Revolution as Ritual: Diego Rivera's National Palace Mural

Author(s): Leonard Folgarait

Source: Oxford Art Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1 (1991), pp. 18-33
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1360275
Accessed: 18/11/2010 11:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oxford Art
Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
Revolution as Ritual: Diego Rivera's National Palace Mural

LEONARD FOLGARAIT

The Mexican Revolution of 1910 was the event that very beginning of this period of ideological struggle,
projected its participantsinto the twentieth century. Rivera painted the history of Mexico for the regime
The very term Revolucidn was new on the minds and on the walls of its central headquarters.5
lips of those eager to transform their nation from a In 1929,6Rivera began painting the vast walls in
nineteenth-century dictatorship into a model of the large stairway of the National Palace in Mexico
modern political and social organisation. The City, a massive structurethat contained the officesof
appeal and power of this myth is felt to this day, as the President and the Cabinet, various government
the ruling party promotes the echoed slogans of 1910 bureaucracies,and the Senate chambers.7The walls
as its basis for legitimacy. It was not clear until 1920, painted are the three that enclose this large stairway,
however, after a decade of bloody civil war between leading from a central courtyard to the second floor
powerful generals, that the Revolution1 had any (Figs. 1-5).
chance for success or for the implementation of its In general (a detailed description follows below),
principles. The 1920s marked the end of the military the three walls present a comprehensive, panoramic
conflict and allowed for a consolidation of the history of Mexico. The right wall, TheAztec World,s
Revolution under a stable government and social starts a right-to-left visual narrative that continues
peace. The firstpresidents of this period encouraged with From the Conquestto 1930 on the central wall,
and financed an educational and cultural pro- and concludes with Mexico Todayand Tomorrowon
gramme, a strategy of propaganda directed at the the left wall. Dozens of historical portraits are
urban and rural masses who were anxious to see included in scenes of pivotal importance from the
how the new regime would serve their needs. In this Conquest, the colonial period, the Independence
context, the so-called Mexican mural movement movement, the Revolution, and the present of the
started. Large surfaces of public walls were put to late 1920s and mid 1930s. Although there are some
work bearing images of cultural and social progress. episodes of this history set in the deep spaces of the
Toward the end of the 1920s, the government landscape, most of the scenes and figuresare pressed
began to re-programme its goals. It is within this up against the picture plane.
context of a shift in the direction of the 'Revolu- The viewer, on the walk up the stairs, encounters
tionary' state that I will examine a major mural the mural first up-close to the walls, somewhat as a
project by Diego Rivera, the dominant Mexican co-participantwith the painted historical characters.
painter of this time. Once on the second storey overlook, the now distant
On July 18, 1928, President-electAlvaro Obregon observerstudies what she or he hasjust experienced,
was assassinated by a Catholic fanatic. At the time of that having been an illusionistic immersion in the
his death, Obregon was the most powerful and historical drama. The moment of this second-stage
respected Mexican leader. Plutarco Elias Calles, observation is therefore disinterested behaviour by
president in 1924-1928, thereupon became the definition, a stepping out of the flow of events in
Strong Man in Mexico, 'eljefemdximode la revolucion' order to see, to assess, to control.
[the great chief of the Revolution], and for the next Something important has happened to the viewer
six years dominated three short-termpuppet presid- in the course of this structured contact with the
ents.2 That period is called 'el maximato'in dubious mural. The entire sequence of approach, arrival,
honour to him. participation,distancing and assessment makes for a
Calles had already, during his own administra- total change in the quality of the experience,
tion, redirected the course of state policy away from marking clear distinctions between its beginning
social reform based on satisfying workers' and and its ending. That the experience appears to be a
peasants' demands for their share of the Revolu- ritual, a performance of some sort, will lead me into
tionary spoils and back toward a deliberately pro- considerationsof the mechanics of such, as well as to
capitalist development in favour of the presence of suggest its historically specific purposes and whose
foreign capital in industry, and began a systematic needs it was intended to satisfy.
co-optation of the masses.3 In spite of this return to A mural of such complexity as this needs a
pre-Revolutionary statesmanship, the government schematic description of the main events and
still presented itself as authentically Revolutionary. persons it contains in advance of any analysis. What
The contradiction between behaviour and propa- follows is not an exhaustive point-by-point invent-
ganda made it necessary for the scales to tip in favour ory, but rather a focused selection of the most
of propaganda in order to legitimise policy.4 At the pertinent subjects.9

THE OXFORDART JOURNAI - 14:1 1991

18
 The subject of the mural is the history of Mexico,
from its pre-Columbian times to an imagined future.
Beginning with the right wall, the north wall,
painted in 1929 (Fig. 2), also begins with the chrono-
logy of the subject of the mural. This is the world of
the pre-Conquest, a panorama of cultural and social
activitiesset in a volcanic landscape. The great light-
skinned god, Quetzalcoatl (Feathered Serpent),
appears in the upper centre holding an audience. To
the right are examples of productive activities by
farmers and artisans. To the left is a scene of the
deliveryof tribute, as bearers of subject tribes labour
up the incline of a pyramid toward a costumed priest
and warrior.Just behind the last bearer is a scene of
Fig. 1. Schematic perspective of the main staircase dissent against the excesses of Aztec power, as a
at the National Palace, Mexico City. Figure speaker before a small group gestures defiance
numbers indicate location of mural painting by toward the display of that power. Left of this scene is
Diego Rivera. (Rendering and photo: author) its narrative sequel, class warfare between the
warriorsof the regime and its slaves. In the distance,
an erupting volcano propels the face of the
Feathered Serpent out of its crater. This figure is

[ ' ~ ' '? :"3":~'~":>'

"M"e... .... ...
iW
iS
M^^^gj,.,;,; . ...............}i:i.::..i.
}, . .*..*?..i
: .. ....,y
."- . f: . K'H '

to theFuture,(detail, right wall). (Photo: Dirk Bakker,Detroit

Fig. 2. Rivera, HistoryofMexico:Fromthe Conquest
Institute of Arts)

THE OXFORDART JOURNAL- 14:1 1991 19

Fig. 3. Central wall (detail, right hand section). (Photo: Dirk Bakker, Detroit Institute of Arts)

seen again to the right as a stylised Aztec glyph, The narrativeon the central wall begins with the
flying and bearing on its back its human form, Conquest of 1521. At the lower right, Spanish
Quetzalcoatl. soldiers load and fire muskets and a mortar. From
The central, west wall, painted in 1929-1930 that vantage point, all attention and energy are
(Figs. 3-4), is so loaded with figures and events that directed to the lower centre of the wall. Within this
it tends to flatten out at first into mere coloured area, thirty-odd figures from both sides of the
patterning.Who the figures are and what they might conflict tangle in close, hand-to-hand combat.
mean seems, at firstappearance, less important than Hernan Cortes is the major figure on horseback in
that they simply occupy wall space without a the centre of the bottom level. He lifts a lance against
particular order. To sort out this apparent con- a feather-costumedIndian standing before his horse.
fusion, I will follow the linear history as begun in and The immediate anticlimax to the Conquest, the
continued from the right wall. colonial period, is shown in a narrow horizontal

