Art Madrid'26 – Futurism exhibition NY

 

The Guggenheim museum in New York traces the history of Futurism with an exhibition of over 300 pieces of the main leaders of the Italian avant-garde movement: “Italian Futurism (1909-1944 ). Reconstruction of the Universe” can be visited until September, 2014 .

It is not very common that such a loud, aggressive and revolutionary movement has received so little attention inside and outside its geographical borders... Futurism, the most violent trend of the avant-gardes of the early twentieth century was born in Italy with the rabid desire to create a new world, machining and bright away from classicism, classical art and the Academy, and based its manifesto on the literal "burning" of museums and cultural institutions in their own country and the glorification of war and violence as the only way for growth Art and society.

"A roaring car that seems to run on a trail of shrapnel is more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace". With tremendous force Le Futurisme portrayed the environment of the Europe of the early twentieth century, an environment on political, philosophical, religious and scientific chances. According to futurists "the triumphant progress of science makes inevitable the profound changes in humanity".

Filippo Tomasso Marinetti, a poet born in Egypt and educated in Paris into an intellectual family, did not hesitate to choose the cover of Le Figaro, the most read newspaper in France , home of the Avant-Garde, to present his ideas. He knew that these Saturday 20 of February, 1909 would raise blisters.

"It is from Italy that we launch this new manifest to the world, because we want to free this country from its fetid gangrene of professors, archaeologists, and antiquarians. Too much time has been this country a place for secondhand-dealers. We want to liberate Italy from the innumerable museums that cover all around with cemeteries".

The exaltation of a renewed Italy impacted to young Italian artists like Boccioni, Giacomo Balla, Gino Severini, Carlo Carrà, Luigi Russolo,… who poured into large canvases their studies of motion, speed, industrial landscapes, smoking chimneys and locomotives, revolutionary masses, electrical cables and airplanes "whose propeller spreads flames in the wind like a flag and seems cheering over the enthusiastic mass" as says the manifesto.

Inevitably, an artistic and nationalist movement of these features drove itself at breakneck-speed toward politics and soon agreed with the thesis of the Fascists. Marinetti joined the Fascist Party in 1919 and showed loyalty to Mussolini until his dead. In one of his points, the Futurism Manifesto ensured "we glorify war, only hygiene of the world". And it was the war, the First World War, who ended the movement. Most of its members and supporters died faithful to his ideas or dissapeared into Europe during this chaotic time.

His main legacy, in addition to the excitement, was the representation of speed, to "bear with static media, the real movement", knowledge that defined, for example, the development of the comic.

Now, this movement lands in the Guggenheim Museum in New York with the strength of more than 360 works by 80 artists. “Italian Futurism (1909-1944). Reconstruction of the Universe” is probably the biggest exhibition about Futurism of all times.

 


ART MADRID’26 INTERVIEW PROGRAM. CONVERSATIONS WITH ADONAY BERMÚDEZ


The painting of Daniel Bum (Villena, Alicante, 1994) takes shape as a space for subjective elaboration, where the figure emerges not so much as a representational motif but as a vital necessity. The repetition of this frontal, silent character responds to an intimate process: painting becomes a strategy for navigating difficult emotional experiences—an insistent gesture that accompanies and alleviates feelings of loneliness. In this sense, the figure acts as a mediator between the artist and a complex emotional state, linking the practice of painting to a reconnection with childhood and to a vulnerable dimension of the self.

The strong autobiographical dimension of his work coexists with a formal distance that is not the result of conscious planning, but rather functions as a protective mechanism. Visual restraint, an apparent compositional coolness, and an economy of means do not neutralize emotion; instead, they contain it, avoiding the direct exposure of the traumatic. In this way, the tension between affect and restraint becomes a structural feature of his artistic language. Likewise, the naïve and the disturbing coexist in his painting as inseparable poles, reflecting a subjectivity permeated by mystery and unconscious processes. Many images emerge without a clearly defined prior meaning and only reveal themselves over time, when temporal distance allows for the recognition of the emotional states from which they arose.


The Long Night. Oil, acrylic, and charcoal on canvas. 160 × 200 cm. 2024.


The human figure appears frequently in your work: frontal, silent, suspended. What interests you about this presence that seems both affirmative and absent?

I wouldn’t say that anything in particular interests me. I began painting this figure because there were emotions I couldn’t understand and a feeling that was very difficult for me to process. This character emerged during a very complicated moment in my life, and the act of making it—and remaking it, repeating it again and again—meant that, during the process, I didn’t feel quite so alone. At the same time, it kept me fresh and connected me to an inner child who was broken at that moment, helping me get through the experience in a slightly less bitter way.


Santito. Acrylic and oil on canvas. 81 × 65 cm. 2025.


There is a strong affective dimension in your work, but also a calculated distance, a kind of formal coldness. What role does this tension between emotion and restraint play?

I couldn’t say exactly what role that tension plays. My painting is rooted in the autobiographical, in memory, and in situations I have lived through that were quite traumatic for me. Perhaps, as a protective mechanism—to prevent direct access to that vulnerability, or to keep it from becoming harmful—that distance appears unconsciously. It is not something planned or controlled; it simply emerges and remains there.


Night Painter. Acrylic on canvas. 35 × 27 cm. 2025.


Your visual language oscillates between the naïve and the unsettling, the familiar and the strange. How do these tensions coexist for you, and what function do they serve in your visual exploration?

I think it reflects who I am. One could not exist without the other. The naïve could not exist without the unsettling; for me, they necessarily go hand in hand. I am deeply drawn to mystery and to the act of painting things that even I do not fully understand. Many of the expressions or portraits I create emerge from the unconscious; they are not planned. It is only afterwards that I begin to understand them—and almost never immediately. A considerable amount of time always passes before I can recognize how I was feeling at the moment I made them.


Qi. Acrylic on canvas. 81 × 65 cm. 2025.


The formal simplicity of your images does not seem to be a matter of economy, but of concentration. What kind of aesthetic truth do you believe painting can reach when it strips itself of everything superfluous?

I couldn’t say what aesthetic truth lies behind that simplicity. What I do know is that it is something I need in order to feel calm. I feel overwhelmed when there are too many elements in a painting, and I have always been drawn to the minimal—to moments when there is little, when there is almost nothing. I believe that this stripping away allows me to approach painting from a different state: more focused, more silent. I can’t fully explain it, but it is there that I feel able to work with greater clarity.


Crucifixion. Acrylic on canvas. 41 × 33 cm. 2025.


To what extent do you plan your work, and how much space do you leave for the unexpected—or even for mistakes?

I usually feel more comfortable leaving space for the unexpected. I am interested in uncertainty; having everything under control strikes me as rather boring. I have tried it on some occasions, especially when I set out to work on a highly planned series, with fixed sketches that I then wanted to translate into painting, but it was not something I identified with. I felt that a fundamental part of the process disappeared: play—that space in which painting can surprise even myself. For that reason, I do not tend to plan too much, and when I do, it is in a very simple way: a few lines, a plane of color. I prefer everything to happen within the painting itself.