This newspaper article contains Bernardo Salcedo’s statements about the Primer Premio de Adquisición he was awarded at the III Bienal de Arte Americano held in Cordoba, Argentina in 1966. Salcedo compares this decision with the one made by the selection jury of the XVIII Salón Nacional Colombiano, which refused to consider his submission because—the jury argued—it was neither a painting nor a sculpture. Salcedo asserts without hesitation that justice was done in Cordoba, calling the Colombian jury—whose members included Colombian critics Sofía Arboleda and Germán Rubiano—a bunch of “cavemen.” Salcedo states that, ironically, he submitted his best works to the Colombian salon; the others were sent to the Argentine biennial.

This article attests to both how controversial the early work of Colombian artist Bernardo Salcedo (1939–2007) was and how strenuously Argentine art critic Marta Traba (1923–1983) defended it, providing it with conceptual support.  In it, Salcedo states that, when Traba learned about the decision of the jury at the Bienal de Cordoba, she stated that finally Colombia will realize that Bernardo Salcedo is not a myth created by the Museo de Arte Moderno and newspapers of Bogota, but a true talent.  

In March of the same year (1966), Salcedo had been at the heart of a controversy surrounding the Dante Alighieri prize organized by the Italian Embassy in Colombia. Salcedo’s work—a construction of boxes entitled Lo que Dante no sabía, Beatriz amaba el control de la natalidad [What Dante Did not Know: Beatriz Loved Birth Control]—was awarded first prize at that event. Many artists and critics questioned the jury’s decision; the issue was almost brought to court and Salcedo—who opposed the painting medium—hired lawyer Belisario Betancur (democratically elected president of Colombia in office from 1982 to 1986) to defend him. It was in this context that Salcedo confronted Barcelona-born Colombian painter Alejandro Obregón, who had been awarded a prize at the previous edition of the Bienal de Cordoba (1964), claiming that painting was a thing of the past. He stated, “I have always thought that Obregón is a remarkable painter, but this time it is his persistence, not his work, that is being rewarded; which is serious.”