ARTE POVERA: A NARRATION OF MATERIALS, PLACES AND SPACES IN OF THE 60s AND 70s

Under periods of social instability, new ways of making art are born. The experimentation with new materials, the use of the mundane and the scepticism towards technology, as well as the denunciation of a division between art and life, characterised . It was not a movement, but a coexistence of artists who were open to new ideas and who were in an artistic dialogue without limits. Moreover, it was a product of the social conditions of Italy during the 60s and 70s. The mass migration from the poor South to the rich North, the growing industrialisation and urbanisation, the workers’ strikes and the students’ protests, made the creation of new art that would express the new social scenery a necessity. Arte

Povera responded as the artistic criticism to the government and the establishment. With the contribution and the intellectual role of the critic , artists like

Michelangelo Pistoletto, , and , narrated alternative stories which brought the individual closer to nature (Fineberg, 2000, p.333). In a country where the art of Classical antiquity was, and is still highly appreciated, the existence and the radicalism of Arte Povera is one of the most interesting narratives in the histories of art.

Italy in the 1960s was a transformative place. After the Second World War, the Christian

Democratic party dominated the political scene for twenty-five years. The state favoured the capital and the Catholic church, and there was a growth in corruption. A big part of society lived under conditions of poverty but the government continued not to pay attention to the severe inequality. As the Christian Democrats were losing part of their power, they were forced to have an alliance with the Socialist party. The radical left and

1

right should be stopped by the establishment and that was the only way to achieve it. In the late 1960s, the situation became critical. People from the south, the poorer part of Italy, migrated to the northern cities as the industry expanded. However, they were largely disaffected (Fineberg, 2000, p. 332). Italy’s economic growth had its roots in the automobile industry. The Fiat motor company was established in . The car, a symbol of modernity, was at the epicentre of Italian life. It was a commodity of the middle class, but it was produced by the automobile workers in the north. However, the latter would not be able to use the object of their production as a commodity, because of their low wages. Moreover, during the 1960s the problem of housing emerged rapidly, as the workers’ salaries were not adequate enough to pay their rents. Strikes were common phenomena. The managers tried to keep the workers occupied far from their residence. A commuter hardly finds the time to organise and resist.

Since 1962, factory workers across Turin had the precedent of dissent. This culminated in

1969’s Hot Autumn, when they protested against their bad working conditions at Fiat. Later that year, in December, a bomb exploded in ’s Banca Nazionale dell’ Agricoltura

(Pinkus, 2001, p. 106). It was the start of a sequence of bombings that would continue in the

1970s.

Students had a pivotal role in Italy’s social context of the 60s and 70s, as well. The institution of the university was one of the most archaic. It had not been reformed for many decades, and the rise in numbers of a new wave of students caused malfunctions in the infrastructures. The role of teaching had been taken by local professionals who could spend little time in university, so that students could not have a substantial support for their studies. Exams were subjective because of their oral character, whilst the fees forced those who came from the working class to get one, or two jobs to sustain their studies. In 1967

2

and 1968, there were protests because of the introduction of highest fees and plans to restricted entry to universities. Occupations happened in Turin, Milan and spread to other cities, as well. By February 1968, the police managed to control the situation, but students’ activism led to the Battle of Valle Giulia in , where 4,000 of them clashed with the police. Both sides suffered hundreds of injuries (Libcom, 2008). Under those social conditions, an art manifesto was born.

In November 1967, Celant’s Arte Povera: Notes for a Guerrilla War, appeared in the magazine (Fig. 1). The critic turned against the system and declared that in modern society humans are forced to remain under its command. The artists were the producers of consuming goods for a cultured elite, and they were becoming traders of their products.