20 THE OXFORDART JOURNAI.- 14:1 1991

Fig. 4. Central wall (detail, left hand section). (Photo: Dirk Bakker, Detroit Institute of Arts)

band running from above the firing soldiers on the milian, shown in the far right with his split, spiral
right, continuing above the central battle scene (with beard. He had been sent to Mexico in 1864 by
the important exception of the area under the central Napoleon III and was executed in 1867 under orders
arch occupied by a golden eagle), and continuing to of Juarez.
the left on that same level to the bonfire. Next in In the next arch to the right (Fig. 6), figures from
historical order is the movement of Independence of the Revolution of 1910 are depicted. Toward the left
1810, when the Spanish colonial government was centre, in white plumed hat and moustache is
removed from power. This occurs under the central PorfirioDiaz, dictator of Mexico from 1876-1910. It
arch, above the eagle. The balding, white-haired was against him and his policies that the Revolution
priest is Hidalgo, great leader of the Independence, was born. At the right centre, in formal clothes and
holding the broken chains of servitude. presidential sash, is Francisco I. Madero, whose
Jumping in this historical progression to the far challenge removed Diaz and in turn elected him as
right arch, the Mexican-American war is repres- first president of the Revolution. Madero is ringed
ented, specifically the penetration of the U.S. Army by twenty or more figures representing every
into Mexico City in 1847 and the armed resistanceto possible political position taken during the bloody
it. In the next arch to the left, along the same years of 1910-1917 and immediately after, some of
horizontal line, one sees more episodes from the these violently opposed to one another. Most
history of Independent Mexico. Presendent Benito important of the historical figures is Emiliano
Juarez holds up the 'CONSTITUTION' and Zapata, at the top right with a large sombrero, radical
'LAWS OF REFORM' of 1857. Juarez is sur- agrarian leader of the South. Here also, to the far
rounded by important figures of the period. The right centre, is Venustiano Carranza,president from
historical narrativejumps next to the far left arch, 1916-1920, the man who with his chief ideologue,
which contains another moment of defense against Luis Cabrera,to the right, dominated the draftingof
foreign imperialism, this time French. In this case, the Constitution of 1917. Carranza holds up the
the Mexicans are triumphant over Emperor Maxi- numbers of Articles of that document. And now a

TIIE OXFORDART JOURNAI - 14:1 1991 21

 WN&'

A z
I

Fig. 5. Left wall. (Photo: Dirk Bakker, Detroit Institute of Arts)

brief return to the central arch (Fig. 7), to point out wall, describing primarily one moment in history,
Zapata again, at the top of the arch, behind the rather than many scattered and mixed ones as does
banner. The two grouped presidents to the left are, the central wall. The lower right contains scenes of
from the left, Obreg6n and Calles. intimidation and violence between armed and gas-
Finally, the eagle in the centre (Fig. 7). The figure masked defenders of the regime and their victims in
is copied from an Aztec stone carving.? As a symbol, both rural and urban settings. Directly above, a
it refers to a period before that pictured in the right workerin overallsagitates a crowd, and Mexico City
wall, back to the very founding of the Aztec capital, burns in class warfare in the distance. The central
Tenochtitlan, now Mexico City. As the Aztecs had section at the bottom shows the teaching and
migrated southward from unknown regions in reading of revolutionarytexts, and continuing up the
search of a permanent home, they looked for an incline, various labourers in typical poses and
eagle perched on a cactus, holding a serpent in its actions. In the centre of the wall, Rivera divided the
mouth, as marking the site where they should settle, large space into distinct compartments and areas,
the place chosen by prophesy (Fig. 9). Thus, this creating a succession of staged actions. These
image of origins appears on the modern Mexican include capitalists round a ticker tape machine; ex-
flag (Fig. 8) and has represented a nationalist President Calles flanked by evil advisors, one a
ideology for over a century." I shall return to remark general and the other a priest; and the rich and the
on the reason for this particularversion of the eagle Church in various conditions of decadence and
holding not a serpent, but an Aztec war banner in its debauchery. Above this piecemeal architecture of
beak. 12 cells rises the dominant figure on this wall. Karl
The left, south wall, was painted in 1935 (Fig. 5). Marx holds a page from The CommunistManifesto,
Its narrative quality is the same as that of the right containing: 'THE HISTORY OF ALL HITHER-

22 THE OXFORDARTJOURNAL - 14:1 1991

 i .
-..... I-.... -s-- - (Photo: Dirk B D oit
,Inti..te
Fig. 6. Detail of Fig. 4, upper section under second arch from left. (Photo:Dirk Bakker,DetroitInstituteof
Arts)

TO EXISTING SOCIETY IS THE HISTORY OF including, an edit out of a vast index of possibilities.
CLASS STRUGGLE ... IT IS NOT A MATTER The issue of chronology is where the pictorialproject
OF REFORMING SOCIETY AS IT EXISTS, becomes complex in a different manner than the
BUT RATHER OF FORMING A NEW ONE.' He written one. Unless thematically organised, conven-
addresses directly a trio of worker, soldier, and tional written histories are little more than elabor-
peasant and points to the left at a perfectly ordered ated lists. Both the production and the consumption
society of the future, with rational cities and thriving of this linear structure is point by point, the
agriculture, all in front of a rising sun. experience being temporal.
With the National Palace mural, Rivera first tried Rivera as the painter-historian encountered a
his hand at narrative painting of a special sort. On problematic of a different order. Although the faces
three huge walls, meeting at two corers to extend and events are painted one afteranother, in a specific
one long, continuous surface of 275 square metres,'3 order, the composition depends upon an instant-
he set out to depict an entire national history. In aneity of vision as experienced by the viewer, the all-
none of his previous murals had the project been so at-once, non-temporal quality of seeing the mural.
simple and so complex at the same time.14 The Due to the crushing multitude of figures and their
simplicity is that of having one story to tell on one complex interaction, it registers at this level first as
large surface, the complexity is of pictorial organisa- flat, generalised, coloured forms covering large wall
tion. In painting the history of Mexico, Rivera was surfaces,a sort of pluralism turned into a singularity,
behaving as a historian, faced with the same like the many words on a printed page becoming a
problems as that of a historian who writes, of how unified visual field.
best to tell that history. Both the painter and the Where, in that case, is the beginning of the
writer will select those elements and events worth painting?And is this the same question as 'Where is

TIlE OXFORDART JOURNA. - 14:1 1991 23

Fig. 7. Detail of Fig. 4, vertical section under third arch from left. (Photo: Dirk Bakker, Detroit Institute of Arts)

