Sasha wrote:
Thanks for the promo for my show, the audio for which
is now up on the web.  And for clarification's sake
I'll just add that the film "Frida" was based on the
biography of Frida Kahlo written by Hayden Herrera.
Art critic Margaret Lindauer, interviewed for this
edition of Living Room, takes Herrera's Fridolatry to
task.

Yes, I should have said that my review relied on Lindauer's book, not the flick. In any case, here's what I said:

There seems to be little in director Julie Taymor's background that would
indicate an affinity for Frida Kahlo, other than as a peg to hang some
rather fanciful cinematic images on. With a career that began in puppetry,
she is best known for her stage direction of Walt Disney's "The Lion King",
a favorite for NYC tourists. Her major film credit prior to "Frida" was an
adaptation of Shakespeare's "Titus Andronicus" that appears to follow the
postmodernist convention of throwing historicity into the wastebasket. One
minute you are in ancient Rome, the next you are in Mussolini's Italy. With
this sort of quirkiness in her background, it should be no surprise that
scant interest in Mexican politics is evident in her film. That would only
get in the way of her story.

In a typical scene, Kahlo (Selma Hayek) and Rivera (Alfred Molina) go to a
wild party where Mexico's entire bohemian left has gathered to drink and to
dance. When a sultry female guest is offered up as a dancing partner to the
winner of a contest to see who can chug-a-lug the most Tequila, Frida
defeats all the men. After doing a vigorous tango with the woman (despite
the fact that the historical Frida was in a wheelchair much of the time),
she plants a passionate kiss on her mouth. This might make for a lively
minute or two of film; it does nothing to advance our understanding of
Frida Kahlo. It would have been much more likely for her to engage in
passionate discussion about art and politics at this party rather than
passionate dancing, but neither Taymor nor the screenwriters would want to
bore an audience (or themselves) with the aspirations of the Mexican
cultural left.

For the details on Frida Kahlo's real life, I urge readers to look at
Margaret A. Lindauer's "Devouring Frida : The Art History and Popular
Celebrity of Frida Kahlo". This is an excellent introduction to her
artistic evolution, which matters little to Taymor. It is also an
examination of the Kahlo cult that began in the early 1980s when her work
first began to be exhibited in galleries and museums worldwide. Hayden
Herrera, whose biography of Kahlo caters to these trends and is credited in
Taymor's film, is the main target of Lindauer in her attempt to demystify
and historicize the artist. In an October 28, 1990 NY Times article titled
"Why Frida Kahlo Speaks to the 90's", Herrera wrote:

"Like a goddess, she is referred to by her first name only. Madonna,
Isabella Rossellini and Cindy Crawford are fans. She has captivated
everyone from scholars writing dissertations to Chicano muralists, fashion
designers, feminists, artists and homosexuals. According to Sassy, a
magazine for teen-age girls, she is one of the 20 women of this century
that American girls most admire.

"From her death in 1954 until the late 1970's, the Mexican painter Frida
Kahlo was virtually unknown outside her native country. Today she has
become an international cult figure. You can buy Frida Kahlo buttons,
posters, postcards, T-shirts, comics and jewelry. You might even come upon
such fetishistic objects as a Frida Kahlo mask or a framed self-portrait
into which a silver sacred heart has been inserted. In 1984, in recognition
of Kahlo's pre-eminence among Mexican women artists -- indeed, in the
opinion of many Frida is the greatest painter Mexico has produced -- the
Mexican Government decreed her art to be national patrimony. (She thus
joins an elite company of male artists that includes her husband, the
muralist Diego Rivera.)"

Landauer writes, "Herrera's interpretation of Frida and Diego Rivera
implies that Kahlo's marriage profoundly affected her character, causing
her to abandon professional aspirations and restricting herself to the
repressive social expectations of a devoted wife." If nothing else,
Taymor's film is slavishly devoted to this portrait of Kahlo.

Far from expressing the frustrations of a wife under the shadow of a
better-known husband, Kahlo's main goal artistically was to express the
beliefs of a philosophical current known as Arielism. This can best be
described as an anti-imperialist ideology that saw Mexico's salvation in
its indigenous past. (In Taymor's film, this is reflected more or less as
homesickness for Mexico when she was in NYC with Rivera working on the
Rockefeller mural.) Arielism was decidedly opposed to any kind of
modernization, including presumably the sort of scientific socialism that
Trotsky defended.

full: http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/culture/Frida.htm



Louis Proyect, Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org

Reply via email to