Conozcamos al Mundo Hispano; Mexican Muralist Traditions and Its Impact on the Southwest

. . . . . . . . . . . . . Miralist art in the Southwest is gradually becoming a popular form of expression. Tonight's program intends to throw light on muralist art by showing its history and roots within Mexican tradition and the growing impact within our own generation. A perspective on art and its relation to muralist art in particular will lead to a discussion between two muralist artists from New Mexico, Walter Baca and Francisco de la Fievere. Other members of the discussion will be Fernando Penialosa, an artist and poet from Bolivia and Roberto Salmón, a Ph.D. candidate in history who is also interested in the study of

muralist traditions of the Southwest. Before proceeding into tonight's program, I think it would be appropriate to quote José Clemente Orozco, a famous muralist at the Mexican Revolution when he says. The highest, most logical, purest and most powerful type of painting is mural painting. It is also the most disinterested as it cannot be converted into an object of personal gain, nor can it be concealed for the benefit of a few privileged individuals. It is for people. It is for everybody. It has been said that art is an outcome of man's spiritual energy and is an attempt to preserve in the present something that has happened in the past.

The artist tries then with his spiritual energy to give the viewer what is needed for a solidarity which gives some type of human understanding and appreciation for the kind of message being given. Mexican art and Mexican muralist art in particular has a long history which goes back at least 2,000 years. In Mexico, like northern part of the continent, man has demonstrated his artistic abilities as a natural reaction to the environment, daily life, the universe, and the religious ideas before the coming of the Spanish. A good example of pre-Spanish murals were those of the Mayas and was seen by Sylvanias Morley in his book The Ancient Maya as. These scenes are narrative in a forthright yet sensitive style. Naturalism has held so important to the artist that the faces of certain of the participants in the mural can be recognized from room to room as they recur in parts of the story,

having an effect of depth. The naturalism is stronger and the drafting more skillful than any old world art at the same period, and this was in the 7th century AD. When the Spanish came and Hernán Cortez, the conqueror of Mexico nearly destroyed the Aztec Empire, many influences of art and thought mixed with Indian concepts and created a whole new style. The Spanish brought influences from the Greeks, Romans, Gothics, the Renaissance, and of course from Spain itself, with its heavy accent of Morish tradition. Colonization is a dominant force. The mural painting is one of its tools for what has been called the Visual Spiritual Colonization of the Indio Mexicano, with the use of such scenes as those on the walls of the Governor's

Palace, where one could see a massacre of Indians at the hands of Alvarado, or as seen in the walls of the Church of Talad de El Olco, where painted with the miraculous appearance of the Virgán de Santiago on the battlefield, or in the Convent of Sochi Milco, where painted was a large picture showing the sacrament of communion given to the Indios. Nonetheless the Indios survived, and a new face emerged as a result of ethnic mixture. The mestizo, a mixture of two worlds, two concepts of life, survived the rich colonial period, even if it was on the edge of society, and he quickly aspired to the new ideas of independence and freedom within this new world.

With his flair for independence came the famous grito de Dolores, by Padre Herno, Mexico City was nearly walked on by Ivalgo and his army of Indios and mestizos. The revolution was, however, frustrated and put down for the time being, but the Mexican people were still hungry for freedom against the controls of the ruling class who aspired more to the

ideas and customs of Spain and Europe. In this time, popular wall painting appeared in the back alleys, churches, markets, shops, and pulquerías. The famous muralists, Josec Clemente Orozco, Diego Rivera and David Siqueiros, after the Mexican Revolution, were to become the leaders of the leaders of wall painting.

And tried to show both the positive and negative aspects of the Mexican society. pneumonia and시죠. muralist artists from New Mexico, Francisco de la Fievere,

and Walter Baca, an artist from Bolivia, Fernando Peña-Losa, and a historian who is studying here at the University of New Mexico on muralist art, Roberto Salmon. We'd like to begin the discussion with a general question and overview, and it would be interesting to find out just what are the roots of muralist art, where do they come from? And I would like to direct this question to Roberto Salmon. I think that you can start with the pre-conquest period. You can go to the Aztecas, Damias, and look for roots, even psychology of what motivates art in the Indian cultures of Mesoamerica. Perhaps all of the murals that existed previously have disappeared, but you can still find evidences of murals in the ancient scrolls, the ancient writings of the Aztecas themselves. By this, you can see the pictographs, the type of murals that were used to convey messages

to the people, to help the people understand their history, culture, and heritage. But then with the conquest, you have the imposition of a conquering society that, I believe, used murals eventually for their purposes. They realized that the indios of Mexico conveyed themselves or conveyed a message through murals. And the church, especially the friars, used this as a form of control. After the colonial period, you had different types of Spanish architecture, like Spanish Baroque or Mexican Baroque that, again, during this period, you don't see very many murals, but somehow the Indian managed to convey his philosophy and his psychology in the work that he did for the conquistadores. From then on, you get into the national period and even the revolutionary period. Somehow the psychology, I think, still exist. And today is still alive in Chicano art. Francisco, recently you did a mural

