Futurism at the Guggenheim

The exhibition curated by Vivien Greene has the unquestionable bonus of being extremely informative and equally inclusive, to encourage the US public to appreciate an often neglected avant-garde.

“Futurism, 1909-1944: Reconstructing the Universe” is an exhibition curated by Vivien Greene for the Guggenheim in New York. The title embodies both the epic all-absorbing ambition of Futurism and its timescale from manifesto to Marinetti’s death.

The exhibition has the unquestionable bonus of being extremely informative and equally inclusive in its attempt to encourage the US public to appreciate an often neglected avant-garde. Although Futurist works have long been a part of American museum collections, this is the United States’ first comprehensive retrospective on this art movement. It is a well-assembled primer on an activity, illustrating all its historic phases and the artistic and ideological fields in which its protagonists moved, including the times of its explicit overtures to Fascism and art expressions of a lesser aesthetic impact.

Installation view of the exhibition "Italian Futurism, 1909–1944: Reconstructing the Universe", Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York. Photo Kris McKay © SRGF

The exhibition selects and reorders but holds back on the severe criticism and, perhaps, for this very reason reopened the debate on the contradictions and ambivalences of Futurism. The New York Times judges the exhibition “epic”, and “both a stain on the Modernist brand and a point of pride.” [1] Futurism, it says, cannot be denied, despite its declared political links. Britain’s The Economist follows on, seeing a reconsideration of Futurism as essential to an overhaul of the conventional narrative of 20th century art, citing the debt owed by certain contemporary art currents to Futurist art. [2]

The New Yorker, cogently describes the little-shared values – misogyny, nationalism, an exaltation of virility and war – that made it “the most neglected canonical movement in modern art [3] – because it is also the most embarrassing,” and puts forward a well-argued criticism of the unequal standard of all the Futurist works and phases, highlighting its limited artistic results compared with both other avant-gardes and the aspirations of its manifesto. Next comes The Wall Street Journal, with a review entitled Backward to the Future, saying “... the Futurists were feeding off of, not furthering, the artistic traditions they claimed to deny and despise.” [4]

The multitalented Fortunato Depero, by contrast, receives consensus and The New Yorker joins the chorus, declaring itself pleasantly surprised by the virtuosity of the artist, perhaps one of the most interesting figures of the second phase of Futurism. Generally speaking, save for a hint of disappointment at the low-key presence of Sironi (WSJ), the exhibition’s curatorship receives praise and appreciation, having done “…a superlative job of tracing the movement’s birth and trajectory,” (Financial Times) [5] and with “...some of the quality of a romper room on steroids, where the avant-garde played, and not always nicely,” (New Republic) [6]. Finally, The Wall Street Journal concludes, “No matter what you think of Futurism, this enormous exhibition has the power to challenge and enlighten.”

As revealed by the presence of many “buts” in the American press reviews, Futurism is still a world being explored and of non-univocal interpretation. This is probably why the exhibition must be flanked by a discussion, whether this filters through from the first reactions of the press or from the critical contributions in the intense catalogue printed by the Guggenheim. Given this need for debate, we can only react positively to the fact that, a few days before the exhibition opened, the Italian Academy for Advanced Studies in New York organised a round table with the title “Futurism at the Guggenheim”, chaired by Ernest Ialongo and driven by interaction between Vivien Greene, Giovanna Ginex, Romy Golan, Marianne Lamonaca, Adrian Lyttelton, Christine Poggi and Lucia Re.

After an introduction by the curator, the first comments highlighted the successful combination of the exhibition’s subject and the museum’s spiral. Marinetti hated museums and would happily have seen them all destroyed but, so they say, the Guggenheim is certainly the museum he would have hated the least. After these initial observations, hinting at to a Futurist attitude in FLW’s design, the debate moved on to the ambivalent and paradoxical characteristics of Futurism: nationalism and cosmopolitanism; open misogyny and the role of the female Futurists; collective phenomenon and individualism; revolutionary art and art of the regime. There was a shared desire to illustrate the phenomenon without censorship and to include works of propaganda and others by lesser-known artists, including the female Futurists. The latter, explained Lucia Re, were a female intellectual type that had never previously been seen in Italy and, despite contesting its misogynist attitude, they were attracted by the anti-bourgeois criticism and liberating sexuality of their colleagues. The discussion kept returning, however, to the difficulties of interpreting the relationship between Futurism and Fascism.

Luigi Russolo, “The Art of Noises: Futurist Manifesto”. Leaflet (Milan: Direzione del Movimento Futurista, 1913), 29.2 x 23 cm. Wolfsoniana – Fondazione regionale per la Cultura e lo Spettacolo, Genoa By permission of heirs of the artist. Photo Courtesy of Wolfsoniana – Fondazione regionale per la Cultura e lo Spettacolo, Genoa

The symposium warned against over-simplistic interpretations and the historian Adrian Lyttelton’s comment was the most piercing. What really matters, he argued, is not demonstrating to what degree Futurism was an art movement at the service of the regime – undeniable in its second phase – but understanding how this served as an incubator to the cultural substratum – definition of a new lifestyle, obsession with virility and physicality, and insistence on interventionism – that the regime shared. Fascism, he concluded provocatively, could not have existed with Futurism or it would have been a very different thing. Aware of the dilemma underpinning a reconciliation with Futurist art, Lyttelton urged us not to stumble into the dishonest operation of ignoring the role played by politics in its constitution but to ensure a rehabilitation of the Futurist energy is matched by new values.

As we attempt to unfurl a debate that is not yet fully defined and the positions of which are anything but predictable and sure, the geography of New York offers an opportunity for further comparison. An exhibition on Degenerate Art in Nazi Germany is about to open at the Neue Gallery, one street-block south of the Guggenheim, in the so-called Museum Mile. Why not opt for a combined ticket? “Futurism, 1909-1944: Reconstructing the Universe” (closes 1 September 2014) at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and “Degenerate Art: The Attack on Modern Art in Nazi Germany, 1937” (closes 30 June 2014) at the Neue Galerie New York museum of German and Austrian Art.

Filippo Masoero, *Descending over Saint Peter*, ca. 1927–37 (possibly 1930–33). Gelatin silver print, 24 x 31.5 cm. Touring Club Italiano Archive

Until 1 September 2014
Italian Futurism, 1909–1944: Reconstructing the Universe
Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum
1071 5th Avenue (at 89th Street)

Notes:
1. Roberta Smith, In Thrall to Machines, War and a More Manly Future
2. Forza Italia
3. Peter Schjeldahl, Futurism and Italian Fascism
4. Lance Esplund, Backward to the Future
5. Ariella Budick, Italian Futurism, 1909-1944: Reconstructing the Universe, Guggenheim, New York – review
6. Jed Perl, New Exhibit at the Guggenheim Is a Romper Room on Steroids

Futurism at the Guggenheim

The exhibition curated by Vivien Greene has the unquestionable bonus of being extremely informative and equally inclusive, to encourage the US public to appreciate an often neglected avant-garde.

Latest on Art

Latest on Domus