Reactions to Folk Culture and Modernity

It seemed that the general theme of this week’s readings was culture as a form of anti-establishment resistance. By first looking at Mexican Muralism and the Official Public Sphere one is introduced to the politicized nature of art—specifically how murals were used in Mexico to “fight the power”. The fact that muralists had to bring guns for protection illustrates the dangerous and controversial aspect of murals. It was a platform that instigated conversations and challenged the politicians and religious leaders, establishing new ways to interpret the actions of these two groups. Art became part of politics and culture and later became symbolic of Mexican culture, consequentially spreading to other parts of the world. This also meant that there was an incentive to continue the creation of murals.

Theoretically if the murals were painted to critique the political climate and those in power, then as soon the government and communities are supportive of muralists’ paintings they have lost their power. Also, it raises the question of whether muralism has become a commodity while potentially losing its controversial elements. As soon as Mexicans stop discussing the cultural relevance of murals, they take on a new meaning and purpose. By becoming something that is universally accepted into the culture, the mural becomes a selling tool to be used by people to make money and to trivialize the work done by muralists like Rivera—who wanted to question the power structures.

Then there is The Spirit Queen’s Court, which looks at this pagan-like religion that in one way challenges the Church and the Europeans who came to South America. This reading was interesting in that it looks at a hidden side of Columbia that does not seem to be as widely celebrated or discussed. From my limited knowledge of the religion it seems that it attracts people who want to believe in something new that did not have as twisted a history as Christianity. Maybe this was the way to pay tribute to the indigenous cultures that were attacked and trivialized by the arrival of the Europeans. In a way it works like Rivera worked in Mexico, raising questions about what constitutes culture and who has been left behind by modernization or development.

As governments look forward to what could be, they lose sight of what exists and who shapes the identity of these regions. Art and religion can be reminders of what is lost when people are always seeking the “new” or the “future”.