at the North Valley Community Center in Candelaria. And I think you try to expose the roots of Mexican tradition and bring it into the present. Would you like to talk a little bit about that? What is your ideas about muralist art and how they relate to the past? A mural is, I feel, it has an obligation to serve the people with this trade. And I feel that he has to have knowledge about events, historical events, and he has to, some way, somehow, he has to put it down so that people can see it. And by that, maybe educate themselves. And perhaps even like a song or a poem, it can bring some kind of happiness into their life. And maybe ease whatever problems they might have. And this is the work of an artist. And this is what he tries to create whenever he's doing the work of art. It's not just doing art for art sake. It's you're trying to do something for humanity in those respects.

Walter, you've done murals in the South Broadway area. And I noticed a lot of what you do goes directly into the history of Mexico. Like you did a thing of a liberal del consejo, which is the Mayan Bible, I guess you might say. What is it that you're trying to get across? What kind of ideas are you trying to? Well, this mural that I did on the South Broadway in the South of Australia, all it is about is the creation, how life began in the sea, how the land emerged from the sea. And then the animals crawled to the land and became mammals from reptiles to mammals. And then it's sort of like the creation, according to the popular view of man and woman. When the gods created men and women, they created four men and four women. And that's how pro-creation started. And then from there, it's sort of like the vicios of the modern world, like the habits and the bad habits that are in the modern society. Because I feel because of oppression. That's maybe one point through the whole period.

It's always been, the India has always been an oppressed person, even under the Aztecs, because the Aztecs themselves were a conquering society. So the India was oppressed then. When Tenochtitan fell, it was just a change of hand. The India was still suppressed. And then today, the Chicano still suppressed in the same way. That's why murals are, I believe, a form of communicating with your people. Native expression. To try and express your way. You can't do it politically. Or you can't do it with the written word. So you do it with murals. You're right. Fernando, you're an artist. And as of yet, you really haven't gotten too involved in muralist art. I'd like to know maybe what your feelings are about muralist art and how it fits into the general perspective of art in general. Maybe you could give me a few ideas on this. Well, I think that art in itself is a universal consciousness that arises from the individual need of expression,

relating yourself to the environment and to the people. For this fact, mural painting, I guess, since time immemorial, since the caves in Altamira, prehistoric places, and also in Latin America, have always depicted the affairs of men, his daily life, his communication with nature. And I guess what has happened, especially talking about the Mexican muralists or murals, is that it's a direct communication with what was happening in the revolution. In other words, they were trying to show the oppression. They were trying to bring consciousness to the level of making it for everybody, for the people, especially, to realize what's happening in the world. To you, what is the difference between an individual type of art, say, for instance, a painting or something that is put in a gallery as opposed to a muralist work that is put on a wall, for instance?

Well, the difference might be an economical difference. It might have to do with money. Let's say a painting could be owned by a collector, or it could be put in a museum board, but a mural is painted on a wall, and it stays there. I don't think people pay to see it. Anybody can see this. So I guess that's the main difference. But ultimately, art is an individual affair, where they both coincide with it, is that they're trying to give a message to whoever can see the mural or the painting. If art is suppressed, the artist somehow always finds a way of expressing himself, right? Like I'm thinking of the bulgarillas that was done by a self-taught artist in the villages and districts of Mexico. But that same psychology held it to art during that period of history was suppressed, so it manifested itself in that form. Walter, ¿dónde está yendo el arte chicano hablando acerca del muralismo? ¿Dónde está yendo el arte chicano? ¿Eres decir como en los barrios?

Sí. Bueno, pues esta el arte en los barrios, como en barrios, en José, el barrio, en Martínez. Yo estoy dando sángeles por cuatro meses, videotolos murales allá. Y algunos murales son políticos, algunos son cultural, y algunos son esterec. Pero todos los murales tienen algo que decir, y no importa qué es el mensaje, pero todo eso mural y eso mensaje para la gente, esa expresión del artista. Francisco, ¿en tus murales qué es el mensaje que tú quieres dar a la gente? ¿Qué es lo máximo de la vida?

