In this article the artist Félix Oliva reviews the debate sparked by the jury’s decision to award the 1975 National Culture Prize for art to Joaquín López Antay, the altarpiece artist from the Andean region of Peru. Following the latter’s death, Oliva discusses the exclusionary connotations implicit in Peru in the category of “art,” as demonstrated by the violent disagreement with the decision expressed by ASPAP (Asociación Peruana de Artistas Plásticos) and the subsequent protest lodged by the painter Fernando de Szyszlo against the decision to send an exhibition of handcrafts to the Bienal de São Paulo in 1977. Oliva deplores the fact that the term “art” is only applied to works that are shown in galleries, but is considered inappropriate for the work produced by peasants or laborers who also express their artistic feelings in a form of visual art. He applauds the deceased artist’s altarpieces, describing them as a reflection of the beliefs and lifestyle of the Andean people, and calling López Antay “part of the history of Peruvian visual art.”

The board of directors of ASPAP (Asociación Peruana de Artistas Plásticos) [Peruvian Association of Visual Artists] violently opposed the jury’s decision. The resulting disagreements between the members of the association led many of them to leave ASPAP and start SUTAP (Sindicato Único de Trabajadores en las Artes Plásticas) [Sole Visual Arts Workers Union] which, however, did not last long. The Union’s name was an attempt to associate it with SUTEP (Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de la Educación Peruana) [Sole Peruvian Education Workers Union], a group associated with the radical left wing. The artist Félix Oliva (1932–2004) was a member of SUTAP; he sought to include elements of traditional Andean culture in his work.

An announcement on December 26, 1975 confirmed that the National Culture Prizes (for the 1973–74 biennium) had been awarded by the Peruvian government through the Instituto Nacional de Cultura to honor the greatest contributions to the development of Peruvian culture. The jury’s decision in the art category (which had traditionally included painting, sculpture, music, and architecture) ignited one of the most heated debates in the history of Peruvian art. The ensuing controversy underscored simmering tensions and suspicions regarding the cultural policies of the revolutionary government of the armed forces led by General Juan Velasco Alvarado (1968–75). This administration claimed to be committed to a progressive agenda, a claim supported mainly by the Agrarian Reform of 1969 which was accompanied by the government’s enthusiastic attempt to glorify the image of the peasant population and lifestyle at the expense of other forms of cultural expression that were considered more “Western.” On this occasion the prize was awarded to Joaquín López Antay (1897–1981), who was chosen over well-known visual artists such as Carlos Quízpez Asín (1900–83) and Teodoro Núñez Ureta (1912–88) and the German-born academic musician Rodolfo Holzmann (1910–92).   

[For more on the subject of this event, see the following articles in the ICAA digital archive: by Alfonso Castrillón, Leslie Lee, and Carlos Bernasconi “Fundamentación para el dictamen por mayoría simple a favor del artista popular Joaquín López Antay” (doc. no. 1135896); by Alfonso Bermúdez “Premio a López Antay suscita controversias. Unos: consagración del arte popular. Otros: una cosa es arte y otra artesanía” (doc. no. 1135879); by Francisco Abril de Vivero, Luis Cossio Marino, and Alberto Dávila “Artistas plásticos cuestionan premio” (doc. no. 1135960); and (anonymous) “‘No todos nos quieren ni en Lima ni en Ayacucho’: así comentó sobre cuestionamiento a premio” (doc. no. 1135930)].