I chose to go to the Minneapolis Institute of Arts and analyze the Prestige and Identity in Latin America. There were a lot of different objects and symbols that expressed the culture as I looked at everything in the exhibit, but on the whole it covered a lot on the textiles and the historic significance of those textiles. There was a description on each part of the exhibit that talked about why it was important. When I got there parking was not a problem at all because there is free parking all around the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. Upon arranging there it was just like any other building with an information desk and a guide that you could use, but I have gone there multiple times so I went ahead without making a stop there.

                Upon arriving at the exhibition I noticed how much more different it was compared to the other exhibitions. Most other exhibitions had a lot more of the pictures in frames versus the amount of objects that were available at the exhibit. Also, there was not a whole lot going on meaning I was the only one there. Other exhibits had other people looking at them, but this one (being assigned) I was the only one at. I wondered why this was and maybe it was the way it was presented. Like it was textiles hanging up on the wall and you could look at them and leave. That may not be it, but I did notice that there was a big difference as far as how big the audience was in this exhibit versus the other ones.

                The first thing to notice was the explanation of the textile being used for the clothes. It really helped to have the two different looks and it I could tell which one was for men and which one it was for women. It didn’t really indicate or signify if having a certain outfit indicates one gender having a dominant role over another. Sometimes symbols (like a hat or another object) signify dominance, but this exhibit did not indicate anything that would show one gender overshadowing another.

The male outfit

The female outfit

The second thing and the main thing was the textile and the textiles really indicated who was considered to be the higher class wise. Assuming the role of a higher class were mostly elders and the color they wore would help indicate that. I may not have understood entirely because there wasn’t anyone walking around (like someone I could ask questions) so I am assuming that to show respect to their elders they were given a textile of a certain color to indicate their level within the social class. Seeing as how the main focus of the exhibit was textiles I can assume that this was considered to be very important to the Latin people. It could be considered a value because it was such a big focus of the exhibit plus it indicates who is higher in the social class. That would indicate the importance of the textile.

Another point of emphasis would be the way the textiles indicate power. Some dress a certain way to indicate power so everyone knows that they are superior or in charge. This is different from my first impression of the two genders indicating the two different types of outfits worn by the males and females because until seeing this I had no idea of how they indicated class to everyone around them. The outfits indicate that which allows for a better understanding of the importance.

These are the high members of society. Things like the head dress and ear rings indicate class and power. 

This was a great way of understanding what the history of the Latin culture was like. It gave a perspective on what types of textiles and what ways of clothing indicated what types of results in the Latin culture. Comparing it to the culture here in the United States for example would draw a lot of differences. Here for example men and women are treated a lot more equally even though there are situations where it might not reflect that same. Clothing is not as big a factor either so it was a good way to compare and contrast what we have here versus the Latin culture.