I don't think that these museums have a large or even nominal permanent collection per se, but they have a feel that is more in the European tradition of the "Kunsthalle", or a space dedicated solely to exhibiting, not actively acquiring and showing, art to the public. The closest thing that we have to this in NYC is P.S. 1 in Long Island City. (And now that is not completely independent anymore since its merger with MOMA a little over a decade ago.)
The MAXXI (which stands for Museo Nazionale Delle Arti del XXI Secolo) is devoted to art, design and architecture. Walking around the building, inside and out, is an artistic experience in itself. The building is quintessential Zaha Hadid, who designed the museum. The light, flow and futuristic design is very conducive to seeing contemporary art. The twists and turns that the exhibition rooms and halls take is surprising - small nooks opening to expansive spaces, artificial light quickly turning into natural light and spaceship, Escher-like stair cases. The lobby and furniture as well as the piazza harmoniously meld with the entire structure. There are a few exhibitions on right now, but the most impressive is a exhibition dedicated to Michelangelo Pistoletto and his works from 1956-1974.
Pistoletto started painting self-portraits in his early career, but his breakthrough came when he started creating "Mirror Paintings"in the early sixties. These paintings, and there are numerous early examples in this exhibition (and he still creates these types of works today - Luhring Augustine showed some in late 2008), were ground-breaking and part of anti-conventional, radical art movement/group in Italy dubbed Arte Povera. Arte Povera wasn't a stylistic movement by any means but a reflection of anti-establishment thinking that was going on in Italy and throughout Europe at the time. Pistoletto's painting and later silk-screen images of contemporary people in their life - waiting for public transport, at a party, shopping, demonstrating, in various states of undress, etc - were on highly reflective surfaces where you can see yourself in the work. These were unique, innovative and highly conceptual. Here the artist was breaking down the barrier as the canvas as a "window" and the beholder was not just a bystander but now could be an active participant as he or she saw himself within the work of art. Some examples are below (these were from the same exhibition in that was at the Philadelphia Museum of Art earlier this year - the MAXXI is not so generous with their installation views).
However, my favorite works in the show are the Venus of the Rags and Mappamondo. Venus of the Rags is part of a larger body of work (stracci) where Pistoletto used discarded pieces of fabric and clothing to wrap individual bricks to make a wall as well as placing them in strategic piles and integrating other materials such as glass to form sculptural pieces. Venus of the Rags is a small mountain of clothing that is piled as high as a life size neoclassical Venus sculpture that is faced backwards. Simply, I love the stark plaster white of the sculpture against the highly-textured, multi-colored fabric. More importantly, this work epitomizes the zeitgeist at the time - the injection of the common, everyday objects into art (see Rauschenberg's "Combine" pieces and Pop Art in the US at the time). The traditional Venus is literally turning her back on us, a metaphor for the artist turning his back on traditional art making processes. I love this work. Its an abandonment of classical sculptural practices for something new and exciting.
Pistoletto has influenced many artists, but what really comes to mind is Christian Boltanski installation that was shown in the Park Avenue Armory in the Spring of 2010. Boltanski filled the hall with piles and piles of clothing. Although I believe that the Boltanski's intended message of the work is different than that Pistoletto's, I really think it couldn't have existed without Pistoletto's ground-breaking rag pieces coming first.
Mappmondo (Globe) envelopes everything that I love about Arte Povera. I knew about this piece in a long time ago, but got to see it in an amazing Arte Povera exhibition in the Summer of 2002 at MOCA LA. I was so happy to see it here again - like an old friend. The work was made from from a ball of discarded newspapers that is in an iron cage. When this ball was made and I believe covered with wax (and not yet in its cage), Pistoletto rolled it around the streets of Turin where it gathered dust and detritus from the sidewalks and roads and permanent marking and sticking to the surface. There is a very playful and performative element to the work. I mean, its a ball that one would want to play with and roll around like a child. But on the other hand, it seriously and consciously is breaking with all art historical hierarchy of subject, materials and practices. I also like that the dimension that it was rolled around the streets. Is that the work of art - the action of rolling the ball? And what we see is this just the result of this act? Or is this the work of art itself? I like that you don't really know.
There is this lovely brown patina of grime and age shown on the surface and, at the end of the day, there is something simple and primal about it, at the same time being defiant in terms of the process of art making. Arte Povera literally means "poor art" and here is art made from everyday trash - but now its sitting here in a museum as a priceless object in its cage - untouchable. Its hard to resolve this and I like that the work has taken on layers of meaning through time. As Pistoletto took to the street to make this work, I can see it give birth to works such as Vito Acconci's "Following Piece" as well as many others.
