The new video of Rebeca Martínez interpreting a song composed by Tanya has been the subject of diverse opinions in recent days. I’m not going to refer to its musical quality, because I think it’s a pop song with no pretensions other than being catchy and nice. I will focus, in these lines on the fly, on an essential aspect in my view: the freedom of creation.
The struggle between the old and the new, between the beautiful and the ugly, many years ago ceased to interest me as a spectator. At the same level of infertility are the debates between whether a work is decadent or extraordinary. The public has placed itself on the side it prefers. Over the years I have learned not to diminish the legitimacy of any opinion because everything is subjective and within the same volume of Universal Art History there are the Gioconda da Vinci and The fountain of Duchamp.
I take “La habitación” as a whole, rather than separate composition, interpretation and video clip. For me it is a liberating gesture, like a kind of bacchanal in which women escape to the theater and not to the woods, taste sushi instead of magical libations and worship the horse and not the billy goat.
Beyond aesthetic tastes, there is coherence in that whole. Rebeca Martínez has a theatricality that begins to be founded on the popular imagination and is projected, thanks to the talent of May Reguera, in a more complete way. Because there is a bit of satire, artifice, simulacrum, a playful sense.
I do not have affective ties with any of the women who participate in the video, nor am I a fan of Rebeca Martínez. I don’t know the insides of the shoot. But I assume, from my role as an Internet viewer, that the game that is established with the stage and the behind-the-scenes of the theater is not fortuitous. I appreciate the post-dramatic game that, from the musical theme itself, seeks to flirt with symbols referring to sexuality, food and leisure. May Reguera’s video, Tanya’s theme and Rebeca’s interpretation are totally in tune and the result of these three feminine visions is transgressive and fun.
The theater is the location, but also as a space for creative freedom, sexual freedom, and exhibition. Under the mantle of the theatre, the fashion style, sequins and wigs, the use of kitsch, spectacular codes and excess as an aesthetic construction and not a defect merge.
I see in “La habitación” a nod to Cinema B, stylized and scandalizing. It has a tropical mannerism, and it stands out as an ode to the distortion of reality that I love and that bothers others. There is also a lot of seduction. Rebellious bodies of women who expose themselves without modesty, with swing despite the years and maternity hospitals.
I am enormously grateful to the theater, especially the one that takes place in the Trianon (where the video was filmed) for teaching me to appreciate different ways of playing with reality. Thanks to the theatre, I do not require anyone to adhere to the presuppositions of realism, nor to talk about deficiencies and problems instead of talking about flowers and jewels. There are genres and there are diverse audiences. There are different needs for expression and there should be respect for all those that are legitimate and harmless. Some like the arias, others the guachineo or the porompompón.
That if it is cheo, that if it is out of context because there is no bread with suckling pig, that if the tits are outside, that it does not make sense, that it is zoophilic. All are, in my opinion, valid comments, although life is full of cool things and it is very rich to be able to experience them. As for what we do not have, if we are guided by that we would have to eliminate a large part of the music and audiovisuals that we consume on a daily basis. Perhaps if the video were reggaeton, bare breasts would be more accepted. And there is zoophilia in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” For centuries no one thought of lynching Shakespeare, not even now on social media.
“La habitación” does not generate violence, nor does it incite hatred, nor does it project unhealthy expressions. Why do their creators receive so much fury from a part of the public? From the point of view of hierarchies, video is not arbitrarily positioning itself in any space of supremacy, it is not taking the place of another “more valuable” video. It just exists.
But just as I defend the freedom of creation, I defend the freedom of opinions. Nor do I judge those who genuinely get angry at the existence of the porompom. Some say that it should be deeper, more coordinated, less decadent, less equestrian, less sexual… I remind you of what Susan said in “Against interpretation”: “instead of a hermeneutics, we need an erotic art”. Here is another dilemma almost impossible to elucidate with certainty in this century: Is it art or not?
I agree with what the teacher Jorge Braulio would say:
It depends on the reading
said the wise Cicero…
In full porompom
who keeps the composure?
