The fascination certain cultural objects evoke resembles a kind of spell that, rather than answering our deepest questions about them, increases their enigma. This effect often stems from the knowledge, cosmogonies, and spiritualities that shaped them, generally distant from our daily lives; worlds from which we can only intuit and feel their power. Some contemporary art artifacts share this aura with ritual objects from popular culture. They are presented as witnesses that symbolically and materially invoke shared meanings that, through ritual, refresh their mythologies, mark the passage of time, measure desires with nature, and continually reconstruct their sense of the communal.

Among the so-called “folk arts,” masks used in ceremonies, festivals, and ritual dances are objects that concentrate extraordinary power, acting as mediators between the human and the divine, embodying in their creation and use the deepest desires of a community. The more than 250 masks from the Muyaes Ogazón Collection, which are the centerpiece of this exhibition, possess this quality. It is one of the most extensive collections of its kind in Mexico—with over 3,000 pieces—and was assembled starting in the 1970s. What makes it unique is that all the masks were used in rituals—they were “danced”—and served as the embodiment of a spirit, soul, deity, demon, or deceased person. This selection speaks of traditions and multifaceted identities distinguished by their spiritual quest, their connection to nature, and their conversations with death.

The exhibition offers  a rethinking of the complex and close relationships between
folk art and works circulating within the contemporary art system. What new connections can we establish between these objects? How do we rethink the meanings of community and bodily action within both sets? How is folk art reconsidered within contemporary art in the context of decolonial and intersectional critique? In the current cultural policy in Mexico, which places folk arts
at the center of its social and ideological program, and in the expanding global art market where folk elements are integrated—sometimes as formal reference, others
as process or methodology—these questions are of vital importance.

Even when folk art appears to integrate naturally into contemporary art at various levels, certain tensions remain regarding its assimilation, now more complex in light of current political and aesthetic concerns. Additionally, certain folk objects and knowledge continue to transcend conventional knowledge structures, demanding different sensitivities, as reminded by the masks displayed in the exhibition. For contemporary art, such artifacts and the wealth of materials, forms, and knowledge they involve still represent, in many cases, a mystery and a challenge to the ongoing redefinition of art.

— Roselin Rodríguez Espinosa