Their two best-known walls, Latinoamerica and the Paco’s Tacos Stand mural were both done in the spring and summer of 1974. They celebrate the beauty and richness of the Latin tradition. For Latinodmerica, the four women comprising the original core of Mujeres Mural- istas—Patricia Rodriguez, Consuelo Mendez Castillo, Irene Perez, and Graciela Carrillo de Lopez—worked together to create the design. Different parts of the mural are painted by each artist in her individual style; yet the mural suc- ceeds as a unified work because of the clear organization; and the distinctively bright, clear color that is characteristic of the group. In the Paco’s Tacos mural the unity is more tenuous. The wall divides into two distinctly different halves reflecting the different artistic styles of Consuelo Mendez Castillo and Graciela Carrillo de Lopez. In many ways Mujeres Muralistas was never really a “collective”, but rather a group of women who came together to work on a particular wall mural. An almost instant fame forced them into a prematurely formalized exis- tence as a ‘“collective group,” while leaving them little time to resolve differences in politi- cal consciousness between members of the group, or cultural differences between Chicana and Latin American women. The problem of individualism was never really tackled, al- though there was an attempt to make decisions by a consensus of the group. Internal differen- ces caused the group to dissolve formally early in 1976. The women who comprised Mujeres Muralistas are now working as individual muralists. Many mural-painting collectives, including most of those that grew out of the largely white counterculture and anti-war movements, either start with women who then invite male artists in, or simply include both women and men. Often led by women with roots in Marxism and feminism, these collectives tend to be strongly anti-sexist, anti-imperialist, and to use overtly political images in their artwork. One of these groups was the People’s Painters of New Jersey, who “muralized” Livingston College from 1972 to 1974. Modeled after the Ramona Parra Bri- gades of Allende’s Chile, the People’s Painters were concerned equally with the political ef- fects of their murals and with trying to over- come individualism and a sense of personal ego. Their first wall was for the Livingston Women’s Center, which was very appropriate since the founders of the group—Julia Smith, Kathy Jones, and myself —considered ourselves activists in the Women'’s Liberation Movement. We worked on the design collectively, discuss- ing ideas first and then finding the images. We chose to work in a simple style, using heavy black outlines and flat color, so that the women at the Center could help us paint. We also con- sciously worked over parts of the mural that others had originated to combat the tendency to say at the end of the project, “And this part is mine.” While we did not wholly succeed in eliminating our sense of personal ego, we did find that by consciously emphasizing collec- tivity in our work we could overcome personal insecurities and achieve stronger political and artistic results. We went on to incorporate men into our group and painted eight other murals before agreeing to disperse in 1974, when some of our members graduated and others decided to go on to other things. The Haight-Ashbury Muralists in San Francis- co, a collective led by Jane Norling, see them- selves as “anti-imperialist cultural workers.” Their first mural, Rainbow People, was painted in 1972 as part of a large anti-war demonstra- tion. A Haight landmark, Rainbow People was repainted and updated in 1974. Unity Eye (1973) diagrams the ingredients for creating a revolu- tionary culture in the United States. The mural shows a revolution peopled and led by women, and was painted by an all-female team. Most recently, the Haight-Ashbury Muralists have been working on a 300-foot-long history of the class struggle in San Francisco. The most radical and problematic challenge to tradition has been the development of col- lective murals in which non-artist members of a community work with an artist-facilitator who helps them to create their own mural. While a strong emphasis on community participation characterizes all community mural projects, this particular emphasis reflects an attempt to create a “people’s art” in every sense of the word. Simply providing paint and a wall to teen- agers and young adults is not the answer. There must be a direction, a method for working co- operatively, and a technique that makes it pos- sible to bypass the need for years of study of drawing and design. The most complete method, and the model for much related work elsewhere in the nation, was developed by Susan Shapiro-Kiok and the Cityarts staff in New York City. This method begins with a number of concept meetings dur- ing which the theme is discussed. In the early Cityarts Workshop murals, scenes were acted out and developed, photographed, and then projected and traced. When the mock-up was complete, it was enlarged by an opaque projec- tor and painted in. Black Women of Africa Today (1971), designed and executed by teen- age girls at “The Smith” housing project on the Lower East Side, is typical of the early silhouette style. Later murals became more complex as the technique came to include the use of drawings and slides as well as photographs and the opaque projector. The Jewish ethnic mural at the Bialystoker Old People’s Home is a collage of images designed and painted by a group of Jewish teenagers under the direction of Susan Caruso-Green (current director of Cityarts Workshop). 19