I don’t agree with that at all. Why shouldn’t feminist art become part of our cultural institutions? It’s not the first avant-garde or radical art movement to become part of the mainstream. It’s true there is an effort in some institutions—in particular, the Museum of Modern Art—to try and disconnect feminist art from its radical roots, but I think the job of feminist art is to enter institutions and broaden the role of art, not only with a female content in art, but in ways of making art. What I don’t want to see is feminist art ghetto-ized in some little corner, scuttled off to the side of the major exhibitions.

I believe that by the very nature of The Dinner Party, it will introduce new ideas into the institution it is now going to occupy. The piece by its nature is causing some rethinking of the different departments of the museum. Collaboration is one of the things that The Dinner Party and my other works expand.

Speaking of collaboration, you were one of the first artists to work collaboratively in a contemporary context. Do you see this as becoming a more common practice now?

The artist as a loner is a myth. Historically, much of the major art we know today grew out of systems where a lot of people were working on the piece but only a single artist’s name was attached. Art history needs to set the record straight—prints are not made alone; they are made in huge collaborations. Even single artists had support systems, although they were invisible.

What I intended with The Dinner Party and my other works was a different kind of collaboration, a more equitable collaboration where my collaborators were not simply doing rote jobs. My imagery was broad enough to allow them to bring their own interpretations, under my supervision. I think collaboration is great for younger artists; it helps them break out of the overly-hyped individual artist syndrome.

The art world has changed significantly since you began working in 1979, but what advancements do you still hope to see?

In terms of the art world, there is definitely a wonderful change for women at the entry level. But at the institutional level, research from the 1970s to 2007 shows that the percentage of women represented at The Metropolitan Museum of Art has declined from 5 percent to 3 percent, and that is an indication that in the upper echelons—the permanent collections, the major museums and the auctions—there has been very little change. That’s the level that guarantees permanence. The entry level is the race to see who ends up a part of history, but unless women can break into that upper level, they’ll be erased again.