24 THE OXFORD ARTJO'RNAI. - 14:1 1991

nr
%gf ? positioned by order of occurrence of historical
importance. A relentless evenness of attention is
given to the entire surface of the central wall, almost
of the same sort if the wall were unpainted, that is,
not organised visually in order to manipulate the eye
and the mind in any particular manner. I want to
emphasise that this quality is not shared by the two
side walls, as they contain a narrowernarrativefocus
each, unmixed and unqualified by other episodes to
the degree seen in the central wall.
That history is not presented with linear coher-
ence on the centralwall implies that it is presented in
its own order somewhere else, that there is a pre-
- ----- -
narrative to the mural, that being the collection of
many previous tellings in print, visual, and oral form
of the history this mural tells. Mexican history comes
Fig. 8. Flag of Mexico. (Photo: author) to the mural pre-narratised,already textualised as a
purely discursive logic to which the images become
attached, which they illustrate.And as we make our
own 'sense' of the images, we of course are super-
imposing a verbal, discursive logic upon the visual
one, such as this very piece of writing is now doing.
Because the viewer is forced into the role of the
narrator,to put the original story back on track, the
painted images are positioned within and sur-
rounded by a determinedly verbal and discursive
process. The central wall can take liberties with
visually linear historical order by making a patch-
work quilt of events because it relies on this system of
discursiveness to make it mean, to make it mean
correctly in the process of looking with an histor-
ically informed eye. The story is put right because it
was right to begin with, and the legalistic logic of
history controls the unruly visual narrative. The
experience of viewing this mural negotiates an
agreement between history proper and this imaged
version of it, between their powers to present a
narrative,but due to the power of the pre-and post-
narrative processes, the discursive has the upper
Fig. 9. Eagle emblem on central panel of Mexican hand.
flag. (Photo: author) The mural makes this clear by including writing
as a sign of that pre-text or pre-narrativeinto the
imaged scene. In the central arch, Zapata presents
his famous slogan, 'TIERRA r LIBERTAD'
the beginning of the narrative?'Does the painting [LAND AND LIBERTY], on a banner, and on the
'start'at the beginning of the history it tells, or at the left wall Marx holds up the fiery phrases of The
first image the eye selects out of all others, or is it Communist Manifesto among several examples.
without a beginning proper due to the instant Events are indicated more by their legalistic 'record,'
comprehensiveness of viewing, making the whole of by the word that legitimises them, than by explicit
the narrative its own beginning, thereby ruling out action. This differencebetween word and action is a
narrativity altogether? One might, for instance, pointed one, especially in the contrast between the
depending on the random targeting of the eye, begin active fighting of the Conquest and the still posing of
at the middle of the chronology, or at the end, figures in the central arch directly above (Fig. 7).
reading backwardsin time, making the past sensible Mexican history is presented as either rushing
in terms of the future. forwardwith full thrust or stalling completely. The
Again, the possibility that this is not a narrativeat on-and-off switching of this process ruptures any
all is presented, in that the isolated moments of possible coherence of a single narrativemode.15And
chronology in the central wall can be seen as merely it is precisely writing that stalls the machinery of
mixed and juxtaposed as cloned modules, next to historical movement. Where it appears, figures
and amongst each other because they belong in that freeze, assume a shared orientation toward the space
history all at once as equals, and not necessarily of the viewer, and bubble to the surface of the wall.

TIlE OXFORDART JOURNAI - 14:1 1991 25

Their bodies also tend to be seen incomplete, and red banners in its beak, the signal for war. The
obscured by their very clustering to the point of eagles belong to both writing and imagery at once
sometimes simply being a flat array of heads. and mediate between the two literacies, making for
Writing stops the action in space, and denies space an extremely efficient form of communication.
itself, because the eye, with the switch to the writing- However, I want to stress that this mediation
dominant mode, needs to move in writing's own between modes ultimately favours the discursive
space, or non-space, flat across a surface, word by over the figurative.
word, face by face, scanning from edge to edge the My point is that in this mural, images are rarely
evenness of the plane of writing. When one kind of purely images and writing is not exclusively con-
seeing is countered by another, the writing mode cerned with its normal, extended, fully discursive
wins, but with writing absent, action rolls along in conventions. Neither mode can entirely be itself
real time and space asserts depth and ambience. because they vie for each other's turf and behaviour.
A particularexample of this process is seen in the The result of this sparring display is to observe the
centralwall, second arch from the left (Fig. 6), where workings of two manners of representation, by
Carranzaand Cabrerahold up referencesto import- definition opposed to each other, engaged in an
ant Articles of the 1917 Constitution and the dates of attempt to deny that mutual difference and to
their implementation respectively.16 The hammer pretend an overlapping sameness, a near con-
and sickle brandished aloft by members of the gruence of usually juxtaposed categories, one now
crowd, separated and therefore weaker than when explained partly in terms of the other.
crossed, are being swallowed up by the contours of All of the examples of writing in the mural are
the sheets of paper, and have to be seen in termsof about the imposition of order through legal systems.
the legal power and formal abstraction of those The words are sanctions and proof of power, of the
words upon that plane of paper. Action, political sort to subject those in its legitimate because legal
action, its very tools of implementation, is sur- influence to follow its bidding. Thus, the events and
rendered to the graphic stillness and order of people in the mural are not only the subjects of the
writing, and thus becomes a form of politics where painting, but are also subjects of (as subject to) the
practice is stopped by theory. See, for instance, how juridical power of the various texts.
the holders of these tools disappear into the crowd, It is in these terms that the details of the presenta-
becoming disembodied and unavailable for pro- tion of the central eagle can now be understood. The
ductive action. eagle on a cactus holding a serpent in its beak, as we
I want to stress here that the mural, in prioritising know, is universally known in Mexico as its most
the discursive over the figurative, is making a real explicit symbol of nationalism and of the myth of its
choice of how to tell a story, how to organise origins (Fig. 9). It is purely figurativein that it has no
knowledge, and how to condition its viewing and writing attached to it. The eagle in the mural
public consumption. perches on a cactus, but rather than a serpent, it
Over each of the outer arches hovers an eagle holds Aztec war banners in its beak (Fig. 7). This is
flattened out and unnoticed by the protagonists in important for several reasons. One is that any eagle
the immediate scenes (Figs. 3-4). The eagles operate on a cactus automatically begins a train of associa-
outside of the space and thus the notice of these tion leading to its identification as the founding,
figures. They read well, however, on the flat of the mythic, serpent eagle. This presumption is wrong
wall, for the mural viewer.Their emblematic quality here, and is corrected at the point of apprehending
is underscored by their own bearing of signs, the the banners rather than the expected serpent, but
arrows and the crown. The central eagle performs belongs to the first reading as an adjusted presump-
likewise over the fighting below. The graphic logic of tion. Another reason is that this war eagle does
the central eagle, flat and pasted-on, has deter- combine a form of 'writing' - the banners as
mined, due to the authority of its centrality,the look graphic, coded information - with the figurative
and function of the others; the function in that this eagle, thereby doubly valent in its behaviour rather
eagle was not present at the event below it exceptas a than singly as is its serpent-bearingcounterpart.
flat image carved on a flat stone. It is important that The war eagle becomes the condensation of the
that source was not a sculpture in the full round, nor processes under discussion, of the co-occupation of a
even in high relief, but rather giving up ultimate single communication space by both a verbal and a
fullness and space to the discursive and writerly figurative literacy and of the ultimate power of the
qualities of the flat stone. Smaller eagles behaving in verbal over the figurative.Whereas the serpent eagle
the same graphic manner are seen underneath the is all action and drama, an end in itself in that its
central arch on the war banner of Cuauhtemoc (the entire image is a message, this war eagle is but the
Indian directly below the central eagle, his name standard bearer of a message, a means to an end.
meaning 'falling eagle'), he himself as an eagle Rather than overpoweringits prey, it is demoted to a
pressed against the picture plane, and the flagpole mere illustration of the militant aggressions of the
eagle floating over Obreg6n's shoulder. And, as message. The only action now is what it refers to,
these examples hold or are attached to sign what it captions; the war raging below it. Because
attributes such as flags, the central eagle holds blue the serpent eagle was part of the initial reading, now

