Subject: Nice art!
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2002 00:41:54 +1100
From: "T & M Ridgeway" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
But maybe you should be yourself... Keep up
the quality of your work. Beware of offending! I'm not offended though.
>From: "mvsedano" <email@example.com>
>Subject: AztlanNet: certain osico better closed until behavior explained
>Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 17:58:11 -0000
>I made a new year resolve to conduct myself with a more conservative compassion in general, offer kind words whenever possible, and reserve slings and arrows for the truly meritorious. The following does not abandon that vow.
>Romero-Sedeno's latest attempt to ennoble himself by proclaiming himself the starving artist and familyman falls flat because it contrasts so wildly from the art terrorist history that he carries as well-earned personal baggage. "Cultural amnesia"? He accuses others of amnesia! In my assessment, whatever Romero-Sedeno says about the art exhibit has neither truth nor value, and will not, until he accepts responsibility for his role in turning a discussion of art and ideas into a hateful and evil affair.
>Romero fails to acknowledge the moral bankruptcy of his position on images of the Virgin. His attempt to rewrite the history of that debacle, placing himself on a noble stallion like the Lone Ranger is puro claptrap. Romero and his ilk threatened the livelihood of the museum staff, over an idea. That's so morally repugnant anything Romero says is drowned out in the noise. Then, I recently learned that Romero's co-terrorists threatened the life and family of the artist herself, threatened to burn her home. And Romero comes to this forum proclaiming himself a cultural hero!
>I say to Romero, don't come looking for empathy or understanding on any other issue until you take responsibility for your history.
Subject: Re: AztlanNet: response to lambe MVS
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 23:05:33 +0000
From: "Pedro Romero Sedeno" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
MVSedano continuously cowers from debate about the semiotics, symbolisms and cultural implications I have raised questions about in criticism about A. Lopez's Our Lady of What-a-Looker. He tries to link me w the religious right that protested her poster here in Santa Fe. I'm just an artist expressing my artistic opinion, and rather than debate the issues, MVS classic m.o. is to assassinate my character, with delusions of conspiracies of art-terrorists et al. Grow up, mvs. I challenge you to debate the art issues instead of being a lambe for Alma Lopez who began this whole "hateful" dialogue in the first place, with her entreaties to AztlanNet for support against "the seven men" in Santa Fe, Lopez denigrating women here who stood up against her anti-Guadalupe poster. Demonize me all you will, MVS, I never made any threats to A Lopez, and I have a right to question if a "public servant" the museum officals should continue to arrogantly midesucate the public about our culture, Mexican and Manito, especially a museum here in my backyard. MVS remains A Lopez's cunning linguist, in my book. c/s
Subject: more catholic outrage
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:26:54 -0500
From: "Svetlana Mintcheva" <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Alex Donis" <email@example.com>
Have you seen this? Given that similar figurines (including monks and priests) are sold on the streets of Barcelona and in front of cathedrals - and have been for a couple of centuries at least - this is so ridiculous.
> Catholics Slam Napa Art Exhibit
> Museum: A group says figures of the pope and nuns defecating are offensive.
> Copia food center defends the works.
> By JOHN M. GLIONNA
> TIMES STAFF WRITER
> January 5 2002
> SAN FRANCISCO -- A national Roman Catholic group is protesting an exhibit at Copia, the Napa Valley's heralded new food, wine and arts museum, that includes figurines of the pope and several nuns defecating.
> Activists say the work by Spanish artist Antoni Miralda has no place in a museum funded in part by tax dollars, including money from Catholics. The exhibit, titled "Active Ingredients," also displays miniature figures of Santa Claus and Fidel Castro in similar poses.
> "Catholics in the state of California are paying to have their religion depicted in a way that's offensive," said Patrick Scully, a spokesman for the Catholic League of Religious and Civil Rights. "This exhibit is insulting. It's gratuitous. It's unnecessary." Scully said that scores of the New York-based group's 350,000 members nationwide who had seen or read about the exhibit had called to complain. This week, leaders sent a letter to museum officials, who responded with an e-mail defending the depictions.
"These figurines symbolize the cycle of eating and fertilization of the earth, which is a requisite for future existence," wrote Copia Executive Director Peggy Loar, according to a news release circulated Friday by the Catholic group.
