Showing posts with label Virgin of Guadalupe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Virgin of Guadalupe. Show all posts

Friday, December 23, 2011

Pictures from Mexico City: The Basilica, and the Centro Histórico

A market stall for a vendor of Christmas lights in La Merced, Mexico City's enormous downtown market for foodstuffs and household items. Yes, those are the real colors. Yes, they were all flashing in various ways. Yes, the display was potentially seizure-inducing. And yes, it's things like this that make me so fond of this basket-case of a city. Click on this and the following images to enlarge. All pictures taken by the Mrs.

For some time now, I've wanted to re-visit Mexico City on December 12th, which (as long-time readers of this blog have often been reminded) is the feast day of the Virgin of Guadalupe, Mexico's patron saint and an iconic figure throughout the Americas. More often than not, though, logistics (here understood as the confluence of money and a 12th free of contractual obligations--exams and submitting final grades) made that trip improbable, if not impossible. This year, though, was to be different: Back in September, the Mrs. had a case of that weird sort of homesickness one can feel for a place that one has only visited once before; I had a look at the calendar and saw that I'd be giving my last exam on a Thursday and the 12th would fall on the following Monday; and after a quick perusal of flights via Expedia (and seeing that DFW-to-Mexico City flights on the 11th were already almost full) and telling myself that I'd have to be disciplined about grading if I didn't want to end up reading research papers on the flight down, I booked a five-day round trip and a stay at the same hotel (small rooms, but centrally-located, clean and cheap) that we'd stayed in three years before. Cut to Finals Week: I got my last grades turned in early Saturday morning; we packed; the Mrs. armed herself with a couple of good camera lenses that she rented; and very, very early on Sunday the 11th we drove to Dallas to catch our flight.

We had three main goals on this trip: 1) Visit the Basilica on the 12th; 2) Be a little more selective about where we ate some of our meals; 3) Relax. The first went well, though, due to what I assume were crowd-control measures (the Metro station closest to the Basilica was closed that day), we had to walk from what used to be the station closest to the Basilica--not all that far, but I got us a little turned around both in the station and out on the street. Also, due to the earthquake that had occurred on Saturday the 10th (no damage in the city, but power was knocked out in places), the number of pilgrims was much reduced. As you'll see below, though, there was still plenty to see.

Pilgrims entering the main gate that gives onto the plaza in front of the Basilica. In the background you can see La Avenida de Guadalupe, which, for blocks and blocks and blocks, is a solid mass of people either heading toward the shrine, leaving it, or wanting to sell just about anything you can imagine to either of the other groups.


A good shot of the interior of the Basilica, taken from just inside one of the entrances. To get a sense of the scale of this space, click to enlarge the image, then look just to your right and below the red of the Mexican flag; there you'll see a priest standing at a small lectern, delivering the homily while we were there. The only Catholic worship space that can hold more people is St. Peter's in Rome.


The image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, taken from behind and below the altar in the Basilica. (The flag is not usually there, but the 12th is a national holiday in officially-atheistic Mexico.) In this space, there is a moving walkway that allows visitors to see and take pictures of the image without disturbing Mass (too much).


A pilgrim honoring a promise to the Virgin that if she honored his petition to her, he would walk on his knees to her shrine.


A group of pilgrims from the state of México (the state immediately to the north of the Distrito Federal, Mexico City's location) gathered in front of the original Basilica.


In the picture above, you can see that many of the pilgrims are dressed in elaborate Indian costumes. Ever since the beginnings of the honoring of the Virgin (this year, incidentally, is the 480th anniversary of her appearances to Juan Diego in 1531), indigenous ritual has been a prominent feature. Juan Diego was himself a devout Indian convert to Christianity, and the Virgin appeared to him as a mestiza; moreover, there's been a long-running debate over the extent to which (if, indeed, at all) the cult of the Virgin has appropriated rituals pertaining to Aztec deities. So, in and of itself, the presence of penitents dressed as Indians was not at all unusual; indeed, on my first visit to the Basilica on the feast day, I saw a fair number of them, but they were dressed very simply, as I recall. On this visit, though, I was struck by both the sheer number of these people and the elaborateness of their costumes. The pictures below are just a small sampling from the dozens the Mrs. took that day:











