemessen, painted in 1548, is likely the first self-portrayal of an artist, male or female, at work at the easel.’’(Govier, 2021) Without any doubt ,if she were a man this information would already be in every art book.

Figure 9. Levina Teerlinc, Mary with Figures in Landscape. Michaelmas. 1553, detail. Another talented and hidden women artist is, sculptor Luisa Roldan (1652-1706) (Fig. 11) called La Roldana. She was an important woman sculptor known in Spain.

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

Figure 10. Caterina van Hemessen, self Portrait, 1548. ‘As court sculptor ant the first woman sculptor recorded in Spain, Luisa Roldan reached the top of her profession. Her father was a sculptor in Seville, and Luisa and her siblings worked in the family workshop. At nineteen, she married s sculptor from the shop and became her family’s primary source of income, working independently with her husband as polychromist. Roldan’s figures are characterized by clearly delineated profiles, thick locks of hair, billowing drapperies, and mystical faces with delicate eyes, knitting brows, rosy cheeks, and slightly parted lips.’’ (Getty: Roldan L.) The quality of the work of the women artists, whose works are shown in the text ,can be understood even by a non-specialist eye. Thus, it is seen once again that the problem is not a matter of talent but because of the cultural and social codes. In the 18th century, the first examples of written studies on women’s issue were given (There are also a few booklets before the to the 18th century). In 1790’s American Judith Sargent Murriy’s On The Equality of Sexes, and in 1791 a pamphlet of Olympe de Gouges’Les Droits de le Femme’ -Women’s Rights- is published. Mary Wollstoncraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, published on January 3, 1792, is considered the first important work of feminist history and literature. Again, women artists were among the founders of the Royal Academy of London, which was founded in 18th century (1768). Griselda Pollock in her article on the relationship between women and art before the 19th century, she explains the position of women in society

Figure 11. Luisa Roldan, Saint Genes de la Jara about 1692 Polychromed wood (pine and cedar)with glass eyes. as follows: ‘’Tracing the history of the evolving concept of the artist from the 16th to the 19th century and mapping at the same time the changing social definitions of woman, we discovered that men and women had followed historically different and finally contradictory paths so that by the 19th century what was understood by the term woman (a passive dependent to be fulfilled through domestic and maternal roles) and what the artistic represented (an anti-social independent creator)were set in an antagonistic relationship. (…) Just as we recognise in the modern women’s movement that changing women’s position is a challange to the structure of society and will not be accomplished merely by the entry of a few women into top jobs and proffessions, so, too, we must devise an approriately sctructural analysis for art history and its cultural myths. We concluded, therefore,that although women artists are treated negatively in modern art history, women artists and the art thay produced nonethless played a structural role in the ideological project of art history.’’ (Pollock,1983:40) When concidered in the context of the historical process, it is seen that women have always had different roles and opportunities with men, both in education and in life. The role and possibilities of women are completely determined by men. In other words, all the

codes in which women live and which are concidered feminine were written by men. The situation did not change in the field of art, and they did not have equal opportunities in art education. They are known to be excluded from art academies. In addition, they were not allowed to participate in model studies from the Renaissance untill the 19th century. ‘’Most feminist art historians misunderstand the nature and effects of the constraints placed upon women artists in the heyday of the academies in the 18th and 19th centuries. The restricted access to academic art education has been represented as a major obstacle, an effective form of discrimination which prevented women from being able to participate in all genres of art. Admittedly the fact that women were excluded from the life class did prevent them from officially being able to study human anatomy from the live model’’ (Pollock,1983:40) Because of keeping away from model study, women artists couldn’ find the opportunity to study from one of the important forms of painting for many years. In the 19th century, the presence of women artists gained a serious momentum compared to previous periods. Many amateur and professional artists have started to have an active presence in the field of visual art, opening exhibitions and taking part in new and independent groups, producing in new disciplines such as photography. However, until the end of 20th century, it is not seen that the issue of the position of women in art has made a holistic development. Studies on women’s rights have become collective and continuous since the second half of the 20th century. In addition, design school Bauhaus, founded in 1919, provided a serious opportunity for women with the innovation in its education motto. Of cource, since this is also an opportunity provided by the masculine belief, it was found appropriate for women to work in two-dimentional areas. As always although women were at least as talented a their male contemporaries, they were still overshadowed by the men they were contemporaries. ‘’(…)the women artists who taught, studied, and made groundbreaking work with them are often remembered in history boks as wives of their counterparts or, worse, not at all. While women were allowed into the German school-and its manifesto stated that it welcomed ‘any person of good repute, without regard to age or sex’-a strong gender bias still informed its structure. Female students, for instance, were encouraged to pursue weaving rather than male-dominated mediums like painting, carving, and architecture. Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius encouraged this distinction through his vocal belief that men thougt in three dimensions, while women could could only handle two.’’ (Gotthard, 2017) Since the 1960’s women’s rights and the place of women in art have been intensively discussed. As its mentioned before with Linda Nochlin’s essay ‘Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?’ its been originated a new discussion. Nochlin begins to explain this question that, the problem is not caused by an inidvidual genius or lack therof. The decisive thing was The nature

