© 1969-2017 RAUL GUERRERO. All Rights Reserved. images on this site cannot be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright holder.

Website by anaimation.design

Oaxaca

Cue Art Foundation

511 West 25th Street, New York, NY 10001
January 21 – March 13, 2010

Richard Kuhlenscmidt Gallery

9000 Melrose Avenue, Los Angeles, CA
June – September 1985

Works on View:



“That style might be defined as primitive but not naïve, with a touch of magic realism from the time and incorporating a narrative feeling of space coming from his sculptural tableaus of the past. The elements that made the sculptural environments stand out had passed into the paintings.” — Allen Ruppersberg

Art in America Review

Oaxaca

Art in America
Raúl Guerrero at Richard Kuhlenschmidt Gallery / Review by Robert L. Pincus, February 1986

“The images in Raúl Guerreroʼs recent oil paintings (all 1985) are highly realistic renderings of unreal scenes and events. Taken one way, they are like mystical visions: windows on a world which defies natural laws. Yet they cast an ironic eye on the view from these windows, since there is a large element of visual cliché in Guerreroʼs work” – Robert L. Pincus

The Pool of Palenque evokes the sensibility of Disneyʼs Fantasia even as it manifests a yearning for genuine religiosity. Surrounded by brightly colored butterflies, a fourth-century Mayan mask floats in mid-air while a frog noncommittally observes its defiance of gravity. In Undiscovered Chamber, the three small Zapotec figurines gathered around a bowl look more like living, breathing gnomes than stone relics.

Guerrero is best known for the conceptually oriented work he created in Los Angeles during the mid to late ʻ70s. In theses recent paintings he returned to the concerns of the 1979 installation for the gallery of the Claremont Graduate School, in which he recreated, among other things, the bird whistles made by early California Native Americans. The whistles were hooked up to play continuously, and a Yaqui Devil Mask, often used by Native Americans in performed rituals, was made to revolve continuously in a circular fashion.

The recent work exudes a similar fascination with aboriginal culture of the Americas, but shifts form a Conceptualist to a quasi-Surrealist approach. Yet even though Guerrero uses an illustrative mode of picture making indebted to Dali and Magritte, he remains true to his Conceptualist origins. Desire pictures a warehouse of objects from various epochs in art history. In the foreground, a Gauguinesque nude has her back to the viewer and the Venus de Milo looks our way; in the background, innumerable sculptures, many of them fragments of nudes, are piled up like so much detritus. The painting is less about personal desire than the forms in which art has represented desire.

Guerreroʼs paintings owe less to Surrealist sources than to conventional Hollywood clichés of the surrealist style. The image of the levitating Mayan mask in The Pool of Palenque reads like a bit of cinematic hocus-pocus rather than a genuine synthesis of dream and reality. The Last Dream is equally theatrical. It depicts partially destroyed wooden gates, adorned with a knocker in the shape of a human hand, through which we glimpse an unpopulated Mexican courtyard bathed in lavender light.

But Guerreroʼs emphasis on Surreal scenes, however self-consciously conventional they may be, hints at his desire to transcend cliché – his desire to find a pictorial vocabulary which takes account of the subconscious. The current work suggest that at some point Guerrero may be able to cast aside an iconography of kitsch infused Surrealism in favor of a more directly visionary mode of painting.

art_in_america

Artforum Los Angeles Review

Oaxaca

Artforum Los Angeles
Raúl Guerrero at Richard Kuhlenschmidt Gallery, Los Angeles, CA / Review by Susan C. Larsen, September 1985

“There are no wildly lunging leopards, no tigers burning bright, in Raul Guerreroʼs rain forests of the imagination. He gives us tightly drawn, static relics of pre-Columbian Mexico, and dreamy, postcard images of sexual desire, but stands apart from them, as a spectator in his own narrative.” – Susan C. Larsen

Guerreroʼs images are stylized and commonplace: the ruined temples dismembered statuary, deserted city squares, exotic birds, and jungle cats are like an illustrators fantasy of ancient Mexico. Engaging in a parody of Surrealist juxtaposition, Guerrero manages to drain this rich undergrowth of its potency. His sharp-edged, impersonal way of painting suits his program very well, yielding up little, if any, emotion. American born, Guerrero lives in San Diego, near the border with Mexico, the country of his ancestors. Many have tried to renew the same fund of imagery he explores: films, adventure novels, solipsistic murals, and other channels of popular culture are rife with the derelict remains of old Mexico. Guerrero has no such goal; he shoes us how clichés falsify experience in this group of paintings, though he still pulls romantic strings along the way.

