106
A. Ospina and A. López
For years, indigenous peoples have been immersed in the Colombian conflict.
They have been part of the processes of collective invisibility, violation of rights,
uprooting of the land, loss of their customs due to the need to immerse themselves
in the city, cultural appropriation by large brands, in addition to the non-recognition
of their identity and culture by part of the Colombian territory [3].
The continuous sociopolitical changes, mediated by the large-scale conflict, configure dynamics of physical and intellectual violence centered on vulnerable communities, rural areas, and places of population settlement [38]. Consequently, affecting
primarily indigenous peoples through the exploitation and destruction of their land,
fauna, and flora, which is their primary center of spiritual connection, creation, and
economic and cultural development for them. Here, handicraft acquires a new narrative and exponential nuance, which envisions artisanal and territorial resilience as
a space for local production and support for creative actions in dispute spaces [8].
Within this framework of exposure and cultural risk, the Artesanias de Colombia
6
program emerged in 1964, and, in 1968, it was declared a mixed economy company
linked to the Ministry of Economic Development. It has thus become a promoter of
the development of the artisanal sector through programs and spaces of visibilization
throughout the Colombian territory. In this way, this program responds to the latent
need to protect handicrafts as social construction and representation of the cultural
heritage of each region, its expression, communication, and commerce [6].
Handicrafts imply recognition and respect for the local characteristics of the communities and its traditional products, which express and keep alive the culture of each
region of the world [29]. This contributes to the identitarian wealth of the nation and
the building of a national history through collective memory.
Faced with the need for change and restructuring of the status quo, the Law 36
was enacted in 1984, which recognizes traditional folk crafts as “the production of
handicrafts, resulting from the fusion of American, African and European cultures,
produced by the people in anonymous forms, with complete predominance of the
material and the elements of the region, transmitted from generation to generation.”
7
However, the conceptualization of this legislative declaration based on the former
Colombian constitution allows communities and the ancestral knowledge that is
embodied in their crafts to continue in processes of non-recognition by the Colombian
people and to stay subject to the permanent manipulation and violation of their rights
as subjects and creative persons, subsequently leaving their work open to cultural
appropriation at national and international level.
Six years later, there was an organizational change, envisioned in the 1991 constitution that was articulated in the Culture Law which aimed to recognize the territory
as a multiethnic nation, governed by laws that visibility and protect indigenous communities and living traditions, as a constituent part of a homogenous country with a
broad cultural diversity [36].
6 www.artesaniasdecolombia.com.
7 Law 36 of 1984. November 19 of 1984, Law of the Craftsman, Decree 258 of 1987. Chapter 1,
article 6.
A. Ospina and A. López
For years, indigenous peoples have been immersed in the Colombian conflict.
They have been part of the processes of collective invisibility, violation of rights,
uprooting of the land, loss of their customs due to the need to immerse themselves
in the city, cultural appropriation by large brands, in addition to the non-recognition
of their identity and culture by part of the Colombian territory [3].
The continuous sociopolitical changes, mediated by the large-scale conflict, configure dynamics of physical and intellectual violence centered on vulnerable communities, rural areas, and places of population settlement [38]. Consequently, affecting
primarily indigenous peoples through the exploitation and destruction of their land,
fauna, and flora, which is their primary center of spiritual connection, creation, and
economic and cultural development for them. Here, handicraft acquires a new narrative and exponential nuance, which envisions artisanal and territorial resilience as
a space for local production and support for creative actions in dispute spaces [8].
Within this framework of exposure and cultural risk, the Artesanias de Colombia
6
program emerged in 1964, and, in 1968, it was declared a mixed economy company
linked to the Ministry of Economic Development. It has thus become a promoter of
the development of the artisanal sector through programs and spaces of visibilization
throughout the Colombian territory. In this way, this program responds to the latent
need to protect handicrafts as social construction and representation of the cultural
heritage of each region, its expression, communication, and commerce [6].
Handicrafts imply recognition and respect for the local characteristics of the communities and its traditional products, which express and keep alive the culture of each
region of the world [29]. This contributes to the identitarian wealth of the nation and
the building of a national history through collective memory.
Faced with the need for change and restructuring of the status quo, the Law 36
was enacted in 1984, which recognizes traditional folk crafts as “the production of
handicrafts, resulting from the fusion of American, African and European cultures,
produced by the people in anonymous forms, with complete predominance of the
material and the elements of the region, transmitted from generation to generation.”
7
However, the conceptualization of this legislative declaration based on the former
Colombian constitution allows communities and the ancestral knowledge that is
embodied in their crafts to continue in processes of non-recognition by the Colombian
people and to stay subject to the permanent manipulation and violation of their rights
as subjects and creative persons, subsequently leaving their work open to cultural
appropriation at national and international level.
Six years later, there was an organizational change, envisioned in the 1991 constitution that was articulated in the Culture Law which aimed to recognize the territory
as a multiethnic nation, governed by laws that visibility and protect indigenous communities and living traditions, as a constituent part of a homogenous country with a
broad cultural diversity [36].
6 www.artesaniasdecolombia.com.
7 Law 36 of 1984. November 19 of 1984, Law of the Craftsman, Decree 258 of 1987. Chapter 1,
article 6.