Even if they were against consumerism, they could not make a rupture with the system if they chose to move inside it. He mentioned as an art outsider, and he argued that the artist had only two choices: to be a servant of the system under its chains or break away and develop freely (Celant, 1967/1989, pp. 189-190). If he would choose the second option, the artist could not be exploited anymore; through Arte Povera, a poor art, one of the present and of the real, the artist would become a guerrilla fighter against the system. The latter distinguished art and life. In Arte Povera, the human and the nature were linked in a dialogue that could liberate from conformity and the metaphysical, and would bring reality to the forefront. The artist would be independent and unlabelled.

3

(Fig. 1)

4

Celant’s text continued with the introduction of artists who made Arte Povera and their innovative approaches. Finally, there was a statement: ‘The guerrilla war… has already begun’ (Celant, 1967/1989, p. 191).

In 1969, his book Arte Povera was published. Its English translation is Arte Povera:

Conceptual, Actual or Impossible Art? There, he defined the approach of the artist as one who camouflages and mixes with the environment, is part of nature, not a representative, and one who ‘does not seek a moral or social judgement’ (Celant, 1969, p. 225). The artist observes a plant, a river, the earth, and rediscovers himself. No more placed under a label, the artist is free and experiences the essence of life. Self-interest plays a central part, not as a consequence of alienation, but as denunciation of any cultural control and as disobedience to the system. Art is practiced through materials of nature such as vegetables and animals, minerals and snow. It does not exist through technology and science or being isolated from the natural elements of daily life. Consequently, art is ‘never allusive to alienation’ (Celant, 1969, p. 230). Furthermore, the failure of the modernist utopia in Italy, dictated the action against the system with alternative ways of making art.

Michelangelo Pistoletto is an artist, critic, curator and theatrical performer who collaborated with Celant, and put the mirror in the centre of his practice. In his Mirror paintings like Seated Man of 1962 (Fig. 2), Pistoletto is experimenting with the dimension of time and the way it is presented in reality. He placed them not at window height, in the traditional way, but down on the floor. Pistolettto, like an actor, is sitting in front of the work (Pistoletto, 2015).

5

(Fig. 2)

He claimed that his aim was:

…to carry art to the edges of life…One can bring life to art, as Pollock did, or one can choose to bring art into life but no longer in terms of metaphor (Pistoletto, 1967/2003, p.

875).

6

Pistoletto’s presence is a reminder that art can exist as reality. The objectification of existence is the negation of metaphor, mentioned above. The artist is not a mediator who tries to depict nature, but is a participator of it.

In the 1960s, the art world in Italy would try to compare his work with that of the American

Pop artists. Although his artworks were exhibited in Turin’s Sperone gallery alongside those of , and other artists, Pistoletto’s style was different. An

Italian aura was evident. The reaction to the aggressive industrialisation and urbanisation of the country produced that new wave of art which was part of life (Lumley, 2004, pp. 10-11).

In the mid-sixties, Pistoletto made the Minus Objects in his studio (Fig. 3).

7

(Fig.3)

It was an experimental collection of objects that tried to show the unrepeatable quality of a moment in time, a place, an action. He was clear that he did not want to reflect himself in the pieces, and he claimed that he wanted to liberate the forms from the system. As Celant called for a rupture from the latter, Pistoletto seemed to practice it through his work:

The problem is not to change the forms and leave the system intact but rather to take the forms intact out of the system. In order to do this, it is necessary to be absolutely free

(Pistoletto, 1967/2003, p. 876).

8

Mario Merz was the oldest artist related to Arte Povera. In 1968 he made his first installations. The Giap’s Igloo (Fig. 4), is a construction made of wire mesh and bags filled with earth. The neon text is a phrase by the North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap. It says: ‘If the enemy masses his forces he loses ground, if he scatters he loses strength’

(Giap cited in Criticos, 1968/2001,p.76)

(Fig. 4)

The coexistence of the modern materials like neon and the plastic bags with nature’s element, the earth, is significant. Merz highlights the human factor, as the subject fills the bags by hand. Moreover, the viewer has to walk around the igloo and read the text. It is a process between the body and the mind. Giap’s words have to do with the terms of concentration and dispersion. It is a mental and natural process. Furthermore, the work of

Merz was closely related with the student protests of 1968. The last student occupation occurred at the Sapienza University in Rome. It was evicted by the police on 29th February.