26 THE OXFORDARTJOURNAI - 14:1 1991

 corrected, that very correction has tamed the wild the massing of faces, such as in the three central
animal, and by denying it its potential for power and arches; and the evenness of attention across this sea
action, turned it into a discursive element. This of faces, an equality of presence which denies any
domestication of figuration and its potential for single historicalfigure to stand out significantlyfrom
describing action has elevated the emblematic the others in these areas. The mural's exploitation of
power of the written sign to absolute authority. The overlapping in the areas of most pronounced
figure now serves the purposes of the juridical massing closes off any spatial development, as the
emblem and itself becomes flat, disembodied, and figuresare not so much in frontor behind, but rather
glyph-like.17Writing has labelled and supervised above, below, and beside each other, moving over
the behaviour of its subordinate. Its ownership of the surface of the wall like a repeat in a wallpaper
the image is both juridical and economic (in that the pattern. This second meaning depends upon a sense
form and behaviour of one serves the needs of the of political flatness, as these historical figures have
other). political qualities over other kinds of qualities. That
But why is the eagle in the centre of the these two kinds of flatnessmatter in the painting is in
composition? On the mural, the eagle escapes the how of their becoming one kind; how an existing
historical and spatial logic, yet has the ultimate political condition in Mexico in the late 1920s could
power to occupy the centre of narrative and be best known and best told by this particularformal
compositional gravity.All else revolvesaround it and treatment. I want to stress now how the qualities of
yet does not take its notice. It is the unseen but this mural painting and of politics at this time,
always present determinant agent of their fate, a sort qualities of flatness and discursivity, made for
of empty fullness, an absent presence, and is the translations from one to the other possible, how the
perfectdevice by which to anchor an at times drifting mural's formal characteristics found their 'best'
composition. subject, and how politics found its 'best' representa-
The eagle operates in the image field of the mural tion.
much as it does on the Mexican flag (Fig. 8). The flag Mexico has always been the place where the
eagle is unrelated by any spatial logic to the white Strong Man exerted the dominant political force,
central panel it floats upon. It asserts the authority of from pre-Conquest times to that of Calles.'8And in
the centre between the red and green panels to either their respective times, both Obreg6n and Calles
side. The three-part (or panelled) National Palace ruled without qualification, the first in a highly
mural is a huge flag, the breeze blowing it into an personalised and visible manner, and the second
irregularcontour, sometimes stiff and sharp-angled, with a hidden, behind-the-scenes approach. A great
at the bottom, elsewhere undulating in deep folds, deal of Obregon's power came from an ability to
producing scalloped edges, at the top. Because it is humanise politics through charisma and face-to-face
so full of events and faces, irregular on the middle persuasiveness.19But with the death of Obreg6n,
wall as to narrative but formally unified by a flat, there appeared a curious condition in Mexico - it
random logic, the wall surface becomes a smoothly was, surprisinglyand uncharacteristically,without a
unified visual field. Because the whole mural is caudillo, or Strong Man, to mould the national
lacking in deep or modulated space with but a few political culture. It is a sign of Obreg6n's tremend-
exceptions, relying mostly on simple and schematic ous presence when alive that such a complete
overlapping, an even, planar sense of a screen is vacuum would result from his sudden removal. On
produced. the day after his death, a press editorial measured
In its own absolute, geometric abstraction,the flag the weight of his loss:
contains and represents the same events and
qualities of Mexican history as does the mural; they The politicalsituationof the nationhad been determined
are both as full and as empty of meaning as each
[by his election].A long periodof peace and orderhad
other. Another way of saying this is that such been assured[...] above all, we had a man capableof
overbrimming fullness of history and meaning controlling small ambitions... [His death] not only
common to both mural and flag merges the contours deprivedthe lifeof a man, but, evenmoreso, decapitated
of events and people into a generalised and unitary the government... God savethe Republic.20
'value' of their importance. Both mural and flag, as
icons of nationalism, depend on the ultimate In September of 1928, a mere two months after the
legitimising arbiter of meaning, the eagle marking death of Obregon, Calles was sober about this odd
the place of the myth of origins and of contemporary and definite absence of a dominant leader, he chose
political power. not to become a presidential candidate himself in
To press the point of the mural's 'smoothly order not to challenge the no re-election principle of
unified visual field', by which I mean to connote a the Revolution. There was a lack, he wrote, 'of
sense of 'flatness' to better fit the flag metaphor, I personalities of unquestionable presence, with
want to make more clear what I mean by the terms sufficient rootedness in public opinion and with
unified and flat. enough personal and political strength to deserve
I mean two things: the denial of deep space in general confidence by virtue of name and prestige
most of the mural, but especially in the passages of alone.'21

