Hybridized Art: an open by Juan Gaitan Underdevelopment isn’t a stage towards development, it is its consequence. Eduardo Galeano. What globalization is bringing today to Third World countries is not development but an illusion of development that is only material- ized for a very small elite. Reality shows that, as much as the future is impalpable for the First World, the present itself is not very clear for those countries belonging to the periphery. Yet in the present, even though our condition shows no improve- ment, a wider space is being offered in the centre for the ‘Other’. Amongst other interests, that sympathy for multiculturalism is a seductive way of attracting new cultural satellites. After being the object of study not only for artists from Europe and North America, but also for many artists of underdeveloped countries, the Western Art mainstream seems to be facing an exhaustion of itis own cultural resources, filling the space with cultures from abroad. Since the beginning of this century, artists in Latin America (as much as professionals from other fields) have been migrating to North American and European countries, seeking direct contact with the contemporary art flow and escaping the poor conditions and opportunities their homeland offers. Nonetheless, not all of them have succeeded in maintaining their cultural identity, and if seen from a certain perspective, all of them have followed the mainstream in one way or another. In his essay Wonder Bread and Spanglish Art', Luis Camnitzer (an artist from Uruguay who has lived in the U.S. since his late twenties), speaking primarily of the North American panorama, identifies the way migrating artists settle in foreign countries. He finds three general attitudes in their arrival and adjustment to an unfamiliar culture. One who sacrifices his roots in order to blend in trying to become one of the masses, with their slang, their habits, and their ways. Another for whom the shock is so strong that he retreats to his "Leftovers" by Luis Camnitzer own roots, holding on to them in a place where very few share them. A third who will keep his values and his cultural beliefs, but still adapting to some elements from that new culture. For many artists and critics, the third case is an individualization of the near future of Latin American Art in the world. Art convert- ed into the Western mainstream is of course not art from Latin America, and art that fully disregards such a mainstream is usu- ally art for a local audience (endangered by sentimentalism that can result in a distortion of the traditions and past cultures). Thus fusion would be now leading the way, where the only mean for communication would be communication through their means. It may be true that Latin American Art in general hasn't found a way of constructing a global-reaching language of representation that is also fully representational of itself. It is difficult to break away from the paradigms that hold us tight to a past culture that is far from being ours in the present. Latin America today is the result of colonization and Colonialism, of hybridization, of mestizaje and Third-Worldism. While many are struggling to shake off those paradigms and give way to an art that is more honest to reality, the Art the hegemonic centres are framing offers a reality based on demand. Many artists and artworks are being looked upon as neo-iconoclast events, but in that case the newer iconoclasts would be the curators, gallery owners and audiences. The merit is entirely theirs. question.(?) ph O by Bruce M. Luis Camnitzer, "Wonder Bread and Spanglish Art," in Beyond the Fantastic: Contemporary Art Criticism From Latin America, (Boston: MIT Press, 1996). 22 @) Se ae arPoper question.(?) Underdevelopment isn’t a stage towards development, it is its consequence. Eduardo Galeano. What globalization is bringing today to Third World countries is not development but an illusion of development that is only material- ized for a very small elite. Reality shows that, as much as the future is impalpable for the First World, the present itself is not very clear for those countries belonging to the periphery. Yet in the present, even though our condition shows no improve- ment, a wider space is being offered in the centre for the ‘Other’. ‘Amongst other interests, that sympathy for multiculturalism is a seductive way of attracting new cultural satellites. After being the object of study not only for artists from Europe and North ‘America, but also for many artists of underdeveloped countries, the Western Art mainstream seems to be facing an exhaustion of itis own cultural resources, filling the space with cultures from abroad. Since the beginning of this century, artists in Latin America (as much as professionals from other fields) have been migrating to North American and European countries, seeking direct contact with the contemporary art flow and escaping the poor conditions and opportunities their homeland offers. Nonetheless, not all of them have succeeded in maintaining their cultural identity, and if seen from a certain perspective, all of them have followed the mainstream in one way or another. In his essay Wonder Bread and Spanglish Art}, Luis Camnitzer (an artist from Uruguay who has lived in the U.S. since his late twenties), speaking primarily of the North American panorama, identifies the way migrating artists settle in foreign countries. He finds three general attitudes in their arrival and adjustment to an unfamiliar culture. One who sacrifices his roots in order to blend in trying to become one of the masses, with their slang, their habits, and their ways. Another for whom the shock is so strong that he retreats to his ‘photo by Bruce M. White, New York "Leftovers" by Luis Camnitzer ‘own roots, holding on to them in a place where very few share them. A third who will keep his values and his cultural beliefs, but still adapting to some elements from that new culture. For many artists and critics, the third case is an individualization of the near future of Latin American Art in the world. Art convert- ed into the Western mainstream is of course not art from Latin ‘America, and art that fully disregards such a mainstream is usu- ally art for a local audience (endangered by sentimentalism that can result in a distortion of the traditions and past cultures). Thus fusion would be now leading the way, where the only mean for communication would be communication through their means. It may be true that Latin American Art in general hasn't found a way of constructing a global-reaching language of representation that is also fully representational of itself. It is difficult to break away from the paradigms that hold us tight to a past culture that is far from being ours in the present. Latin ‘America today is the result of colonization and Colonialism, of hybridization, of mestizaje and Third-Worldism. While many are struggling to shake off those paradigms and give way to an art that is more honest to reality, the Art the hegemonic centres are framing offers a reality based on demand, Many artists and artworks are being looked upon as neo-iconoclast events, but in that case the newer iconoclasts would be the curators, gallery owners and audiences. The merit is entirely theirs. “Luis Camnitzer, "Wonder Bread and Spanglish Art," in Beyond the Fantastic: Contemporary Art Criticism From Latin America, (Boston: MIT Press, 1996). 25 @