What follows here is some really superficial and underinformed speculation. I think that for a variety of reasons, indigenous issues (always a presence in Mexico, especially in the central and southern regions of the country) are particularly visible nowadays. Here in the States, we're familiar with the all-out war amongst the drug cartels and the Mexican government against them; less well known, though, is that the Zapatista Movement is still organizing indigenous peoples in various forms of resistance to the government and that paramilitary groups, with the tacit approval of the government, are capturing, beating and killing prominent indigenous community members. One such killing, according to a handbill given to us one night, had occurred earlier this month in the state of México--andthis cross, one of dozens set up in the Alameda in the heart of the city and likewise protesting recent atrocities in the state of México, was another, sobering reminder that for many, many people in Mexico, these are dark times. Given all this, then, it's hard to imagine a safer--and more appropriate--place for quiet affirmation of indigenous peoples than the Basilica, at least for the days surrounding the feast day. The Virgin appeared to an Indian, and as a mestiza at that; Miguel Hidalgo used a banner with the Virgin's image as his flag when he led his armies against the Spanish. She may yet again become--or perhaps already is becoming--a uniting symbol for Mexicans confronting these dark times.

More pictures from elsewhere below the fold.



What follows are cheerier pictures and reflections on what we saw.

Francisco I. Madero Street at dusk. Once a busy one-way street running from the Zócalo (the city's enormous main plaza) to the Alameda (a large park-like space half a mile away), it's now a pedestrian mall.


One could make the argument that no city should have 20 million people, but Mexico City's location makes it especially ill-suited for its size. Sitting well inland in its bowl-shaped valley over 6,000 feet high, rarely visited by prevailing winds of any real strength, whatever comes out of its smokestacks basically just sits there over the city. Back in the '80s, its air pollution was so bad that the U.S. considered its embassy there a hazardous-duty post; on my visits there while living in Durango back in those days, I certainly saw plenty of evidence to justify that designation. But things have slowly changed for the better since that time. There was still some smog, but nothing like the old days. Those older, dirtier-burning cars and trucks have left the roads. The city has greatly expanded its subway system and is also adding above-ground light rail systems that extend beyond the terminuses of the subway lines into outlying areas. It's in the process of building a bus system that runs in dedicated bus lanes along major arteries--thus, these buses won't be as susceptible to the city's traffic snarls as regular buses are. Just in the time since the Mrs. and I were last there, dedicated bike lanes have been installed, along with stands that rent bicycles that we saw lots of people using. And, as in the picture above, some streets have been converted into pedestrian malls.





Scenes from the Zócalo, which is decorated for Christmas and filled with people and activities (ice-skating rinks, a small fairground, dancers and singers) for the holidays.


El Palacio de Bellas Artes (The Palace of Fine Arts), which sits at the east end of the Alameda.


If there's one regret I had about this trip, it's that we didn't stay quite long enough to see the Alameda really geared up for Christmas. During the last two weeks of December, people set up elaborate Christmas-themed stands complete with their own Santa Clauses for kids to climb on and have their picture taken, and the park fills with food vendors selling Christmas tamales as well as more traditional street food. It's a joyous chaos of lights and smells and sounds, especially at night. But all in all, I think we did all right on this trip.

More pictures to come, these of some monuments and La Merced.

Read More...

Sunday, October 03, 2010

And over at Domestic Issue . . .

Sor María Antonia de la Purísima Concepcíon. 18th century. Ex Convento de Culhuacán (some pictures here and here), Mexico City. Click on the image to enlarge. The caption records her parents’ names, her birthdate, and the date and place she took the habit for the first time.

Some of you have been kindly indulgent of my relatively frequent posts on Mexican colonial Catholicism--in particular, the cult of the Virgin of Guadalupe--and casta painting (most recently, this one). Over at Domestic Issue, I have a new post on this subject that, finally, feels close to right.

Maybe I can move on to something else now.

Read More...

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Casta paintings and the Virgin of Guadalupe: a link

Luis de Mena, casta painting, c. 1750. Museo de América, Madrid. Click on image to enlarge. Image found here.

(A couple of earlier posts on casta painting are here. A long post on the meaning of the Virgin of Guadalupe in connection with the New World as a miscegenated space is here.)

