Collectivism after Modernism - autonomous learning - Blogs

Performing Revolution 155
boy in question was Alejandro Acosta, a neighbor of Novoa’s, “with certain troubles
(trastornos) and a singular personality which allowed him to join in our projects.”
E-mail from Novoa, August 19, 2004.
84. February–March 1988. Sites for the installation included the National
Museum of Fine Arts, the Castillo de la Fuerza, La Casa de las Américas, Galería
Haydée Santamaría, and Habana Club. As though anticipating criticism of the
project from an anti-imperialist position, Roberto Fernández Retamar (the President
of La Casa de las Américas, and a leading ofWcial intellectual Wgure) went to some
lengths to justify its importance in “Rauschenberg, American Artist,” his text for
the exhibition brochure: “It is understandable that a man who incorporates so much
[referring to the artist’s work with assemblage] goes around the planet to show his
wares in the most distant sites, and also to enrich those sites with new visions, born
in those sites. Of course: one should not look in those visions for the spirit of the
people in those places, but instead for that of Rauschenberg, heir to the pedigree
including those North Americans who, like Whitman or Hemingway, brought together
in their work, in the manner of vast collages, that which the world requires
to express itself: in order to express the best of a community of energetic pioneers,
who we cannot confuse with those responsible for other adventures.”
85. The group did quickly move on to more confrontational, performative works.
And, as Novoa has pointed out, even if they were painting murals, “more than
painting on the wall it was the fact of going and doing it illegally, clandestinely, of
doing it on the run. Also, with the attitude that they would arrive and burst into
some place or other.” Interview with the author, Miami, December 30, 2002.
86. Glexis Novoa, interview with the author, Miami, December 30, 2002.
87. According to Leal, “they made something like a pact with us, that was not
actually a pact but more like a threat: that we could no longer keep doing those
things outside.” Interview with the author, Havana, March 18, 2002.
88. Navarro, “Unhappy Happening,” 25.
89. Glexis Novoa, interview with the author, Miami, December 30, 2002.
90. Art-De consisted of an artist (Juan-Sí González), a lawyer specializing in
human rights (Jorge Crespo Díaz), and a Wlmmaker (Elizeo Váldez).
91. The Brigada Hermanos Saiz (the youth wing of UNEAC, the Cuban Artists’
and Writers’ Union and therefore an organ of the Communist Party) actually provided
support and cover for even the most provocative works—so long as they were
legitimated on the grounds of being art. In that case, the Brigada’s role was to manage
the situation, and to work with the dynamics of the “adolescent rebellion” to
produce a more positive dynamic. Art-De’s cardinal sin was to position themselves
completely outside of this ofWcial safety net, seeking neither recognition as art nor
the support of any arm of the cultural apparatus for the creation or presentation of
their work.
92. Ernesto Leal has also spoken of this safety in numbers: “it was not so palpable
(presente) as it is now, the fact that something can happen to you, to your personal
integrity. At that moment it was more softened, more diluted—the idea that
we were a large group that is, that there were people that, when we were arrested,
were in the police station, there would be a group of people outside waiting, and
somehow that gave you strength. Today they take you prisoner and you are alone.”
Interview with the author, Havana, March 18, 2002.
93. At Wrst these events were held in the Coppelia park in Vedado every Wednesday
afternoon (March 2, 9, 16, 23); permission to use that site was then withdrawn,