Como una persona, como se viste, como se porta, dice qué clas de persona es. Y así no es como los edificios, si están pintados, y así no también se sabe qué clas de gente es la que vive ahí. Y creo yo que si algún día el mural puede llegar a un estado donde todo está pintado, entonces es cuando la gente va a estar más abusto en la vida. Entonces, ¿crees tú, por ejemplo, aquí en México que hay una falta de conciencia por el hecho de que no están pintados los edificios, no han tratado de comunicarse con la gente todavía. I don't know if this pertains to that, but the expense I had in Los Angeles, over there, the walls are covered with a lot of graffitis. Macchital Casper will black you, Alvajinas. Y tienen toda esta graffitis escrito por todas las paedas. And they have programs through model cities or through different organizations where they get together and they start painting these walls and get a home as a people together. The guys will be long to gangs and they start painting and covering up all the graffiti

and they decorate the walls and at the same time, they're giving a message, too, because a lot of those meals are political. That's the same thing they do in San Diego with the police athletically. They try and take people off the streets and put them to work like that and they're many murals that have been put up because of that. There's a lot of things I saw with it. One of the things I experienced myself was I was crossing the street and I saw a Chicano from one gang, shoot another Chicano, from another gang, shoot twice in the head. And so if these murals keep the kids from doing this to each other, well, that's great. I think that's all right. One thing that Francisco was saying earlier that interested me is he said, as an artist, he has to be politically involved. He's not just a Chicano, but politically yet. And historically, he has to keep up with so many things. There's an artist as a rule, isolate himself from stuff. I mean, that's the general psychology that lay people have that an artist is secluded in the visual. Yeah, secluded is centric that lives in an addict somewhere

and just paints away or wears word clothes and doesn't even belong to society, but yet a Chicano artist is he different? Maybe a good point to make would be, how would you define a Chicano artist? What is, you know, what? And do we have to do that? I don't know. I guess it is a Chicano artist. How much is he involved in the movement? Or is Chicano artist a movement himself? Francisco? Well, I think that a muralist has to have ideas and have to have something to do with it, because we're going to say how to talk about the muralists of the time, the Renaissance. This is what the movie was about, the Christianity theme. And now, that theme has painted it a lot. And it's not that it's not that it could be painted, because it could be, but now I think that the painter and the muralist want to paint something that is of it, that is more that it can relate

and it can also relate to what is being painted. And now we're in a time where people and our people are fighting for their rights and for the rest of their lives to be considered as the most work, and that's the class of business. Well, I think that the Mexicans, yes, understand, but the Americans are afraid of the work of art. Here too, they are afraid. Why don't they understand what they want to say? Well, I think that the Mexicans have always interpreted it as a person who should depend on other people and that they should work for someone. But I think that the Mexicans have reached a level where they are ready to stop at their own feet and say that this is what is coming, this is what is evil, because they have been educated and have reached a point where they have a consensus. And they say that their consensus is good because also, since many years past, their life is very natural and it's a lot of land

which is a very rich thing that has evidence and I think that they have to teach the world and they have to see it. And the most important thing about the muralist is that his work is done well so that he reaches that planet where everyone can meet him and that is what he creates more. Because if he doesn't reach a level, he doesn't reach more than he will say, he will take it as a challenge. Because he says, I know how to date this mural. And this is when the muralist doesn't have a political consensus, he doesn't have a consensus of what he should do, it's the truth. He's not doing things he shouldn't do, but he has to, I think, have a very rich consensus of what the world is and what life is. So do you think the artistic movement of the Chicano, of the muralists here in New Mexico is more or less an expansion to society? Let's say that people want... Well, I don't know if they want to see something like that

and develop themselves. Well, people say that they are very used to living as they live, as they say, no, everything is fine and they don't pay for being bad, and this is going to be a violence thing. But that's not the case, I think that the thing is, is that one goes to his work and the people look at it as they interpret it as they want it. Because if many people have bad thoughts and look at something and they want to look at it, they say, no, this man doesn't know what he's saying and he's just starting to say bad things and he's just doing Instagram and stuff like that. And he's just doing things that are going to be violence and people will be able to pay the price. But I think that the muralist has to have a very rich consensus to be able to interpret a good thing. And that's why it must be inherited in politics, it must be inherited in history, it must be inherited in all the things that are important in life. I think that the reason that America has so much fear about painting or muralists

because the man has always been afraid of the consensus. And what the mural is trying to show is that the symbols that come from the unconscious and that show our state, in which ways we live. And in the way that people live in America, it can be said that it's empty, empty. And a reason that the mural has so much impact and because of the fact that they have so much fear is because they bring another consensus. And maybe they think about religion, maybe they give them ideas about where they should be moving. If it's like, I also say, it's an interpretation of an artist, let's say, with the slavery. It's something that there are definitions and there are concepts of things. But each one has the idea, every one defines one thing as he wants. And when one speaks like he says, he speaks to one of what is government,

what is good and what is bad, every one can say his opinion. But the artist paints it and they look at it and you can accept it or say, your hands are fine. And this is a power that has the artist that has the evidence of his work. I also think that it must be understood that society is not only America, but many Latin American societies in Latin America and in the whole world they have fear of individualism. For the fact that societies are not based on individualism, they are based on social contract, they are based on what the men are doing. And when a person is individualist, for example, we call Salvador Dali, he takes it from the eye. And maybe, as they wanted here, with sequels or oroscopes, they voted because they could not accept their individualism. Not only America, also Mexico, and I think today, not only Mexico, but also the whole world. Always the artists have been rejected, because I think the work of the artist