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

of social institutions and what this institutions prohibit or support in certain calsses or groups Thus, the discussion emerges from the inability or lack of women and is carried to another area. ‘Tracing the history of the evolving concept of the artist from the 16th to the 19th century and mapping at the same time the changing social definitions of woman, we discovered that men and women had followed historically different and finally contradictory paths so that by the 19th century what was understood by the term woman (a passive dependent to be fulfilled through domestic and maternal roles) and what the artist represented (an anti-social, independent creator) were set in an antagonistic relationship’’ (Pollock,1983:40) In their book 1981 ‘Old Mistresses: Women, Art and Ideology’, which is concidered another building block of feminist writing, two female art historians, Rosika Parker ve Griselda Pollock, reject the criticism and methodology aimed at valuing Works of art and examine the sociological and ideological identity of women over the ages. For Parker and Pollock, the existing art history and the method of researching this history are by no means objective or scientific. For hem, the choices made in the history of art, thus the acceptances and rejections, exhibit an extremely subjective structure. In other words, the history of art consists of an entirely ideological practice. The position of women in the process of transition from object to subject within the framework of art history began to change rapidly after the 1970s. Since the 1960s women have focused on being objects in the work of art with their differing questions in the fieldx of art and in life. When the question was asked why there were no great female artists in the period, women, feverishly began to search for female artists in the history, who were either under the shadow of a man in history, or never revealed. Thus, in the history of art written by men, women artists, -who were also ignored by menwould be found and brought to light and the question will be answered. However, when it was realized that this research would not answer the question, it was started to go to the roots of the problem. The answer to the question was that, most fundamentally, the world in which women lived was shaped by men and the fact that women are allowed to enter areas that men find appropriate. On the other hand, it would be wrong to think that this research as a completely useless pursuit. With this research, many female artists were brought to the surface and it is seen that these women artists produced as impressive as their male contemporaries. Despite this quality in their work, their ignorance has also helped to see more clearly the cultural influences that form the roots of the situation where women are left in the secondary place. It is another fact that after early movements, which made a big noise in the 1970s, entered a different crossroads after the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. When considering art history boks and museum collections untill the recent past, it is possible to get the impression that no female artists has lived, or even if she did, she could not

Yıldız Sos Bil Ens Der, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1–10, Haziran, 2022

achieve as important as male artists, but today there is a general consensus as why this is not true and why.

Conclusion

Today, due to many reasons, the differentiation of order and conditions has brought the position of women in the field of art to a different level, as in every field. With the changing understanding over time, women began to be more visible in the art world. The influence of the women’s movement, which started in the 1970s, has gradually increased, in the 80s, 90s and 2000s, the movement evolved and developed. With the consistent and developing studies, women have begun to freely determine their place in every field. Today, women can benefit equally from the educational opportunities that men have and they do not need the signiture of any man to legitimize their production. Despite the many rights gained over time, when we look at both art and other fields, it will not be possible to say that women have equal rights with men all over the world in every geography. According to the cultural, religious and sociological characteristics of the geography they live in, women still have to live a male-dominated life in many countries. But unlike in the past, today, at least, female artists who lives in such countries have the chance to make art by moving to other countries. In the field of art, the woman who managed to overcome the injustices she suffered through cultural codes for many years, and although it has been able to chance her position from the object of art to the positionof being the creator of the image, she still has to continnue and defend its struggle in life and in any areas. Of course, the full transformation of women from an object position to a producer position in art will only be possible if they become completely egalitarian in every field from a male-dominated world discourse. But at least today we know that women artists have not been influential in the field of art due to any deficiency or inadequacy. History written by men has written the story of men over the years. Women’s job description were also made by men, and women were given the task of taking care of the housework and raising children. For centruies, the woman made her decisions first under the control of her father and then her husband. Despite the quality of their work, ignorance of women artists in history has also helped to see more clearly the cultural influences that form the roots of the situation where women are left in the secondary place. The position of women in the process of transition from object to subject within the framework of art history began to change rapidly after the 1970s but still struggling to find its deserved place for ‘herstory’ in ‘history’. Ethics: There are no ethical issues with the publication of this manuscript. Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed. Conflict of Interest: The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,

and/or publication of this article. Financial Disclosure: The authors declared that this study has received no financial support. Etik: Bu makalenin yayınlanmasıyla ilgili herhangi bir etik sorun bulunmamaktadır. Hakem Değerlendirmesi: Dış bağımsız. Çıkar Çatışması: Yazar, bu makalenin araştırılması, yazarlığı ve/veya yayınlanması ile ilgili olarak herhangi bir potansiyel çıkar çatışması beyan etmemiştir. Finansal Destek: Yazarlar bu çalışma için finansal destek almadıklarını beyan etmişlerdir.

Share and Cite