Another stop on one of my March exhibition-expeditions (more about which here) was my first visit to Tate Britain. I was mainly there to see their current exhibition, Women in Revolt! Art and Activism in the UK 1970-1990. According to the Gallery’s website, it “presents two decades of art as provocation, protest and progress” and promises an exploration of feminist art and the issues that not only inspired the works, but made them a necessity. 

Since I had an hour or so to kill before my time slot, I also took in some of the main gallery while I was there. There’ll be a post soon on Tate Britain more broadly, but I wanted to sneak this review in before this particular exhibition closes in a few days. So, as always, I’ll start with…

The basics: 

Women in Revolt! is at Tate Britain (Millbank, TfL zone 1) until 7th April (so you need to be quick if you want to catch it!). Adult tickets are £17, and it’s open daily. 

The good…

First of all, this kind of thing (by which I mean cultural and social history, feminism, liberation movements and a bit of good old rage) is right up my street, so my expectations going in were sky-high, and I wasn’t disappointed. Starting in 1970 with the National Women’s Liberation Conference, the exhibition walks you sequentially through the two decades that follow, the political and social environment and the art that came out of those contexts. 

I was never under any illusion that this would be a fun, easy exhibition to see; anything that seeks to effect any kind of social change is going to be uncomfortable. The pieces are very much “of their time” as much as they’re timeless in the issues they address, and that was an interesting tension in itself. 

Without wanting to sound pretentious, there was something about stepping back in time and immersing myself in the inequalities and struggles faced by generations that went before me that made me feel even more deeply connected to my gender and my politics. It wasn’t an entirely comfortable feeling, but it was certainly powerful, and has left me with a lot to ponder on in the weeks since my visit. 

Among the work on show are paintings, photography, sculpture and textiles, produced by over 100 different artists. The exhibition guide is clear in its aims: “by acknowledging the action these artists took and the relevance their art still holds, the exhibition hopes to give them the attention and credit they deserve”, and it does. It wasn’t an exhibition centred around particular household names – the important thing is the art itself, and that was centre-stage. 

Going in, I had a little bit of trepidation that – given the timeframe it covers – it would be predominantly white, and potentially TERFy-adjacent in places. I needn’t have worried. It clearly had intersectionality at its core, dedicating whole sections to Black feminist art and its place in the British Black Arts Movement, explorations of subcultures and the fight for lesbian rights, and the overlap between these movements.  

It was presented in an accessible way, giving enough of the context and history of the time to put the pieces in perspective and give a greater understanding to those of us who weren’t there in the 1970s and 80s. I didn’t feel talked down to, but nor did I feel like the messages of the works went over my head. Alongside the controversial, uncomfortable and subversive were pieces that I could identify with even in 2024. Gina Birch’s 3 Minute Scream, for example, is the most relatable piece of art I’ve ever come across. 

The bad…

The only real negative that I could find was that it felt quite cluttered – this is mostly because of the limitations of the space (especially for a temporary exhibition) but a lot of the smaller works were presented almost on top of each other, meaning that it was difficult to linger and really take them in without hogging a big chunk of the display for a long time. It also made it hard to stop and watch the entirety of some of the video work without getting in people’s way. If it had a little more room to breathe, it would have been pretty much perfect. 

Things I didn’t get to see…

There wasn’t much, other than the video I’ve already mentioned, which I’d have liked to be able to sit and absorb for longer. 

So…is it worth the trip? 

Yes. It’s challenging, and uncomfortable at times, but that’s the nature of anything that is aiming to instigate social change, and it was accessible in the way it presented the context as well as the art. It was a beautifully crafted, thoughtfully executed glimpse back into the history of the hard-won battle for women’s rights, and an extremely timely reminder that we can’t take those rights for granted. If you can squeeze a trip in before it closes, I’d thoroughly recommend it. 

The small(ish) print: This is one in an occasional series of reviews of places I’ve visited under my own steam, with my own money. Everything’s accurate at the time of writing, and all the opinions are mine.