His Artwork Draws from Rubens and Velazquez — But Trump Calls It Woke
Rigoberto Gonzalez, a Texas-based artist renowned for his vivid and deeply personal paintings inspired by classical masters like Rubens and Velazquez, has found himself in the eye of a political storm. His 2020 painting, Immigrants Crossing the Border Wall Into South Texas, which portrays a family scaling the U.S.-Mexico border wall, was recently cited by the Trump administration as an example of “woke” art that glorifies illegal immigration. This confrontation touches on profound questions about art, immigration, national identity, and freedom of expression.
The Painting and Its Powerful Story
Gonzalez’s painting is more than just an image—it tells a story rooted in lived experience. The work features an immigrant family climbing a ladder at the border, symbolizing the struggles, hopes, and resilience of those making the perilous journey for a better life. The artist explained that the piece draws on firsthand conversations with immigrants detained at border centers, though he deliberately avoids photographing them to protect their dignity.
Born in Mexico and now an American citizen, Gonzalez has a personal connection to his subject matter. His family’s multi-generational migration narrative informs his art, which explores what it means to be American beyond narrow or exclusionary definitions. His father’s migration during the Great Depression and his grandfather’s crossing after the Mexican Revolution reflects the broad and diverse fabric of American identity.
Trump Administration’s Criticism and Cultural Clash
The Trump administration, in a wider campaign to reshape museums and cultural institutions to fit its nationalist agenda, singled out Gonzalez’s painting in a White House article denouncing the Smithsonian Institution for “overemphasizing” themes it labels divisive or unpatriotic. Officials claimed that the painting “commemorates the act of illegally crossing” the border, framing it as objectionable propaganda rather than art.
This push fits a broader governmental attempt to influence museum content, including reviews aiming to ensure displays “celebrate American exceptionalism” and remove what is seen as partisan or “woke” narratives. Several exhibitions focusing on race, colonialism, immigration, and gender have been scrutinized or targeted.
Gonzalez’s Response: Defiance and Pride
Far from backing down, Gonzalez has embraced the criticism as a badge of honor. He views the administration’s attempts as an effort to censor and restrict artistic freedom. “If they demean my artwork or don’t have good things to say about it, I take it as a badge of honor,” Gonzalez said. For him, art is a catalyst for change and empathy, not propaganda.
He sees the comparison to oppressive regimes of the past—like the Nazi denunciation of “degenerate art”—as strikingly accurate, echoing fears that censorship and ideological control threaten creativity. Gonzalez stresses the importance of preserving authentic, diverse voices in the arts, warning that political interference risks silencing vital stories about America’s complex history and ongoing challenges.
Broader Implications for American Art and Identity
This confrontation highlights a growing cultural and political divide about who gets to define American identity and history. Gonzalez’s painting challenges narrow views by illustrating the struggles of immigrants, emphasizing hope and resilience that underpin many American lives. The administration’s critique illustrates how art remains a battleground where questions of race, belonging, and memory are fiercely contested.
Artists and museum leaders argue that such politically motivated censorship undermines democratic values like free expression and pluralism. The Smithsonian itself has pledged to resist partisan influence as it seeks to represent the nation’s diverse stories. Meanwhile, artists like Gonzalez continue creating work that reflects lived realities and inspires dialogue.