Collectivism after Modernism - autonomous learning - Blogs

178 Rubén Gallo
had broken with Castro in the sixties to become one of the most vocal critics
of Cuba’s treatment of dissidents, writers, and homosexuals; and Sarduy,
a gay writer who had left Cuba soon after the revolution, became a permanent
exile in France after learning that Castro’s government was imprisoning
homosexuals in concentration camps.
Proceso Pentágono could only see the three writers as anti-Cuban.
Scandalized by what they perceived as a right-wing conspiracy, the four groups
sent a letter to the Biennale organizers demanding Kalenberg’s ouster. Chief
among their complaints was the prospect of having Borges—“who recently
received an award from the hands of the Chilean military government”—
write about their art! 24 More disturbingly, they thought they had uncovered
Kalenberg’s hidden ideological agenda: “to use culture as a means to legitimize
military governments in Latin America—regimes that without exception
imprison, torture, and murder dissident artists.” In addition to Kalenberg’s
removal, the four groups demanded that the catalog texts be written by
authors of their choosing: Julio Cortázar, Gabriel García Márquez, and Mario
Benedetti, three of Castro’s staunchest supporters (although probably as unprepared
and unwilling as Borges, Paz, and Sarduy to write about activist art). 25
The Mexican press got wind of the struggle between the groups
and the Biennale, and most local critics were quick to side with the artists.
Raquel Tibol, Mexico’s most prominent art critic and one-time secretary of
Diego Rivera, published a scathing article in Proceso defending the stance
of the groups. “It is paradoxical,” she wrote, “to choose a blind man, Jorge
Luis Borges, a passionate defender of petty dictatorships, who give him medals
and homages, to write about something he cannot see.” More important,
she praised the groups for standing up against the Uruguayan government:
“recent news about Operation Condor and the aggression against university
students add to our conviction that these young Mexican artists have taken
a just and timely posture.” Tibol ended her article by applauding the groups’
“absolute refusal to collaborate in any way with the criminals who rule the
Southern Cone” and their stance against “the stomach-turning, blood-stained
Uruguayan tyrants.” 26
When the Biennale organizers got wind of the Mexican uprising
against Kalenberg, their response was tepid and bureaucratic. Boudaille sent
a laconic letter to the groups assuring them that the upcoming exhibition
was “an artistic event and not a political one” and urging them to behave
professionally. 27 The catalog, he declared, would go ahead as planned, and
Kalenberg would continue as head curator of the Latin American section.
The four groups responded by announcing their plans to publish
a “Biennale countercatalog” written by pro-Cuba intellectuals. (The groups
seemed unaware that at the time the Cuban government was in the midst