As part of my research for the book project, the other day I revisited this post's accompanying image, and some further reading--especially in reading the historical record supporting the authenticity of the story and, more directly, here--I was reminded, in a different way this time, of the contested nature of just about everything regarding the story of the Virgin's appearance to Juan Diego, from the very earliest days of that story (she appeared to the Indian Juan Diego in 1531). Some (much?) of that argument, we find between the lines, was driven by rivalries among bishops and their respective orders (which I first speculated on here). Thus, it makes sense that we also have overt written and visual assertions of Juan Diego's worthiness as a way of asserting the truth of the Virgin's appearance to him on the hill of Tepeyac; hence, in the frieze over the east entrance of the old basilica dedicated to the Virgin, Juan Diego's accompanying hat and staff, which mark him iconographically not only as a shepherd but also as someone making a pilgrimage to a shrine, and the beaver in the foreground (a symbol of chastity in medieval bestiaries).

Anyway, that and the fact of the Virgin's appearance as a mestiza to an indigenous person--that is, she appears, in effect, as always already of mixed ethnicity--made me wonder about linkages, whether direct or thematic, between depictions of the Virgin and the genre of casta painting that arose in Mexico and, to a lesser extent, in Peru during the colonial era. Those paintings are not merely secular in content, they are quite literally domestic: often their settings are the interiors of houses, or they show a family out for a promenade; some standardized depictions of castes show physical violence occurring between the spouses, their child attempting to intervene. So, off to Wichita State University's library I went yesterday, and in one of the books I looked at I ran across the Luis de Mena painting you see at the top of this post. As it turns out, this same image also appears in Ilona Katzew's excellent book on the subject; I own this book, but I didn't remember seeing it in there and so didn't bother to look again before last night. (Man: the things I tell you people.)

In a way, it's my forgetting this image that really prompts this post.

Casta paintings that also include images of the Virgin apparently are not very common: this is the only such example in Katzew's book, and I know I've not seen any others like this. At one level, that near-absence of juxtapositions is to be expected: The Virgin is, of course, the embodiment of chastity, while the most direct message of the casta paintings is, ahem, the consequences of the procreative act; moreover, though interracial marriages were officially permitted in Mexico, some, as I discussed in this post, were more approved-of than others were with regard to the social standing of the children of that marriage--more approved-of because of the matter of their racial purity. These were clearly not sacred but secular matters, as regarded the rules governing the painting guilds and their permitted subjects; to directly link the Virgin to such paintings would cross not only legal bounds but also those of propriety. I can be forgiven for not having remembered Mena's painting, then: it's something of an anomaly within this genre.

Katzew herself doesn't spend too much time on Mena's painting, either. She briefly discusses it within the context of a book by Juan Manuel de San Vicente, a book published in 1768 whose purpose was to extol New Spain's virtues and whose language Katzew describes as an example of "creole discourses of pride" (193)--even though San Vicente was a Spaniard. This book

ends majestically with a discussion of the Virgin of Guadalupe, of whom he quotes the famous verse from Psalm 147 (20): "Non fecit taliter omni nationi" (He has not done the like for any other nation), pointing to the honor that God bestowed on Mexico by having the Virgin appear in that country. The Virgin of Guadalupe also features prominently in Mena's casta painting along with the fruits of the land, the city's famous retreats [shown in the upper-right corner], and the Virgin's sanctuary [in the upper-left corner], allowing us to see how the work might have been interpreted by contemporary audiences. (194)


Katzew, as is typical of her book, doesn't go into those interpretations. But, especially when compared to other casta paintings, it becomes pretty clear that Mena wants to insist on a more benign interpretation of these different castas by placing their depiction within a context in which Mexico's other virtues are submitted for our admiration. The castas occupy the middle two registers of the painting; they are framed, below, by a depiction of native fruits and vegetables (it is no accident that the costumes of the figures in the casta paintings are in the same colors as the produce--as if to suggest that these many-hued people are likewise the fruit of the same Mexican soil) and, above, by the Virgin, her basilica and Ixtacalco, a popular place to visit on the southeast of the capital known for its canals. The painting's overall message is that of exuberant variety that is clearly and distinctly Mexican, a variety, moreover, presided over approvingly by the Virgin herself.

But as soon as I saw Mena's painting, I was immediately reminded of the painting below, which I saw for the first time when the Mrs. and I went on our Mexico City trip back in the fall of 2008:

Anon., Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe de México, Patrona de la Nueva España. 18th cen. Museo de la Basilica de Guadalupe, Mexico City. Image found here.


(Apologies, by the way, for the poor quality of the image. For details I describe below, I'm working from a picture in a small booklet I bought at the museum.)