TIE OXFORD ART JOURNA, - 14:1 1991 27

 Beginning in mid-1928 and into the next handful another and complementary sort of political 'flat-
of years, it was impossible for a frontline Strong Man ness' as I have been discussing, collapsing onto one
to emerge. Followers of Obreg6n were kept from plane and upon a single, ideologically homogeneous
reaching positions of power inside or outside of the platform these previously distinct agents, now
Calles system. Even the apparent heir to Obreg6n telescoped into an abstract, flat whole, efficient and
and strongest challenger to Calles admitted in 1928 absolute. The claim here is that political and social
the need for 'all Revolutionaries to form ... a life in Mexico at this time was being organised by
compact group.'22The success of Calles depended, discursivity into discursivity, that the disembodi-
to a large extent, upon projecting bland and un- ment of the real, three-dimensional, charismatic
ambitious men onto the front line of government. qualities of individuals and events into ciphers
The resulting vacancy left by the departure of a occupying a unified plane was being practiced in
Strong Man was filled by the crowded presence of politics and representedin art. Thus was effectedthe
undemanding and unrecognisable bureaucrats move from an Obregon to a Calles style of politics,
minding the Calles machine, the power concen- from the Strong Man to the Strong Party, from a
trated in an institutionalised, ratherthan a personal- figurativeto a discursive political system.
ised fashion. Calles spoke of the nation's need to What could remain constant in this fundamental
'pass, once and for all, from the historic condition of shift in the behaviour of power was its spectacle,
"the land of one man," to that "of institutions and made up of the symbols of nationalism, especially
laws ... under a government institutional in the flag and the Constitution of 1917. In the face of
nature".'23 Political 'flatness' serves well as a such discontinuities of political practice, it was
descriptiveterm for this condition, and 'abstraction' important to stress the continuity of the legitimacy of
just as correctlyfor the quality of the centre of power the nation's leaders by referringto static images of
supporting and organising it. Any representation of permanent values. Such changes in practice were
this condition would have to take account of these masked in a remarkablemanner by conflating Party
qualities, or as was claimed by a Calles backer at this leadership to populist nationalism and its symbols,
time, 'the uniformity of the grand organism [the even Calles to the flag itself: 'when one attacks
Calles machine]' would permit 'the uniformity of General Calles, what is attacked is not his person but
propaganda.'24 the flag of the Revolution; [.. .] the very essence of
What Calles needed, and what he created and our Revolutionary life.'28From 'person' to 'essence',
nurtured, was a crowd of generic politicians, effect- from figure to discursivesymbol. In this way, the flag
ing an evenness of presence and removing overtly came to legitimise the newly formed party by
personalised demands upon the system.25And it was becoming its rubber stamp of propaganda, leaving
clear that a system should now take priority over its impression on the party logo and on the walls of
personalistic leadership. The three presidents of the the government's headquarters.
maximatowere carefully chosen for their subser- The ideological climate that made this representa-
vience to Calles.26Emilio Portes Gil was intended tion of the government's new power structure not
only to manage the business affairs of the govern- only possible, but necessary, was stated in the
ment until the election of a permanent president in manifesto of the PNR, drafted in December of 1928,
1930. This was Pascual Ortiz Rubio, previously eight months before the mural was begun:
ambassador to Brazil and absent from Mexico for
the last eight years, thereby lacking political recogni- Firmlyconvincedthatnow is the historicmomentforthe
tion. He was forced to resign in 1932 after fostering resurgenceand formationof political parties of real
opposition to Calles. Abelardo Rodriguez lacked a principleand organizationalstrength,we addresswith
greatenthusiasmthe nation'sRevolutionaries, so thatwe
political base, had no followers, and was appointed around our old as we believethat if we
to finish the presidential term, as he himself wrote, may unite flag,
succeedin organizingstablepartiesthatwillrepresentthe
'remaining in the margins of the political direc- distincttendenciesof the opinionof the nation,we will
tion.'27 save the Republic from the anarchycreatedby purely
The formation of such a false-front political personalambitionsandwe willhaveestablishedthe bases
system began in late 1928, leading to Calles fora new democracy.29
founding in 1929 the Partido Nacional Revolucion-
ario (National Revolutionary Party), the PNR. It is Terminology such as 'resurgence and formation',
no coincidence that the logo for the PNR was a circle 'organisationalstrength', and 'representthe distinct
banded verticallyinto three parts, coloured, in order tendencies', could be applied (and my argument is
from the left, red, white, and green, with the three that they were) to the composition and content of the
initials PNR occupying one coloured band each. By right and central walls of the mural (as the left wall
taking the nation's flag as its logo, although freely was begun in 1935 under very different conditions,
changing its shape, the party assimilated the the demise of Calles for one) in ways that I have
government and the ultimate sign of nationalism suggested. By representing all the political factions
into its symbolic repertoryof power. operativein Mexico in the late 1920s, post-Obregon,
An equivalence between these factors - the the mural images the words of the manifesto. As the
nation, the government, and the party - created yet PNR aimed to 'save the Republic from the anarchy

28 THE OXFORDART JOURNAL - 14:1 1991

created by purely personal ambitions', the central expressed in terms of liberty and equality. I have
wall allows no single historical individual to assert suggested ways in which the figurativeis dominated
dominance over another or over an entire group. by the discursive here, how the work of the juridical
Only the worker at the top of the central arch and system denies action on the part of the individuals-
the central eagle stand out as figures of authority and citizens, who in turn seem to exist for the purpose of
share an overscaled size. But as the eagle is not representing a 'general will inside a "legal state",'
personalistic, neither is the worker, generically ratherthan as agents of production or self-motivated
described to stand for an entire class, the proletariat, political beings of any sort.
otherwise unrepresented in the central wall. His But there are agents of production in these
presence also satisfies the party's ambition at this sections, all along the bottom line of the three arches
time to be all-inclusive and 'no-clasista'.3 one sees, in order from the left: campesinosmassed
And, of course, there is 'so that we may unite together, seen from the back, observingthe historical
around our old flag'. The flag as metaphor for the figures as an audience to a mural painting would.
anchor of organisational strategies of the PNR,31 Amidst general labour or armed readiness, some
providing a united, or flat, field of support is stop their activity to look at the massed portraits, at
confidently asserted here. The presidential candi- those who do nothing but merely 'are'. This
date in 1929, Pascual Ortiz Rubio, echoing his difference between doing and 'being', between
party's manifesto, called for a project of national producing and posing, between audience and
unity: object, points to a fundamental division between
producers and non-producers in a capitalist system.
in which the intellectualand the workercan collaborate The ultimate apparent relation between the
with the sameintensity,in which both rich and poorwill leaders and the led in this painting, however, is
have an equallyimportantfunction.32 neither political nor economic, but juridical,
The emblematic display of the politically levelling expressed by the written pronouncements. Were it
power of the PNR since late 1928 found a smooth political, Zapata would be with the campesinos. Were
translation from manifesto to flag to Calles/PNR to it economic, the labours of the peasants would be
shown as directly related to the owners of pro-
party logo to painting, with all terms becoming one
under the authority of a populist, nationalist Revolu- duction, which is not the case here.
tionary ideology of abstract institutionalisation, By leaving out the political and the economic
factors, the mural, then, 'prevents us from under-
managed by a 'government Party'.33
I have characterisedthe rise of Calles and the max- standing the relation of the state to the class
imatoin general as a period of intent reaffirmationof struggle', since 'it is impossible to relate it [the state]
the capitalist state in Mexico. In almost every cate- to classes and class struggle [...] by hiding [...]
gory of political and economic organisation, Calles [class struggle] under the ideological problematic of
the separation of civil society [the peasants in the
sought to return the nation to a stage of development
last seen during the reign of PorfirioDiaz. mural] and the state [the historical figures].36
This process created the classic contradiction of a One group does hold up pronouncements from
the Constitution, and the other does pay attention.
'revolutionary' government acting in a counter- What binds them is the object that mediates this
revolutionarymanner. I want to take a look at a most
communication, that being the abstraction of law,
cogent description of the effects of capitalism and Constitutional law. 'It is on these juridical relations,
apply it to what we have seen of the mural so far, and not on relations of production in the strict sense,
focusing on the central wall (Figs. 3-4). that the labour contract and the formal ownership of
Nicos Poulantzas has written of the capitalist state
whose: the means of production depend.'37That is, in other
words, the formal make-up of capitalism. One
national political community shows itself in universal reason that the powerless do not express a desire or
suffrage,which is the expressionof the 'generalwill'... attempt to unseat the powerful in this section of the
The modern capitalist state thus presents itself as mural is because their relation by law has produced
embodyingthe generalinterestof the wholeof society,i.e. 'the following effect on the economic class struggle:
the willofthat'bodypolitic'whichis the
as substantiating the effect of concealing from these agents in a parti-
34
'nation'.... cular way the fact that their relations are class rela-
tions.'38 The actual division of classes from each
The modernjuridical system [under a capitaliststate] other is seen, rather,as ajuridical union, and sets up
[.. .] bearsa 'normative'character,expressedin a set of one of the greatest contradictions of the capitalist
systemizedlawswhichstartsfromthe principlesof liberty state. The rift between producers and non-
and equality:this is the reignof 'law'.The equalityand
libertyof the individuals-citizens lie in their relationto producers is papered over by the ideological as
abstract and formal laws, which are considered to juridical.
enunciatethis generalwill insidea 'legalstate'.35 It is clear that the peasants are gathered in-
formally, almost casually pausing in their everyday
The three central arches of the large wall contain routine, rather than organised and self-aware as a
many written examples of the law of the land class. That we see them mostly from the back takes

