Scholarlink

In 1964, under the directionFolk art of the artistUniversity extension NemesioChile Antúnez, the MuseumMuseum of Contemporary ArtContemporary Art held the exhibition Chilean Folk ArtFolk art which included craft pieces from different genres and territories of the country. To revitalize the discussion in this area and establish a connection between “cultured artArt” and “people’s artArt” (MAC, 1964), the organization proposed a vision of these objects distant from the folkloric view that governed them until then, instead highlighting the social value of the artist-craftsman as a producer of plastic expressions. This perspective, in line with the ideal of a “living museumMuseum” promoted by Antúnez (Lihn, 1963; Novoa & Avaria, 2022), generated tensions within the Institute of Extension of Plastic ArtsPlastic arts of the University of ChileChile (IEAP), both for the questioning of the work of the MuseumMuseum of Popular American ArtArt (MAPA), which had more than two decades of activity, as well as for the administration of the IEAP of the museumsMuseum under its charge. The implications of this dispute exemplify the problematization of the concept of Folk ArtFolk art within the University of ChileChile in the years prior to the University Reform, confronting the anthropological and traditional vision led by MAPA, with a more dynamic and inclusive one, akin to contemporary artistic institutionalism. This chapter analyzes the curatorial policies of these university museumsMuseum in terms of Folk ArtFolk art, with the aim of recognizing their contribution to the recent discussion on this term in areas such as visual artsArt, designDesign and crafts. For this, a historiographic and qualitative approach will be taken from perspectives from cultural studies, artArt history and designDesign.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Folk Art and University Extension: Some Categories in Tension During the 1960s in Chile

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Paulina F. González-Valenzuela,
  • Eduardo E. Castillo-Espinoza

摘要

In 1964, under the directionFolk art of the artistUniversity extension NemesioChile Antúnez, the MuseumMuseum of Contemporary ArtContemporary Art held the exhibition Chilean Folk ArtFolk art which included craft pieces from different genres and territories of the country. To revitalize the discussion in this area and establish a connection between “cultured artArt” and “people’s artArt” (MAC, 1964), the organization proposed a vision of these objects distant from the folkloric view that governed them until then, instead highlighting the social value of the artist-craftsman as a producer of plastic expressions. This perspective, in line with the ideal of a “living museumMuseum” promoted by Antúnez (Lihn, 1963; Novoa & Avaria, 2022), generated tensions within the Institute of Extension of Plastic ArtsPlastic arts of the University of ChileChile (IEAP), both for the questioning of the work of the MuseumMuseum of Popular American ArtArt (MAPA), which had more than two decades of activity, as well as for the administration of the IEAP of the museumsMuseum under its charge. The implications of this dispute exemplify the problematization of the concept of Folk ArtFolk art within the University of ChileChile in the years prior to the University Reform, confronting the anthropological and traditional vision led by MAPA, with a more dynamic and inclusive one, akin to contemporary artistic institutionalism. This chapter analyzes the curatorial policies of these university museumsMuseum in terms of Folk ArtFolk art, with the aim of recognizing their contribution to the recent discussion on this term in areas such as visual artsArt, designDesign and crafts. For this, a historiographic and qualitative approach will be taken from perspectives from cultural studies, artArt history and designDesign.