David Alfaro Siqueiros

Art: Marcelo Guimarães Lima


Entry from the “Dictionary of Marxism in America”

Life and political praxis

David Alfaro Siqueiros (1896-1974), born José Jesus Alfaro Siqueiros, is registered as a native of Mexico City; however, as we know today, he was born in the capital of the state of Chihuahua (Northwest Mexico). At the age of six, he moved to Irapuato, in the state of Guanajuato, where he began his studies.

At the age of 12, he painted a reproduction of Madonna della Seggiola, of the Renaissance artist Raphael, a fact that excited his father to hire the muralist painter Eduardo Solares Gutierrez as his teacher. Two years later, he began attending the Academy of San Carlos and participated in the Free Air Painting School, by Santa Anita – an experience that intended to renew painting exercises, at that time still very much linked to the classical European academic tradition and confined to closed spaces.

During the battles of the Mexican Revolution, more specifically after Victoriano Huerta's coup against Francisco Madero's government (in 1913), some students from the School of Fine Arts enlisted among the revolutionary troops; among them Siqueiros, who served in the Constitutionalist Army until 1917, when the new constitution was enacted. As a soldier, he traveled across the country, getting to know Mexican culture better and coming into contact with the daily struggles of workers and peasants.

In Guadalajara, the young painter met his first wife, Graciela Gachita Amador – who studied folklore and directed puppet theaters –, whom he married in 1918. In this city, Siqueiros helped to organize a congress of Soldier Artists and debated with his peers the polemic that would remain a recurring theme for several lectures and articles during his lifetime: the relationship between the function of art and its form; or, in another way, the relationship between politics and painting.

In 1921, Diego Rivera, who was then living in Europe, was invited by José Vasconcelos – Minister of Education in the post-revolutionary government of Álvaro Obregón (1920-1924) – to participate in a project involving painting. The minister's original idea was to continue the painting on the walls of public buildings with educational themes aimed at the illiterate Mexican population or with little access to literature, history and science; to this end, he hired a series of artists, including Siqueiros (who would return to his country in 1922), to interpret Mexican history and decorate the walls of two public buildings in the center of the capital.

These murals inaugurated the Mexican Muralist Movement, in the 1920s. Although the original project still had a narrow educational meaning, the influence of the entry of most of these muralists into the Partido Comunista de Mexico (PCM) reoriented the content of the initial proposal for mural works; Siqueiros played a fundamental role as articulator and spokesperson for the group. It was from his initiative that the Sindicato de Obreros Técnicos Pintores y Scultores (SOTPE) was born, an association that founded the newspaper The Machete (1924) – which in the following year became the central organ of the PCM. The union, organized by the muralists, was originally influenced by an anarcho-syndicalist perspective – at a time when Marxism-Leninism was just beginning to spread in Mexico.

Since then, and until the 1940s, Siqueiros dedicated himself to building the Communist Party, unions and peasant organizations – such as the Ligas Agraristas, influenced by the PCM. During this period, he participated more in strikes, clandestine meetings, workers' and unions' congresses, than in the creation of murals. His artistic activity was very focused on cartoons published in working-class newspapers, caricatures and graphic production. The newspaper The Machete, the Peruvian magazine amauta (by Mariátegui), the South American Correspondence e The Liberator (where Tina Modotti and Julio Mella published articles) had drawings of Siqueiros printed – in addition to the propaganda materials of the unions and the Agrarista Leagues.

From 1929, the PCM became illegal and countless communists were persecuted. Siqueiros then traveled to different countries, articulating the communist movement; he participated in the Latin American Trade Union Congress, in Montevideo, and represented the PCM in the I Latin American Communist Conference, held in Buenos Aires. In the meantime, he had also visited the Soviet Union (1927-1928), together with the muralist Diego Rivera, and personally met Josef Stalin, through Vladimír Mayakovsky; this meeting was narrated in his memoirs, in a humorous tone, where he reveals, for example, that the leader of the USSR approved his criticisms of the excessive academicism in Soviet painting, even after ten years of the Bolshevik Revolution.

