When a painting by Zapata provoked blows at the Beaux-Arts

Fabien Chairezpainter from Chiapas, Mexicocaused controversy in 2019 by making a work where we could see the Caudillo del Sur, Emiliano Zapatawith feminine characteristics very contrary to his usual masculine image.

The painting, called The revolution, shows a Zapata who wears a pink hat and carries a pair of guns that shape his shoes. Likewise, a flag encircles her bare waist. The leader is mounted on a horse with an obvious erection.

The female image of a historical hero continually tied to masculinity has touched the sensitive fibers of nationalism for many. The discussion, first encapsulated in social networks and the media, divided into two clear camps which defended their position.

On the one hand, supporters of Chairez advocated the freedom of expression and the talent of the painter, arguing that art should disturb and communicate. The painting was precisely a commentary and critique of Mexican masculinity and machismo.

On the side of his detractors, there were those who admired the history of the revolutionary. Followers of the figure of Zapata who put on the table the importance of not touching the image of such an important character in this way, consider femininity as a crime.

An example of what was said in the media about this was what was said in the program Shoot, Margot, shootled at the time by Horacio Villalobos, Sergio Zurita and Claudia Silviawhen the guest Avelina Lesperwell-known art critic famous for his acid complaints about art contemporary and conceptualsaid “It caused a lot of controversy, do you know what causes me controversy? That they hung such a bad picture (…) You can paint anything, but you have to paint it well. This painting is awful.”

However, this virtual discussion went beyond written tweets and often uncivilized exchanges of arguments. On December 10 of that year, protesters against the painting gathered at the Palace of Fine Arts, where it was exhibited. The revolution as part of an art exhibition entitled “Zapata after Zapata”.

The demonstrators, who were peasants who were members of organizations affiliated with the revolutionaries, such as the Union of Agricultural Workers (UNTA), demanded that the painting be removed from the Beaux-Arts, as they considered the work to belittle the caudillo and the palace itself. There were shouts and slogans of all kinds.

The situation got out of hand when the rival group, the one who sympathized with Fabián Cháirez and his work, showed up at the Palacio de Bellas Artes to also defend their position. These were members of the LGBT+ community trying to explain to the protesters the meaning of the painting..

It was impossible to establish a dialoguebecause the men and women who were against the painter’s work, which is also part of the LGBT+ communitythey started throwing homophobic criesand it became a pitched battle not just of offense, but of physical attacks.

At some point in the discussion, the blows appeared. The admirers of Emiliano Zapata attacked the opposing group, made up mainly of young people. In videos and photos that can still be found on social networks, we see the attackers beat up boys in front of the Palacio de Bellas Artes, very close to the Alameda Central.

After the confrontation, the conversation in the networks and the media continued, adding to the dispute the fateful fact. This situation, far from worsening the prestige of Chairéz, means that the economic value of the painting “The revolution”it will triple.