> To which Catholic League President William Donohue sarcastically responded in the release: "Now I get it: To show his appreciation of Mother Earth, Miralda had to show the pope and nuns defecating. But why couldn't he have chosen the Lone Ranger and Tonto instead? Or better yet, just Tonto and a few of his Indian buddies."
> In an interview Friday, Loar said the activists were spreading inaccuracies. "It's surprising that a national organization would send out a news release with so much misinformation about one artwork in an entire exhibit they have never seen," she said.
> The 35 figurines, each about the size of a chess piece, are rooted in Spanish Catholicism. "They're called caganers and they're part of a Catholic Catalonian tradition that dates back to the 1800s," Loar said. "They're included in nativity scenes to ensure good luck for farmers in
the following year. We've done our homework on this."
> A museum spokeswoman said the Catalonian figurines were traditionally peasants, not Popeye, Santa Claus or the pope, as included in the exhibit.
> Loar blasted the group for claiming that the museum received $75 million in public funding, saying the Copia had only recently received a $50,000 government grant.
> "And I think the group's mention of Tonto and his buddies in their release is insulting to American Indians. This from a group that touts religious and civil rights."
> Donohue was unavailable for comment Friday. But Scully said the comments showed the "ludicrousness" of the artist's vision.
> "The fact is you won't see any museum showing an American Indian
defecating because those images are important to people and they're sensitive," he
said. "But when it comes to Catholic imagery, it's open season for the
arts community. And that's not right."
> Scully acknowledged that neither he nor Donohue had seen the exhibit.
> Napa City Councilman Harry Martin said Catholic museum volunteers had quit over the works.
> "It gives Napa a black eye," he said. "People promote this place as the shrine of Napa. Locals say they no longer have to go to the Louvre in Paris because the Parisians are going to come here.
> "Now local Catholic groups are canceling functions there. This may bring a few curiosity seekers, but that's a one-shot deal."
> Named for the Roman goddess of abundance, Copia aspires in its advertising to be "the world's leading cultural center dedicated to the discovery, understanding and celebration of wine, food and the arts."
> The two-story structure of stone, concrete, metal and glass, with 13,000 square feet of gallery space, opened last fall. The brainchild of vintner Robert Mondavi, the museum offers wine tasting and gourmet dining along with public programs in its demonstration kitchen, classrooms, gardens and theaters.
> The $55-million nonprofit museum is in large part funded by private donations, including $20 million from Mondavi.
> "Active Ingredients," which runs through April 22, features specially commissioned food-related works by seven contemporary artists. Miralda, a Catalonian artist based in Miami, filled 11 refrigerated soda cases with found objects as part of his continuing project "Food Culture Museum."
> In a Nov. 25 review, Times critic Suzanne Muchnic wrote: "Grouped according to themes, the collection of kitsch and bric-a-brac presents everything from a giant red plastic light-up tongue and a batch of chamber pots to statuary portraying eating and drinking rituals in various cultures."
> In the past, the Catholic League has launched campaigns against "anti-religious" exhibits at the Brooklyn Museum of Art gallery, including a portrait of the Virgin Mary smeared in elephant dung and an interpretation of a famous Leonardo da Vinci painting showing a near-naked African woman in place of the Christ figure. The work was called "Yo
Mama's Last Supper," Scully said.
> He said the group did not plan to picket the Napa museum. "But we want to shine the light of truth on this incredible misuse of taxpayer dollars," he said.
> Activists plan to contact museum trustees, including wine and art luminaries. "We're going to ask these folks if they're aware of this part of the exhibit. And do they approve of it," Scully said.
> And they plan to send another missive to their members.
> "I'm sure the good people of California will be better informed on how to spend their entertainment money," Scully said. "Especially if they're Catholic, they may want to go to a different museum or maybe a ballgame.
For the Copia, this is an inauspicious start."
For information about reprinting this article, go to http://www.lats.com/rights
Subject: Our Lady outcome
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:45:02 -0600
From: Shelly Reese <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I have been periodically checking your site in order to keep up with developments surrounding the Cyber Arte exhibition and specifically Our Lady. I realize the exhibition has closed, but I was interested if there were additional links containing any new developments since September. I was fortunate enough to view the exhibition twice, and I am interested in writing my master's thesis on Our Lady. I am a second year student in the art history graduate program at UT-Austin and am working with Amelia Malagamba.
