JR:
How did Carlos Luna, the painter, emerge?
CL: I'm going to confess
something that I haven't made public before.
Only a few people know about this situation;
however, it may help to understand the course of
my art. My father suffered from a kind of
schizophrenia, and I remember in my childhood,
during a period of crisis in his disease, he
drew on the walls of his room, especially near
the bed. This was something he apparently
needed to do to relieve his anguish. I was
about five or six years old then. I was never
able to observe him in the full action of
drawing, but I contemplated the result of his
renderings when my mother wasn't looking, and I
could to slip into the place. There were clay
brick walls plastered with cement, about two and
a half meters high and three wide that my dad
covered with pencil and crayon images. This was
my first encounter with the act of visual
expression… Figures spawned by the urgent need
to get things out from inside. Now my first
contact with fine art was in my grandfather's
tobacco shop, where Grandmother had a collection
of very curious images of Christ. Of these I
remember the Christs by Matthias Grünewald,[1]
Andrea Mantegna,[2]
and Velázquez. She also had images of people
beatified in the Romanic period, in particular
the Beatus of Liébana.[3]
These were my first experiences with art, and
from them my first artistic stirrings coalesce
and emerge.
JR:
Do you remember something about your father's
drawings?
CL: They were very primitive.
Perhaps this is what later predisposed me toward
an interest in the outsiders,[4]
and this magnetism that has always influenced my
taste and that has its roots in the fascination
with my father's drawings.
JR:
But, in addition, your entire work has a
tremendous Caribbean and rural influence…
CL: Good, because above all
I'm a guajiro,[5]
and to the extent that I have painted and
immersed myself in the introspective process of
creation, I realize that my guajiro status is
obvious. This definitely marks my work.
JR:
Do you regard your painting as costumbrista?*
CL: No, because I don't seek
to illustrate rural customs in a certain way.
Further, I like the city and the benefits it
provides. My work, I believe, goes beyond
Creole picturesqueness and becomes a chronicle
and reflection of various aspects of culture and
its idiosyncrasy. It is a mix of things. In
many cases they are only excuses for aesthetic
and formal studies.
JR:
Would you dare to classify your work?
CL: It's difficult. I feel
that I am a translator in conjunction with
diverse cultural and even racial references. I
don't see myself as part of a specific trend.
Within me there intersect genres and epochs.
For instance, it is true that what predominates
in my works is representation, but there are
visible zones of abstraction.
JR:
In your discourse there are well determined
signs that are reiterated. Is this a technique
articulated with premeditation or one of
obsessive involuntary recurrences?
CL: There are two things. Of
course I have a glossary I turn to and I
assemble visual phrases, but there is
semi-unconscious moment, if you will, that is
like a trance wherein the hand responds to what
is spontaneously flowing. I am different from
an outsider because I quickly lend an order to
these obsessions. So there are indeed codes
that are repeated, and I am unaware. I come to
the painting with a general idea established in
the sketch, and in the execution, accidents of
creation are produced, and some of them are
intuitive.
JR:
Does the painting or the title come first?
CL: The title often comes
first. The phrase or word can condition the
course of a project. On other occasions both
appear simultaneously. Take the example of my
painting El Gran Mambo. I was immersed in the
creation of this piece which is like a gigantic
rhythmic detonation with a prodigious melodic
narration, when I remember hearing something by
Pérez Prado[6]
performed by Benny Moré,[7]
and the idea of the title suddenly came because
it was related to what I was painting, a sort of
monumental mambo.
JR:
I once wrote that this painting, El Gran Mambo,
is your masterpiece; it is the summation of your
experience as a painter. There is manifest in
this work a closeness to Picasso, Lam, and
Mexican muralism… Is that true?
CL: No doubt there is [in this
painting] a lot of the magic of Mexican popular
art and muralism. More than Picasso, it
contains is a great lesson from the apocalyptic
passages of the Beatus of Liébana, from whom
Picasso also draws inspiration. Also, there is
a touch of Bosch, and the assimilation of Lam is
inevitable for any Cuban artist.
JR:
I also see in El Gran Mambo, and in some of your
other works, something of the narrative
disjointedness of the Latin American literary
boom.
CL: Definitely. Considering
this in depth, connections can be established
with this literary phenomenon.
JR:
What endures of Carlos Luna from the 1980s and
the 1990s?