is to paint the conscience of the times. For example, Miguel Ángel painted in the System Chapel. They did not receive it well because he was painting naked people and in that era it was forbidden. But what he wanted to understand is that God created the man in his own image and that he should not have any shame of trying to paint these things. This happened here in the United States with the Ashcan School, at the turn of the century. The Ashcanters started painting life as it was, especially in the east, in New York, in areas that the art wasn't accepted. So many left the country, went to Europe, some, I think, even came here to move on Mexico to change their themes or try and find something that they could work with. What kind of painting was this? They were called the Ashcan School. What they did was paint contemporary scenes in the ghettos, the progressive period of American history.

And they tried to paint the reality of life what it was really like. And the art itself was never really accepted. Like here in New Mexico, I don't think the value is really that down and out is some of the vitals in the big cities. I think that the larger city gets, the more vitals you get, and the more people get. I mean, the poor get poorer, and the richer get richer. It just seems that way in the larger cities. As for the Ashcan thing, there's all kinds of movements. I've read in life magazines, or time magazines. They got movimentals where the people get funding and they go around painting fire hydrants. It's a good thing that they make little cartoons on the fire hydrants and everything. They're doing that right now. I think that the murals, they have a lot more to say. And I think you have to look at a mural to find that out yourself. You can look at a fire hydrant, and look at a cartoon and get whatever you want out of it. But you can also look at a mural, and you can also get the artist's message. And you can interpret it to your own thing,

and sort of try to grasp the artist's impression or expression that he put out on that mural. But that's going to be entirely up to you, and how you view that mural or that painting. In other words, would you say that muralist art has an educative type of purpose in the sense that, even though it's an individual interpretation, it serves to the universal education of a lot of people. When you do a mural, you have to do a lot of research. You have to do a lot of studying and everything, and do a lot of writing, and do a lot of sketching. So you can put out there what has been down in history, and you can get it out there on the mural. And it's sort of like a large book. It's just opened up right there for the people. And then the artist also puts his own impression of it, how he sees it, how he sees the history or something. And if history is advancing, if history hasn't changed, it's time really gotten any further, or has it a standstill? I mean, are we better off now than the Aztecs were,

or from the times that came out, and the times of antiquity, or are we at the same stage or whatever? It's kind of hard to understand you for me anyway about history. That's a good point, like what you said about a large book. The early manuscripts of the Aztecs were basically murals. They were books or manuscripts, but at the same time, they conveyed them a message and pictography through pictures. Does the basic psychology was there? Well, it's just the thing with history. It's like you said, it's a mural is like a large book. When you do research and you do a lot of study, you can look at it and see sort of like a historical sequence or whatever, you know. And also the artist's expression and the way the people interpret it. Do you think that's maybe stretching the point too far to say that Chicano origins go back that far? Or really, is that a valid point? As far as history goes, all I know is that New Mexico was a part of Mexico at one time, you know? Part of the Spanish Empire, yeah.

Well, yeah, supposedly the Indians came through the Bering Strait of Sun travel through United States, and they traveled through New Mexico and they traveled down to Mexico. I think we have a city here in New Mexico called Aztec or something, where they supposedly left some ruins or something. And then they went on further down into Mexico and to the center of Mexico, you know, and they kicked back there. And this is where they built the city of Tanas de Llan, the pyramids and everything, pyramid of the sun, pyramid to the moon. I think maybe one thing, as far as finding roots, like when the conquistadores came in, all they did, like I said previously, was superimpose their hierarchy on what was already here. And the Indians, yeah. And the church saw that it could use the Indians or the Indian artists to their advantage. Because at first they built these big horrendous type churches and they didn't work. So they had to adapt. They had to adapt to the Indian religion. And so they themselves went to open their chapels, the same thing that the Aztecs used. But that was a form of adaption.

And they basically didn't have any artists among their own groups. So they used the Indians taught them the methods that they wanted them to learn. But still the Indian's basic traditional art came out. In other words, we have sort of like an influence from European and Indian art from here. Yes, I would say so. I'd like to make a statement which is based on the Western thought and the Indian thought, which is a striking difference. And the worst in thought is basically, I would say, it's idealistic. It's based upon ideals, utopias and the perfection of the world, heaven afterwards. And the difference with the Indians is that I think that we're very much down to earth. Literally, they were much connected to nature, to their surroundings. And another thing that should be noted is that in the Western man, what he has tried to do with art

is always tried to explain it by literally means or by criticizing it or by either intellectually building it up or destroying it. And much of it, too, was, as far as his commencement, art for the sake of art in the Western hemisphere. And I think that the Indians, in their symbols, being much simpler yet, I think, more complicated, we're trying to reach the essence of nature itself, of what holds the universe. And I think that's why there are codecs and their art is so involved with astrology. And for that fact, it becomes very mystic. Well, how do you get around the basic premise of Christianity that it's individual salvation rather than an environmental participation, rather than? Because that was a guiding principle that you were to convert the so-called pagan Indians

