Week 8 - Chicano Art: Looking Backward

When describing Chicano art in Chicano Art: Looking Backward,  Shifra M. Goldman states,"What is at stake, basically, is the question of commitment: should Chicano artists, at the cost of economic security and possible artistic recognition, continue to express themselves artistically around the same matrix of social change and community service that brought their movement into existence? Or should they, now that some of the barriers are cracking, enter the mainstream as competitive professionals, perhaps shedding in the process their cultural identity and political militancy? Or is there a middle path between the two?" (p. 436). Her arguments are convincing and I do agree on some level but also hold contradictory interpretations and beliefs. 

    I can see why Shifra M. Goldman is very critical of how Chicano art is both displayed and created because the art loses its meaning when out of the typical environmental context is has historically been in. For example, Murals of Aztlán perfectly demonstrates such decontextualization by the creation of what is arguably named a mural because it is on a canvas and due to the artificial ambiance and environment. It was almost a false sense of community while the artists worked on the "mural" on a canvas. Also, the way in which Chicano art has come to be displayed can be seen as off-putting because it can be said to have lost its contextual meaning. For example, as Goldman argues, posters and much of the Chicano art created during the Chicano Movement was made to support, enhance, and voice the movement's motivations to fight against social injustices. Recently, however, things have changed. For instance, the way in which Goldman describes the Craft and Folk Art Museum is telling of her discontent. She especially notes that, "it is not folk art ... but contemporary art with a popular audience" (p. 439). The way in which viewers have access to the Chicano art on display is seemingly unnatural with flashes, brief glances, and as a commodity and entertainment. 

    I understand Goldman's argument and where she's coming from, however, it is hard for me to not visualize and see Chicano artists continue to further push back against the status quo in various artistic arenas including: content, manner of display and circulation, and in institutions and museums. I think what can get lost in translation is how more and more Chicanx artists have gotten recognition for their art by the western art world, which may leave less-known Chicano artists to feel like they too have to get recognition for their art. It's a tricky thing to deal with. 

    Considering how far Chicano art come in terms of social impact, recognition is incredible. As Goldman argues, I also think the Chicanx Art Community is at a crossroads pertaining to how it will continue to be recognized. I think Shifra M. Goldman's essay is quite controversial. When reading it, I found myself both agreeing and disagreeing with her critiques and arguments. I am still stuck in the middle.