CL: First of all, I'm still
the same Cuban. The same keen desire of
creating a career with its own identity
continues. The same approach of being
contemporary while standing on the shoulders of
tradition. Of course I have evolved, I have
integrated the journey and information gleaned
from the decades gone by.
JR:
You left Cuba for Mexico?
CL: Yes, in September of 1991.
JR:
What motivated you to leave Cuba?
CL: I don’t want to get
involved in political topics, but I can tell you
that my decision is based on the need to express
myself with total freedom. In Cuba you can
express yourself while you don't deal with a
touchy aspect that irritates the government.
For my rebellion there in Cuba, I always felt I
was trapped; I wasn't welcome in the established
structures of the official culture. I got
everything I could out of my work in Cuba.
There I had a successful career with prizes and
distinctions. I can't complain, but I could not
stand the status quo.
JR:
Of your twelve years' residency in Mexico, what
lesson did you feel most strongly?
CL: Especially Rufino Tamayo.
Tamayo influences me, above all, in the ideas,
in the way of perceiving art, in his attitude of
being contemporary while standing upon
tradition. Rufino was a very disciplined artist
and very firm in his beliefs―above movements,
trends, criticism, and curatorial opinions. He
was an artist independent of all this. He was a
paradigm for me before leaving Cuba. By then I
had read a text by Octavio Paz about Rufino, and
what I wanted to do was clarified in those
paragraphs and in his painting. In general,
Mexican art has a fundamental importance in my
body of work. There are other Mexican masters
who strongly appealed to me, and I can mention
José Guadalupe Posadas, Antonio Ruiz el Corzo,
and I personally knew José Luis Cuevas, Juan
Soriano, Francisco Toledo, Irma Palacios, and
Miguel Cervantes, who was a friend and close
advisor.
JR:
Do you think at this stage of your career you
have been endowed with a language and
characteristic iconography?
CL: Of course. I think that
people can easily recognize my work by the
personal way I express my universe.
JR:
Where does the routine end and experimentation
begin in your work?
CL: They coexist. I use
traditional means, but in every piece there are
new approaches. There is a constant search for
new materials or tools. Brushes with a specific
use I use for other variations. Techniques I
followed in one way I now do in another. Many
times experiments are a result of observations
derived from the work of masters in painting,
and on other occasions the piece's requirements
demand a new solution. In each painting, there
is a moment of experimentation, on a level with
the painter's discipline and the methods learned
in the academy. Painting involves a lot of
science because you can't achieve a result
without beforehand respecting certain
processes. Experimentation can surprise you at
any stage of these processes, and one has to pay
attention to this encounter with innovation.
Otherwise, you don't evolve.
JR:
Have you undertaken a painting project with one
intention that has drifted toward another
outcome?
CL: Yes. In this sense, I am
always open to how an idea can shift and the
route of improvisation. I work with a
preconceived plan and with control, but also
with a tendency to flexibility and changes.
This is natural in art.
JR:
Do you have some ritual that proceeds or forms
part of the creative process?
CL: Well, yes. I have a type
of ceremony that begins when arriving at my
studio and changing into more comfortable
clothes. I immediately put on music that gets
me in the mood. Music is like the formal
opening of the workshop. Often I light a
cigarette and from my chair reflect about the
piece I am going to work on. Since the day
before, the palette, the brushes, and all the
tools I use have been clean. I work
simultaneously on various paintings, and during
the small prelude with the tobacco smoke is when
I determine which will be the piece of the day.
I then have some moments of looking at the
designated piece, examining what has been done
and what remains to be done. Music is very
important for me. I listen to traditional Cuban
and Mexican music that immediately connects me
to memories, details, and significant aspects of
my life. Then, the ideas flow and I begin to
paint.
JR: In the anecdotal
material that gathers in your imagery and in the
eroticism that at moments you recreate there is
a perceptible predominance of the masculine,
that is, there is a palpable presence of
machismo. Do you think about it ahead of time
or does it spring involuntarily?
CL: It comes spontaneously
because I was born and educated in an
essentially male chauvinist society. The
unusual thing is that although there is more
work with the masculine in my art, the moment
the female figure appears, this figure becomes
predominant. The female figure I depict as
all-encompassing, or if she appears alongside a
man, I make her of a size proportionately
greater. I believe that in the Cuban case it is
necessary to determine the woman's
responsibility in this way of seeing things.
