The brief interview at the end of this article alludes to another debate about the movements that flourished in Peru outside the parameters of the local art world’s conservative views, such as non-indigenism, non-figurative art, avant-garde, Pop Art, among others. The paintings exhibited by Miguel Ángel Cuadros underscored the suspicions with which works of this nature were viewed by more conventional painters. Though he enjoyed some local success, Cuadros and other (second generation) abstract painters had been eclipsed by Pop Art and other new movements. This was made abundantly clear by the jury’s decisions at both the Festivales de Ancón (1969) and the earlier Fundación para las Artes (1966). On that occasion the prize went to Luis Arias Vera, an artist who created the magnified versions of postal envelopes that Cuadros mocked in his interview. Luis Zevallos Hetzel was one of the pioneers of Pop Art in Peru, and was a member of Arte Nuevo, one of the avant-garde groups at that time. But controversial reactions and other factors subsequently led him to stop experimenting with innovative styles. The jury’s decision concerning the First Prize (for painting) at the Festivales de Ancón in 1969 was extremely controversial, and marked both the peak and the turning point for the Peruvian cosmopolitan avant-garde in the local art scene in the 1960s. At that time Ancón was the most fashionable resort on the outskirts of Lima. During the summer it hosted musical and theatrical events, as well as lectures and a painting competition which (on that occasion) attracted a great deal of attention. When the results were announced, Caretas magazine published a letter accusing the winning painting—Motociclista No 3, by Luis Zevallos Hetzel—of plagiarism because it was a “faithful copy” of an advertisement published in the United States for a brand of motorcycles. An honorable mention at the contest went to a (playfully erotic Pop) painting by Ugo Camandona, an Italian painter and ceramicist who lived in Peru, who was also accused of supposed plagiarism. Both accusations sparked a heated debate about the value of “originality” in modern art, and about Pop Art’s role and function in consumer society. The apparent anachronism underlying the controversy clearly revealed the very limited penetration of avant-garde ideologies that had been achieved in a cultural milieu that was still reluctant to embrace the radical transformations that art was already experiencing in the rest of the world. All this was taking place in an environment that was increasingly having to adjust to the socialist and nationalist policies of the Gobierno Revolucionario de las Fuerzas Armadas (1968–1975), the military regime led by General Juan Velasco Alvarado. [On the subject of the Grupo Arte Nuevo, see the following articles in the ICAA digital archive: “De cómo el Gral. Velasco reventó el ‘¡Pop! Art,’” by Luis Freire (1139323); “Espíritu renovador: exposición del Grupo “Arte Nuevo,’” by Juan Acha (1142771); “Exagerado sentido realista: Exposición de Luis Arias Vera” (anonymous) (1142510); “La nueva imagen del IAC” (1142594) and “La pintura se fue a la feria: Happening vs ‘bienal’” (1142737), both written by Mário Belaúnde Guinassi [alias, Juan Gris]; “Resentido social,” by Felipe Buendía (1142644) and “Mala noche de Buendía,” by Buendía (1142628); (untitled) [“Nos encontramos en un mundo determinado (...)”], written by the group (1142628); “Grupo Arte Nuevo” (anonymous) (1142834); “Op-Pop-Sex” (anonymous) (1142804); “Treinta minutos de charla con la señora Gloria Benvenuto de Gómez Sánchez, nuevo valor de la Pintura Nacional” (anonymous) (1142413)].