Documents of 20th-century Latin American and Latino Art

www.mfah.org Home

IcaadocsArchive

Document first page thumbnail
  • ICAA Record ID
    1137793
    TITLE
    Dice Fernando Szyszlo que no hay pintores en el Perú ni América : el joven pintor peruano declara sentir su pintura y la de los demás pero no puede explicarla
    IN
    La Prensa : diario independiente de la mañana (Lima, Perú). -- Jun. 2, 1951
    DESCRIPTION
    ill.
    LANGUAGES
    Spanish
    TYPE AND GENRE
    Newspaper article – Essays
    BIBLIOGRAPHIC CITATION
    La Prensa: diario independiente de la mañana (Lima, Perú). "Dice Fernando Syszlo que no hay pintores en Perú ni en América: el joven pintor peruano declara sentir su pintura y la de los demás pero no puede explicarla." June 2, 1951.
    NAME DESCRIPTORS
Synopsis

This text contains the polemic statements that Fernando de Szyszlo made on the occasion of his exhibition of abstract paintings held at the Asociación de Arquitectos del Perú in Lima in May 1951. He starts off by provocatively asserting that “There are no painters in Peru. Indeed, except for Mexican artist [Rufino] Tamayo, I don’t think there is a single painter in all of the Americas.” De Szyszlo believes expression is the basic aim of modern art. In relation to his own work, he states, “I am not interested in creating aesthetic objects.” He describes modernism as the pursuit, in art, of “a form of contact with the characteristics of language.” On those grounds, he defends the importance of craft, a sort of vocabulary that determines the validity of expression, one that, because artistic, de Szyszlo believes ineffable. In de Szyszlo’s view, abstract painting is the result of a “sense of the absolute”; it is a “total solution” to the compromises of realism. Within abstraction, he pinpoints two tendencies, one logical and the other—the one he adheres to— “emotional, sentimental.” In asserting that Peru forms part of Western culture, he states “any possible approach to Peruvian painting must be an approach to Western painting”—a position that invalidates socially committed painting and Indianism as forms of superficial nationalism. “The true Peru is not in external representation […] but lies within.” With the exception of pre-Columbian and colonial artists, and—as mentioned above—Tamayo, he believes that there are no painters in the Americas.

Annotations

In early 1951, Peruvian painter Fernando de Szyszlo (b. 1925) returned to Lima after having spent almost two years in Paris. His time in the French capital proved decisive to a turn towards Abstract Expressionism in his work, largely due to the influence of German artist Hans Hartung (1904–89). In May 1951, de Szyszlo exhibited his most recent works at the Sociedad de Arquitectos in Lima, in a show held under the auspices of the Agrupación Espacio, a group that spearheaded innovation in art and architecture in the country. [For further reading, see in the ICAA digital archive “Expresión de principios de la Agrupación Espacio” (doc. no. 1126309)].

 

De Szyszlo’s show was, generally speaking, favorably reviewed, though influential Peruvian critic Carlos Raygada (1898–1953) did have some reservations [see “De arte: exposición Szyszlo” (doc. no. 1150738)]. The overall belligerent tone of de Szyszlo’s rebuttal was overshadowed by his now-famous statement in La Prensa newspaper: “there are no painters in Peru” (doc. no. 1137793). His open contempt for contemporary art from his country gave rise to an irate reaction from Peruvian artists and intellectuals and earned him a leading role in the first debate in Peru on non-figurative art. [For additional information, see the following articles: (unsigned) “Pintores peruanos hay, lo que aún no hay es pintura peruana: dice Juan Ríos y agrega que la pintura abstracta es pobre e inhumana” (doc. no. 1137808); (unsigned) “Cristina Gálvez opina que sí hay pintores en el Perú: citó a cuatro: ‘Hay que ser muy intelectual para ser abstracto’ dijo y añadió luego ‘Szyszlo no es intelectual’” (doc. no. 1150897); Sérvulo Gutiérrez’s “Qué arte abstracto ni que nada, el arte es esencialmente uno... lo que debe hacer el pintor es ‘pintar’” (doc. no. 1150851); (unsigned) “Gran problema del arte peruano es la falta de críticos: ‘Xanno’: Alejandro Romualdo Valle agregó que los que escriben sobre arte son improvisados o huachafos” (doc. no. 1150928); Federico Costa y Laurent’s “La ‘polémica de los pintores’” (doc. no. 1150866); (unsigned) “‘Julia Codesido y Sabogal son buenos pintores’: Aquilles Ralli cree, además, que muchos sólo buscan la fama por medio de la publicidad” (doc. no. 1150882); Juan Ríos’s “El debate sobre pintura: carta del Sr. Juan Ríos R.” (doc. no. 1150912) and “Balance de una polémica: cuatro preguntas fundamentales” (doc. no. 1137882); and Ángel Guido’s “A los pintores peruanos” (doc. no. 1150943)].

 

Though intentionally provocative, the statement “there are no painters in Peru” made reference to the lack of local points of reference for any artist interested in participating in the most recent international trends. The most ornery issues in the debate were the terms that should be used to define local modern art, suggesting early differences among Peruvian progressive intellectuals. By defending “earthly abstraction” as the sole option for Peruvian art, critic Samuel Pérez Barreto (1921–2003) found himself up against fellow former members of the Agrupación Espacio, a group that vehemently rejected any partisan and totalizing view that identified “the national” with “the Andean.”

Researcher
Ricardo Kusunoki
Team
Museo de Arte de Lima, Lima, Peru