Discussion 2 - Cuban Arts and Culture - Austin Smith
One of Fidel Castro's main goals for the country of Cuba was to make the country well-cultured. This goal led to the construction of several art schools, and eventually led to the right to sell art outside of the socialist system. Artists in Cuba could sell to tourists without restriction, and as a result, many were able to make more than a living for themselves and their families. Many locals discuss an "inverted pyramid", where artists have many freedoms and doctors and lawyers often struggle to make ends meet (Artists Pioneer Cuba's Changing Economy). Unfortunately, this has led to a high number of artists and a low number of buyers, creating an inflation in supply that has ended up devaluing much of the art produced by the country.
This art boom has led to the development of several movements, in particular the Vanguadia movement and the Afrocubanismo movement. The Vanguardia movement sought to push progressive social and cultural ideas, which seems to me like something that the Cuban government would have been very weary of. In a country controlled by heavy restrictions, the fact that Castro chose art, a source of discourse and change, to be a free territory surprises me a little bit.
Much of the Afrocubanismo movement depicted Afro-Cubans in a stereotypical light, but integration with the Vanguardia movement and its artists began to challenge these ideas and perceptions. These changes seem to have inspired pride in their heritage in many, where before it had been a potential source of shame. Wifredo Lam was a Cuban artist of African and Chinese descent, two nationalities that may have easily been frowned upon in Cuban society at the time. Upon a meeting with Picasso, the Spaniard reminded Lam that his African heritage was nothing to be ashamed of, starting a trend of heritage masks across Lam's artwork. Small sentiments like this can so easily change the course of art and bring about a metamorphosis in communities.
I find the introduction of Decree 349 a very interesting development in the culture of Cuba. This decree serves to censor many common themes in art; the restriction of one of the country's major exports in the face of a continued embargo with the US seems to be a very isolationist move despite being an already isolated country. Already, art was restricted to being non-contrarian to the government, but this decree tightens restrictions even more, as well as giving the government some added ability to decide what is contrarian.
Do you think that the pre-Decree 349 restrictions on art allowed for any form of freedom of speech through art for the Cuban people? And how does the new decree change that freedom?
How do you think the restrictions on art will affect its sale and exportation? What effect will this have on the Cuban economy?
I'm glad that you touched upon Decree 349 restrictions. I think it's terrible and an obvious power grab over the artists and their art. The purposefully make the language vague so they can use it to their liking. I think that the restrictions can have contradictory effects. I think that if people know about the Decree 349 then they may want to support Cuban artists and buy their work. Which will generate more money for them. But also, subsequently the government can also just control what can get sold and what can't get sold. And this obviously hurts them financially. So maybe if there's some publicity about the Decree 349 it could influence people but ultimately, I think it will hurt the sale of Cuban art.
ReplyDeleteHi Austin!
ReplyDeleteI think that there was no freedom of expression before or after the decree, it just became worse. Freedom of speech and expression is the freedom to speak or express oneself without repression from their governement, which was not true before the decree. The decree seems to enable the government to better repress its citizens through the perceived legitimacy of the decree, which is purposely worded to be vague so it can be selectively applied. So in summary, it changed it by making something bad worse. I do not think it will effect it too much, but I feel one of the great draws for art buyers wanting Cuban art could be using it as a commentary on the situation in the country. If this is minimized, it could decrease one of the main buying points of Cuban art as its niche is unable to be exploited. Though this is proven wrong with works from groups like Los Carpinteros, the point still has merit for more on the nose peices.
What do you think is the major selling point of Cuban art? Polotics, culture, or both?
I believe that the art Market will still be fine after the decree. I do acknowledge the fact that selling and exportation will be affected as you mentioned but I feel that the market will still prevail. the main reason why I believe this is because selling art is very ingrained in Cuban culture and when selling art or any other type of Market is deeply ingrained into one's culture, it is exceptionally hard to remove it peacefully and or quickly. I believe that the Art Market will take a hit, the black market and unofficial Market channels will open up to the world, and the market will surge in the underground. I mainly believe this because of not-so-current events. I can compare the limiting and banning of Art being sold to prohibition. alcohol was banned in most aspects but has such a deep connection to the American way, that people still found ways to get around it even with the government doing as much as it could to beat down on it. I also think that the market will Thrive because it has positive connotations in the Cuban culture. this means that more people will be willing to support it illegally than something similar to Prohibition. I also feel that while the domestic market might not be so great after the decree the international market as has been said in all the other readings, is too great to satisfy and shut down.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI think that freedom of speech-particularly speech about the government- has consistently been limited in Cuba. So in that sense I doubt It will play a huge role because that rigidity in enforcing punishment against free speech has always been present. I think the beauty of art is that it allows for a form of self expression that is free speech, but it is veiled and very layered which can prevent intervention from governments that disagree with the potential message. Since the decree puts the governments enforcement against free speech into a legitimate law, artists will now have to be more creative than ever before in order to subvert the decree and continue to state their beliefs and express themselves
Hi Austin,
ReplyDeleteGreat questions. I myself was thinking similarly while reading the articles of this module. The Decree 349 restrictions are quite intriguing and I agree with Henry's thoughts regarding Cuban artists finding other ways to express themselves under censorship. The idea that art can be censored only fuels the fire of creativity and artistic representation. Throughout history, minority cultures have always found a way to express themselves through coded images and messages. For example, Christians hid under the ichthys symbol in the Roman Empire to avoid persecution. The LGBTQ+ communities in New York and San Francisco developed Handkerchief code in the 1970s– a certain way of dressing to communicate and express sexual orientation and preferences. In other words, even if the government enforces censorship on expression, the artists will adapt and possibly find even more inspiration with the limitations on their freedom. Conversely, with the large involvement of Cuban government in art schools and programs, the artists and their exports may serve as propaganda the government can use to convey a global image of Cuba.
P.S. I highly recommend Hal Fischer's collection "Gay Semiotics." Amazing photography collection that highlights histories of survival-based queer coded messaging through street style https://www.gaysemiotics.com/gay-semiotics