The students dispersed, but planned their retaliation on their meeting of 1st March. That led to the Battle of Valle Giulia (Libcom, 2008).

General Giap’s words refer to the defeat of the French in the battle with the Vietnamese at

Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Vietnam practiced guerrilla war against the French and the

9

Americans. Celant published Notes for a Guerrilla War in 1967 and Merz created Giap’s

Igloo in 1968. There is a strong link between the social and political conditions of that period, the critic, and the artist (Criticos, 2001, p. 77).

One of the most unconventional artists of Arte Povera is Jannis Kounellis. He criticised the system with his works and his sayings, as he claimed that institutions like art schools impose their ideology which the artist should follow. New and radical approaches are a threat. He followed no techniques as he found them unnecessary. He said that the institutions favour false values, whilst the real ones are to be found in creative freedom. The latter does not have to do with technique, but with expression (Jacobson, 2001, p. 238). In 1969, Kounellis created Untitled (Twelve Horses) (Fig. 5).

(Fig. 5)

In the new site of Rome’s Galleria L’Attico, a former underground garage, twelve horses occupied the space for three days. Kounellis challenged the idea of what art is, by choosing as his subject matter living animals. He received fierce opposition by some critics because of

10

that choice. It was an attack to the established views of the middle class about art. The horses, the smells, the sounds, was a guerrilla tactic against the art system. Kounellis did not even choose the horses or organised the scene. His art was a continuation of Marcel

Duchamp’s approach, but here we have readymades that come from nature, living organisms who could be an inspiration for traditional painters as well. That was an essential ingredient of the artist’s work. Kounellis is creating the radical through the use of the classical. Moreover, that was an essential element of Arte Povera. Unlike other forms of the avant-garde, there was not a tendency of erasing the past, but an eclectic and free approach to it. Italy’s classical past was treated with respect. However, the new social conditions favoured alternative ways of making art and challenging the status quo. It was reflected even in the places that hosted exhibitions, like the use of a garage as the new site of Galleria

(Lumley, 2004, pp. 32-33).

Luciano Fabro was already a known artist when Arte Povera emerged. He was an intellectual character who communicated with the other artists of the group in an open dialogue that

11

could produce new roads of expression. In 1971 he made Golden Italy (Fig. 6).

(Fig. 6)

It is the most recognisable work from the Italie series. The Italian peninsula is presented upside down. Fabro favours the abnormal appearance of Italy, because of its social and economic inequality. The weight and significance of the rich, industrial North is responsible for that. The poor, rural South is condemned to struggle. In an epoch when Italy tried to strengthen its economy and live the modernist utopia, the places below Rome had to make a big effort for their economic survival. The mass migration from the small southern towns and villages to the centre of the automobile industry, Turin, and the other northern cities, divided the economic importance of the country in two. Fabro’s Golden Italy criticises that.

However, he kept his distance at the same time:

12

To those who ask me about my work, I can only respond in my own way. I’m no auctioneer (let me emphasise that), I do what most pleases and moves me in imagination

(let me emphasise that) (Fabro cited in Jacobson, 1971/2001, p. 223).

Freedom of expression was vital in Arte Povera. The artists were not forced to follow an artistic path, but experiment and be in a constant dialogue with the other artists. Celant was not the intellectual leader, but one who would interact with them and offer curatorial assistance. He encouraged self-liberation from any authority. In his Notes, he wrote about

Pistoletto and how the latter emphasised the uniqueness of the moment and nullified expectations. Kounellis, through his existence and his daily life found the way to make art.

He did not care about anyone else, as long as he was alive and used nature as inspiration.

Fabro did not want to satisfy the system, but destroy it. As for Merz, he used neon to oppose the commodification of the object (Celant, 1967/1989, pp. 190-191).