by individually converting them, isolating them. You don't mean us, or whatever. Yeah, indoctrinated. Well, what first must be noted is that the Spanish did not bring Christianity with them. They brought Catholicism, which is an institutionalized form of what Christ began to teach. So for that fact, I don't think much of that essence was carried. And it also should be noted of the parallel between the Aztecs and the Spaniards, when they met, was that they're both empires. And very much, I would say, decadent in their own religion. For if we study Christianity, they believe in that killing. And they sacrifice about 30 million Indians in the name of Christ. And if we go even further into the roots of the Aztecs, the philosophy is perhaps based upon all the basic things that the similarities of Christianity. But later on, we see sacrifices and all of this, which

I think were in parallel with the Spaniards. I'd like to change the direction of the conversation a little bit right now. Francis, do I like to ask you a question? For instance, how do you go about preparing a wall before you start painting, talking about techniques now and things like that? Well, the practices that I use is, first of all, I try to see the space that I'm going to work on. From what angle is going to be looked at? And then from there, you start working out of it. You can get the right effect with a mural. And after you see things, you start working with a composition relating to the subject that you're going to paint. As you work on this composition, you develop it to eliminating certain symbols and perhaps bringing in some other symbols in order to so that you can create a clearer message as you go along. And then after you got a sketch of more or less of what's going to go on the wall, you grid the wall.

And then you grid to scale. And then you grid the work that you're going to do on paper. And then you just transfer it from the original sketch into the wall. Walter, I know that muralist art is a very difficult type of thing. It takes the involvement of not just the artist who does the planning, but I guess you use a lot of different people. How does this work? For instance, when you do work with other people, how do they feel about it? Well, I've worked with other people before. As far as doing a mural, the first thing you've got to do is you've got to have some funds. You've got to have some kind of money to have your paints and everything. And then from there, the way I start is first I make sure I have the paints and everything. And I have the wall. I talk to some people, find out who wants to say donate a wall. And then after that, I do my sketches. I do some research for maybe for about a week or two. And I do all my drawings and sketches and do a lot of reading and everything so that I know what I'm also putting on the wall. And after that, as far as preparation for the wall, the only thing I do is just give it a basic code.

And then just start work out the composition and everything on the surface and then just start painting right in. Sometimes it takes two to three months to finish a mural. Sometimes maybe four, five, six months. Goes a long way through. But it does involve a lot of other people helping you as well. Yeah, there's some people that will come by in the neighborhood and the vineyard, you know, where I'm working at. During the daytime, they'll come by and they'll say, hey, is there a right if we help you paint? It's a sure. And they do their own thing on the wall, and they do a section there. And then I do my thing. And it doesn't, I sort of work in their paintings or their designs in with the composition that I have there, you know. I've done that several times. And then there's some murals that I've done entirely on my own. How does that work for you, though, having people participate in the activity itself? Well, it's pretty well organized. I mean, you don't get into each other's ways because it's also large. You just work on a different section and everything.

Everybody does their own thing on the wall. And once in a while, when they maybe run into a little bit of problems or something, they'll come and ask me, you know, how they can solve it. And me, if I know the answer to the solution or the solution to the problem, maybe I'll try to help them out. And if not, well, I'll just leave the painting like that. It looks good. I think in 1973, and I studied by Rupert Garcia, he said that there was something like two or 300 mural paintings in Attslan. In other words, we're talking about the Southwest United States. And I'm sure that there have been a lot more recent contributions. And I would like to throw out a question now. Do you think that this growth will continue? Do you think that the impact that was made during the late 60s and the early 70s is going to be a continued movement? Where do you think muralist art is going now? You know, I did some traveling in the late 60s. And I did some traveling to San Diego and to San Francisco

and to Los Angeles. And here in New Mexico, and I saw a lot of murals. And I've seen some murals also in Texas. At one time, the Chicano moon was pretty strong. The mural paintings were really coming out. And they were starting art schools for Chicano's. They had cultural centers in San Francisco and they had painted all kinds of murals. And they had different muralist painting there. And in LA, they had cultural centers also. Along with your boulevard, they had a home sown. Now that I was there, just recently, they closed down some of the art centers. Of course, I don't know if they opened them or some place else, but in the place where I went back to see if they were still in existence, they had already closed them down. And then in San Diego, also, they have the Toltecas central cultural, the Toltecas, Yaslan, I think. And I believe that's still in existence. But as far as mural paintings, I think in the late 60s, it was a lot more. And maybe in the early 70s, it was a lot more mural painting being done by a lot of artists. And now it seems that there isn't as much a mural.