In 1930, Siqueiros was arrested for his union activities; in prison he produced a series of easel paintings and lithographs. From that year on, in a context of persecution of the communists, the muralists ended up having to move to the United States, where they found an enthusiastic public of young artists interested in the novelty of frescoes by Mexican painters.

In the USA, the work of his colleague Diego Rivera gained international recognition, but the period also corresponded to the crystallization of divergences between muralists; The interest in Rivera's work was in its Mexicanist theme, in its appreciation of the colors and motifs of popular Mexico in epic compositions and ideologically engaged with the political struggle of the time, expressed in the dichotomy “revolution versus capitalism”. Siqueiros, a restless polemicist, then began to criticize Rivera's work and try to point in another direction to the artistic work developed by Mexican muralists.

After General Francisco Franco's coup d'état – against the Second Spanish Republic (1936) – Siqueiros enlisted as a volunteer in the International Brigades; as a lieutenant colonel, he fought on the front lines of the Spanish Civil War. After the fall of Barcelona and the help given to the exiles, the Mexican communist returned to his country. Together with the leadership of the PCM, in 1940, in the heat of the conflict with the Nazis, he participated in an unsuccessful attempt to kill Trotsky (who had been considered a traitor by the Communist International); because of this, he was imprisoned for six months, until Pablo Neruda (Chilean poet and diplomat) interceded and helped him to obtain an exile in Chile.

During the 1930s and 1940s, Mexican anti-fascist artists organized the Liga de Escritores y Artistas Revolucionarios (LEAR) and, later, the Taller Editorial Gráfica Popular, organizations that developed a consistent work of socialist propaganda, with special emphasis on the work of members such as Leopoldo Mendez, Luis Arenal, Pablo O'Higgins, Xavier Guerrero and Siqueiros himself, in addition to promoting the rescue of Mexican engravers such as José Guadalupe Posada and Manuel Marilla – creators of the skulls catrinas mexicans –, popularizing revolutionary art through prints.

Between 1941 and 1942, during a period in which he was in Chile, Siqueiros produced another important mural – together with Xavier Guerreiro – called Death to the invader. In this work, the artists represented the Latin American resistance with figures of popular leaders from Chile and Mexico, such as Cuauhtémoc, Zapata, Luis Emílio Recabarren and Lautaro, in the fight against the invader.

In the 1950s, the Marxist experimented with what he would call a “sculpto-mural”, a painting over a structure carved out of concrete. These works are displayed on the outside of several buildings of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM). In one of them, called El Pueblo at the university, the university at the pueblo (1952-1956), students raise their hands with their books and pens towards society, symbolizing the students' commitment to returning the knowledge produced by the university to the Mexican people. On another mural, called New university symbol (1952-1956), in which two birds of prey appear, symbolizing the Mexican eagle and the Andean condor, he sought to represent the unity between the southern and northern parts of Latin America.

In 1956, Siqueiros began to paint one of the rooms in the former residence of Mexican presidents, the Castle chapultepec (current Nacional History Museum), where the famous mural From Porphyrism to the Revolution, painted between 1957 and 1966; during this period (from 1960 to 1964), the painter was imprisoned in Lecumberri Palace (Mexico City), accused of “social dissolution” – for speaking out against the government.

Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, Siqueiros traveled to various countries in the socialist bloc, and steadfastly supported the Cuban Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, and anti-colonial revolutions. Shortly before he died, he still managed to finish the polyforum, a space that he himself would call a “total work” – in which he synthesized his ideas about muralism.

Accompanied by his partner Angélica Arenal – with whom he had lived together since the Spanish Civil War – Siqueiros died in January 1974 in the capital of the state of Morelos, Cuernavaca, and was buried in Rotunda of the Illustrious Persons of the civil pantheon of Dolores (Mexico City).

Contributions to Marxism

Siqueiros was the youngest among the three great Mexican muralists (he, José Clemente Orozco and Diego Rivera); he was also the one who acted most politically and reflected from Marxism and Leninism on the meaning of the art he was producing.