The Museum caters to a niche audience, obviously, but if you've read this far and ever find yourself in Mexico City with a few extra hours to spare at the basilica, it's well worth the 30 pesos admission fee to visit. Fortunately for the Mrs. and me, it wasn't too crowded the day we went because when I saw this painting, I couldn't help but stare and stare at it.

In remembering this painting, it suddenly occurred to me that it bears some compositional similarities to the standard casta painting: we have a male and female of different races (here, the female figure on the left symbolizes Europe; the male figure, dressed in indigenous garb, represents the Americas. (The male figure, by the way, is speaking the same verse from Psalm 140 that Katzew reports San Vicente as quoting regarding the Virgin's appearance.) But other images in the painting seem to argue for the Virgin's distinctive Mexican-ness. Directly below the angel who is directly under the Virgin's feet (the angel, by the way, is part of her traditional depiction--it's on the framed cloth with the miraculous image that hangs over the altar in the new basilica), we see two small scenes depicting, on the left, the Virgin's final appearance to Juan Diego and, on the right, Juan Diego showing the bishop his ayate with the Virgin's image on it. But those two scenes rest on the outspread wings of an eagle perched on a prickly pear cactus, which itself is emerging from a body of water: the Aztecs' sign from the gods to build their city on that place and, now, the emblem in the center of the Mexican flag.

Clearly, this painting functions as more than an image honoring the Virgin or as one depicting particular scenes from the story of her appearances to Juan Diego. It contains, in the allegorical figures of Europe and the Americas, themselves explicitly female and male, "parents" for the Virgin--whose respective races would account for the Virgin's mestiza appearance, were this a typical casta painting. Moreover, her placement over the eagle on the cactus seems both to locate her in a very specific place and to explicitly associate her appearance with that earlier tradition (pagan though it was) of miraculous signs to the people in the Valle de Anahuac.

But no matter the truth of the Virgin's origins, no religious syncretism is at work here: The Conquest was by now two centuries past for both Mena and the anonymous painter of the painting I have been discussing. San Vicente, whom I quoted above, introduced his work on Mexico by celebrating the Aztec emperors who preceded Cortés' arrival, "because it is one of the circumstances that truly makes this city great, for having as its children (although heathen) eleven so great and illustrious emperors." Katzew goes on to comment, "In other words, Mexico's precolonial past is deployed to legitimize the uniqueness of the country and to set the stage for the remainder of his description [of the country]" (194). The latter half of 18th century was a time among Mexicans of growing pride of place and of culture, and the Virgin was most definitely included in that pride, so much so that in 1746 she would be declared the patroness of New Spain by the archbishop. What is at work in this painting is an allegorizing of the Virgin's cultural parentage, and that her parentage is a miscegenated one. To see a painting of the Virgin from this time borrowing the basic form of the casta paintings is certainly startling from the point of view of religion and of veneration, but from that of culture, specifically Mexican culture, it makes perfect sense. But even more importantly, the Church's official embracing of the Virgin as New Spain's patroness implicitly validated the mixed-race populations who venerated her.

In a later post, I want to address at greater length something I said in this post--in particular, this:

Whatever happened in December of 1531 and the weeks and months following–whether miracle or fraud or some now-irrecoverable combination of the two–the Church lost control over the meaning of the Virgin and the resulting manner of her veneration in the instant that she appeared to an Indian as a mestiza. Which, of course, is tantamount to saying that it thus never had control over her. Such is her power in Mexico and throughout Hispanic America: that everyone knows this; all the Church can do is acknowledge it and appear to grant it official sanction as it is able via such means as papal visits and the move to canonize Juan Diego.

Read More...

Saturday, December 12, 2009

What matters? Two very different responses

I'm still reading and grading papers (I have needy students this semester, about which more later), but I wanted to pass along links to a couple of things before I forget to later on.

First of all: It's December 12, the feast day of the Virgin of Guadalupe, the patron saint of Mexico. This is a day when I am especially nostalgic for a place I love and spend more than a little time thinking on the terms "miracle" and "devotion." Long-time readers know that I've posted a couple of times about this day; in this one, I write about the time I was fortunate enough on a long-ago December 12th to visit the basilica in Mexico City dedicated to her. Apologies for the now-missing image from that post. To get a sense of the size of the the place I'm describing, go here.