Two years later in Arte Povera, he would add that in anarchy and nomadic behaviour one could find the greatest liberty of expression (Celant, 1969, p. 229). It was that uncompromised freedom that would reflect the workers’ and the students’ motto vogliamo tutto, which means we want everything.

In conclusion, Arte Povera reflected the instability of Italian society in the 1960s and 1970s and the need for change. Corruption, inequality and the failure of a modernist dreamland caused continuous upheavals. The industrial expansion led to migration from the south to the north, and an economic chasm between the two regions. The wretched working conditions, the low salaries, and the high rents led to industrial disputes and strikes. The students were disaffected, as well. The conservative institution of the Italian university was

13

in crisis. The subjective methods of teaching, the implementation of highest fees and the plans of restricted entry to higher education were followed by student protests and occupations. The situation worsened with the bombings of the 1970s.

Arte Povera was the artistic attack to the system. It was the child of an aggressive industrialisation and urbanisation who was born in the Italian North, made by Celant and artists like Pistoletto, Merz, Kounellis and Fabro. They were open to an artistic and intellectual dialogue at a time when the critic and the artist exchanged ideas and coexisted dialectically (Lumley, 2014, pp. 9-10). Experimentation was at the centre of their practice.

When the artist broke away from the system, that led to individual freedom and self- development. Under these circumstances, the artist becomes a guerrilla fighter who uses nature as battleground. Unlabelled, thus truly independent, becomes part of nature and mixes natural elements and elements of urban society in a way that the artwork is the everyday.

Arte Povera had a national identity made from the social context of Italy. However, it affected the international art world with its innovative practice. It was exhibited in places which substituted the traditional gallery, like Kounellis’ Untitled (Twelve Horses), that happened in an underground garage. The element of performance was a significant ingredient in many works, and the use of materials like wood and cement helped the artwork to escape from its mutation to a commodity. It could be made from earth products, industrial products or just describe a moment in which sound was the protagonist. Arte

Povera was a constant resistance to translation and definition (Flood, Morris, 2001, pp. 14-

15).

As an epilogue, I would like to point to the only female who is linked with Arte Povera:

Marisa Merz. It seems that even for a progressive and radical group of individuals, the

14

female participation was still a taboo. She was not mentioned in Celant’s book and her presence was limited. However, her works like Small Shoes of 1968 (Fig. 7), are the most appropriate to describe that resistance to translation and definition mentioned above, and the enigma that surrounded it.

15

(Fig. 7)

16

The anarchic liberty of expression that Celant wrote in his book is best represented in the nylon thread shoes of Merz, left on the beach in the seaside town of Ostia, near Rome. How could anyone describe more accurate what Arte Povera was about, than her declaration?

If a man asks me to do something, I do it the way I want to.

I no longer believe in catalysts because they are the beggars of slaves.

At present the world is peopled by slaves, and catalysts are still around.

I’m not interested in power or in career; only myself and the world interest me (Merz cited in Jacobson, 1968/2001, p. 262).

References

Celant, G. (1967/1989) ‘Notes for a Guerilla War’ In Politi, G., Kontova, H. (eds.) Flash Art:

Two Decades of History: XXI Years. Milan: Giancarlo Politi Editore, pp. 189-191.

Celant, G. (1969) ‘Germano Celant’ In Celant, G. (ed.) Art Povera: Conceptual, Actual or

Impossible Art? London: Studio Vista, pp. 225-231.

Criticos, C. (2001) ‘Reading Arte Povera’ In Jacobson, K. (ed.) Zero to Infinity: Arte Povera

1962-1972. Minneapolis; London: Walker Art Center/ Tate, pp.67-68.

Fineberg, J. (2000) ‘Arte Povera and a Persevering Rapport with Nature in Europe’ In

Fineberg, J. (ed.) Art Since 1940: Strategies of Being. 2nd ed. London: Lawrence King, pp. 332-

337.