THE OXFORDART JOURNAL- 14:1 1991 29

expression and will away from them. This also style itself, as there are those definite intersections
happens to viewers who 'assume' the place of the between words and images. Again, that the mode of
peasants by virtue of the automatic absorption of the visual production can be thus described and that the
viewer into figures facing the same direction and subject depicted is a stressed form of nationalism, is
'seeing' the same sights. Why then show this class at no coincidence. These two points suggest that
all if it plays such a diminished role? Well, perhaps nationalism is a process in action in the workings of
because, according to Poulantzas: this mural. The 'cluster' dynamic in the mural
works something like this: there are paired cat-
Popularsovereigntyis identifiedwith state sovereignty egories of behaviour on these walls, such as
[...] [and]the peopleare identifiedwith the stateonly if participant/observer and image/word, each mem-
they are represented.39 ber of a pair being other and discontinuous to its
mate, but by virtueof being its mate, similar as being
And if viewers become the peasants as I suggest, part of the same system. All of which suggests that I
then they are also represented. am talking about the mural in terms of nationalism
Let me get straight that what I am saying is that according to Giddens, but also of nationalism-as-
class differences are there in the mural, clearly ritual.
pictured, in terms such as dress and activity,but that Edmund Leach has written about ritual in
they are there in order to be overcome by the unifying precisely these terms. Rites of initiation, for instance,
force of the relationship under discussion. Differ- depend upon the discrete before and after states of
ences cannot be denied if they are not representedto the initiate, but also that by the nature of before
begin with. As the PNR itself proclaimed at this eventually becoming after, these states are part of
time, the Party 'constitutes the site where radical, one continuum. Ritual is a way of both stating this
conservative,and moderate action can fit together,' bald paradox and then resolving it.42
and generally presented itself as non-ideological and I want to look at the central wall in these terms.
all-inclusive.40Notice the strategy:naming the terms We have seen that both side walls deal with distinct,
of difference before erasing the lines separating dominant historical periods, the pre-Conquest on
them. the right, and the present on the left. The central
All of which brings me back to the eagle, the wall, however, includes scenes from all periods:
symbol of the power of legality itself. For lack of a before and through the Conquest; the colonial,
contemporary sign of such unifying power, the Independence, Revolutionary, and present periods;
Calles years went to the ancient myth of origins, and and the perfected future. The two sides walls, then,
to the legitimacy necessarilyattached to it. It was not make up a system of differencesin meaning (past vs.
an unhappy coincidence that the Aztec stone present) yet twins in function (in balancing the
monument bearing the image of the eagle copied by composition and the narrative). By definition the
Rivera was found in the foundations of the National central wall is apparently not part of such a system
Palace. There was no other choice but the eagle, and is not needed to produce the before-afterritual
transformedfrom an agent of action to an emblem of effect. But on the contrary, 'a boundary separates
the juridical levelling of differences, kept on its two zones of social space-time which are normal,time
original site to retain its power. bound,clear-cut,[...] but the spatial and temporal
Anthony Giddens claims that: 'it is around the markers which actually serve as boundaries are
intersection between discursive consciousness and themselves abnormal,timeless,ambiguous,at theedge.'43
"livedexperience"that the ideological consequences The central wall, as slash mark and liminal space
of nationalism will cluster.'41I want to apply this between discrete categories, explodes into huge
insight to two of my previous observations.The first dimensions to put this dynamic on explicit display.
is about the behaviour of the viewer to the mural, in Yes, here all times do mix into a kind of timelessness,
particular the difference between the 'participant' linear narrative ruptures its linked structure, the
and 'observer' status as the viewer climbs first through-line of colonial history is broken by the
toward, then along the walls, arriving finally at the central eagle, and nineteenth-century wars are
balcony overview. I mean to strike a parallel here thrown to opposite corners. In agreement with the
between Giddens' 'intersection' and the one that blending of this one category, time, other sorts of
occurs between the 'lived experience' of the viewer's blending are put on display. Classes lose their
first approach and the final 'discursive conscious- opposition, individuals are swallowed into groups,
ness' of apprehending the mural from a static and deep and shallow space co-exist, and word and
uninvolved distance. That the viewer necessarily image are conjoined. To stress this synchronicity,
shifts from one behaviour to the other while the two great rituals of social change in Mexican his-
consuming massive doses of visual nationalism tory, the Conquest and the Revolution, share equal
speaks of a complementary purpose between the billing. All is levelled to a visual, historical, and con-
physical and thematic axes of the painting as it sub- ceptual flatness. This flatness controls the otherwise
jects its viewer into a special form of subjecthood. dangerous potentials for 'dimensionality' on the
The second point of application is to the wall, the dimensionality of a real and fully formed
figurative/discursive qualities of behaviour in the present, of real class struggle and real social change,