Controversial and proactive, Siqueiros is well known for his mural work, as is the case of the aforementioned painting From Porphyrism to the Revolution – in which Zapatistas appear, with the traditional hats Mexicans, united in a compact and armed mass –, or from their UNAMe murals of the polyforum. His ideological and political commitment to the Communist Party of Mexico is also famous – having been a defender of Stalin's legacy. However, his participation in Mexican political and cultural life had other formidable episodes, and his work, founded on Marxism, presents an important reflection on the history of Mexico and Latin America, in addition to a Marxist interpretation of art.

His contributions to Marxism relate to the artistic experience in general and are linked to the trajectory of the Movimiento Muralista Mexicano. Since the manifesto of the Sindicato de Obreros Técnicos Pintores y Escultores, an event that marks the beginning of this muralist movement, Siqueiros has sought to think of art through Marxism-Leninism. The manifesto itself brings basic reflections to the debate about art.

In the early years of muralism, overcoming the separation between manual and intellectual work was highly valued, the forms of work organization, artistic production and also exalted one of the instruments of organization of the working class, the union. Even the factory overalls would be used for the paintings. The centrality of the working class in the work of muralist painters was directly related to the enthusiasm for the Russian Revolution (1917) and the expectations generated by the first socialist state in the world.

From the idea of ​​an art whose motives and appreciators were the Mexican working class, other questions arose, such as: what is art, or what is the role of the individual in the work of art? On these questions, fundamental to Marxism, Siqueiros spent his life reflecting – and trying not only to theorize about the subject, but to put it into practice. Many of these issues began to be addressed in the painters' manifesto and were soon exposed in articles in the 1930s; however, they were always the subject of polemics, sometimes public, particularly between Siqueiros and Diego Rivera – who had approached Trotsky and André Breton, one of the theorists of surrealism. In an article published in New Masses, Siqueiros explicitly attacked Diego Rivera; his main criticism was that Rivera had become a “snob”, and that he did not present the qualities of a revolutionary artist.

But the direct confrontation between the two most famous Mexican painters took place publicly when Siqueiros, in 1934, openly criticized Rivera, in a lecture at the Palace of Fine Arts, in Mexico City. After a disorganized exchange, the painters agreed to continue the debate on another day; the controversy was documented and followed with interest by artists, students and the press. Siqueiros' censorship was centered on his opponent's lack of critical stance towards the Mexican government, particularly after the persecution of communists in the early 1930s. in history, in addition to denouncing its alliance with “reactionary sectors” and with Trotskyism.

With regard to painting, Siqueiros questioned his colleague's attachment to ancient procedures for making artistic works, in addition to his technical “backwardness”, particularly due to his insistence on the fresco technique; he understood that Marxists were at the forefront of their time, including from a technical point of view. According to him, Rivera’s work was becoming, both formally and ideologically, the official image of the reductionist nationalism of a new bourgeoisie, making him a “mental tourist” of his own country – in a reference to “tourism”. as something inauthentic, promoted by a bourgeoisie that did not relate to the nation and its popular traditions. Rivera responded in writing (Dec. 1935) questioning the Party's authority to decide who was worthy and who was not; he also accused the authoritarianism and verticality with which art was debated, in addition to denouncing the International’s policy – ​​which had gone from an “ultra-leftist” position in China, Germany, Spain and Central America, to a social-democratic position in the context of confrontation against fascism. He also stated that Siqueiros criticized him for “personal” reasons, since the USSR and the PCM itself had already recognized the value of his work between 1927 and 1929.