Pistoletto started painting self-portraits in his early career, but his breakthrough came when he started creating "Mirror Paintings"in the early sixties. These paintings, and there are numerous early examples in this exhibition (and he still creates these types of works today - Luhring Augustine showed some in late 2008), were ground-breaking and part of anti-conventional, radical art movement/group in Italy dubbed Arte Povera. Arte Povera wasn't a stylistic movement by any means but a reflection of anti-establishment thinking that was going on in Italy and throughout Europe at the time. Pistoletto's painting and later silk-screen images of contemporary people in their life - waiting for public transport, at a party, shopping, demonstrating, in various states of undress, etc - were on highly reflective surfaces where you can see yourself in the work. These were unique, innovative and highly conceptual. Here the artist was breaking down the barrier as the canvas as a "window" and the beholder was not just a bystander but now could be an active participant as he or she saw himself within the work of art. Some examples are below (these were from the same exhibition in that was at the Philadelphia Museum of Art earlier this year - the MAXXI is not so generous with their installation views).
However, my favorite works in the show are the Venus of the Rags and Mappamondo. Venus of the Rags is part of a larger body of work (stracci) where Pistoletto used discarded pieces of fabric and clothing to wrap individual bricks to make a wall as well as placing them in strategic piles and integrating other materials such as glass to form sculptural pieces. Venus of the Rags is a small mountain of clothing that is piled as high as a life size neoclassical Venus sculpture that is faced backwards. Simply, I love the stark plaster white of the sculpture against the highly-textured, multi-colored fabric. More importantly, this work epitomizes the zeitgeist at the time - the injection of the common, everyday objects into art (see Rauschenberg's "Combine" pieces and Pop Art in the US at the time). The traditional Venus is literally turning her back on us, a metaphor for the artist turning his back on traditional art making processes. I love this work. Its an abandonment of classical sculptural practices for something new and exciting.
Pistoletto has influenced many artists, but what really comes to mind is Christian Boltanski installation that was shown in the Park Avenue Armory in the Spring of 2010. Boltanski filled the hall with piles and piles of clothing. Although I believe that the Boltanski's intended message of the work is different than that Pistoletto's, I really think it couldn't have existed without Pistoletto's ground-breaking rag pieces coming first.
Mappmondo (Globe) envelopes everything that I love about Arte Povera. I knew about this piece in a long time ago, but got to see it in an amazing Arte Povera exhibition in the Summer of 2002 at MOCA LA. I was so happy to see it here again - like an old friend. The work was made from from a ball of discarded newspapers that is in an iron cage. When this ball was made and I believe covered with wax (and not yet in its cage), Pistoletto rolled it around the streets of Turin where it gathered dust and detritus from the sidewalks and roads and permanent marking and sticking to the surface. There is a very playful and performative element to the work. I mean, its a ball that one would want to play with and roll around like a child. But on the other hand, it seriously and consciously is breaking with all art historical hierarchy of subject, materials and practices. I also like that the dimension that it was rolled around the streets. Is that the work of art - the action of rolling the ball? And what we see is this just the result of this act? Or is this the work of art itself? I like that you don't really know.
There is this lovely brown patina of grime and age shown on the surface and, at the end of the day, there is something simple and primal about it, at the same time being defiant in terms of the process of art making. Arte Povera literally means "poor art" and here is art made from everyday trash - but now its sitting here in a museum as a priceless object in its cage - untouchable. Its hard to resolve this and I like that the work has taken on layers of meaning through time. As Pistoletto took to the street to make this work, I can see it give birth to works such as Vito Acconci's "Following Piece" as well as many others.
Jumping to the MACRO (Museo d'Arte Contemporanea Roma), which is a completely different neighborhood but reachable from MAXXI by a short trolley and subway ride, is an entirely different experience. MACRO is a series of neoclassical buildings that used to be slaughter houses and as you walk around, you can see the stalls that held the animals, the troughs where the blood used to flow and the hooks to hold the meat. The spaces are pulled together with consistent lighting fixtures, steel beams, glass and bleached wood doors and ceilings. (There is also a space that looks like an al fresco after hours club where the museum stays open late and attracts a young crowd. The MAXXI also has a fantastic restaurant next door in repurposed building which shares the piazza and is also a big draw to that area.)