Anyway, I have really found the internet useful
in researching thus far, and have found several great websites. I have not
been able to find any updates since September, however. I would also love
to interview you by phone, email, or possibly even in person if you have the
time sometime this Spring when my research and writing progresses.
Thank you for any information you can provide.
I appreciate any comments and/or advice!
Subject: Our Lady/Asking for help
Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 08:56:50 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 08:56:50 -0600 (CST)
Organization: The University of Oklahoma
I was in Santa Fe with my family last summer
and my husband, a Chicano Studies teacher at the University of Oklahoma, brought
his class to the cyber-arte exhibit at the Folk Art Museum. I think your work
is wonderful, and it really touched me as a woman. I also read your statement
online and agree with you about a woman's body being beautiful. I am a breastfeeding
mother, and I feel so connected to my children--all my children from this
experience. I read an article in a Museum article (Museum News, July/Aug 2001,
"Faith and the First Amendment, pp. 30-35) about the exhibit and your
work, and so was excited to see it in person. I did not expect to connect
so deeply to it, and for it to have such a lasting impact for me.
I am currently working on a paper (part of my master's degree work at the University of Oklahoma) for a directed reading dealing with chicana identity and portrayals of women in art and literature by women. I have talked about Our Lady quite a bit, and also about the work of Judy Bacca, Santa Barraza and others.
Specifically, I am intersted in images of the
Virgin, La Malinche, and other female archetypes that convey strong messages
about gender and culture.
I was hoping to find a quote by a chicana writer
(of fiction, poetry, etc.) about Our Lady or any of your other works to use
because I also am talking about women writers such as Pat Mora, Denise Chavez,
Sandra Cicsneros, and others to show how they give voice to the images that
female artists give form to.
Anyway, I read all the posted e-mail reponses
on the site and found some that almost fit what I was looking for, but not
quite. I know it's a huge favor for a stranger to ask, but if you have had
any correspondence with a writer and would be willing to share a few lines
of it with me, that would be so wonderful.
Don't worry if you can't because I know I am
asking for something very specific and I don't want to take up your time either.
Again, thank you for being "Out There,"
for making a statement, making a difference and helping women of all ages
and ethnic backgrounds see beyond stereotypes that are generated for us and
perpetuated by patriarchal systems that have always been afraid of what women
possess, what women know.
Best and Blessings, Julie
Subject: 'Our Lady' Thesis Questions
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:56:55 -0700
From: "Katie FitzCallaghan" <email@example.com>
Dear Alma Lopez,
My name is Kathleen FitzCallaghan (Katie) and I am an Art History graduate student at the Univ of Colorado in Boulder. I am writing my master's thesis on your work 'Our Lady' and the controversy surrounding it in Santa Fe this last year. I grew up in SF and I have an obsession with Guadalupe imagery, so your work and this issue have a very personal meaning to me. Despite these admittedly gushy undertones, I am attempting to write a scholarly thesis for the world of academia!
I love the piece, and have become really quite
impassioned by the whole situation. My interpretations of the piece, my support
of you, your work, and the need for powerful images of women, especially in
male dominated hierarchies (whether the Church or any institution of 'truth'
or knowledge, por ejemplo) drive me to write this thesis. I plan to discuss
your work within the context of Guadalupe imagery, feminism, and Chicana art.
Also, I want to look at the controversy in Santa Fe, and the deeper issues
in the community that may have only come to light after the CyberArte exhibit.
Is the conflict really about 'Our Lady' or other problems, i.e. power struggle?
Your input will be particularly interesting
I am writing to inform you that I am doing this
work, and to ask if I may contact you with questions or to discuss the work.
Please let me know the easiest way to communicate with you, e-mail, phone,
etc.-my guess is e-mail from the extensive internet communication surrounding
you and your work!
Thank you so much for your time. I await your
Sincerely, Katie FitzCallaghan
Subject: Virgen de Guadalupe project
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 09:18:04 -0800 (PST)
From: elaine pena <firstname.lastname@example.org>
My name is Elaine Pena and I am a graduate student
at Northwestern University in the Performance Studies department. I am currently
working on a project exploring gendered performances of worship specifically
focusing on the Virgen de Guadalupe. Of course I am intrigued by your depiciton
and I regret that I did not make it up to Santa Fe to see it in person. I
used to live in Albuquerque but moved back to San Antonio shortly before your
showing. Anyway, I love the idea, your reconfiguring her image as a woman
and not just an unattainable role model for women.