I think that for that fact, it's that we have been overruled by in light metapathy, what it's called in light metapathy. And I think it's the contentment of the people. Let's say the generation of the late 60s, university people who were doing or whatever, the young people, I think that by now, they already become part of the system. And pretty much if you settle down, if you have children, you have to be contented. And you have to follow the trend of the system. But I think that's why it's important not to conform, perhaps to accept, yes, accept our conditions. I think we shouldn't conform. By no means, for the fact that we are well fed and clothed in everything. I think that those are only superficial facades that come and go. And I think that the oppression goes much deeper than just starvation. Perhaps now it has become a psychological oppression. This can work unconsciously also.

It's been brought up by the media. It's been brought up by the styles, the facades of the times. And slowly, without perhaps realizing, being conscious, we integrate it. But I guess that's where our job is. I guess that's where the job of the artist, whatever he is a muralist or just a craftsman, he should realize these things. He should be aware of these things. Again, what we're talking about psychology, hitting the unconscious with this kind of art. Well, that's like in Francisco's mural at the North Valley Community Center. I was down there one day watching the reactions. And the first thing that people picked out, especially in Americanos, was see that, what is that thing? It looks like it's frightening. People were unaware of what that was. Until I explained it to a few people,

and then they understood. But it was just a mestizo syndrome. But nonetheless, murals work in this way. They have a tendency to stimulate somebody's mind. And a series of questions come up. And in order to get answers, you're going to have to talk with other people. I think that's the object of a mural is not for the sake of happiness or static beauty, to please people in other words. I think it's ready to cause vibrations that can set out people to say, I think this is bad, or I think this is good. Whatever the opinion might be, at least you're getting some reaction. But I think that the difference between the murals in Nuevo México and the difference in Mexico is that what the Mexicans have been doing is just taking part of the culture and using it in the walls. There's something that can identify right away. And what has happened in Nuevo México for the fact of the dominant culture, much of the Indian culture has been lost. And in other words, what people might be doing

is reeducating themselves by looking at these murals, and looking back to their past. Francisco, I'd like to ask you a question. What do you think the movement of the artist Chicanos is going on? I feel that it's a young movement. And most of the Chicano artists and murals are all pretty young. And for the future, I think that, let's say, 20 years from now, I think most of this artist are going to be creating some murals that are probably of great respect. And I think they will be at a state that they will be equal to the murals of the Renaissance and the murals of Mexico. Most of the Chicano muralists are young artists. I've yet to meet a muralist artist that's in the 50s. Otherwise, you could probably see already high quality work. But like I was saying, most of these artists are pretty young. And they're very, I think, that they're very dedicated to the work.

And if it goes on at the pace that it's going, I think that in the future, we'll probably see some work of art and it'll probably be very respected. I've seen this as being a criticism here in Nuevo Mexico is that a lot of people who are considered artists or part of the artist's community or something have a tendency to look at muralist art as a very non-professional type of thing. In other words, they try to compare the evolution of Chicano artists, like what is going on right now, to the great masters, Diego Rivera, Siqueiros, and Orozco. And as of yet, I don't see any comparison, although nonetheless, there is an evolution that is going on. And one day, like you say, naturally, there will be this level that is reached. Definitely. I think that, for example, I've studied like the works of Siqueiros and Orozco and Rivera. And I've seen the work that they did when they were in the early 20s and 30s. And they didn't start working on masterpieces

until they were on 40 and 50 years. And I think that for most Chicano artists, I think that they'll get to that position one day. And I see no reason why they can't accomplish such things. One thing that I like to mention is that criticism, I think, is worthless when somebody's going to validate the work of anybody to begin with. And therefore, comparisons have no meaning. Because I believe that the consciousness of the new Mexicans here, it's a unique consciousness. It has nothing to do with Mexico now. Perhaps one, back in the 1800s, 1900s, but not today. Today, it's a mixture of different values, a mixture of rebellious values against the American system, let's say, not only that also integrated with the Spanish culture and Indian culture. So I think it's a totally new and radical movement. Would you say that this is a unique circumstance than that this is a unique condition for the rise of a more unique type of art? I think the time is perfect for that.

But as I mentioned before, it's going to take effort and more than anything effort. Historically, New Mexico is an entity to itself, even during the Spanish period. It was always an isolated frontier. Many traditional concepts, even especially the religious, like the penitentes, for example, are unique to New Mexico. Ideas have been carried down and New Mexico, even the language itself, some of the phonetic examples in the language remain, too. Not only that, also, in talking about what New Mexico has inherited from the culture of Spain, I think that as in comparison to South America, much of the older ways have been kept here, of the morality, let's say, religion, and they're perhaps even stronger in the north. And these things were made conscious by, also, by Octavio Paz, in one of his speeches that he has. He says that many of the values here, or even older,

