![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
C/S Tuesday, June 13, 1972 Those involved in social commentary (art) in relation to technical art (minimalist tradition).... The very little that we do have reflects social comment... * Despite our disparities, we are still a unit, and because we deal with human concern, we are universal. Yet as a group how do we look harmonious without sacrificing those painters whose subjects differ? * Mel: There is disparity in ages, different styles, ideas and approaches; yet we are also a unified group - doing the same thing but not by the same means. Jesse: We are an autonomous group being rhythmic & harmonious - as artists are rhythmic. We creat [[create]] harmony and thus better communication - we are the bridge to the gap between people and the establishment in the visual sense (positive instead of negative). Fel.: But we must also keep in mind that if we are oriented towards harmony, we are also involved in the process of institutionalization of a more viable Chicano reality. this in itself is a conflict and a cause for disharmony; harmony could be counter-productive. [for example: demanding the hanging of Chicano art in permanent collections of museums...] Are we to be considered or labeled as Barrio Spokesmen? How do we feel? Fel.: We are not in reality spokesmen for the barrio, because we are cut off from it (jobs, homes, etc.). Mel: Yes we are! We are spokesmen in the visual sense - in an image sense. We have surfaced or emerged though we have not been appointed. We are artists whose roots are in the barrio; we cannot help but speak the barrio ling.