When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .


Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

In Venice, The Irony Of Marxist Art For the Super Rich

As Venice's biennial art extravaganza reveals, sexual provocation is old hat, and anti-capitalism is the new means of selling expensive art to millionaires.

In Venice, The Irony Of Marxist Art For the Super Rich
Carlos Granes


VENICE — Gone are the days when modern art used sex to earn your embarrassed attention. The latest Venice Biennale shows that to get international visibility these days, contemporary art must play with something much hotter: politics.

The Venice show, curated by Nigerian Okwui Enwezor, has brought together dozens of artists who, by different means and with varying effectiveness, denounce capitalist exploitation, colonialism, inequality and the destruction of nature. All human evils are on display here, as are sundry works and installations that denounce, denigrate and point an accusing finger at the vices of modern life.

Themes include the uncertain future that awaits us in the current capitalist system, and not surprisingly, Marx is a central protagonist. In one of the spaces, actors dressed in black read through Marx's book Das Kapital all day. This might initially seem disconcerting. But let's not forget that the first ones to arrive in Venice — most likely in their own yachts — were the art collectors and gallery owners who attend the Biennale's previews.

Reading Marx's Das Kapital — Photo: La Biennale di Venezia

You mean to say that pieces on display in the pavillons will later go on show, and sale, in galleries at prices that couldn't be described as "charitable"? And in addition, these devotees of art will be leaving a trail of money spent in Venetian boutiques, restaurants and hotels? Get out of here!

It's not as if visitors are traveling here to be told that the world is full of misfortune and greed. You have the news for that. The works shown in Venice don't tell us anything that someone with a minimal level of education or information doesn't already know. The novelty is instead the spectacle of Marx and anti-capitalist posturing mixing harmoniously with mass tourism, consumerism and multimillionaires.

What Enwezor's fair suggests is that criticisms of capitalism have become another cog in the wheel of capitalism. Marx and consumerism don't flee the flow of money generated by the art market and cultural tourism. It may be that many artists really believe that their art, besides pointing to the evils of humanity, must foment values such solidarity, brotherhood, environmental consciousness, collectivity and even gratuity. The paradox is that all these values, despite their anti-capitalist appearance, are extremely useful today in selling things.

In the 1960s, advertising used values such as revolution, authenticity, sex and youth. Today, judging by the luxury art market, a critical conscience, green issues and post-colonial discourse are more effective. Cities become ecological to attract tourists, post-colonial artists fetch high prices on the market, and critical theorists become international stars.

It doesn't seem so easy today to leave or criticize the system. Whoever does is more likely to be grabbing a rope that will take him to the top — the elite's nest. Is that good or bad? I don't know. I suspect it's another of the many paradoxes of our time.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.


A Naturalist's Defense Of The Modern Zoo

Zoos are often associated with animal cruelty, or at the very least a general animal unhappiness. But on everything from research to education to biodiversity, there is a case to be made for the modern zoo.

Photograph of a brown monkey holding onto a wired fence

A brown monkey hangs off of mesh wire

Marina Chocobar/Pexels
Fran Sánchez Becerril


MADRID — Zoos — or at least something resembling the traditional idea of a zoo — date back to ancient Mesopotamia. It was around 3,500 BC when Babylonian kings housed wild animals such as lions and birds of prey in beautiful structures known as the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

Ancient China also played a significant role in the history of zoos when the Tang Dynasty (618-907 AD) created several parks which hosted an assortment of animals.

In Europe, it wouldn't be until 1664 when Louis XIV inaugurated the royal menagerie at Versailles. All these spaces shared the mission of showcasing the wealth and power of the ruler, or simply served as decorations. Furthermore, none of them were open to the general public; only a few fortunate individuals, usually the upper classes, had access.

The first modern zoo, conceived for educational purposes in Vienna, opened in 1765. Over time, the educational mission has become more prominent, as the exhibition of exotic animals has been complemented with scientific studies, conservation and the protection of threatened species.

For decades, zoos have been places of leisure, wonder, and discovery for both the young and the old. Despite their past success, in recent years, society's view of zoos has been changing due to increased awareness of animal welfare, shifting sensibilities and the possibility of learning about wild animals through screens. So, many people wonder: What is the purpose of a zoo in the 21st century?

Keep reading...Show less

The latest