17

Flood, R., Morris, F. (2001) ‘Introduction: Zero to Infinity’ In Jacobson, K. (ed.) Zero to

Infinity: Arte Povera 1962-1972. Minneapolis; London: Walker Art Center/ Tate pp. 9-20.

Jacobson, K. (2001) ‘Artists’ Works and Selected Writings’ In Jacobson, K. (ed.) Zero to

Infinity: Arte Povera 1962-1972. Minneapolis; London: Walker Art Center/ Tate pp. 177-336.

Libcom 1962-1973: Worker and Student Struggles in Italy [online] [Accessed on 1 December 2015] http://libcom.org/history/1962-1973-worker-student-struggles-italy

Lumley, R. (2004) ‘Movement and Criticism’ In Lumley, R. (ed.) Arte Povera. London: Tate, pp. 6-17.

Lumley, R. (2004) ‘Place and Space’ In Lumley, R. (ed.) Arte Povera. London: Tate, pp. 18-42.

Michelangelo Pistoletto Mirror Paintings [online] [Accessed on 4 December 2015] http://www.pistoletto.it/eng/crono04.htm#

Pinkus, K. (2001) ‘Italy in the 1960s: Spaces, Places, Trajectories’ In Jacobson, K. (ed.) Zero to

Infinity: Arte Povera 1962-1972. Minneapolis; London: Walker Art Center/ Tate pp. 89-108.

Pistoletto, M. (2003) ‘Famous Last Words’ In Harrison, C., Wood, P. (eds.) Art in Theory

1900-2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 873-877.

18

Bibliography

Celant, G. (1969) Art Povera: Conceptual, Actual or Impossible Art? London: Studio Vista.

Christie’s Luciano Fabro: Italia d’ Oro [online] [Accessed on 6 December 2015] http://www.christies.com.cn/lotfinder/LotDetailsPrintable.aspx?intObjectID=3992758

Fineberg, J. (2000) Art Since 1940: Strategies of Being. 2nd ed. London: Lawrence King.

Harrison, C., Wood, P. (2003) Art in Theory 1900-2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.

Jacobson, K. (2001) Zero to Infinity: Arte Povera 1962-1972. Minneapolis; London: Walker

Art Center/ Tate.

Lumley, R. (2004) Arte Povera. London: Tate.

Michelangelo Pistoletto Minus Objects [online] [Accessed on 4 December 2015] http://www.pistoletto.it/eng/crono06.htm#

Politi, G., Kontova, H. (1989) Flash Art: Two Decades of History: XXI Years. Milan: Giancarlo

Politi Editore.

Illustration List

19

(Fig. 1): Celant, Germano (1967) Arte Povera: Appunti per Una Guerriglia (Politi, Kontova,

1989, p. 3).

(Fig. 2): Pistoletto, Michelangelo (1962) Seated Man, Painted tissue paper on polished stainless steel mounted on canvas, 125 x 125 cm, Private Collection, Brussels.

(Fig. 3): Pistoletto, Michelangelo (1965-1966) Minus Objects, Pistoletto’s Studio, Turin 1966,

Dimensions variable, Pistoletto Foundation, Biella.

(Fig. 4): Merz, Mario (1968) Giap’s Igloo- If the enemy masses his forces he loses ground, if he scatters he loses strength, Metal tubing, wire mesh, neon tubing, earth in bags, 120 x 200 x 200 cm, National Museum of , Pompidou Centre, Paris.

(Fig. 5): Kounellis, Jannis (1969) Untitled (Twelve Horses), Installation, Galleria L’Attico,

Rome.

(Fig. 6): Fabro, Luciano (1971) Golden Italy, Gilt bronze, steel cable, 75 x 45 cm, Private

Collection.

(Fig. 7): Merz, Marisa (1968) Small Shoes, Nylon thread, Dimensions unknown, Private

Collection.

20