Hosted By: Paola Carimati Uncomfortable Thought - How the inauguration of the 61st Venice Art Biennale brought back to the surface a fragility that calls the stability of the system itself into question

«What you truly love remains, the rest is dross,» are the words recited by Ottavia Piccolo for the press opening of the 61st Venice Art Biennale. Authentic words, free from any moralism, chosen deliberately to emphasize how love, in its highest sense, and respect for cultural traditions are fundamental for the survival of an institution. Especially in times like these, when the inversion of values and the perception of the world order are rewriting geopolitical balances.

I listened to them on my way back from the Lagoon: two days are not enough, but certainly necessary to frame the event and understand what remains for the public beyond the exclusive clamor of the inauguration. In order: a popular award established to replace the one that should have been assigned by the resigning jury; a Russian pavilion open, but closed to visitors; the Israeli and American pavilions deserted by the public; the promise of the opening of the Iranian one, but not for the entire duration of the exhibition.

And yet, little more than an ANSA headline remained of the references to The Pisan Cantos by Ezra Pound at the Piccolo Arsenale Theatre. After all, bringing order to the syncopated flow of occupations, strikes, and protests is not easy. Especially when what is happening takes on an exceptional character: it was in fact since 1968 that the very architecture of the Biennale had not been so openly questioned, already accused at the time of elitism and profit orientation, and criticized for its hierarchical award mechanisms.

That Pussy Riot occupied the Giardini, that marches and performances crossed the streets around the Arsenale and Via Garibaldi, and that the pavilion doors remained closed during the first workers’ strike in the history of the event, are concrete facts which, almost sixty years later, confirm a situation that is partly crystallized. They reflect a collective unease that cannot be reduced to a simple clash of egos — to once again borrow from Ezra Pound. The question is inevitable: is it time to rethink the Biennale’s participatory model?