Biennale Boycotts, Museums Under the Microscope

A major new effort out of the University of Pennsylvania is taking aim at a surprisingly basic problem: museums collect constantly, but the public rarely gets a clear, comparable picture of how decisions are made. Artnet News highlights a new “landmark survey” intended to bring transparency to museum collecting practices. The goal is to gather standardized information across institutions—how acquisitions are evaluated, what policies shape choices, and how collecting practices are documented. It lands in a moment when provenance, ethics, and public accountability are under intense scrutiny. The promise here isn’t a single new rulebook—it’s a clearer view of the systems museums already use, and where those systems may be uneven, outdated, or opaque.

Staying with transparency, ARTnews spotlights a new tool from the research initiative Open Restitution Africa, or ORA. On March 31, ORA launched the ORA Open Data Platform, a database focused on restitution of African artifacts and ancestral remains. The platform was developed over six years by an all-woman, pan-African team, and it’s available in French and English. It brings together 25 case histories spanning 200 years, using data visualizations, essays, and interactive tools to make restitution processes easier to follow. ARTnews spoke with ORA’s founders, Chao Tayiana Maina and Molemo Moiloa, who describe the project as a response to how opaque restitution can be—especially for communities trying to understand what’s possible, what’s worked, and what outcomes actually happened.

Now to Venice, where the awards system itself is becoming the battleground. The Art Newspaper reports that more than 70 artists participating in this year’s Venice Biennale say they do not want to be considered for the Golden Lion awards, which this year will be chosen by public vote. Artists in the main exhibition, In Minor Keys—organized by the late curator Koyo Kouoh and realized by five of her collaborators—joined artists, curators, and exhibition staff representing 22 national pavilions in withdrawing. The statement, published on e-flux on 9 May, was signed by artists including Walid Raad, Alice Maher, Laurie Anderson, Pio Abad, and Alfredo Jaar, in solidarity with the resignation of the jury selected by Kouoh.

That turmoil around prizes connects to a wider rupture at the Biennale. Hyperallergic reports that a Venice Biennale strike made history during the preview, with Palestinian flags draped over artworks and more than two dozen national pavilions shuttered as part of a 24-hour action. The strike was organized by the Art Not Genocide Alliance and local activist groups, and thousands marched down one of Venice’s main streets as Italian police beat back protesters. Hyperallergic frames it as the first cultural strike in the Biennale’s 131-year history, tying demands for Palestine with workers’ rights. In the same Venice dispatch, the outlet notes a small, surreal side scene too: a nesting seagull near the shuttered Polish pavilion that organizers believe may be the first known instance of the bird nesting in such a prominent spot.

Another Venice story centers on representation and who gets to speak for a nation. Hyperallergic reports that Somali artists and cultural groups are criticizing Somalia’s first-ever Venice Biennale pavilion, saying artists based in Somalia were not “meaningfully consulted” or “included” in the selection process. The Somalia Arts Foundation denounced the absence of Somalia-based artists from the pavilion’s lineup, which, according to marketing materials, names three diaspora artists: Somali-Swedish painter Ayan Farfah, Somali-Danish poet and filmmaker Asmaa Jama, and Somali-British poet Warsan Shire. The pavilion is titled SADDEXLEEY, after a Somali triadic poetry form, and promotional materials describe it as engaging oral tradition, displacement, and memory. The criticism also targets co-curator Fabio Scrivanti, an Italian graphic designer, alongside co-curator Mohamed Mire.

ARTnews adds yet another political layer from Venice, quoting Italian cultural minister Alessandro Giuli on who he thinks “won” the Biennale: “There’s no doubt about it. Putin won at the Biennale,” he told Corriere della Sera in an interview published on May 7. Giuli, who repeatedly denounced Russia’s presence, argued that it doesn’t seem the Russian pavilion includes people able to express dissent against their regime, which is under sanctions. He said he doesn’t think Russian artists performing inside the pavilion are “agents of Moscow disguised as artists,” but that artists from the free world have the right to express dissent against those who govern them. The Russian pavilion went on view amid protests, including a demonstration led by Pussy Riot and FEMEN.

Across the Atlantic, ARTnews reports on a new artwork on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., installed at the D.C. War Memorial. It’s titled Operation Epic Furious: Strait To Hell and is made to look like an arcade game, with colorful images including Donald Trump, FBI director Kash Patel, and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, plus quotations from speeches and some Trump Truth Social posts. The anonymous artist group the Secret Handshake created it as a critique of what they describe as the Trump administration’s use of hype footage from video games in official military videos promoting the conflict with Iran. A plaque beside the work leans into the satire, pitching it as a “boots-on-the-ground simulator” and warning, “this game may never end.” A playable version is also online.

In London, a single show has sparked a surprisingly sharp question about art and inner life. Hyperallergic’s essay “Did Zurbarán Believe What He Painted?” reflects on an exhibition of Francisco de Zurbarán at the National Gallery—his first time on that grand scale there. The writer describes towering works, displayed sparely against pitch-black walls: crucifixions, monks in brown habits, and female saints rendered in exquisite fabrics. But the piece turns on uncertainty: did Zurbarán himself have personal faith? The curator tells the author nobody knows—there are no letters, diaries, portraits, or drawings, only contracts. A small late Crucifixion raises fresh ambiguity: an old man with brushes and palette stands by the cross, which some interpret as Zurbarán, though it could also be Saint Luke.

A big name in postwar art dealing has died. Artnet News reports that Bruno Bischofberger, a Swiss art dealer and early backer of Jean-Michel Basquiat, died at 86. He was also closely linked to Andy Warhol, and he became known for helping shape the careers and markets of major contemporary artists. The obituary frames him as an influential figure in how art was brokered, promoted, and placed during a decisive period for contemporary art’s global rise. Bischofberger’s reputation was built not only on transactions, but on relationships—an ability to connect artists, collectors, and institutions at the right moment. His death marks the passing of a dealer whose reach extended across the art world’s most visible names.

And in Brooklyn, Artnet News looks at Radiohead’s visual world getting the immersive treatment. The band’s strange, distinctive universe is being brought to life in an installation tied to “Motion Picture House.” The project translates Radiohead’s imagery and atmosphere into a physical experience—less a traditional exhibition than a walk-through spectacle built from the band’s aesthetics. Artnet frames it as an expansion of a long-running collaboration between sound and image in Radiohead’s practice, where artwork isn’t an afterthought but part of how the music lands. The piece sits squarely in that growing zone between museum installation, moving image, and live-event energy—an experience built to be entered, not just viewed.

That’s it for today’s download—links to every story are in the show notes. Come back tomorrow for more art-world news you can actually use, and until then: Chinga la migra

Today's Stories