The republican defeat in Spain inspired Siqueiros to paint with Josep Renau, former Secretary of Culture of the Spanish Republic, one of his main works: portrait of the bourgeoisie (1939), with 100 square meters, in pyroxylin (a kind of lacquer paint initially used in the automobile industry) on concrete, with the use of aerosols. The work explores other technical innovations proposed by Siqueiros, such as the use of corners and the ceiling in a dynamic perspective, in addition to what he called “polyangularity”. This perspective was conceived by him in opposition to the fixed point of an observer looking at a traditional screen, since it allowed several possibilities of observation points of the work. In his reflections, the author proposed an approximation between artistic expression and the meaning that Marxism gives to movement, dialectical and interrelated. the mural portrait of the bourgeoisie, which decorates the walls of the Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas (Mexico City), exposes what would be a visual interpretation of fascism for the authors: the destruction of the liberal parliament, the militarization and centralization of the executive, violence, imperialism, the barbarism.

the mural From Porfirism to the Revolution – completed in the mid-1960s – was designed to be seen in motion as the viewer walked across the room. From a mass of peasants and workers, one arrives at the center of the work, in which a dispute for the flag appears (with Marx and Engels and the martyrs of the Revolution); on the other side, the castes that made up the dictatorial regime are represented, with Porfírio Diaz at the center, ballerinas in his surroundings, the intellectual class of the porfirista regime (the “scientifics”), members of the Army and the aristocracy. In this mural, Siqueiros applied new techniques of polyangularity and ways of suggesting movement inspired by cinema.

The author sought to apply the principles of Marxism to art in all aspects that involve it, from the production processes of the artistic work to the final result. He rejected ideas of artistic genius, spontaneous creative inspiration, and any Manichaean sense of class struggle. Politics was always at the center of his concerns, but not in a dogmatic way. His works and the questions they suggest are profound, dialectical, seeking to link national particularities to the general sense of humanity, technique to form, the individual to historical processes, manual work to intellectual work – thus inserting the struggle of the Mexican people and their artistic production in the great political and ethical debates of the XNUMXth century.

Understanding art in a universal Marxist perspective, Siqueiros sought to find a total form of artistic expression, which explored all the senses, making use of volumes, sounds and movement. Taking advantage of a historical context that combined the national recognition of Mexican muralism, the expectations of the 1968 Olympics (in Mexico City) and the climate of political radicalization in different countries, Siqueiros managed to find a patron who could finance his greatest undertaking. . Thus, at the end of his life, he dedicated himself to his “total work”: the polyforum.

Rather than having it painted on the wall of an already constructed building, Siqueiros designed a building to place his mural, painted inside and out, on all the walls and ceilings. The building has the shape of a dodecahedron, where the history of humanity is represented, from primitive times, to the future revolution - socialism. There is a huge range of symbolism and representations, in semi-figurative or abstract lines, that seek to express humanity's struggle for a communist future. In the center of the building, there is a central dome over nine meters high, where artistic events, lectures and theatrical presentations with light and sound shows are currently taking place.

In this work, the Marxist put all his ideas about the development of muralism into practice, and tried to integrate painting, sculpture, architecture, music, theater and dance. With more than 2400 square meters of painted surface, the mural is the painter's most ambitious work, having been evaluated as the largest in the world; it is considered by many to be his final work – as well as that of the muralist movement itself.

Of the countless legacies that Siqueiros left for the history of art, it is also worth mentioning the works of Jackson Pollock, the most famous of his students – who, although acknowledging the influence of his teacher, walked his own paths.

Siqueiros was, among the Mexican muralists, the one who most contributed to the Marxist debate. In this sense, he left not only a set of works of art – which are among the most important in the history of Latin American and universal artistic production –, but also raised the debate on the meaning of art for Marxists and socialists in general.

Comment on the work

According to Siqueiros himself narrates in his memoirs (published posthumously) – Called me the Coronelazo (Mexico: Biografías Gandesa, 1977) –, it was during his wanderings among the Constitutionalist troops (for which he fought until 1917) that he got to know popular Mexico; later, when sent to Europe as a military attache (where he stayed until 1921), he met Diego Rivera and the French modernists. After the nationalist impulse produced by the Mexican Revolution, Siqueiros gradually discovered Marxism and Leninism; he produced a vast body of writing in articles on art and politics, although what best expresses his contribution to historical materialism are his murals. For him, art and politics are inseparable and, therefore, the paintings must be read and interpreted.