As soon as my husband walked in he said he could smell the blood from the slaughter house. These buildings have not been used for that purpose for quite a long time and are strikingly clean. I said he was crazy and there was no way that he could smell it, but he asked the guard about it and the guard said there are a few people that come into the buildings and are overwhelmed by the smell. I guess he's special - but I already knew that....
Unfortunately, there were many new exhibitions that were opening the week after we were visiting, but the space itself was very interesting. They were having quite a large exhibition of Italian design, which included household appliances, furniture, lighting, etc, which were displayed in very cool vitrines. Now I know how I am going to decorate my Italian home when I retire...
In an area devoted to design innovation, the exhibits were interactive and great for the kids. Also, there was also a whole display of Italian advertisements and movie posters which were fabulous. It was actually nice to have the opportunity to focus on these instead of a show by a particular artist. You can see over the decades through the posters how the interest in style and innovative design are not just important to promote items or offer the feeling of novelty in this country but really ingrained in the Italian culture and an essential part of life. Everything they make, even a poster for Nutella, proves fun and beautiful, thoughtful and striking and the colors are totally unique.
Its worth mentioning that Italy is celebrating its 150th anniversary of unification, so there are a lot of events and exhibitions dedicated to this right now. Focus on Italian history, innovation, design and art are the focus right now - so its a very exciting time to visit if you can. I didn't have a lot of time to look at individual galleries, but I will say that I popped my head into Gagosian, who has a prime location around the corner from the Spanish Steps. Not a surprise that the neoclassical facade of the gallery and the contemporary-designed space are very special.
He has devoted the group show "Made in Italy" to the anniversary of unification and this is expressed by works of artists either inspired by or that have worked in Italy. Heavy-hitters included in the show are Warhol, Basquiat, Baselitz, Damien Hirst, Giacommetti, Koons, Andreas Gursky, Cindy Sherman and Richard Prince as well as the all-important, Cy Twombly, who recently died and lived and worked most of his latter life in and around Rome.
The exhibition seems a little like a chance to exhibit some very expensive, well-known artists to someone that might have some deep pockets that would be shopping at the luxury stores in the area. In this setting and in this theme of the exhibitions, Warhol's Vesuvius, the Last Supper and the Mona Lisa seem a little schlocky and less inspired than the canvases of someone like Twombly, which seems truly influenced by Italian history, art, architecture and culture on many different levels. I understand that Warhol was playing into the iconic imagery and speaking to the kind of commodification of these images in contemporary culture, but I think after walking around and enjoying Rome for a while, when you look at these works, they come off almost cynical and not really celebratory as the exhibition claims.
Furthermore, I was shocked to see the omission of photographs from Gregory Crewdson's recent project that was shown at Gagosian in NYC in the early fall and in Rome in the late winter. The photographer took black and white photos of the deserted Cinecitta, the movie sets and studios outside of Rome. Although they were just exhibited a few months prior, I think one of these photographs included in this exhibition would have been exceptional. On their own and altogether, they looked a bit dry and lifeless (which, I think, is very different than his entire body of work), but its my opinion, that in this context, this group show would have added some life to them and one or two of them would have looked quite stunning and been more interesting.
The exhibition seems a little like a chance to exhibit some very expensive, well-known artists to someone that might have some deep pockets that would be shopping at the luxury stores in the area. In this setting and in this theme of the exhibitions, Warhol's Vesuvius, the Last Supper and the Mona Lisa seem a little schlocky and less inspired than the canvases of someone like Twombly, which seems truly influenced by Italian history, art, architecture and culture on many different levels. I understand that Warhol was playing into the iconic imagery and speaking to the kind of commodification of these images in contemporary culture, but I think after walking around and enjoying Rome for a while, when you look at these works, they come off almost cynical and not really celebratory as the exhibition claims.
Furthermore, I was shocked to see the omission of photographs from Gregory Crewdson's recent project that was shown at Gagosian in NYC in the early fall and in Rome in the late winter. The photographer took black and white photos of the deserted Cinecitta, the movie sets and studios outside of Rome. Although they were just exhibited a few months prior, I think one of these photographs included in this exhibition would have been exceptional. On their own and altogether, they looked a bit dry and lifeless (which, I think, is very different than his entire body of work), but its my opinion, that in this context, this group show would have added some life to them and one or two of them would have looked quite stunning and been more interesting.
Link to exhibition
Make sure you take the time to take in the new, MACRO and MAXXI, than just the old when in Rome!
Make sure you take the time to take in the new, MACRO and MAXXI, than just the old when in Rome!
