This article acknowledges the accomplishments of the policy of producing public events—such as the Contacta 72 and Inkari festivals—instituted by the self-styled Gobierno Revolucionario de las Fuerzas Armadas en el Perú (1968–75). It explains that although the general guidelines for that policy are set by the INC (Instituto Nacional de Cultura), the field is so vast that it becomes a subject for general concern and constant debate. The article clarifies that the revolutionary process will not interfere in artistic expression since “there is ample freedom for creativity and expression, a proliferation of schools and movements.” The governmental support of creative freedom, however, sought to break with the “cultural dependence and the subcultures of the masses with which capitalism has infected us.” The article concludes that as a result of those activities, “the Peruvian Revolution is clearing the way for a potent renaissance of the national culture, one that is nourished by a profound tradition of the earth and by the boldest and most significant experiments of universal culture.”  

This article expresses the official opinion of SINAMOS (Sistema Nacional de Apoyo a la Movilización Social), an acronym that encouraged various word plays (“sin amos” [“no masters”], for one). This government agency was created in June 1971, by the Gobierno Revolucionario de las Fuerzas Armadas del Perú, the military regime that was led, during its first period (1968–75), by General Juan Velasco Alvarado (1910–77). The main goal of the agency was to promote public organizations and mobilize them along official political guidelines. In the field of culture and the arts, the agency played a key role by organizing huge public events with the help of young, left-wing Peruvian artists and intellectuals. Some of them—such as Jesús Ruiz Durand (b. 1940), José Bracamonte (1928–91), Francisco Mariotti (b. 1943), Luis Arias Vera (1932–2016), and Emilio Hernández Saavedra (b. 1940)—joined the institution, contributed their works of art, and created graphic images of those public events.   

[As complementary reading about SINAMOS and Naylamp 72, see the following articles in the ICAA digital archive: (unattributed) “Revolución en la artesanía” (doc. no. 1139278); (unattributed) “Naylamp 72” (doc. no. 1139009); 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 Cossío Marino, and Alberto Dávila “Artistas plásticos cuestionan premio” (doc. no. 1135960); and (unattributed) “‘No todos nos quieren ni en Lima ni en Ayacucho’: así comentó sobre cuestionamiento a premio” (doc. no. 1135930)]. 

[See also the following articles, all unattributed, about the multidisciplinary festivals organized by SINAMOS, such as Contacta 72 (1972) in “Arte libertario” (doc. no. 1138949), “SINAMOS Contacta 72: a los artistas y artesanos del Perú” (doc. no. 1138964), “Contacta 72 será una experiencia de significación” (doc. no. 1138979), and “Pueblo y arte se dieron la mano en Contacta 72: gran cita en el Parque de la Reserva” (doc. no. 1138994); about Inkari (1973) in “Reintegración. Inkari: un reencuentro esperado” (doc. no. 1139039); and about ORAMS IX (1975) in “Arte y Pueblo” (doc. no. 1139024­­­­)].