Mama educated all of us to operate in a male
chauvinist society. I note that it is a
terrible factor that characterizes Latin
American society. And machismo in Cuba is
extreme. It is like a concealed fear and at the
same time powerful that the woman is recognized
for the true role she plays as shaper of
generations and indispensable arbiter of social
life. In my work possibly can be found this
internal conflict of the Latin American macho.
This battle of the sexes that flows more or less
consciously in the psyche of our continent's
men. At times, in my painting, I try to
ridicule or satirize the topic or expose it in
all its rawness. Whether I am right or not, it
is part of my internal struggle. Yes, I can
fully affirm that I greatly respect women, and
my companion can vouch for that, and although I
am not a pro-feminist, I do attempt to defend
their qualities, their interests, their needs,
and their concerns. I believe that women have a
capacity for resistance that men lack; they have
a capacity for autonomy and leadership which we
lack. Women, generally, are better prepared to
manage among so many other things. I consider
that in the case of male artists, the selection
of the woman with whom he is going to form a
team is fundamental in his career.
JR:
There is another burning topic related to your
uniqueness, though it is a phenomenon spread in
contemporary turbulence and that shows in your
painting through aggressive intent and the
presence of weapons. I refer to violence…
CL: My childhood was spent in
a peaceful country town, where the most natural
thing in the world was to kill an animal for
daily survival; this could be a goat, a pig, or
a hen. There were acts of violence that formed
part of the rigors of daily life. However, when
I moved to Havana to study, I discovered urban
violence, and it became commonplace to see
people carrying guns for self-defense, or
because of the need to intimidate their fellow
men. In Mexico I experienced this phenomenon
personally, and my work has not been nor will it
be detached from this phenomenon that is
unfortunately part of the everyday modern life.
JR:
Do you feel bound to the path chosen by you in
the development of your work?
CL: You know that question
seems to me to be somewhat one-sided. I am open
to shifts, truly, but I feel satisfied with the
means and the world that I recreate. Throughout
my years as an artist I have gone one step at a
time. Neither abrupt transformations nor great
leaps have interested me, all the while
reviewing good choices and bad choices. I spend
my life seeking to give myself feedback,
reconsidering technical and conceptual
solutions. When in solo exhibitions I have had
to chance to contemplate sequences of works that
I have created over different periods of time, I
notice the evolution, and the different way of
resolving the challenge of a painting. There is
recycling with innovations. With viewpoints
that maneuver according to experience.
JR: Now that you have
mentioned the topic of exhibitions, I would like
you to speak about the MOLAA project. Who is
curating it?
CL: Cynthia MacMullin, Vice
President associated with exhibitions at MOLAA,
and Idurre Alonso, curator of MOLAA. They are
in charge of the itinerary of the two shows: one
in MOLAA with seventeen works and another in the
American University Museum at the Katzen Arts
Center in Washington, DC with three or four
pieces more. Cynthia is American, and Idurre is
Spanish. Both were familiar my work and were
interested in bringing it to these spaces. The
same night my exhibition opens in this
institution, a major exhibition of Lam opens
here, as well. Imagine how I feel having this
moment marvelously synchronized with a master.
JR:
What specific thesis has the curatorship
proposed?
CL: Well, at MOLAA they have
proposed a collection of artists born in Latin
America, whose works are especially resolved by
traditional methods. My work fits perfectly
within that criteria.
JR:
The group of pieces selected have a tendency
toward your most baroque and exuberant facet,
and I'll name a few titles―in addition to El
Gran Mambo, such as Café Con Con, Misa Negra, El
Rapto de la Catalina, Bruca Manigua, Hello mi
amiga. To what do you attribute this choice?
Is it related to parallelism with Lam?
CL: Not at all. This is a
prominent feature of many of my paintings.
Frequently I inundate the areas of the canvas
with a hodgepodge of colors that arise from an
incessant flow of ideas or of formal
intentions. At times I feel cramped. It is
something innate in me; it forms part of my
insistence on mixing dissimilar things. In the
case of establishing a connection with Lam, it
would be better to look at it as contrasts,
because the painting of the maestro, Lam, has a
great deal of metaphysical content while mine is
more attached to earthly things.
JR:
I also notice a variety of techniques and media
in the selection… This was the curatorship's
choice?