Her image has been appropriated so many times by men, on battlefields, on their bodies, stage, paintings I am elated every time I see your work and others who have incorporated a feminine interpretation into public space. I'm so frustrated by what is accepted as legit Chicano art(Cesar Martinez's "Mona Lupe" is currently on display at the Mexican Cultural Center here in Chicago).
Anyway I woud love to get your comments on "gendered performances of worship" and also on how Sandra Cisneros' literature has influenced your work. My master's thesis concentrates on her writing, especially Woman Hollering Creek and her article "Guadalupe: The Sex Goddess".
Thank you very much and have a good day.
Subject: Re: AztlanNet: FOLK ART, FINE ART,
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 19:05:45 +0000
From: "Pedro Romero Sedeno" <email@example.com>
CC: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
These recent musings and questions by Romano should "be continued" after he reads up more on this issue that has been around for a couple decades, at least, since when the culti-multi dialogue started. Duh, It is akin to the point Gronk once made LONG AGO: "If Gronk paints on the wall of a gallery, they call it a mural, but if Jonathan Borofsky paints on the wall of a gallery, they call it an installation." Galleries aside, the issue is more significant when the museum venue is examined. Museums as validators and definers of culture play with the fine or folk? distinction all the time, and sometimes not intelligently. Witness last year's non-sense of the Museum of International Folk Art of the Museum of New Mexico stumping Alma Lopez's digitalia**. To me, this "cultural display" by a folk art institution only promoted the stereotype, the pigoenhole, of all Chicano artists are folk artists whose esperiments belong in the folk art venue ---- they are new and naive to the medium, and the work comes out this way because they know no better. (Perhaps true in terms of Lopez's naive marketing of herself) Chale! For good reading relevant to some of Octavio's neophytical questions, if you can find a back, back issue (June 1987) of the New Art Examiner, an article by Luis Camnitzer called "Access to the Mainstream". If I had the time, I'd post the article, but..
From: Octavio Romano <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>To: AztlanNet@yahoogroups.com, AztlanNet@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: AztlanNet: FOLK ART, FINE ART, AND FINER ART
>Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:54 -0800
>FOLK ART, FINE ART, AND FINER ART.
>One time, when I first arrived in Berkeley, I took my paintings on wood to a gallery. The paintings were rejected. "Why? I asked. Looking for a gentle way to tell me, the curator, who was an artist, replied, "Well, your work is not fine art. I would say," she added, "it is more like folk art."
>I was proud of my work. So I returned home and did replicas of my retablos in oils on canvas. After a reasonable time, I sprayed the paintings with a light coat of varnish, so they would look like new originals, and returned to the gallery.
>It did not take long before I had my own one man show at the gallery. In their eyes I was no longer a meagre peasant peddling his crafts. Now I was an artist of FINE ART!
>That was my introduction to the concept of fine art. It was, and is, a concept that places the artist in a hierarchy of art, at the top, of course. I concluded that Fine Art is an expression of pompous egomania. It is also an expression of self-centered ego superiority. It is a device that strongly wants to make the rest of the world inferior.
>If this is not true, then why is Maria, the master potter of New Mexico Pueblos not considered a master of fine art? In the same vein, why aren't the muralists of the Maya civilization considered fine artists? And why aren't the master workers of gold foil of South America considered fine artists?
>The answer is simple. The concept of fine art is a European contrivance geared to make all other peoples of the world, and their art inferior.
Octavio Romano Ph.D.
(Continued tomorrow. )
Subject: "Our Lady" "Our Lady"
Virgin of Guadalupe!
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 16:25:12 -0700
From: sneaky <email@example.com>
!st of all; your so called critics, give you
rent free space to promote your concept of; "Our Lady" "Our
Lady" Virgin of Guadalupe!
To me its like a hand print on sand, a digital
photo, a phone call passing from one bay to another bay, from relay to relay
to phone to phone, a concept, a flame passing from one log to another log!
Its an image, carbon copy, you can twist it,change
You can get several other images, tear em into
peices, throw em up into the air and let em fall on a canvas then paste em
where ever they fall! then connect w/your imagination! this is what gets me
excited! simply a cause and effect! thats is what you have done, my dear!
will your exhibition be toured anywhere by phoenix az? whois the women? do
you specilize in religious concepts?
cheers from ROSALIO AKA ROSS "SANCHO"
SANCHEZ BESIDES SNEAKY!
