In this text, Carlos More argues that there are two distinct modern art movements in Europe, one—started by Paul Gauguin—that is basically decorative in nature, and the other that goes so far as to see art as “a state of consciousness.” The author provides a quick overview of that second tendency, which emerged, he argues, thanks to Paul Cézanne’s innovation in painting. Starting with Cézanne, painting began operating independently; it was “rid of any literary whim or decorative infatuation” to become “sheerly visual.” In More’s view, Grau’s work forms part of that second tendency; thanks to its radical commitment to pure art, it knows no limits of nation or of theme. Because his painting produced in Peru does not look to Indianist themes, it is not tied to geography and engages in no subterfuge. More believes that local art criticism is for beginners accustomed to the modality imposed by Julia Codesido, Manuel Pantigoso, and José Sabogal—all of whom are, in his view, just decorators. At the same time, the technique of academic painters like Ignacio Merino, Francisco Laso, and Teófilo Castillo is European and, hence, “imported,” and learned from third-rate teachers. Grau, on the other hand, is the first painter “to bring us firsthand and fully formed technique.”

This text by painter Carlos More (signed with the initials C. M.) addresses the solo show of Peruvian painter Ricardo Grau at the Instituto de Música Bach de Lima. 

Born in Bordeaux, France in 1907, painter Ricardo Grau returned to Lima permanently in early 1937 after having studied at the École Royale des Beaux-Arts in Brussels and the École Supérieure des Beaux-Arts in Paris, as well as in the private studios of painters André Favory, André Lothe, Fernand Léger, and others. Characterized by conservative figuration, his technically sound work formed part of the rappel à l'ordre that emerged in France after World War I. In Lima, that formalist and cosmopolitan approach to painting—one that, despite traditional language, timidly incorporated some avant-garde resources—was seen as an antidote to the Indianism advocated by José Sabogal at the Escuela Nacional de Bellas Artes (ENBA). Grau played an important role in the I Salón de Independientes, where opposition to Indianism was first expressed publicly by a diverse group of artists not bound by an overriding agenda but, rather, by interest in providing an alternative to the ENBA. It was at Grau’s first solo show, held the following month, that he consolidated a leading position in a movement to renew the local art scene. While Carlos Raygada (1898–1953)—the only intellectual of the day to work consistently in art criticism—read that show in solely formalist terms, radical critics of Indianism like Luis Fernández Prada (1917–73) saw it as an authentic renovation; they believed the show put the local scene in synch with new developments in international art without the thematic restrictions and deliberate technical crudeness of the “Peruvian School” advocated by the Indianists.

Due to this polemic, this article praising Grau as the prime representative of Peruvian art is signed only with the initials “C. M.” (the author was painter Carlos More (1904–44), who years before had begun questioning José Sabogal’s Indianist group). According to the reviewer, Grau’s austere and formalist understanding of painting—as opposed to superficial and decorative Indianist works—was truly modern.

[For additional information, see in the ICAA digital archive the following articles: Juan E. Ríos’s “La pintura contemporánea en el Perú” (doc. no. 1293275); Raúl María Pereira’s texts “Ensayo sobre la pintura peruana contemporánea (doc. no. 1293152) and “Consideraciones sobre la pintura peruana” (doc. no. 1293103); Carlos Raygada’s “La exposición de Ricardo Grau” (doc. no. 1146716); Ricardo Grau’s “Lo que nos demuestra la Exposición de pintores chilenos: qué es lo que de ellos podemos aprender” (doc. no. 1146583); Luis Fernández Prada’s “Ayer se inauguró una exposición de gran aliento” (doc. no. 1144189); and Froylán Miranda Nieto’s “Elogio en forma de fusta” (doc. no. 1144173)].