Then, there's this long May 2007 review article by James Wood on Cormac McCarthy's The Road, "Getting to the End." Wood is a very attentive reader; you may not always agree with his take, but you can't argue that he's been slipshod in his reading. A sample follows:

It is the common weakness of novels such as Walter Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz, Doris Lessing's The Memoirs of a Survivor, P.D. James's Children of Men, Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go, or even Anthony Burgess's A Clockwork Orange and Orwell's 1984, that they are all to some extent science-fiction allegories in which the author extrapolates from the present, using hypothetical developments in the future to comment on crises that he or she sees as already imminent in his or her own time. . . .

McCarthy's vision is nothing like this. The Road is not a science fiction, not an allegory, and not a critique of the way we live now, or of the-way-we-might-live-if-we-keep-on-living-the-way-we-live-now. It poses a simpler question, more taxing for the imagination and far closer to the primary business of fiction-making: what would this world without people look like, feel like? From this, everything else flows. What would be the depth of one's loneliness? What kind of tattered theology would remain? What would hour-to-hour, day-to-day experience be like? How would one eat, or find shoes? These questions McCarthy answers magnificently, with the exception of the theological issue (about which more in a moment).

McCarthy's devotion to detail, his Conradian fondness for calmly described horrors, his tolling fatal sentences, make the reader shiver with fear and recognition. The Coke can is a good example: McCarthy is not afraid to stint the banal, and we are always aware of the contemporary American civilization that has been overthrown by events; it pokes up out of the landscape like fingerposts. There is a barn in a field "with an advertisement in faded ten-foot letters across the roofslope. See Rock City." (So we are in Tennessee, the scene of many of McCarthy's novels.) There are old supermarkets, and abandoned cars, and guns, and a truck the father and son sleep a night in, and even a dead locomotive in a forest. The narrative is about last-ditch practicality, and is itself intensely practical. In one of the houses they enter, the father goes upstairs, looking for anything useful. A mummified corpse is lying in a bed, a blanket pulled up to its chin. Without sensitivity, the man rips the blanket from the bed and thieves it. Blankets matter.

Read More...

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

"Who painted it?"

[Edited for clarity so that no one would understand me to be saying that all of the image has been painted on the cloth]

Oops.

In fairness: no one denies that some of the things seen on the relic in the basilica have been painted. But instances such as this lead me to reflect on two things: 1) that one person's "common knowledge" is not necessarily another's; and/but 2) one's religion or lack thereof aside, the centrality of the Virgin of Guadalupe to Mexican history and culture--and, by extension, hispanic American history and culture--is such that the briefing book of any diplomat visiting Mexico should contain at least a cursory mention of her. Especially if a visit to the basilica is on said diplomat's itinerary. There's also 3) that, surely, my nation's diplomats are not the only ones who occasionally blunder in such ways

Ah, well. It's also useful (if embarrassing) to be reminded that diplomatic faux pas will occur no matter whose administration is in power.

EDIT: Speaking of weird moments in diplomacy . . . Miss Universe blogs about her visit to Guantánamo. On second thought, "surreal" may be more appropriate than "weird." (Hat-tip: Talking Points Memo)

Read More...

Friday, December 12, 2008

Felíz día del santo!

View of the Basilica of the Virgin of Guadalupe, Mexico City, October 2008. Click to enlarge. Image taken by the Mrs.

Today is the feast day of the Virgin of Guadalupe, a day I have written about before. The Wikipedia article on the Virgin is a good place to start for those who would like an introduction to the story of her appearances to Juan Diego and, on this day in 1531, the miracle of her image's appearance on Juan Diego's ayate (something like a man's rebozo), now on display in the basilica.

As readers of this blog know, recently I have written some posts here and elsewhere on the Virgin and how she is depicted in art of the colonial era, and what all that might suggest about her place in the history and culture of the Americas. Below are links to those posts, should anyone be interested.

A look at a painting. Not primarily about the Virgin of Guadalupe, but this post makes some observations about the practice of syncretism as, at least in part, a response to the rapidly-growing mixed-race population in New Spain.

The Virgin of Guadalupe and "The New World" as oxymoron. A look at three allegorized paintings of the Virgin and what they suggest about her image (in all its senses) as beyond the final control of either the Church or the people who venerate her.

A brief adventure in New World iconography. In which I try to explain why a beaver, of all things, appears in a frieze depicting the Virgin's appearance to Juan Diego.

Read More...

Thursday, November 06, 2008

A brief adventure in New World iconography

Frieze depicting the Virgin of Guadalupe's appearance to Juan Diego, on the east side of the old basilica dedicated to the Virgin of Guadalupe, Mexico City. 1531-1709. Image taken by the Mrs. Click to enlarge.