Subject: Re: AztlanNet: Re: The MYTH OF ARTIST
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 20:45:56 EST
In a message dated 1/28/02 2:47:43 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org
<< "prosyletizing >>
not only did you misspell the word you misused
it. There is nothing about Alma's work that recruits anyone to join her or
believe what she believes.
You are the only one proselytizing. I should
add that you are also passing judgement on people you don't know. Perhaps
respecting differences is not something you have been given the gift to do.
I leave you with Merriam-Webster Dictionary
definition of Proselytize:
Main Entry: pros·e·ly·tize
Inflected Form(s): -tized; -tiz·ing
1 : to induce someone to convert to one's faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause transitive senses : to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause
- pros·e·ly·tiz·er /'prä-s(&-)l&-"tI-z&r/ noun
Subject: Re: AztlanNet: Re: The MYTH OF "RESPECT"
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 02:19:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Pedro Romero <email@example.com>
CC: Gmendoza@aol.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
To TraveisaBlue, thanks for the detailed posting
on the definition of the word "proselytize"; I wish I had your dictionary.
Please understand my efforts have been to EDUCATE
my colleagues in the face of the tedious jingoistic pattern I've seen in the
movement since the 70's and in AztlanNet that says: "I'M a HIP CHICANO;LOOK
HOW ANTI-CATHOLIC-CHURCH I AM" <<<<< the standard quips
against organized religion never evolve past this pattern. Alma Lopez reflects
this same jingoism in her Lupe series, "our lady" serving as propaganda
for Alma's gender-politics, a rant against the Catholic male hierarchy. Sure!
i got my own gripes against the Catholic hierarchy as to how it often keeps
our people in spiritual bondage, but the Aztlansecularists should consider
there's a lot of truth to learn from revelation, and get past a primitive
attitude and cliches about religion and civilization, specifically about personal
religious experience. It could help their art!
Traviesa, Your concern about me "passing
judgement on people I don't know" should also be directed to Alma Lopez
who labelled the women of Santa Fe opposed to her poster as "just followers
of men". What a crock. Alma doesn't know these women, some I do personally
know: some are strong LEADERS serving my community for many years, mothers
and grandmothers. In their defense against Alma's and the Museum's proselytization
of her pseudo-feminist cause,
I must say these women know a lot more about
the strength of a woman than Alma Lopez could ever begin to comprehend or
communicate in her work. They are mothers, more than mothers, they know the
MotherSpirit who is la Lupe, and She don't fool with mermaids.
As per "respecting differences", my opinion is that "respect" got thrown out the window of AztlanNet once Alma and her supporters started bad-mouthing my community here in Santa Fe and New Mexico. "To whom much is given, much is required" c/s
Subject: Re: AztlanNet: Re: The MYTH OF "RESPECT"
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 07:44:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Lizette Sanchez <email@example.com>
I have to come to the defense of Alma and to
say that she is a wonderful human being and a wonderful artist.
As I recall the Santa Fe community was the first
to throw stones and Alma defended herself. I would do the same if I was in
her shoes. Since I do support Alma Lopez and her freedom to make art. I have
never ever bad mouthed Santa Fe, New Mexico. The individuals in Santa Fe attacked
Alma for no apparent reason. The reason for their attack on Alma was the image
she created. They made judgements towards Alma saying that she has no morals.
They don't know her. I know Alma, I know Alma very well. And I will always
defend her until people open their eyes and take the time to know Alma as
a person. They will not be disappointed because she is an amazing person!!!!!
Subject: AztlanNet: Re: The MYTH OF "RESPECT"
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 16:05:14 -0000
From: "mvsedano" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
At last, something we can agree upon. We share
a mutal distaste for what you term a "tedious jingoistic pattern"
that has characterized el movimiento. I, too, object to mindless nationalism
that foments uncritical acceptance of all things amerind or Mexican just because
of their label, and the glazed-eye brainwashed youth who argue `til their
face is white that we are not chicanas chicanos, not meztizo, but Aztekas,
or some such label. (I can't stand, btw, the inherent jingoism of so many
unitedstatesians, especially right now, with flagwaving and right or wrong
my country crap, but let's save that for a different forum).