even the Spanish that some words spoken in Spanish, no longer use in Mexico and Latin America, which there have been still use here. Francisco, what is art to you as an individual? El arte, creo yo que es una cosa, que es to serve people, es el deber del arte, servirle al pueblo, y no nomás, como tirar tinta en la padera y decir que es una pintura, porque creo yo que eso es lo más tiempo gastado, y tinta gastada también. In other words, art should have a message, should convey an idea, a meaning, and that there is no such thing as individual expression to the extreme that it is totally removed from the people. Is that what you're saying? Claro, como art shouldn't be an individual thing, como decir que, for just pleasure, o, por algo así, debe de dar uno a un plano de que es importante, es tan importante como la vida misma, creo yo,

porque es una cosa que nunca nos han enseñado del arte. Por ejemplo, lo que yo sé del arte es porque yo lo ha aprendido, mismo no porque en las escuelas nunca lo ha aprendido aquí, y yo lo más con lo que ha aprendido ha leído, ha aprendido del arte, y yo creo que la gente conforme se va educando va aprendiendo qué es la necesidad del arte, y a mí, no, porque hoy mismo en la vida todo lo que es importante es decir el lujo, el luxury, vivir así, y no le ponen atención a lo que es una cosa de crear ese negocio, pero con el tiempo creo que la gente va a ir aprendiendo a su negocio. Fernando, cuál es su opinión sobre el arte del individuo? Well, I think art is an individual statement. It's like, instead of writing your name at the end of a letter, you paint the picture, so I think that's your autograph.

And what I think art is, or should be, is the best of your consciousness, the best of the consciousness of the artist in whatever relation, in whatever environment he's living and try this to convey it to the people. But, and again, in a sense, try to convey it to his soul. It should be his own reflection. In other words, showing him what's inside the artist. Then again, I share the same attitude, the same views with Francisco, that it should be directed to the people. Otherwise, it's meaningless, because artists know themselves that they're artists, or if they're trying to do a work, or if they do a work, it should be a message to the world. Walter, I'd like to ask you, I guess, the same question. Where does individualism fit in muralist art? Well, I feel that I share the same attitudes with Francisco and Fernando. I feel that it's a thing that you do for the people. And you do the mural painting, you do the painting,

and you're expressing a message. And also, it's sort of like your autograph. You do in your own thing with it, too, also. You're also your painting a picture, let's see if I can swim. Your painting a picture, so therefore, you are like autographing the picture. But yet, you're doing it in a messist style so that other people can understand it. And then your feelings on the painting, whatever, they'll be up to the people who figure it out. And then when they look at it, it could be their feelings that they're seen out of the painting. In other words, it's like a response to your individualism, which in turn is filtered. It goes through, say, for instance, when you do the work, it goes through your soul, it goes through your mind and everything else, and then it goes to the people. And in turn, they get the same feelings from that and give that back to you. In other words, it's kind of like a cyclical process. It comes back and forth. That's one thing that, with Rivera Norosco,

he picked up the revolutionary theme, but they didn't pick it up until the 20s, early 20s. That's really strange that their participation in the revolution really wasn't that great, although Norosco wasn't involved in the early period with Garanza. But yet, they had the theme. They had the motivation. So was the Quedos, the Quedos was... Yeah, they couldn't have some dude over there in Russia or something, and he was always on the run and everything. And then he was the wildest of all the mural of the Quedos, because he was considered a communist at the time. And that's what a lot of people say. Well, these people are muralists, and the muralists

in Mexico were communist, so therefore you are communist too, you know? Yeah, I think that's why they were afraid. In America, you know, murals, because they might have communist tendencies. Yeah, but that's funny. Rivera was always an allowed communist from the beginning, but yet he did some of his best work here in the United States. See, what must be noted also is that, you know, communism and Marxism and socialism, there's a lot of difference. And I think if we were to ask Rivera or Quedos, you know, their views on it, we'll probably be probably totally different from the standard views, you know, of what the words mean today. I think that there were more inclined to be socialists in the sense of painting for the people, for the proletariat, rather than, you know, conveying political messages of how the system should be structured. Nothing was more of a humanitarian looked, which, you know, it's resembled more to a Christian way or a Marxist way. And then this, people, they never took a naive attitude

about any circumstances. They were the head, they said, they were a valour, a pintalo, Quedos elacía, que era la verdad. Yes, and this is what is very important of the artist, that he has to paint the truth that he falls into the ground and he has to do his work because from a beginning, an artist, I think, must be committed to working for the people and they can't paint something that will be a lie because nothing, that's also how you spend tints, too. And that's why I think that, and I never, as I say, can't make a naive ideology. It's always worth painting what he thinks is the truth. I was thinking more about what you're saying along with the themes, like Arosco had comparisons to make, like the stuff that he did at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. I think it's New Hampshire. He, one of the panels he has,

a comparison with the Revolutionario in La Esquina, Iluego, next to him, he has the American symbol, the teacher, and the two, he has them counterbalance in each other, but yet he has, I can remember, right, the Americans being led by the symbol of womanhood, but yet the Mexicans are led by El Mestizo. But he had that comparison to make it. Chicano muralists are making comparisons in similar ways, I think, about making them making. Somehow, I want to say propaganda, but I know there's a fine line that you can't say, you know. I think that in order to appreciate a mural, I think that, well, first of all, there's a great part in America that is not educated, that know anything about art, because the trend of art that follows here is, is very concrete.

