Photo copyright held by Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone via Getty Images
Let’s Talk a Little Bit More about Frida Kahlo
I read a lenghty essay
about Frida Kahlo from the viewpoint of her self-portraits
and feminism. Okay, there’s something true
here: feminism today is not good,
it should be revolutionary, making love
with Trotsky is okay but freedom
of an artist is not a way leading to the author’s
self-portraits with Stalin. OK, Frieda’s Stalin, did not turn out well,
he looks more like Nietzsche;
the artist is therefore forgiven — somewhere else the slip
in the portrait of dictator would cost her the head. I’m interested
whether the art was something secondary to Frida and whether she was
really revolutionary? Her house in Coyaocan (La Casa Azul)
is close to the house-bunker of Leon Trotsky.
Looking not so long ago in her mirror (mirrors?)
I wrote a haiku: In the mirror of Frida Kahlo
I see only myself.
Frida was an artist, she was an artist,
(in the shadow of great Diego Rivera, if that’s important)
she was therefore an artist — her obsessive
self-portraits are artificial hypertrophied ego,
that fertilizer from which the art grows (paraphrasing
an early poem).
Trotsky argued that Rivera is an artist-revolutionary
because he is speaking to the masses with its murals because it is
epic and historical. Frida was not like that at all, she was
a petit bourgeois in her maison obsessed with herself, who
in disappointment of her lover escapes into the embrace
of the killer of her (hypothetical) lover, and his children, and thousands of others.
Interestingly: Frida’s leap from Trotsky to Stalin’s nobody
disturbs. Is this a proof that she was a communist?
No one condemns the artist–mistress
for this ideological salto mortale because liberalism
and feminism both are on her side and everything is so humane!
I could not figure out if the story about the relationship
between Frida Kahlo and Trotsky is just fine
Stalinist propaganda that wants to present Trotsky
as a greedy Jewish Satyr incapable of abstaining
(therefore unable to lead the state) and even in the presence of
his wife commits the satanic promiscuity? It smells like incense.
A photo from Tampico, where Frida pushes her own
breasts between Trotsky and Natalia Sedova probably
ticked erotic imagination of KGB officers convicted
to the office masturbation … There is no answer. Even students employed
in Trotsky museum do not know the answer. What we know watching
famous picture from Tampico: in January 1937 germ of betrayal was present everywhere
around Trotsky. Shachtman, then Frida, and then Natalia will follow the road
from Trotsky’s hated “petit bourgeois tendency”.
In the picture from Tampico, the hesitators surround the revolutionary.
Frida, therefore, is not a revolutionary – neither in male
or female grammatical form. Frida is a painter,
very dear to me. Her paintings reveal hardship. Her paintings
show that power of art grows out of weakness.
Dimitar Anakiev’s “Let’s Talk a Little Bit More about Frida Kahlo” was first published in XXZ Magazine’s regional portal in Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrian, and Serbian. https://www.xxzmagazin.com/jos-malo-o-fridi-kalo