But mindless nationalism is not what I've read
here at Aztlannet, nor any self-congratulatory "I'm hip because I'm against
the Church." I find atheism completely acceptable, equally agnosticism
and sincere belief. True Believerism, however, is abhorrent, whether it comes
from an uncritical nationalist or an equally uncritical religionist. In that
"hip" charge, you appear to be reaching back into your personal
history and tarring some of us with a True Believer brush.
When I read your debating posts I shake my head
in regret that I'm not an academician writing a book on argumentation because
your typing is so rich in examples of fallacy and unreasoned emotionality.
That's the price you pay for preaching. Hence my urgency to you that you remain
focused on art.
Say, what are you working on now? How's that
northern California ceramic mural progressing?
Subject: AztlanNet: I know what I am, but...
(was Re: GUADALUPE 2)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 21:39:46 -0000
From: "jmup2000" <email@example.com>
DISCLAIMER: I have seen way too many "articles"
and "art" from Romano. This one takes the cake and I feel compelled
to vent. Thank you for reading. :-)
--- In AztlanNet@y..., Octavio Romano <oromano@t...>
> FROM OCTAVIO ROMANO: ARTIST OF GUADALUPE 2
> As I have said before, I am an artist.
Damn... If Romano is an artist, then I am a
Nobel prize winner... But wait, maybe I should have the cachaza to fire up
my scanner, grab all those books I have, and start colorizing all those illustrations
with Photoshop. Then I will post them one after another as sizable JPEG files,
drive up the use of bandwidth through the roof, and, for good measure, annoint
myself as an "artista." Al fin y al cabo, nobody here tells the
emperor that he has no clothes. Hell, he gets even encouragement. Don't you
people know that everything that you post is sitting in an archive in yahoo?
Don't you realize that the most you post, the fuller the archive gets and
sooner or later yahoo will either pull the plug or start charging for the
service? Do you want to kill the gallina de los huevos de oro?
> I am not a picky-nit-picking sociologist.
Could have fooled me. According to http://www.jsri.msu.edu/RandS/research/ops/oc53.html
you wrote a paper titled "The Anthropology and Sociology of the Mexican-Americans:
The Distortion of Mexican American History." Does this means that you
were posing as a sociologist back then? The same article claims that you "directly
and acerbically took up issues of conceptualization, ahistoricism, and the
lack of validity and replicability in the design of many social science studies."
If that doesn't make you a nit picking sociologist, I don't know what will.
> Nor am I a near-sighted microscope scientist.
News-flash: only life sciences people use microscopes.
Please revise your stereotypes. But due to chromosomes inherited from my father,
I am nearsighted. But I look very distinguished with glasses.
> Then there are whose who want to find out
> was a lesbian and marry her to a mermaid.
Otra vez la mula al trigo... Why does that pisses
you off so much? Have you forgotten that you were an early praiser of "Our
Lady?" Could it be that you fired off that laudatory note before you
noticed that the bandwagon was going the other way? To excercise your brain,
here is what you wrote:
"I was immediately struck by the magnificent
technical ability of the artist. The composition is masterful, the color renditions
a visual delight that informs the viewer that one is in the presence of one
of the leading artists of this nation. In her series on the Virgin of Guadalupe
, her principal theme is lesbianism, as currently exhibited in Santa Fe, New
Mexico. As such, Lopez reaches out to an all-loving god. However, her admirers
and followers seek the precise opposite, they seek not an all loving god,
but a punishing, fascistic god that mercilessly punishes the "pagans,"
very similar to the Mexico invading Spaniards who sought not only to eliminate
contrarians, but also alternatives. All of this is sad, for I truly believe
that the last thing in the mind of Alma Lopez is to foster neo-fascism in
a democracy. Yet, this appears to have been the case. --Octavio I. Romano,
Ph.D., Scholar/publisher, Quinto Sol Publications (3/28)"
Of course, since you did not get a sniveling
note back from Lopez, you went at her with a vengeance. And you still won't
quit. Hate does keep you alive, doesn't it?
> By the way, were there really those little
> of sky falling. Perhaps someone can do some
> serious research and tell me. Or perhaps I
No need to do research. I know that the sky
is not falling. Trust me, since I don't need no stinkin' sources. I am my
> should have named the work not Guadalupe
> Chicken Little. After all, "the sky is falling!"
> Octavio Romano
> Director: Division of Finer Arts
Jeez, como te madereas... How many hats do you
wear? Do you also take out the trash and mop the floors of your virtual publishing
empire?Ah, that felt good...