In Barcelona, ​​he published the first of his articles, a manifesto called “Three calls for current guidance to painters and sculptors of the new American generation” (american life, Barcelona, ​​1921). The text was addressed to American artists, calling them to follow the European modernist avant-garde, but inspired by their own national themes: “let us aspire to theories based on the relativity of 'national art', let us universalize ourselves!” – he asserts, defending that the physiognomy of each people should show itself “inevitably” in his works. In this sense, he tried to project a national modernism that did not end up in archaisms, or even in what he classified as “decorative, tourist and folk art”.

Among his theoretical production at the time is the “Manifesto of Union of Workers, Technicians, Painters and Sculptors"(El Machete, Mexico City, 1924) – a landmark of Mexican visual arts, largely written by Siqueiros. Some issues raised by the muralists' manifesto were: the proletarian and popular character of their artistic activity; the understanding of the Mexican revolution as a social revolution; and, given these circumstances, the role of revolutionary painters, “armed” with their walls, scaffolding and brushes.

One of his articles – with which he opened the debate he had with Rivera – is called “Rivera's counter-revolutionary road”[Rivera's counterrevolutionary path] (New Masses, New York, 1934); throughout it, Siqueiros sought to return to central issues of the 1923 muralist manifesto, such as collective work in the production of the mural, the need to develop modern techniques, and not just limiting oneself to fresco techniques. In terms of composition, Siqueiros denounced the “chaos” and “petty bourgeois spirit” of Rivera, who, according to him, would be at the service of the counterrevolution in Mexico; he recalled that, among all the muralists, only Diego Rivera had been awarded contracts by the governments of the maximum (from 1928 to 1934, known for the persecution of communists in the early 1930s). He also accuses Rivera of being at the service of the new Mexican bourgeoisie, born of the counterrevolution, and of being close to the Trotskyist movement and the American activist Jay Lovestone (who had been expelled from the Third International and the Communist Party of the USA).

Other of his texts were edited from notes and manuscripts prepared for conferences, in which the Mexican artist reflects on Marxism and art. Among these are: “Los vehículos de la Pintura dialéctico-subversiva”/“The vehicles of dialectic-subversive painting” (shorthand transcription, 02/10/1932), conference given (part in Spanish, part in English) at John Reed Club, Los Angeles (USA); “Art criticism as a literary pretext” (mexico in art, Mexico City, 1948); It is "The Mexican pictorial movement, the new way of realism"(to a young mexican, Cid. Mexico, 1967).

In the conference that gave rise to the 1932 text, the Marxist explored the relationship between painting techniques and the revolutionary ideas that guided the muralist movement; he opined that if the movement wanted to be revolutionary in the subjects of its paintings, it also needed to be revolutionary in the ways of producing a mural; for that, a new technique was needed that would allow painting on outdoor surfaces. Siqueiros criticized the individualistic work common in easel painting and called for a transformation of the technique that would accompany the revolutionary aspirations of the muralists. Revolutionary aesthetics should be neither academic nor modernist, but “dialectical-subversive”, adapting to the new meaning of human revolution: the proletarian revolution.

Already in his 1948 essay – “Art criticism as a literary pretext” –, Siqueiros was concerned with refuting Parisian artistic trends, which influenced the West in the post-war period. The object of his condemnation were exactly the formalist and “art-purist” art critics, as he called them, considering that they were not “painters”, but “writers”, and as such they lacked technical and practical knowledge. In addition, they sought to opine based on superficialities, pure personal taste, instinct; the result was the depoliticization of art, the idea that there could be “art for art's sake”. The Marxist crosses the text opposing the idea that the depoliticization of art is a condition for artistic authenticity.

Finally, in the aforementioned 1967 text, more than 40 years after the painters' manifesto, Siqueiros sought to find, in the History of Art, the place of Mexican muralism and its own legacy; finding meaning in art, with periods of light and obscurantism, from the art of Antiquity, passing through Da Vinci, Masaccio, Uccello and Cimabue, until reaching realism – which he believes is the space that muralists occupy in this chronology.

