In this article the Venezuelan curator and critic Luis Enrique Pérez-Oramas (b. 1960) discusses Art d'Amérique Latine 1911–1968, the exhibition presented at the Musée National d'Art Moderne, at the Centre Georges Pompidou, from November 12, 1992 through January 11, 1993. The exhibition was part of a traveling show, sponsored by the International Council of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), that had been commissioned by the City of Sevilla to be part of the celebrations marking the Fifth Centenary of the Discovery [of Latin America] in 1992 or, as it was referred to on that occasion, the “Encuentro entre dos Mundos,” the meeting of two worlds. The exhibition was shown in New York, Seville, Paris, and Cologne.
The original plan envisioned a large exhibition called Artistas latinoamericanos del siglo XX / Latin American Artists of the Twentieth Century. On its arrival in France, it was split into two parts, each with its own collection of works and catalogue. Art d'Amerique Latine 1911–1968 was installed at the Centre Georges Pompidou (this is the one reviewed by Pérez-Oramas in this article). Ameriques Latines: Art contemporain was relegated to the Hotel des Arts and consisted of a mutilated selection of the region’s more contemporary art.
The ideas that Pérez-Oramas expresses in this article reflect the opinions of Latin American critics, curators, and researchers who, beginning in about the 1970s, disagreed with the curatorial approach, perspective, and policies used in the exhibition of Latin American art at international events. The curatorial approach, on the whole, tended to highlight traits identified with an apparent formal exoticism in Latin American art that piqued the interest of critics and the public in other latitudes. In other cases, bolder perspectives suggested the existence of formal and aesthetic affinities between Latin American and international art. In either scenario, the result was a diluted version of the actual ideas proposed by Latin American artists and movements.
Pérez-Oramas goes beyond the reaffirmation of a Latin American quality—in the sense of an intended meaningful unity and identity—and insists that any reading of the art produced in the region should recognize the specificity and the differences inherent in the ideas proposed by particular individuals and/or aesthetic movements or trends; as well as, of course, their actual contributions that are created in the complex, heterogeneous universe of the nations involved. This mission, adds the critic, can only be accomplished by critical thought that is “American” in its outlook.