Subject: AztlanNet: re: Guadalupe and "European"
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:47:02 EST
CC: Gmendoza4@aol.com, Owlofstone@aol.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Lizz.email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
AztlanNetters Manuel Velez, Irene Castruita,
Katie Johnson and Calaca ought to do more homework before perpetuating the
pseudo-hip Chicano jingo about Guadalupe as a symbol of "European"
dominance. Recent scholarly interpretation of the Tilma image reveals
how visual elements in the tunic and manta validated to the indigenous
viewer in 1531 that Guadalupe-Tonantzin indeed was a revelation of a new Deity
in the MEXICA pantheon, and that this new Deity was the supreme mother of
the Mexica Lord of the Universe, indeed a new deity qualified by compassion,
upstepping the Indio concept of divinity. The research indicates that
the Spaniards were not aware of this indigenous encoding.
Image was revealed on Tepeyac hill, the site of ancient Mexica worship of
To-nan-tzin, "Our-Mother-Revered", and that an Indio was spoken
to in Nahuatl by this new dark-skinned Deity Who delivered it, also
contextualized and validated this revelation to the Indios.
Sahagun in the 1500's noted that BEFORE the Europeans embraced the Tilma image,
a "suspicious cult" of Indios were gathering in worship of
Guadalupe Tonantzin, making pilgrimages to the site of the Tilma image. The
Tilma image was, and still is, considered by the indigenous a divine amoxtli
, a Divine Codex, the diety's garments marking the time
(the Winter Solstice of 1531) and the place (the Valley of Mexico) of
this revelation on the tilma . The Tilma image is riddled with
these references that spoke to the indigenous, hidden from "European"
understanding till only recently. Note how the floral designs on the
tunic are derivative of Nahuatl iconography, not European.
This posting could include much, much more info. Indeed, books have been written about the Tilma image. Before abriendo el pico, AztlanNetters addressed above should crack open a few of these books and educate themselves. I have recommended a few of these books in past postings to AztlanNet and to Alma Lopez, postings Alma Lopez characterized as "drunken rants" in December 2001. In response to her, I here note the words attributed to the Lord of the Universe: "Don't throw your pearls before swine lest they be trodden underfoot" . The 1999 digital poster by Alma Lopez deletes the garments of Guadalupe that are codexes in themselves, and claims are made that this poster is an interpretation of Guadalupe-Tonantzin. Yes, but an ignorant interpretation, is my point, an interpretation that perpetuates Chicano jingoism, oblivious to scholarly debate, and certainly, one ignorant interpretation a get-smart cultural institution called the Museum of New Mexico erroneously attempted to validate.
Subject: <no subject>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:11:34 -0500
From: a and t <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: La Virgen
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 00:29:48 -0600
From: "James Wiske" <email@example.com>
I just wanted to add my voice to the list of
your supporters. While I'm one of the whitest gringos around, I have always
loved Hispanic/Latin culture - especially the powerful artwork, and yours
ranks up there with the best as far as I'm concerned. I've always loved artwork
that makes you think and look at new interpretations of how we perceive the
world. I wish you all the luck in the world against those who don't understand
that the right to self-expression also applies to Latinas.
I also wanted to share with you that "Our
Lady" reminds me of a good friend of mine who I've nicknamed "La
Princesa Cacahuate." Cacahuate because she hates peanuts with a passion
and Princesa because she once put on a feathered headband given to me by some
Paraguayan friends, and in that instance, she looked the world like an Aztec
princess. Your model resembles her quite a bit both physically as well as
in the personality that comes through, as she is very proud to be La Raza
as well as Latina.
I come back to your website often to check on
updates. I hope that one day you offer poster prints of "Our Lady."
Good luck in the future.
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities." --Einstein, Albert
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:11:10
From: "Luisa Fernanda Basurto Casais" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Es tristisimo ver la imagen que hiciste de la
Virgen de Guadalupe, espero que tengas miedo, porque por lo visto respeto
no hay pero para nada, obviamente es el mal (el Demonio) el que está
detras de la miseria humana, queda claro en que equipo estas.
Estas pecando contra el primer mandamiento, porque este es un ejemplo claro de blasfemar y pecar contra el Espiritu Santo,segun Cristo, eso no tiene perdon (Marcos 3, 30)