CL: Yes, that's how Cynthia
and Idurre decided; they made the entire
selection of the works. There are things
representative of the last three or four years
and pieces of my artistic production in Mexico,
from the first visits Cynthia and later Idurre
made to my studio, they emphasized that my
passage through Mexican territory is critical to
understanding my discourse. The curators are
very connected with my perspectives as an artist
and they share them, concur with their concepts,
and use my work to reinforce them. I believe
that they take into account the great
traditional energy of Latin American visual arts
and, it seems, they have found a compact example
of it in my work. Visual thought in the
continent has a contained and stunning force,
and a deeply indigenous identity. They think
that my insertion in Mexican culture and the
hybridization with the Cuban background has
created a fresh way to create images.
JR:
In the present context of your residence in the
United States, do you feel yourself a Cuban
artist, Hispanic (according to the bureaucratic
classification), or Latin American?
CL: I feel like all of them at
the same time. Whoever exhibits or doesn't
exhibit as a Cuban, doesn't make me feel less
Cuban. Whoever exhibits or doesn't exhibit as a
Hispanic or Latin American artist, doesn't
affect this belonging, either. But also, with
my subject matter of local color, I also feel
I'm an American artist. I am proud to be a
citizen of the United States and thankful for
what this country has given me. I also feel, at
the same time, something of a citizen of the
world. I believe that this is a sentiment quite
familiar to Cubans scattered across the globe.
JR:
What is your debt to American art?
CL: I am indebted for certain
aesthetic influences and the civic and
entrepreneurial sense of the artist. Artists in
the U.S. have a pragmatic sense of fighting for
their art. They seek quality material and what
is most adequate for their projects. They
legally protect the artistic result and document
their work, respect others' work, and develop
the link with the market.
JR: And from the purely
aesthetic viewpoint?
CL: There are American artists
I feel very drawn to, such as Susan Rothenberg,
Philip Guston, Elizabeth Murray, Basquiat,
Jasper Johns… and the outsiders. In the
American culture the outsiders occupy an
important space. And I feel close to Martin
Ramirez, Eddie Arning, and Bill Traylor, among
others. In them I detect identity,
originality. They have an inimitable DNA. They
were capable of discovering and marking their
own territory of expression. The outsiders live
so overwhelmed by the exterior noise that they
live submerged in themselves, and their
creations are simply the result of what they
throw to the exterior world from their
respective labyrinths. Their art conveys an
exclusive language and personality.
JR:
What does the artist-museum nexus signify for
you?
CL: The ideal space for the
categorization of an artist's oeuvre is the
museum. The museum's role is above all to
disseminate culture. I learned this from the
Mexican masters. They confer enormous
importance on the museum space as the Mecca of a
creator's work. Today there are scores of art
fairs that operate like a huge trade parties in
which the transcendence of a seminar or any
didactic event is lost. The fairs become the
cover for conducting business beyond the contact
with the work of art; they are meeting places
for bankers, moneylenders, and real estate
agents. The museum is the place that gives
priority to the educational and aesthetic value
of the work, and I see this institutional
relationship as something essential for the
artist and for the position his work can occupy
within the critical and historical appraisal. I
can't complain in this regard. There are
prestigious institutions that have been
interested in my pieces, and there they are
[housed], thank God.
JR.
How do you judge the artist-market interaction?
CL: This is quite a complex
issue. The market is a voracious mechanism to
and it doesn’t care who you are. You should
abide by the law of supply and demand. You have
to create art that doesn't betray you, and at
the same time, is a product for the collector's
consumption. It's hard. There are many ways
to link yourself as an artist to the market.
There are those who join up with a gallery, and
the gallery promotes the artist. I decided to
personally assume my management. The buyers who
approach me are interested, and they like what I
do. My wife helps me with the promotion, and
making myself known is something I learned in
Mexico that is essential for the creator, to
make his creation known.
JR: The market hasn't
treated you badly, and has this threatened your
aesthetic?
CL: Not at all. I have done
what I've felt like in my work. I paint what I
desire. My happiest paintings, for example, are
ripe with a sexuality that can offend the
conservatism of many families, and people still
buy them. There is something noteworthy about
this: while generating my art I don't flirt
with anybody's tastes but my own. I am
impulsive with what I paint, and I will continue
that way. Those who commission a piece do so
because they like my work and not because I am
willing to cater to them. And I won't stop
tackling themes in a crude or difficult manner
to please a buyer. I will keep doing what
satisfies me, independently of criticism or the
market; in this sense, I am totally irreverent
and try above all to be true to myself.
