Art Madrid'26 – Louise Bourgeois in Picasso\'s Malaga Museum

Louise Bourgeois (1911-2010) returned from hell like someone returning from a pleasure trip, full of ideas, motivated, rejuvenated ... "I've been to hell and I've come back... and let me tell you it was wonderful," is the title of a work by the artist dated in 1966, an embroidered handkerchief that talks about the balance and serves as a provocative title of the exhibition that has landed in the Picasso Museum in Malaga.

 
The exhibition, curated by Iris Müller-Westermann and organized by the Moderna Museet, covers seven decades of the career (and life) of the Franco-American artist through 101 works created between 1940 and 2009, one third of which have never been exposed before. The exhibition is arranged in thematic sections, following the symbolic and evocative Bourgeois's style with names like The Fugitive, Soledad, Trauma, Fragility, Relationships, Giving and receiving and Balance... Concepts that also highlight how deep and complicated their work was, always crossed by psychological states, emotions, sexuality, memory, human relations and identity. 
 
"Louise Bourgeois never differentiated between art and life," said at the press presentation Jerry Gorovoy, president of The Easton Foundation, an institution that manages the legacy of the artist ... For Bourgeois, art "was a healing art."
 
Louise Bourgeois was born into a wealthy and educated family  dedicated to the restoration of antique tapestries that moved to the US in the late 30s, where Louise developed her career as part of the American Abstract Artists Group.
 
Her work encompasses virtually all artistic disciplines, with sculpture as her favorite language: "The sculpture is the body, my body is sculpture," Bourgeois defended. In Malaga you can enjoy from her first wooden pieces from the 40s to her representations of the human body with fabric and metal. They are her big Spiders (... spider, mother, protective, weaver and patient ...) which will make it world famous. The critical acclaim and the market arrived late, she had already 71 years old, with the retrospective dedicated the MoMA in 1982, and Louise Bourgeois was recorded in the History of Art as the most important female artist of our time. It was the second woman who exhibited at MoMA, after Georgia O'Keeffe.
 

The Picasso Museum also shows the most intimate side of the artist, Louise Bourgeois: Photo Album, a room that traces the life of the artist in photographs and complete with the documentary `Louise Bourgeois: No Trespassing' of Nigel Finch for the BBC Channel.

 


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.