30 THE OXFORDARTJOURNAI,- 14:1 1991

 and reduces them to their formal role in the ritual belongs more to the side panels than to the central
process. 'The effect of ritual is to render continuous one, as only the sides and the eagle assert a visual
what is normally distinct. Within it, two opposed presence, whereas the central panel recedes into a
states become mutually accessible and the ideal kind of absence. But it is the centre, in its liminal
order is expressed.'44 status, that has structurallyallowed this to happen,
Let us remember that the blending of a Revolu- that has served as stage for the ritual, allowed it its
tionary past with a non-Revolutionary present was necessary space. According to Leach: 'Wheneverwe
exactly the strategy upon which the entire success of make category distinctions within a unified field,
the Calles 'ideal order' depended. And since this either spatial or temporal, it is the boundaries that
order was overtly capitalist, it is important to matter.'47
consider this blending of history as an example of There are ultimate rituals here: the mural
'the way in which capitalism constructs the past, in a becoming a flag, the history on the central wall
massive totalization of human history [..] as a changing from narrative incoherence to coherence
moment of the present.'45 with the application of a 'correct' viewing/reading,
The central wall instructs the viewing of the entire Mexican politics going from figurativeto discursive,
mural in the semiotic terms developed above. The and Revolutionary Mexico becoming a post-
flattened 'dis'organisation of the central wall Revolutionary, capitalist state. The mural viewer
organises the whole system, another victory of becomes an initiate in this rite of passage (Fig. 1),
discursivity over space and action and figuration. experiencing the mural in time. First as a particip-
The one way in which this wall demonstrates linear ant, changing into an observer (first a 'figure', then
narrative is in the central vertical axis leading becoming a discursive being), and also first as a
upwards from the Conquest to the Worker (Fig. 7), viewer, changing into a citizen, subject to and of the
passing in order through the time of Independence, nationalist content of the mural. The ritual
the Revolution, through the present and into the produced by the mural served the purpose of the
future. Whereas linear narrativeis broken up on this capitalist state under a government party invoking
wall across its undifferentiated expanse, it is joined the laws of the land in order to claim legitimacy and
and intact in the vertical axis, 'giving an ordered continuity in the face of induced and profound
structure to what otherwise might have become an change.
overburdenedform of representation.'46It is important to
remember that the bottom of this axis, the fighting of
the Conquest, is the first section of the mural
encountered by the viewer on the initial approach. Notes
This vertical axis sets the major episodes and the
1. When Revolution or Revolutionary appears with an upper case R,
sequence of the narrativefor the rest of the mural at it refersto this specific event.
the 'beginning' of the viewer's path (another 2. For the best account in English of the Calles years, see Cornelius,
narrative),as a sort of table of contents, but at a cross pp. 392-498. Includes an extensive bibliography.
direction to the general right-to-lefthorizontal sweep 3. See chapters I and II of L. Meyer, Segovia and Lajous; and
of the three walls. The instruction to shift to the Cornelius, pp. 395-408.
4. This had already started during Calles' own administration, as
horizontal comes in the 'cross piece' to this totem described in J. Meyer, Krauze and Reyes, especially chapters III and
pole, that being the central eagle, belonging thus to VII.
both vertical and horizontal, but to neither 5. This essay does not consider the role of the artist in its delibera-
completely. Out of scale with its vertical-axial tions, partly for lack of space, but mostly for reasons of methodology. I
want to explain the look and content of the mural as produced by extra-
neighbours and escaping their space, it hovers flat
and emblem-like, pointing to the left and redirecting personal forces. The biographicalinformationon Rivera, furthermore,is
notoriously unreliable, especially as regards his motivations. This has to
the flow of history and of sight. With this central, do with Rivera himself, fabricating events and motives in his life
vertical, chronological axis that contains all the differentlyto differentchroniclers, as satisfied his momentary whim. It is
major historical periods depicted on the three walls, difficult even to generalise on his theory of revolutionary art without
and with this cross form, this signal that determines sidestepping discrepancies in his position from one year to the next.
Rather than get tangled in this muddle, I will simply say that in 1929,
the general narrativedirection, the rest of the central Rivera was as anxious as any other muralist to accept such a large and
wall can well afford to let go of linear narrative. prestigious commission, regardless of his on and off again membership
The three walls, then, are like the Mexican flag. in the Mexican Communist Party (resigned in 1925, reinstated in 1926)
Each side panel is of a specific and different period, and its combative relations with the government. The opportunity to
as the side panels of the flag are each of a solid describe and make commentary upon all of Mexican history, with the
freedom to press a Marxist line, presumably overrode any objections as
colour, but one green and the other red. The middle to the collaborationistovertones of such a venture. In early 1929, Rivera
wall of the mural is dominated by the eagle, which, had distanced himself from the Communist Party's vigorous attacks on
although belonging to the vertical axis at first, the government, at the same time that the party was declared illegal. By
ultimately breaks away from its authority and floats August 18, when the painting began on the north, right wall of the
National Palace stairway,Rivera had survivedthe general crackdownon
freely in a historically mixed and spatially flat communists.
ground, an area as neutrally charged as the white The only comprehensive biography is flawed by factual errors:
central panel in the flag, which supports an eagle Bertram D. Wolfe, The FabulousLife of Diego Rivera(New York: Stein
with a serpent in its mouth. The eagle in both cases and Day, 1963). Very reliable is the chronology by Laurance Hurlburt,