The “new way of realism”, proposed by him, is related to the interpretation of the social reality produced by plastic language, and not necessarily to forms with “photographic” pretention, associated with the common idea of ​​realism. He understands that social reality is related to ideology, to science, which he conceives as a perspective that, in addition to being Marxist, is also “humanist”: a “new humanism” that overcomes the bourgeois limits of art in capitalism.

Decades later, several of these writings by Siqueiros were organized and published by Secretary of Public Education Mexican with the title Selection of texts (Cid. Mexico: SEP, 1974), bringing together reflections produced in different moments of his life.

Recently, important conferences given by Siqueiros have also been published, hitherto unpublished. They are texts that debate the meaning of revolutionary and Marxist art in Latin America, its characteristics and perspectives. Collected in a book called Fundación del Muralismo Mexicano: unpublished texts by David Alfaro Siqueiros (org. Hector Jaime/ Cid. México: Siglo Veintiuno, 2012), the selection presents us with three moments of the polemics opened by the painter. In the text “Conference on Mexican pictorial art” (manuscript, 1935), the author reflects on the relationship between the painter's political activity and his work. He defends the need for the revolutionary artist to behave like a communist militant, that is: to have discipline, objective and proletarian direction.

Understands that such characteristics have implications on the result of the work; the mural, for example, should be outdoors and have a dynamic composition that corresponds to an active spectator, not a static one. Called polyangularity, such a perspective would correspond to the introduction of historical-dialectical materialism in works of art. In the lectures entitled “Conferencia de Argentina” (manuscript, 1930) and “El Sindicato” (manuscript, 1930s), he presents the meaning of Mexican muralism, at a time when his presence, as well as that of Orozco and Rivera, had aroused much interest in Mexican revolutionary painters; in both, he explains how Mexican muralism emerged, how mural painting techniques were constituted, what the limits of the fresco were and what meaning they should give to the muralist movement. Particularly inThe Union”, highlights the role of the workers' organization as the key element in promoting mural painting.

Other recurring themes addressed in the texts are: “plastic integration”, that is, the use of different techniques and surfaces for artistic expression, such as sculpture, murals, cinema; “monumentality”, that is, the need to paint large works in popular circulation areas; “collectivism” in artistic creation, that is, the idea that the production of artistic work is a collective process and not the result of an individual genius; “public muralism” versus “interior muralism”; “mass art” and “for the masses”; and the “overcoming of bourgeois aesthetics”.

Regarding his artistic work, his most outstanding murals are: plastic exercise (1933), where the artist explores the entire surface of the walls in the form of a tunnel, with the innovative use of the airbrush. portrait of the bourgeoisie (1939), painted on a staircase of the Mexican Electricians Union, was the result of a collective work with exiled Spanish painters (such as Josep Renau). This mural interprets the authors' understanding of fascism shortly before the start of World War II; in it, soldiers guided by a dictator destroying Parliament and “democracy”, a representation of death, the power of capital, colonialism, violence against children, fire, industrial warfare, gas masks, massacres.

It is, however, in the 1940s that Siqueiros consolidates himself as one of the great muralists of the Mexican movement, painting Death to the invader (1941-1942), Cuauhtémoc against the myth (1944) and new democracy (1944 and 1945). The two murals that enshrined his work in the visual history of the world were Del porfiriato a la Revolución, or la Revolucion contra la dictatorship porfirista (1957-1966), and the mural The march of humanity (1971), located, respectively, in the National Museum of History, and Siqueiros Cultural Polyforum, both in Mexico City.

Many of Siqueiros' writings and paintings can be accessed in digital format, available online at portals such as: do International Center for the Arts of the Americas at the Museum of Fine Arts – Houston/USA (https://icaa.mfah.org); of National Museum of History – Mexico (https://mnh.inah.gob.mx); from the Siqueiros Public Art Room (http://saps-latallera.org/saps); It's from Council of National Monuments of Chile (https://www.monumentos.gob.cl).

*Felipe Santos Deveza He is a postdoctoral fellow in Latin American history at UFF. Public school history professor and college professor of American history. Author, among other books, of The communist movement and the particularities of Latin America (UFRJ/UNAM).

Originally published on the Praxis Nucleus-USP.


