There is a constant dilemma between maintaining socialism and creating a free market economy through artwork. In the example of Los Carpinteros in the interview provided they had to go to an art display in Chicago but the restrictions of the government did not allow them to attain the visa quickly they know that even if they are not there the artwork will be shown and people will appreciate their art. They are aware that their art pieces can be sold at a higher price than in Cuba and this theme is common among local artists. Although the government does offer art galleries and gives them benefits for being artists they know they can get more showing those artworks in tourist venues. In the US their artwork is more valuable and could get 100 times more than what they get in Cuba.
These artists have acknowledged that their artwork is profitable but they struggle with the socialist ideology. Artists like Toraic don’t want foreigners to think all Cuban artwork should be political or be associated with the political party. Even though he painted Castro he says this is just art, just like a painting of a Pharoah or Napoleon. I think that artists have a powerful skill that can be used to show how communism is applied and the effects of this ideology in modern times. I don’t think is it just art it should have a message if they are painting a political figure it should be for a reason and if they don’t it to be political then they can paint the marvelous beaches, Cubanos, or their delicious food. Although money is very important in a socialist society maintaining culture and art should be more important should they use art to create a message or to show their talent?
The political party in Cuba influences art in many ways and in an interview with a local artist named Danilo Maldonado, he wanted to release two painted pigs with the names of Fidel and Raul. This was a purposeful action taken by the artist to show how the party was not as easy-going as they say they are in relation to artworks. Indeed he went to jail for 10 months but thanks to Human Rights Organizations he was released and pointed out how the government continues to be restrictive and influences the art of local artists.
However, I think there was no need to use real pigs but he wanted to prove a point. Also, freedom of speech has been a major issue in Cuba and I love the creative thoughts and criticism of the political system this is why artists should continue to use these cultural forms to criticize the government and not go to jail. The restrictions cause many artists to leave the country and work in the US or Europe where they can create art without many restrictions. Do you think that if I painted Trump’s or Biden’s name in a pig and released them in Washington DC, wouldn't the government see me as a potential threat? I don’t think I would go to jail but I would certainly be followed by government officials or defenders of the presidents is that a restriction of my art? Am I free to criticize presidents? Our systems are not the same and in New Hampshire is live free or die but criticizing a president has obvious restrictions even burning the American flag has some consequences.
Such a crazy story regarding the imprisonment of an artist for his pig painting. Communist leaders often don't tolerate negative imagery of themselves. Like in China where President Xi punishes those who compare his look to Winnie the Pooh. Winnie the Pooh is illegal in China.
ReplyDeleteI was not aware of the incident with Maldonado and his controversial painting. That just goes to show how seriously the Cuban government takes their censorship. Sometimes we easily take freedom of speech for granted because we are so used to it. Regarding your question about freedom in criticizing presidents, you absolutely have the right to say what you want about the president, since you are protected by our first amendment rights. When it comes to threatening the safety of our president, I'm sure that is a different story. I hope that eventually Cuba will provide more power to the individual, similar to the rights we have.
ReplyDeleteHello! I think you bring up some interesting points. But the part of your post that really caught my eye was the last sentence. "Our systems are not the same and in New Hampshire is live free or die but criticizing a president has obvious restrictions even burning the American flag has some consequences". That is because even though NH is the "live free or die state", it still has restrictions on what you can and can’t do when it comes to free speech. For example, public sector employees cannot protest. Also, what you said about burning of the flag is not completely true. Because in the supreme court case Texas v. Johnson case, flag burning is a protected form of speech. So, if someone gets in trouble its not because they burnt the flag.
ReplyDeleteHi Angela,
ReplyDeleteYou provide a very level-headed outlook on both the upset artists, censorship, and their chosen forms of protest. The artists seem to take a variety of approaches to voice their discontent with the way things are in Cuba. I'm intrigued by how you related their actions to laws in the United States. While the action with the pigs may seem a bit extreme, it also raises the question of what is needed to create the change artists are seeking? In some perspectives, pigs may not have been extreme enough. In others, they may have been the wrong action entirely.