In other words, it has boundaries, you know. But the art of, in the tradition of artists, you know, of the great artists, has always been expanded, more universal. And I think in order to appreciate a mural, we cannot come up with naive statements or naive ideas of, you know, saying, this represents something, or this means something, and if the soldiers together with this one, this is what it means. I think that it even goes deeper. In my go to the symbolism of what you're trying to say with a color, you know, what you're trying to represent with a blue, you know, with a yellow, how you use your shapes, how you use your whole composition, might be a whole symbol, even deeper than what the, what the story behind the mural, you know. And I think that's what Orozco and Cikero's have done, you know, even though they tell a story, you know, they have a team, I think that the message is behind the figures, you know, it's much deeper than, you know, it's much deeper than something that we can understand

and relate to, you know. So you create okay, like art, the whole process of art is revolutionary in its own sense. And by that, you know, I think that the artist is very sympathetic to the revolution there. Iporesto, Criollo, you know, they always have a tendency to go against the grain, not only politically, but it's a main culture, it's a main aesthetic. It's like a paradox. You could say that they're the destructors of culture and they're the ones who are, you know, building culture. And I think that's what cultural lies. It doesn't lie in the country, it doesn't lie in the society, lies in the individual, you know. And for that fact, you know, if you have many individuals who carry that same consciousness, you know, then the country, you know, will have a culture of its own. And I think that's why the main comparison, you know, the main difference between America and the Latin American countries is that this is what we have, you know, the Latin American countries have tradition, have art, you know.

And sadly, now these things are, if not dying, you know, slowly disappearing in America. And again, it's for the fact that I mention contentment, you know, and conformity. ok игja игра игра игра игра игра игра игра игра игра The moralist art is a direct communication that makes the need to express the most pure and deep feelings of the artist, in isolation to his environment, his society and the consciousness of the times. From time to time, the art has served to man as a reflection of his spiritual state, extracting the substance and essence of the mere material reflections, the show artist has a more inherent and true reality.

The moral, before being art, is a soul and soul, it is an obstacle to stop or stop, as much as to defend. It is there, where the artist declares his consciousness into individualism, the metamorphosis begins at the first touch of the broken glass, and continues to transcend the common limits of space, time and material, transforming into a universal allegory, rich in symbols and messages that lead to the totality of life. The moral has already, interestingly, is a clear and direct message to the reach of all who, as an open Bible, and with its own voice, to the people in bright colors, vibrants, the message of the beings, since it was institutionalized in Mexico after many evolutions, in a violent era full of social and modern contradictions, where the technology of the soul,

surges in this chaos, the heroic grit of the artist, the obligatory protest, since, in front of his eyes, the oppression of the masses, the political injustices, and the monstrosity of selfishness, imperialism, destroying without fear, the basis of human salvation, which is the equality and freedom among all creatures that participate in the universe. Geared by the spirit of justice and enmity, the chaotic battle of the artist, which will only end when the dead hand of the moralist, leaves his brother to the ground, and I'm not afraid of him. But Abraham, and there are other spirits that will pick up the brother, and will follow the immortal task, although the weight of ignorance, the hierarchy, the path and the egoism, are put into a wall in front of the consciousness, since he loves life, the freedom and art. Because we all are moralists, all must fight and declare their rights in the morals of the universal art.

It is the political, political, literary, carpenter work, the wall is a symbol of conscious evolution, not of violence and destruction, it is a revelatory inspiration that moves the background of the viewer, pure feelings of honest and valid, to make a better universal understanding, joining the man in the work and the necessary appreciation of art, which is based on the source of our existence, which is love and devotion, true for life. And the events are urgent in the walls of the vows, there is a great consensus that they are still going to be. We must go out of our limits and social conditions,

to declare war to India and pressurization, we must take the brother again and continue fighting without rest, committed to life whole, and continue with humanity's work, which paths are already open for those who declared a sacred sacrifice, the right to be free. We cannot be happy with the virtuous value of the materialist luxury, not because our stomachs are full, we must sit down apathically and see the life of our front. That is why our souls die in December, action is what is demanded and is required to create a wall, hard work and conscious with a life-to-death wish. It will be a day, then, the human conscience is united in a common purpose, the largest and most beautiful wall that confides in it, we will contemplate in the eternal tomorrow, where the eternal world will be tested until the beginning of the divine birth of the fifth soul. .

. . . . . .

. . .