JR: Do you feel what you do
is tied to popular culture?
CL: I felt since I was in Cuba
and Mexico that I could enrich it in a decisive
way. Popular art is a vigorous force of
expression. I have the theory that pop culture
is the spinal column of all fine culture. In
general, I have absorbed any popular expression
from around the world, for example, in my town
for years they made floats and giant dolls for
the carnivals that had an enormous impact,
between kitschy and popular that were
fascinating, where you found present the sly
mockery of power with a great show of cunning
and ingenuity at the moment of creating all this
paraphernalia. These images left an important
influence in me.
JR:
Do you understand painting as a more permanent
expression?
CL: What is permanent is very
relative, what is permanent for one person is
impermanent for another. What I can tell you is
for a long time they have tried to kill
painting. Painting has many detractors, and,
nevertheless, it's still there, lasting. They
are detractors due to inability, ignorance, or
laziness. I am an artist, and I express myself
through traditional means with an emphasis on
painting, but foremost, I am a defender of art
that is one single art. I believe in the
solution of vital conflicts through aesthetics,
whatever the means of expression, be it drawing,
painting, sculpture, engraving, video,
installation, etc. The work of art as art will
be defined and resolved in itself. As I told
you, I feel comfortable in painting; it is the
medium in which I want to develop.
JR:
Let's take another point of the same question.
Do you believe in painting as a discursive
resource in the contemporary world?
CL: For me the contemporary
world is not attached to a medium. This is an
error of perception and a manifestation of
ignorance, as I mentioned previously. Modernity
defines the position that is taken in this
context and in the time you happen to live in.
I am as contemporary as somebody who does
altered photography or video. Today there are
many who judge the modernity of artists by the
medium they use to express themselves. For me
it's easy: the fact that art requires a powerful
capacity of invention fortunately does not mean
that every invention is art. Ask the people who
now visit the Prado Museum if they would stop
going simply because the galleries house neither
videos, nor installations, or other conceptual
assemblages. And there is the Prado and the
world's other great museums receiving visitors
constantly. People are interested in seeing
works that leave a mark, and that's enough.
Contemporary life is all that is happening now.
This conversation that we're having now beside
this bird-of-paradise is contemporary life.
This bird-of-paradise and its hundreds of leaves
playing in the light is contemporary. Its
exuberance, its showiness, and its calm shadow
are contemporary. And it prompts me to paint
this bird-of-paradise with its shadow, and I do
it in an unusual way. This is, definitely,
contemporary.
JR:
Do you feel removed from performance art or the
installation.
CL: As part of my career they
don't interest me. I have a more purist
vision. I prefer avant-garde theatrical or
movie decoration to an installation. Or I get
more enjoyment out of the monologue of an
intense theater piece than from performance
art. Which is not to say that I am unable to
praise alternate visual creations of high
quality, although they appear to me as mediums
of expression halfway between more concrete
forms of artistic representation. With these
forms of expression, I experience seeing them as
an attempt to add many things which, a good deal
of the time, mean nothing. For example, I
wonder about the installations, if they are
good, new, and expensive, how come when the art
fairs conclude these complex assemblages end up
in the garbage because there are not enough
reasons to take them home. With what I am
saying I am not disdaining these ways of visual
discourse today, but I am thinking aloud about
the misgivings I have about them.
JR:
Your great loves besides painting?
CL: My wife and my children.
The family is a compendium of love. Music,
especially Cuban music… Animals… Some carefully
chosen friends, we care for each other, and
protect each other. I am contented to know I am
a friend of my friends.
JR:
Claudia…?
CL: Claudia is my wife,
companion, and confidante. The mother of my
children, the one who watches out for their
education. The friend who helps me, a partner
in work. A harsh critic of my work. The person
who keeps my feet on the ground. The advisor.
The one who accompanies me in everyday life. My
children are the greatest reward. Claudia is an
essential part of me. God wanted something to
happen between us, so he put her in my path.
It's wonderful that when we bumped into each
other, we realized that we had to do things
together. We have been together for fifteen
years. Sometimes I look at her and I say to
myself, she ought to be annoyed from waking up
and looking at my face every morning. But here
we are, above all the stormy weather, respecting
the union that God willed one fine day.
Miami, FL
Summer 2007