THE OXFORDARTJOURNAL- 14:1 1991 31

'Diego Rivera(1886-1957): A Chronology of His Art, Life and Times', in 19. L. Hall, AlvaroObregon: Powerand Revolutionin Mexico,1911-1920
Helms, pp. 22-118. For writings by Rivera on the relationship of art to (College Station, 1981).
politics, see Raquel Tibol (ed.) Artey politica (Mexico City: Grijalbo, 20. El UniversalGrdfico,July 18, 1928. Translations are by author,
1979). unless otherwise noted.
6. There is a pencil sketch of 1926 for the south wall, reproduced as 21. Quoted in Meyer, Segovia and Lajous, p. 21.
figure 189 in Helms, p. 90. 22. This was Aar6n Saenz. Ibid., p. 33.
7. The building dates back to Aztec times and had been re- 23. Medin, p. 35. Calles was unquestionably in control of Mexico, but
constructed several times since the days of Cortes to those of Calles. R. in the posture of calculated retreat, pulling the strings on a large cast of
Casanova, in Acevedo, p. 117. government men.
8. These titles are according to Stanton L. Catlin in his 'Mural 24. El NacionalRevolucionario, August 10, 1929.
Census,' in Helms, pp. 235-336. In general, I refer to the three walls as 25. In a joke of the day, Calles, as tender of a chicken coop, is asked,
the National Palace stairwaymural. Those paintings found on the walls 'And why so many of the same breed, my General?' In Meyer, Segovia
of the second floor open-air corridorwere painted by Rivera much later and Lajous, p. 155.
(1941-1951) and will not be considered here. 26. The difficultiesinvolvedin maintaining this control are detailed in
9. In this I depend on the descriptions by R. Casanova, pp. 117-122; Medin.
A. Villag6mez L., 'El Palacio Nacional', Reyero, pp. 140-155; and S. 27. Autobiografia (Mexico City, 1962), pp. 145-146.
Catlih, 'Palacio Nacional', Helms, pp. 260-267. 28. Medin, p. 144.
10. From the rearof the so-called Moctezuma's Throne, or Temple of 29. Meyer, Segovia and Lajous, p. 37.
Sacred Warfare, discovered in 1926 under the southwest corner of the 30. Ibid., p. 88.
National Palace itself. English transcript of E. Umberger, 'El trono de 31. The Partywas a coalition of generals and politicians, various state
Moctezuma', Estudiosde culturaNdhautl, 17, 1984, pp. 63-87. Umberger political organisations, and worker and peasant groups. The first
first shared this information with me in public discussion. Most declaration of the December 1928 manifesto was: 'To unite all parties,
probably, Rivera had seen Alfonso Caso's El Teocallidela GuerraSagrada groups, and political organizations of the Republic, of Revolutionary
(Mexico City, 1927).The title of Caso's work is one of the various names belief and tendency; to unitt and to form the National Revolutionary
given to the Throne. Party.' Ibid., p. 36.
11. The account of this myth varies. Sometimes the vision is only of a 32. In his Discursospoliticos(1929) (Mexico City, 1930), p. 29. My
cactus growing from a rock (Tenochtitlan means 'the place with the emphasis.
cactus in the rock'),or the eagle is holding a small bird or a human heart 33. This is the term of Portes Gil, in ElNacionalRevolucionario, May 3,
or nothing in its beak. The design of the flag as it looks today was deter- 1930.
mined by presidential decree in September of 1916, when Carranza 34. Poulantzas, p. 123.
called for a return to 'the Aztec eagle'. Although the general design of the 35. Ibid., p. 123.
flag has remained unchanged since 1823, PorfirioDiaz had decided that 36. Ibid., p. 125.
the eagle be upright and frontal.Since 1916, the eagle has been in profile, 37. Ibid., p. 128.
head lowered to attack the snake, and facing to the viewer's left. 38. Ibid., p. 130.
W. Smith, Flags ThroughtheAgesandAcrossthe World(New York, 1975), 39. Ibid., p. 278.
pp. 148-150. 40. Meyer, Segovia and Lajous, pp. 88-89.
12. It reads 'Atl Tlachinolli'.Umberger (as in n. 7), explains this 41. Giddens, p. 220.
terminology as 'atl-(water) tlachinolli-(somethingburned), a metaphor 42. Leach, especially chapters 2, 3, 5, and 7.
for sacred warfare,'p. 4. The red (the symbol twisting toward the left in 43. Ibid., p. 35.
the mural) stands for fire, the blue forwater. Villag6mez L. (as in n. 6), p. 44. This is C. Colley explaining the Leach theory in 'The function of
150. art as 'iconic text': An alternativestrategyfor a semiotic of art,' Semiotica,
13. The side walls each measure 7.5 X 8.9 metres. The central wall is 36, nos. 1/2, 1981, p. 135-152, under the name A. C. Hasenmueller, p.
8.6 X 12.9 metres. 146. This essay introduced Leach to me and is, I think, groundbreaking
14. In both the Preparatoriaof 1922 and the 1923-1928 Ministry of for its topic.
Education murals, both in Mexico City, circumstances of site and 45. This is a direction that deserves longer treatment than is possible
program had precluded these new categorical qualities. At the here. The writer is J. Frow, Marxismand LiteraryHistory(Cambridge,
Preparatoria, the Creationmural is non-narrative, but rather depicts Mass., 1986), p. 227.
allegorical figures representingtimeless cultural attributes. The series of 46. R. Brilliant (my emphasis), on the organisational power of
paintings at the Ministry of Education does present explicit narratives, 'upright structure', in VisualNarratives:Storytellingin EtruscanandRoman
but the organisation of these is determined by the linear logic of the Art (Ithaca and London, 1984), p. 96. He credits J. Brengelmann,
architecturalsetting, that being the wall surfaces of long corridors. 'Preference for Upright Structure in Memory-Traces,' Psychologische
15. Two articles that touch on these two possibilities are G. Genette, Forschungen, 30, 1967, pp. 273-280.
'Boundaries of Narrative', and S. Alpers, 'Describe or Narrate? A 47. Leach, p. 35.
Problem in Realistic Representation', New LiteraryHistory,VIII, no. 1,
1976, pp. 1-15 and pp. 16-42 respectively.
16. Cabrera's sign reads 'LEY DEL 6 DE EANERO[LAW OF
Bibliography
JANUARY 6].' This refers to the law he sponsored in support of the
ejido,a way of distributing land to village peasantryto be worked collect-
ively. This law was passed on that date in 1915, and eventually became Acevedo, E., (ed.), Guia de muralesdel centrohistdricode la
Article 27 of the 1917 Constitution. Carranza'ssign refersto this Article ciudaddeMexico(Mexico City, 1984).
and also to number 123, which guaranteed wide-ranging advances for Cornelius, W. A., 'Nation Building, Participation, and
labour. The best treatment of the Constitution of 1917 remains Distribution: The Politics of Social Reform Under
C. Cumberland, MexicanRevolution:The Constitutionalist rears (Austin Cardenas,' Almond, G., Flanagan, S., and Mundt, R.
and London, 1972), especially chapters 9 and 10. (eds.), Crisis, Choice,and Change:HistoricalStudiesand
17. The anonymous reader for this journal noticed that 'in the PoliticalDevelopment (Boston, 1973), pp. 392-498.
discussion of Text/image/flatness etc., no mention was made of the
Giddens, A., The Nation-Stateand Violence,vol. 2 of A
importance of the pre-hispanictraditionsof pictographicwriting' as part
of the evidence to support the overall argument. I welcome this Contemporary Critiqueof HistoricalMaterialism(Berkeley
and Los Angeles, 1985).
comment, agree with its provocative possibilities in general, but after
considerable searching, have uncovered no evidence that this was indeed Helms, C. (ed.), Diego Rivera:A Retrospective (New York
an operativeconcern in the making of this mural. and London, 1986).
18. R. Hansen, The Politicsof MexicanDevelopment (Baltimore, 1971), Leach, E., Cultureand Communication: the logic by which
pp. 133-145. symbolsare connected- An introductionto the use of

32 ART JOURNAI.-
THEOXFORD 14:1 1991
 structuralistanalysis in social anthropology(Cambridge, La politicadel maximato:Historiade
la institucionalizacion.
1976). la revolucionmexicana,per?odo1928-1934 (Mexico City,
Medin, T., El minimatopresidencial:Historiapolitica del 1978).
maximato,(1928-1935) (Mexico City, 1982). Poulantzas, N., PoliticalPowerand SocialClasses,trans. by
Meyer, J., with Krauze, E., and Reyes, C., Estado y O'Horgan, T.; McLellan, D.; de Casparis, A.; and
sociedadcon Calles: Historia de la revolucionmexicana, Grogan, B. (London, 1975).
perfodo1924-1928 (Mexico City, 1977). Reyero, M. (ed.), DiegoRivera(Mexico City, 1983).
Meyer, L., with Segovia, R., and Lajous, A., Los iniciosde

THIEOXFORD ART JOURNAI.- 14:1 1991 33