Invisible Talents: The Paradox of Italian Art Abroad

Which contemporary Italian artists born after 1960 have achieved greater visibility abroad, and thanks to which factors?

If we talk about international visibility, some clarifications are necessary. First of all, we are referring to artists who began working in the 1980s, a particular moment for art, a time of great international change—mainly economic and systemic changes. The rise of financial capitalism imposed a series of new economic and professional rules that do not follow the Italian mental and cultural attitude. Financial capitalism demanded a structural shift involving detachment from local territory in favor of international networks, a new professional attitude for the artist, increasingly distant from the bohemian figure, investment logics and collecting based not on one-to-one human relationships, the emergence of new economies—and thus artists—in the contemporary scene (India, China, Africa, etc.), and much more.

From the point of view of “centers of power,” with the exception of the city of Milan, no other Italian city has asserted itself internationally, and most of the most famous Italian artists actually belong to earlier periods. To all this, add the limited attention from the state (much improved in recent years) and, it must be said, a certain foreign preference.

It is no coincidence that, when looking solely at visibility, almost all the more “famous” artists born after the 1960s have developed their careers moving north, in Italy and Europe, particularly thanks to economically and financially strong locations—in Italy, Milan. For example, Maurizio Cattelan, born precisely in 1960; Vanessa Beecroft, who studied at Brera; Francesco Vezzoli, Milan; Paola Pivi, Milanese; Monica Bovincini, who moved immediately from Genoa to Northern Europe; MASBEDO, again Milan; Lara Favaretto, Milan; Arcangelo Sassolino, Vicenza and New York; Yuri Ancarani, Milan; Giorgio Andreotta Calò, Venice and then abroad; Rossella Biscotti, Naples but then immediately abroad; Adelita Husni-Bey, Milan; Massimo Bartolini, Milan; Liliana Moro, Milan; Formafantasma, Milan; Rosa Barba, who immediately left Italy for Germany; Roberto Cuoghi, Milan; Diego Perrone, Milan; Piero Golia. Among the younger artists, Diego Marcon and Giulia Cenci.

Despite its inability to establish itself as a European art capital, Rome has nevertheless launched artists—albeit a very small percentage compared not only to Milan but also other European capitals. These artists mostly built careers abroad and then returned—think of Marinella Senatore, Elisabetta Benassi, Ra Di Martino, Quayola, Daniele Puppi.

If we narrow the Italian geography further, the circle tightens, but we must certainly mention Gian Maria Tosatti, Francesco Arena.

Which artists, on the contrary, have not yet achieved adequate visibility, and why?

If we talk about poetics, moving away from visibility issues, I find that Italy has formidable artists with great potential who probably would already be established if they were in different contexts. Regarding visibility, however, distinctions must be made. There are artists with very strong works who have had international visibility, but for various reasons, expectations were not met. This factor highlights another problem of the Italian system: the inability to maintain the international level achieved. I think of Daniele Puppi, an artist who worked with galleries such as Lisson Gallery, Massimo De Carlo, Noero, and Magazzino, the first Italian artist to have a solo show at Hangar Bicocca, and many other important exhibitions… and then something was missing—that link, that push which maybe in Germany or France he would have had. I think of Micol Assael, an extraordinary artist, very promising, but then she did not have a system that truly understood her needs and stabilized her affirmation.

A second level is artists who are working hard, established, but have not yet reached adequate international visibility (though they are on the right path). I think of Riccardo Benassi, Luca Trevisan, Invernomuto, Eva and Franco Mattes, Margherita Moscardini, Anna Franceschini, Alterazioni Video, Donato Piccolo, Marzia Migliora, Danilo Correale, Elisa Giardina Papa, Roberto Fassone, Tomaso De Luca, among many others.

Which emerging Italian artists (born from 1990) currently have the potential for adequate visibility abroad, and thanks to which factors?

I think the young Italian scene is very interesting, and I also believe there are important programs to highlight these artists through structured programs, such as those by the Sandretto Foundation (remember EXIT, the show that launched many Italian artists) or the MAXXI Bulgari Prize. Names that come to mind include Valentina Furian, Irene Fanara, Gaia De Megni, Eleonora Luccarin, Monia Ben Hamouda, Binta Diaw, Ambra Castagnetti, Federica Di Pietrantonio, Emilio Vavarella, Antonio Della Guardia.

Where, in your opinion, is the Italian system lacking in supporting contemporary Italian art on the international art scene?

Obviously, there is no single answer, but rather multiple structured answers on various levels. A more general point I touched on in the first question: Italy, while very strong in a cultural and economic international context but still local as in the ’60s and ’70s, has not been able to keep pace with the changes that began in the ’80s, except Milan. Changes characterized by deregulation, globalization of financial markets, and a different professional approach. This also led to a new attitude for the artist: the artist increasingly became a professional with large studios and people working under them, far from the bohemian logics still typical of the ’60s and ’70s. The most successful artists are like small businesses internally—inevitable when entering increasingly accelerated international production systems.

New international artistic trends—for example, the importance of technology in art, a dominant sector today in which Italians showed an extremely late interest—or the disinterest in topics now prevalent such as gender or sustainability. Institutional delay—consider that the first real band-supported investment for contemporary art can be considered the Italian Council, born only in 2017 (BKM in Germany was founded in 1997, not to mention the international network of Goethe Institutes; and in France there have long been national DRAC funds and regional FRAC funds). Also, there is still no legal regulation of the artist’s work; in this regard, AWI has fought hard.

The entry of new international powers that have strongly promoted new artists—think of India, China, Africa in general, and today the Gulf countries. Besides the Venice Biennale and MAXXI, the most internationally important institutions are private and strictly linked to other sectors such as fashion.

It is interesting to note, however, how that financial system changed after the 2008 crisis, and that change accelerated since the pandemic. Since the pandemic, technology has made incredible advances in managing the global economy (artificial intelligence!); there is an important emergence of new creative sectors; and a difficulty for the great cities that have so far held capitalist power (London, Paris, New York, first and foremost) to maintain that power in the face of new cities, “cathedrals in the desert” without history or with histories unrelated to either art or Western economic models—like Dubai, Singapore, Riyadh.

Perhaps this crisis could lead to a new localism and a rediscovery of a new attitude in those logics that have characterized world art, and this could be a great opportunity for Italy.

What interventions are necessary to promote better support?

Again, it is impossible to give a single answer. Certainly, the first thing that comes to mind is “more money for culture!” but more money is nothing without new strategies and a real change in mentality, both from below and from above.

From below, by all art operators. Let’s rethink the figure of the curator, a role increasingly requiring not only knowledge of the art world but also managerial competence; also, artists themselves—those who want to enter an international art system—should (unfortunately or fortunately, I don’t know) think of themselves differently, more professionally, and free themselves somewhat from the image of the artist outside the system and against everyone, typical of a bohemian vision (still true in the ’60s and ’70s; think of Rome’s Schifano, Boetti, Emilio Prini, etc.).

Then new strategies from above—the Italian Council has been a great accelerator in thinking of an Italian logic with an international vision. Also, funding that rethinks the museum not as an isolated place but integrated within logics of tourism, sustainability, urban planning, interacting with the city.

I would then add the idea of a new public-private logic, leveraging private and independent realities that now dominate the contemporary art scene. And I wonder why not rethink the figure of the artist themselves, not only as a content producer for art but also as a social engine, someone who helps rethink time, a broadening that could attract funding beyond just artistic sources. Think of artists working with technologies that are changing our societies—could they not also receive funding from the innovation sector?

Micro-changes that could accelerate a process still somewhat stuck between a heavy past and a future not yet developed.