
As I got refered many times to Frida Kahlo and her blue house in Mexico City (although by the same person), it was a ‘must’ to walk over there and have a look. Kahlo was born 1907 in the so-called blue house (left) in Mexico City. Due to infantile paralysis, she had a shorter and thinner right leg. In 1925 she had a bad accident leading to lifetime health problems. However, in the hospital she started painting for which reason disease is a re-occuring topic in her objects. In contrast to the doctors’ predictions, she suceeded in learning to walk, again. In 1929, Kahlo married Diego Rivera who was already a world-famous artist. She had a couple of love affairs, i.e. with Leo Trotzki, who moved into the blue house with his wife for some years. Rivera also had lots of love affairs. So, they got divorced in 1939 but married again one year later. Then, they moved into a new house which in fact consists of two different houses connected by a bridge (see 2nd picture below). Kahlo was living in the blue part while Rivera occupied the red part. This way of living (and being married) lasted until Kahlo died in 1954.

The blue house contains a very nice garden (left) giving an authentic atmosphere of a relaxed spot to focus on art or intellectual discussions. Every few meters, there is a photo of Kahlo connected to a citation of Rivera complimenting her work (while she was usually very critical about his work). However, the exhibition in the house is mainly disappointing except the first room. Although the whole museum is dedicated to Kahlo and her work (and is named after her), only this first room contains her works. The small number of paintings are impressive but do not seem to be very representative, e.g. as only one has a connection to disease/health. The next room contains paintings from other artists while the remaining four or so rooms only contain works from Rivera. Furthermore, each room is introduced by a huge citation from Kahlo about Rivera and his genius. In summary, I had the feeling that the whole exhibition was focused on Rivera instead of Kahlo. For me, this points to some chauvinism as Kahlo achieves nowadays higher prices for her paintings than Rivera (if one can take this as a measure). It is really troublesome how the exhibition places Kahlo as a small side-product below the ‘genius’ Rivera.

Before I visited the blue house, I went to the houses connected by the bridge (left). They were supposed to contain exhibitions about the artists, as well. After a long walk, I arrived at these houses. After paying the entrance fee, I entered the exhibition about Rivera. His studio is left as it was and is, therefore I guess, really impressive. Huge windows, a lot of sunlight and all over the place material to paint and create objects next to some everyday-use articles. As I went to Kahlo’s studio, there was another surprise: It was closed due to construction work. I was told that all her work was moved to the blue house, which I visited afterwards (see above). Now, I am really wondering about this: Without the studio closed, which works would have been at the blue house from Kahlo at all?