The editorial categories are research topics that have guided researchers during the recovery phase and continue to be the impetus behind the Documents Project’s digital archive and the Critical Documents book series. Developed by the project’s Editorial Board, each of the teams analyzed this framework and adapted it to their local contexts in developing their research objectives and work plans during the Recovery Phase. Learn more on the Editorial Framework page.
During a visit to Poland and the USSR, Siqueiros noticed that some young artists, led by Paúl Reveyrolle, were moving from abstract or semi-abstract work to figurative art, which was clearly social and political propaganda and at the same time, anti-academic and modern. Although he noticed that the paintings maintained anti-realist influences, they did not match his more advanced theory. Siqueiros declared his opposition both to formulism, which he associated with the academy, and formalism; in other words, the latest “ultra-abstractionist” expression that he believed had no future outlet.
During his trip to two important socialist countries, David Alfaro Siqueiros (1896-1974) noticed that young painters there had clearly rejected academism, although they were linked to School of Paris formulism. In an open letter, the painter advised them to enact a profound change toward the creation of an innovative, whole and modern realist art, one that would take the place of the prevailing influences of formulism and formalism. Siqueiros believed that as long as art belonged to the capitalist world and not to a people’s democracy, this phenomenon would continue to exist. The painter discovered that in the USSR artists had greater clarity regarding the political content of art; he also noted their rejection of formulism. The young soviets were impatiently seeking either an answer to, or a solution outside of, the School of Paris.