The way forward for the Gelman Assortment, one of many world’s most important collections of Twentieth-century Mexican artwork, is below rising scrutiny after 350 cultural professionals signed an open letter urging Mexican cultural authorities to be extra clear and abide by heritage legal guidelines within the administration of the cultural treasures. The open letter follows final month’s announcement that the gathering—assembled by Jacques and Natasha Gelman and together with 18 works by Frida Kahlo—had been acquired by the Monterrey-based Zambrano household in 2023. Below the settlement, the Spanish financial institution will now oversee “the conservation, analysis and exhibition” of the newly re-branded Gelman Santander Assortment, together with 160 works.
Although privately owned, the gathering is complicated: 30 works are nationwide inventive monuments below Mexican legislation, requiring oversight by the Instituto Nacional de Bellas Artes y Literatura (INBAL). Signatories, together with the curator Cuauhtémoc Medina and the artists Mónica Meyer and Teresa Margolles, emphasise that Kahlo’s work are essentially the most strictly regulated, prompting requires transparency.
Details about the Gelman Santander Assortment’s future has emerged in fragments. After initially asserting a summer time exhibition at Faro Santander, the financial institution’s new artwork house in Cantabria, Spain, adopted by a global iteration, information emerged that 68 works from the gathering would first be displayed at Mexico Metropolis’s Museo de Arte Moderno. That ongoing exhibition (authentic resulting from run till Could, now prolonged till July) options ten Kahlo work, together with the long-lasting Self-Portrait with Monkeys (1943) and Self-Portrait with Necklace (1933). The gathering was final proven in Mexico 18 years in the past.
Exhibitions and export restrictions
The gathering’s most up-to-date public show was on the Artwork Gallery of South Australia in 2023. For years, it was the topic of controversy resulting from curator Robert R. Littman’s decision-making. He had been Natasha Gelman’s adviser, when she died in 1998 and served because the executor of her will—which reportedly indicated that the gathering ought to stay in Mexico.
Whereas the continuing exhibition in Mexico was celebrated, it raised considerations in regards to the protected standing of sure works within the assortment, together with ten items every by Kahlo and Diego Rivera, seven by José Clemente Orozco, two by María Izquierdo and one by David Alfaro Siqueiros. Mexican legislation stipulates differing levels of management over these works. Some, like these by Rivera and Orozco, could also be completely exported for exhibition, whereas works by Kahlo are topic to stricter controls.
“In Kahlo’s case, the prohibition of everlasting export is definitive, with non permanent exports allowed for affordable timeframes,” says Eduardo Pizarro, a companion on the Mexico Metropolis-based agency SMPS Authorized. “Such agreements don’t pose issues so long as they respect heritage legal guidelines.”
Export permits are usually legitimate for one or two years, however on 16 February, INBAL’s director Alejandra de la Paz instructed Excelsior {that a} renewable five-year mortgage was deliberate. The signatories of the open letter aren’t questioning the possession of the Gelman Santander Assortment, however searching for ensures of prioritizing its show in Mexico.
“What we’re asking is transparency from INBAL concerning the export permits and to prioritise and renegotiate the works’ extra everlasting exhibition in a public or non-public establishment in Mexico,” says Francisco Berzunza, a historian and member of the collective Defensa de la Colección Gelman, the group that organised the letter. “An prolonged mortgage may endanger Kahlo’s legacy as different collectors have unsuccessfully tried to relocate Kahlo’s works.”
The letter additionally questions the characterisation of the gathering’s show at Faro Santander, by that establishment’s director Daniel Vega, as “everlasting but dynamic”, and of heritage legislation as “versatile” and “topic to exceptions for conservation functions”. On the identical January press convention asserting Banco Santander’s stewardship of the gathering, Vega additionally confused full compliance with Mexican legislation.
In an announcement posted on INBAL’s X account on 11 March, the company emphasised that it was appearing in accordance with heritage legislation, below which it grants non permanent export permits. It added: “INBAL is not going to authorise Kahlo’s works’ everlasting export or every other.”
Diego Rivera’s Portrait of Natasha Gelman (1943) © 2026 Banco de México Diego Rivera Frida Kahlo Museums Belief, Mexico, D.F. / VEGAP. Picture: Gerardo Suter
Stress intensified following the publication in e-flux of one other open letter organised by Defensa de la Colección Gelman on 18 March, addressed to Banco Santander and the leaders of European museums that can quickly host exhibitions of Kahlo’s works—together with the Fondation Beyeler in Switzerland, the Neue Nationalgalerie in Berlin and the Nasjonalmuseet in Oslo.
“We respect the safety of cultural heritage and worth the shut and open dialogue we now have with the accountable cultural authorities in Mexico,” a spokesperson for the Fondation Beyeler tells The Artwork Newspaper. “The Nationwide Museum of Norway has nice respect and understanding for the robust dedication to Mexican cultural heritage,” Ingrid Røynesdal, the museum’s director, mentioned in an announcement. Representatives for the Neue Nationalgalerie didn’t remark.
“The settlement doesn’t suggest the gathering’s acquisition or relocation, which stays owned by the Zambrano household, and respects Mexican heritage legislation,” reads a 23 March assertion by Banco Santander. “We reiterate it’s the house owners’ will and our dedication to return the gathering to Mexico after the non permanent export.” The Artwork Newspaper contacted each INBAL and Santander, however each declined to remark past their prior public statements.
Clamouring for Kahlos
Regardless of the necessity to navigate Mexican heritage legal guidelines, institutional curiosity in Kahlo’s work has by no means been higher. “There’s a ready checklist of museums wanting to point out works from the gathering,” Borja Baselga, the director of Fundación Santander, mentioned on the January press convention.
“Shortage is a consider Kahlo’s work, and these works are masterpieces,” Berzunza says. He provides that almost all of her works are owned by establishments and personal collections: “The Mexican state solely owns one Kahlo self-portrait.”
The controversy over the future of the Gelman Santander Assortment has even reached the president of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, who mentioned at a 25 March press convention: “Our want is for it to remain in Mexico—we must always converse to those that have it.”
Extra particulars of the settlement between the Zambrano household, Banco Santander and Mexican authorities emerged on 29 March, when the Mexican newspaper Reforma reported reviewing the 7 January settlement between the three events confirming the “five-year renewable mortgage”. A supply near the Zambrano household instructed Reforma that their aim can be to exhibit the works in Mexico.
In keeping with the settlement, per extra reporting by Proceso, topic to renewals the gathering is not going to return to Mexico till 30 September 2030, to “keep away from, so far as attainable, periodic and recurrent returns, given the dangers of dealing with and transport that would harm the works”.
At a press convention on Monday (30 March), the tradition minister Claudia Curiel confused the significance of worldwide motion, stating that the gathering will return in 2028, as required by “customs-related points,” and that its exhibition in Mexico is deliberate. No particular date was shared. She additionally introduced that the Museo de Arte Moderno’s exhibition of works from the Gelman Santander Assortment will proceed by July, till after the conclusion of the 2026 World Cup.
However considerations stay within the Mexican cultural neighborhood. “This perverts the legislation; the contract opens the unprecedented risk of extending the works’ export indefinitely,” Berzunza says. “Why did authorities signal this settlement?”