During the ʻ70s Guerrero used elements of native Mexican culture as building blocks for his investigations in conceptual art. He explored ancient musical instruments, masks, and rituals performances for his work in photography and video. The archaeological element in his style and subjects provided a welcome richness amid the didactic neutrality of much art of the time.

The enterprise of the painter, however, is more declarative than analytic, even if analysis is its primary subject. In these paintings Guerrero functions as a conceptual artist, opening up a broad cultural and emotional landscape and then abruptly closing the door. His tight draftsmanship, featureless pigment, and smoothed contours are studied to the point of lifelessness. This contrasts sharply, however, with a group of his black-and-white ink sketches in an adjacent room, which reveal a rich, warm, bravura performance lavished – perhaps wasted – upon simple genre scenes of barnyard chickens and plants.

Passion does not need expressionist form to be legitimate, as Magritte demonstrated so potently. Passion does need sustained focus, even obsession; the light in the eye of the lover is required, not the cool, impartial gaze of the clinician. If Guerreroʼs purpose is to undermine the Surrealist concept of the marvelous, using the myths of Latin America, he has succeeded; but to what end, and at what cost to the life of his own art?

art_forum

Los Angeles Herald Examiner Review

Oaxaca

Los Angeles Herald Examiner
Raúl Guerrero at Richard Kuhlenschmidt Gallery, Los Angeles, CA / Review by Christopher Knight, June 2, 1985

“Guerreroʼs art comes close to B-movie mysticism, but his works rarely plunge over that dubious edge” – Christopher Knight

Raúl Guerreroʼs recent paintings are double-take pictures. They donʼt jerk your head around in a sudden shock of recognition as much as surreptitiously slip the rug out from under you, leaving your equilibrium momentarily suspended and floating. At their best, his paintings are visual conundrums in which a tone of conjecture, rather than conclusions, is sounded.

Remarkably enough, the artist accomplishes this feat through a kitschy veneer in which shallowness is all. A languorous jaguar encountering an ancient wall-painting, a pre-Columbian temple glimpsed through a lush and erotic jungle, a ruined door opening onto a monastic courtyard, an apparitional head surrounded by butterflies and hovering over a still pond − these and other Romantic images of a debased, pulp-novel sort dominate the show. The imagery is orchestrated in a straightforward, iconic frontality, and is rendered in a slick, deadpan, uninflected style, in which no trace of the artistʼs hand is visible. With their graphic look and often exotic subject matter, these paintings enter into territory that is perilously close to cornball metaphysics: They exude a steamy, B-movie mysticism of Aztec and Mayan hidden truths. Rarely, however, do they slip over the edge. In almost every case, the paintings are composed from a close and precise foreground that presses hard against a background remote in time or space, like actors on a stage before a painted backdrop. Any suggestion of a middle ground has been excised.

An abrupt collision thus takes place between immediate sensual, close-at-hand, experiences and the anticipation of a remote, far-off encounter. Perversely, that anticipated encounter is in an arena that is the residue of the past: The background images depict barren desert hills, colonial or pre-Columbian ruins, a waterfall in an ancient forest and the like. The legacy of a communal cultural history is offered as the destiny for future experience. In this way, a sense of impending revelation marks these canvases − itʼs as if an obscuring veil is about to be lifted – but they stubbornly hold their tongues. Guerrero plays on the familiar promise that artistic experience will change your life – and then pulls up short.

The future tense is drained from these paintings, and in its place one finds an acknowledgement that the present is neither free nor unencumbered: itʼs always bounded by beliefs tenaciously pushing their way into the foreground from the recesses of the past. Belief, particularly religious belief, is everywhere suggested in Guerreroʼs chosen iconography of ritual objects and symbols of birth, regeneration and revelation. Yet the disclosure made by his strangely compelling brand of kitsch conceptualism has more to do with faith itself than with faith in a particular doctrine. In these idiosyncratic (and occasionally very funny) paintings, be pries open and splits apart the comfortable reliance on unquestioning assumption that is the nature of faith. Thereʼs no middle ground depicted in these pictures because thatʼs the space the spectator occupies. Between unthinking habit and unfocused desire, Guerrero seems intent on establishing some room in which to move.

los_angeles_herald_examiner