What to do with stuff that turns up during sabbatical-related research that in all likelihood won't show up in the book project but which may yet be of interest to, oh, a dozen or so people besides myself?

What to do . . . what to do . . . ?

As regulars here know, I recently posted a discussion of a couple of paintings depicting the Virgin that I saw on my recent trip to Mexico City. I'll have more to say later regarding this façade within that context, but what I wanted to post on here is the depiction of Juan Diego. On the day we took the picture, I was more interested in the European-style hat on the ground directly below his kneeling figure and the maguey plant in the lower-right corner. (Pulque, a fermented drink made from the juice of the maguey, was drunk by the Indians on her feast day, December 12.) But as the Mrs. and I played around with cropping the image she had taken and we enlarged it, I really noticed for the first time the small animal to the left of the maguey plant.

We thought (at first) that it was a squirrel. However, in the course of Googling about for associations (if any) among squirrels and Christian and Aztec iconography and what any of that might possibly have to do with Juan Diego and/or the Virgin, I happened to run across this passage, from the Aberdeen Bestiary:

Of the beaver There is an animal called the beaver, which is extremely gentle; its testicles are are highly suitable for medicine. Physiologus says of it that, when it knows that a hunter is pursuing it, it bites off its testicles and throws them in the hunter's face and, taking flight, escapes. But if, once again, another hunter is in pursuit, the beaver rears up and displays its sexual organs. When the hunter sees that it lacks testicles, he leaves it alone. Thus every man who heeds God's commandment and wishes to live chastely should cut off all his vices and shameless acts, and cast them from him into the face of the devil. Then the devil, seeing that the man has nothing belonging to him, retires in disorder. That man, however, lives in God and is not taken by the devil, who says: 'I will pursue, I will overtake them...'(Exodus, 15:9) The name castor comes from castrando, 'castrate'. (Emphasis added; image found here)
The clear association here between beavers and living a chaste life reminded me that it is said of Juan Diego that he and his wife--both early converts to Christianity--after hearing a sermon on chastity, dedicated themselves to live chaste lives. Some say that this is the reason the Virgin chose to appear to him. At any rate, I went back to the image of the frieze and enlarged it some more; sure enough, the animal has a flat tail, rather than a bushy one. And now, I would love to know what that plant is that it is eating.

The beaver's appearance here in a depiction of a scene that it ostensibly has nothing to do with is at one level, that of iconography, perfectly understandable. Most of us are familiar with Renaissance-era depictions of animals or objects along with saints (think of Peter often shown with a set of keys, in reference to Matthew 16:19). What's intriguing here is the application of this principle to a depiction of Juan Diego. It speaks to the apparent need to assert or remind the visitor of his virtue and, thus, of his worthiness to receive a visitation from the Virgin. It causes me to wonder if certain visitors were considered to need this reminder more than others did (even in the decades immediately following the apparitions, elements within the Church questioned the veracity of the story). And as for what indigenous people made of the beaver . . . As of this writing, I have not been able to find what if any significance beavers held for the Aztecs, but somehow I doubt that chastity figures into their thinking.

In short, in this frieze is a not-yet-seamless fusing of iconic languages, as embodied by the beaver and the maguey plant, from two different religious traditions. In the associating of European images--the hat and the beaver--with the Indian Juan Diego, we see hesitancy in depicting some more overt sign of his Indianness to the viewer due to those signs' inevitable associations with the very religions that the Church sought to supplant. Besides, in the Church's eye, the fact of Juan Diego's Christianity would trump all other identities he might claim. Meanwhile, the maguey, a plant firmly linked to life before the arrival of the Spaniards, is a sturdy, literally rooted presence here. It's a strange visual space, this frieze. But then again, the New World is a strange place.

Read More...

Saturday, October 25, 2008

"The Virgin of Guadalupe, and 'The New World' as Oxymoron"

Anonymous, Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, Patrona de la Nueva España. 18th century. Museo de la Basílica de Guadalupe, Mexico City. Image found here.

Some of my official work while in Mexico City is beginning to bear a little preliminary fruit. Over at Domestic Issue, I've just posted something on the cult of the Virgin of Guadalupe--specifically, its centrality to Mexican and, by extension, Hispanic identity, that was inspired by this--a painting we encountered completely by accident--and a couple of other paintings you'll see at that post. It's long and wonky, and it's less-than-smooth in places, but it's headed in a direction I feel good about.

Read More...