BARBERENA, Lucia Andrea Vinatea and NAVA, Alfredo. “David Alfaro Siqueiros and his Polyforum: politics as an artistic space”. Power & Culture Magazine, Rio de Janeiro, Vol. 7, no. 13, Jan/Jun. 2020.

CRUZ MAJARREZ, Maricela González. The Siqueiros-Rivera controversy: aesthetic-political plantings (1934-35). Mexico: Museo Dolores Olmedo Patiño, 1996.

GUADARRAMA PEÑA, Guillermina. La Ruta de Siqueiros – stages in his mural work. Mexico: INBA, 2010.

HERNER, Irene. Siqueiros: from paradise to Utopia. Mexico: SCDF, 2010.

LEAR, John. To imagine the proletariat, artists and workers in revolutionary Mexico (1908-1940). Mexico: Mexican Union of Electricians/Grano de Sal, 2019.

CARRILLO AZPEITIA, Rafael, “Introducción”. In: SIQUEIROS. David Alfaro. Siqueiros. Mexico: SEP, 1974.

ROCHFORT, Desmond. Mexican muralist: Orozco, Rivera, Siqueiros. San Francisco: Chronicle Book, 1998.

POLYFORUM SIQUEIROS [Catalogue]. The legacy of two visionaries. Mexico City: Polyforum Siqueiros AC, 2012.

RUIZ ALONSO, Jose Maria. “David Alfaro Siqueiros on the front sur del Tajo (1937-1938)”. Anales Toledanos, no. 30, 1993. Disp.: https://realacademiatoledo.es.

SUBIRATS, Eduardo. Mexican Muralism: Myth and Enlightenment. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2018.

the earth is round exists thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.

See this link for all articles


  • About artificial ignoranceEugenio Bucci 15/06/2024 By EUGÊNIO BUCCI: Today, ignorance is not an uninhabited house, devoid of ideas, but a building full of disjointed nonsense, a goo of heavy density that occupies every space
  • The society of dead historyclassroom similar to the one in usp history 16/06/2024 By ANTONIO SIMPLICIO DE ALMEIDA NETO: The subject of history was inserted into a generic area called Applied Human and Social Sciences and, finally, disappeared into the curricular drain
  • Franz Kafka, libertarian spiritFranz Kafka, libertarian spirit 13/06/2024 By MICHAEL LÖWY: Notes on the occasion of the centenary of the death of the Czech writer
  • A look at the 2024 federal strikelula haddad 20/06/2024 By IAEL DE SOUZA: A few months into government, Lula's electoral fraud was proven, accompanied by his “faithful henchman”, the Minister of Finance, Fernando Haddad
  • Letter to the presidentSquid 59mk,g 18/06/2024 By FRANCISCO ALVES, JOÃO DOS REIS SILVA JÚNIOR & VALDEMAR SGUISSARDI: “We completely agree with Your Excellency. when he states and reaffirms that 'Education is an investment, not an expense'”
  • PEC-65: independence or patrimonialism in the Central Bank?Campos Neto Trojan Horse 17/06/2024 By PEDRO PAULO ZAHLUTH BASTOS: What Roberto Campos Neto proposes is the constitutional amendment of free lunch for the future elite of the Central Bank
  • Chico Buarque, 80 years oldchico 19/06/2024 By ROGÉRIO RUFINO DE OLIVEIRA: The class struggle, universal, is particularized in the refinement of constructive intention, in the tone of proletarian proparoxytones
  • Why are we on strike?statue 50g 20/06/2024 By SERGIO STOCO: We have reached a situation of shortage of federal educational institutions
  • Return to the path of hopelate afternoon 21/06/2024 By JUAREZ GUIMARÃES & MARILANE TEIXEIRA: Five initiatives that can allow the Brazilian left and center-left to resume dialogue with the majority hope of Brazilians
  • The melancholic end of Estadãoabandoned cars 17/06/2024 By JULIAN RODRIGUES: Bad news: the almost sesquicentennial daily newspaper in São Paulo (and the best Brazilian newspaper) is rapidly declining