Colombian artist Gonzalo Ariza defends the autonomy of Latin American art and the internationalization of culture in a column written in response to a text by Argentine art critic Marta Traba, published in the magazine Mito. In her text, Traba advises Latin American artists to turn their backs on the influence of Mexican painting, and imitate “Argentine painters who in turn are copying the masters of European abstraction.” Ariza considers Traba’s ideas “ridiculous” at a time of internationalization where culture is no longer the privileged realm of Europe let alone of a certain elite. Instead, he advocates that culture belongs to all people owing to the fact that internationalization has enabled them to create their own art, based on local as well as foreign elements. In opposition to the past when Europe imposed its artistic models on the world, Arizas speaks of three major artistic schools in order of importance: Eastern art, French art, and Mexican art. Ariza does, however, agree with Traba that it is necessary for “the viewing public to become more and more open to the universe of the possible with images from all over the world” in order to put an end to “fastidious cultural colonialism.” Ariza adds that Colombian reality must be studied and incorporated into artistic practices. He criticizes art instruction in Bogotá because it is still based on copying European masters. Indeed, the works that win awards at biennials are just fragments or references to foreign works.

This text outlines the ideas of Colombian artist Gonzalo Ariza (1912–1995) on a number of topics: Latin American art and its power relationships with the rest of the world, and the way art was produced and taught in Colombia in the fifties, a decade that witnessed the consolidation of various strains of abstraction in the country. The text also attests to Ariza’s interest in encouraging greater awareness of Eastern art and architecture as points of reference. Ariza had come into contact with Eastern art while studying in Japan from 1936 to 1938 as the result of a grant from the Colombian government. 

“Problemas del arte en Latinoamérica” [see doc. no. 1061697], the article to which Ariza refers in this text, was written by Marta Traba (1923–1983), an Argentine art critic who lived in Colombia. It had been previously published shortly before in the cultural journal Mito. Whereas Traba believes that Latin American artists must eschew nationalism in their work and be open to foreign influences that enable them to interpret “the reality of the Americas,” Ariza believes that Americanism was blossoming within the framework of the cultural internationalization that took place in the twentieth century. In the end, however, both the critic and the artist supported the emergence of a Latin American art opened to foreign influences and current artistic movements. The difference lies in that Traba considered the European avant-garde the point of reference, whereas Ariza looked to autonomous Asian art largely devoid of foreign influences. Two days after the publication of this text, a harsh rebuttal was published [see doc. no. 1129442]. 

Ariza was the first Colombian painter of his generation to study in a country other than Spain, France, or Mexico, the classic destinations for Colombian artists interested in furthering their knowledge. After studying printmaking at Koto Kogei Gakko in Tokyo and taking private classes in watercolor at the Tsuguharu Foujita studio, Ariza returned to Colombia where he exhibited landscapes in a number of exhibitions and salons. By the time he wrote this article, Ariza had received major awards, such as second prize at the third Salón de Artistas Colombianos (1941) and first diploma of honor at the seventh Salón (1945). Due to differences with art critics, Ariza’s work was not exhibited in Colombia from 1963 to 1973.