The Canarian Coalition and PP are set to propose a motion at the upcoming plenary meeting of the Tenerife Cabildo, which both parties govern, to rename the prominent Franco monument in Santa Cruz as a Monument for Concord. Their aim is to redefine it as “a space of remembrance that fosters peace and understanding among citizens.” This monument, inaugurated in 1966, was originally established, according to the NO-NO of that era, “to commemorate the departure of Generalissimo Franco when, as captain general of the Canary Islands, he left to lead the national movement. This initial creation by Ávalos was financed by the residents of Tenerife through public fundraising.” In 2010, the City Council of Santa Cruz de Tenerife changed its designation to “monument to the Fallen Angel,” and for years efforts have been underway to assess its artistic merit. While experts have declared it lacks artistic value, a judge has asserted the contrary.
In an official statement, Rosa Dávila (CC), the president of the Cabildo, and vice president Lope Afonso (PP) emphasise that while the institution “respects the judicial determination” that necessitates beginning the process for declaring Juan’s work by Ávalos as an asset of cultural interest (BIC), “the alteration of its name and significance” is “vital and cannot be delayed.” This judicial verdict was issued last July when the administrative litigation judge number 3 of Santa Cruz de Tenerife concluded that the monument to the dictator shows signs of containing artistic and cultural value. Consequently, the Cabildo of Tenerife must initiate a file for Asset of Cultural Interest (BIC), a judicial opinion regarding artistic matters that notably contradicts the assessments made by field experts.
CC and PP now assert that their focus is on “adapting it to the democratic and coexistence values that the institution upholds and that the current historical memory legislation advocates.”
According to the president of the Cabildo of Tenerife, “from the island council, we express our firmest commitment to freedom and democracy, hence it is unfathomable to retain historical elements that do not reflect existing democratic values.”
Dávila further argues that this monument, situated at the junction of Rambla de Santa Cruz – previously dedicated to General Franco – and Francisco La Roche Avenue, necessitates a new interpretation, “so as to transform it into a symbol of unity, concord, and future strength for the entire society of Tenerife, rather than perpetuating the glorification of a dictator whose regime represented the darkest period of our recent history.”
Lope Afonso adds that the intention behind this joint proposal from CC and PP is to ensure that this work “is not perceived as an exaltation of divisive figures.” Although it was inaugurated for that purpose and is popularly known as the Franco monument, the aim is for it to be seen as a memorial space that encourages peace and understanding among citizens.
In his view, “this initiative not only serves as a means to comply with the court ruling that mandates the protection of the work, but also provides a significant opportunity to align it with current democratic values and promote a message of reconciliation and peace for the society of Tenerife.”
Both parties underscore that the motion they intend to present at the plenary session will serve as “the institutional expression of the judicial decision that mandates the protection of the monument due to its potential artistic value.” Within this motion, they will advocate for the commission of experts assigned to this purpose to evaluate whether the work possesses values worthy of protection, while also prompting them to “contextualise it with a new meaning that does not evoke the darkest chapters of Spain’s history.”
They also concur on emphasising that the Tenerife Council seeks to position this process as “an example of how it is”
“It is achievable to reinterpret contentious heritage elements and relate them to the principles of contemporary society.”
“We aim for the public to grasp that safeguarding a creation, in this instance due to legal obligation, does not signify endorsing its original context. By renaming it the Monument of Concord, we are advocating for a message of respect and harmony for all residents of Tenerife and future generations,” they state.
A judicial decision on artistic significance
The judgement that compels the Cabildo to commence this file arose from an appeal submitted by the Association for the Investigation and Protection of Historical Heritage of San Miguel Arcángel, which asserted the artistic and distinctive worth of Ávalos’ creation in the Canary Islands.
According to the judicial decision, the sculpture must be preserved not solely for its importance as a sculptural entity but also for being a rare example of the artist’s oeuvre in the islands.
The Official Gazette of the Canary Islands announced this week the commencement of the BIC declaration procedure for the monument to Franco.
In a document released on September 12, the Historical Heritage technical unit of the Cabildo of Tenerife offers a description of the sculptural ensemble, which consists of an angel with a “figure of a man, upright, who brandishes a sword” on its wings.
It also notes that the initiative for its creation emerged in 1964, spearheaded by the then civil governor Juan Pablo Abril.
He further mentions that concerning the iconographic interpretation of the monument “there is no consensus”, particularly regarding whether it is dedicated to Franco, although the NO-DO previously claimed that it was.
On one hand, the report from the Cabildo de Tenerife cites information from the newspaper The Vanguard dated March 17, 1966, stating that the monument embodies “Franco, the fearless captain, symbol of guidance and leadership; his sword resembling a cross, as he was to embark on a Crusade defending the noble ideals of the nation; the aircraft that transported them from the Canary Islands symbolised by an archangel, as its mechanical wings were providential that day; ultimately that cascade of water, a tribute to the heroes who, in a fervent march, placed themselves under the command of the valiant captain.”
On the other hand, it refers to “other documents” that suggest the title of the work is Monument to the Peace of Tenerife, as indicated in the inventory of works by Juan de Ávalos, and that the human figure, due to its physical characteristics, cannot be attributed to Franco, with some interpretations suggesting it represents “a friar carrying a cross.”
These additional reports, which the Cabildo of Tenerife does not identify, also claim that the figure of the angel “is not exclusively a Christian symbol, as it appears in other religions,” and refute that it is a creation that glorifies the Franco regime, as there are no additional iconographic elements associated with it.
The processing of the BIC declaration for this sculptural group will necessitate the input of the University of La Laguna, which at one time included this monument in the catalogue of Francoist relics, a designation later revoked by the incumbent Government of the Canary Islands (CC-PP); the Autonomous Organisation of Museums of Santa Cruz, the Provincial College of Architects, and the Royal Academy of Fine Arts San Miguel Arcángel.
Beyond the Canary Islands, the National Museum of Sculpture (Valladolid) and the Royal Academy of Extremadura will also be consulted, considering that Juan de Ávalos hails from Mérida.
