In this interview, Alejandro Romualdo Valle (“Xanno”) reacts to the ideological turn that the debate as to whether or not there are painters in Peru has taken. He states that the real problem facing Peruvian art “is the lack of critics.” Valle asserts that local criticism is improvised and beset with “huachafería”—a vernacular term for something tacky, ignorant, and overblown; it lacks, he goes on, method and purpose, and is determined solely by personal tastes. He further states that “the only thing we artists should do is look, feel, and express, be men and learn to love things without asking why.” He believes that sincerity is the sine qua non of the human; it is what makes each human work a vital, and not necessarily “bohemian,” experience. Xanno closes by stating that painting can be judged only on the basis of its quality, not whether it adheres to a certain tendency or whether it is figurative or abstract. “It seems,” he says, “that painters have clamored more for their dignity than for their art. Whether or not he is misguided, de Szyszlo has forced us to clarify things.”

Poet and draftsman Alejandro Romualdo Valle (“Xanno”) (1926–2008) made these remarks in the context of the debate unleashed by the statements Fernando de Szyszlo made on the occasion of his show of abstract painting at the Sociedad de Arquitectos del Perú in Lima. Here, Xanno makes reference to the anti-bohemian statements of painter Sérvulo Gutiérrez (1914–61): “Before becoming a poet, I had to learn to be a man, and to do that did not require drinking or going hungry.”

In early 1951, Peruvian painter Fernando de Szyszlo (b. 1925) returned to Lima after having spent almost two years in Paris. His time in the French capital proved decisive to a turn towards Abstract Expressionism in his work, largely due to the influence of German artist Hans Hartung (1904–89). In May 1951, de Szyszlo exhibited his most recent works at the Sociedad de Arquitectos in Lima, in a show held under the auspices of the Agrupación Espacio, a group that spearheaded innovation in art and architecture in the country. 

De Szyszlo’s show was, generally speaking, favorably reviewed, though influential Peruvian critic Carlos Raygada (1898–1953) did have some reservations [see in the ICAA digital archive “De arte: exposición Szyszlo” (doc. no. 1150738)]. The overall belligerent tone of de Szyszlo’s rebuttal was overshadowed by his now-famous statement in La Prensa newspaper: “there are no painters in Peru” (doc. no. 1137793). His open contempt for contemporary art from his country gave rise to an irate reaction from Peruvian artists and intellectuals and earned him a leading role in the first debate in Peru on non-figurative art. [For additional information, see the following articles: (unsigned) “Pintores peruanos hay, lo que aún no hay es pintura peruana: dice Juan Ríos y agrega que la pintura abstracta es pobre e inhumana” (doc. no. 1137808); (unsigned) “Cristina Gálvez opina que sí hay pintores en el Perú: citó a cuatro: ‘Hay que ser muy intelectual para ser abstracto’ dijo y añadió luego ‘Szyszlo no es intelectual’” (doc. no. 1150897); Sérvulo Gutiérrez’s “Qué arte abstracto ni que nada, el arte es esencialmente uno... lo que debe hacer el pintor es ‘pintar’” (doc. no. 1150851); Federico Costa y Laurent’s “La ‘polémica de los pintores’” (doc. no. 1150866); (unsigned) “‘Julia Codesido y Sabogal son buenos pintores’: Aquilles Ralli cree, además, que muchos sólo buscan la fama por medio de la publicidad” (doc. no. 1150882); Juan Ríos’s “El debate sobre pintura: carta del Sr. Juan Ríos R.” (doc. no. 1150912) and “Balance de una polémica: cuatro preguntas fundamentales” (doc. no. 1137882); and Ángel Guido’s “A los pintores peruanos” (doc. no. 1150943)].

Though intentionally provocative, the statement “there are no painters in Peru” made reference to the lack of local points of reference for any artist interested in participating in the most recent international trends. The most ornery issues in the debate were the terms that should be used to define local modern art, suggesting early differences among Peruvian progressive intellectuals. By defending “earthly abstraction” as the sole option for Peruvian art, critic Samuel Pérez Barreto (1921–2003) found himself up against fellow former members of the Agrupación Espacio, a group that vehemently rejected any partisan and totalizing view that identified “the national” with “the Andean.”