Alessandro Rabottini and Leonardo Bigazzi on the Trilogy of Uncertainties
On the occasion of the exhibition’s opening, Mara Sartore met Alessandro Rabottini, Artistic Director of the Foundation, and Leonardo Bigazzi, Curator, to retrace the genesis of this multi-year project, reflect on the evolution of moving images, and discuss the increasingly deep relationship that binds this experience to Venice.
Alessandro Rabottini and Leonardo Bigazzi
MS – We have arrived at the third chapter of “Trilogy of Uncertainty”, a project that began more than six years ago. A temporal dimension that seems central to me, along with that sense of uncertainty you have chosen to explore across the three exhibitions, almost like a trilogy. How did this journey begin, and where do we stand today?
AR – The journey began in 2022 with “Penumbra”, the first moment in which the Fondazione In Between Art Film engaged with the international context of the Venice Biennale. From there, a project took shape that, every two years, has given life to an exhibition composed of video works specifically commissioned and produced for the spaces of the Ospedaletto Complex. The works have always been deeply tied to this place, not only from an architectural point of view, but also on an existential and thematic level. After “Penumbra”, “Nebula” arrived in 2024, and today the journey concludes with “Canicula”. Each chapter took its cue from a different atmospheric metaphor – penumbra, fog, and now excess light and heat – inviting artists to reflect on the state of the contemporary world.
MS – I find the role of “time” within this process very interesting. I remember that, from the outset, you recognised the extraordinary opportunity of working with long-term horizons. I therefore wonder whether there was a comprehensive vision from the beginning, or whether this form gradually took shape. Was the project conceived as a trilogy from the start?
LB – In fact, no. But it is interesting that you identify time as a foundational element, because it is a dimension that runs through our entire way of working. First of all, there is the time we share with the artists. It is a privilege to be able to develop a commission over the course of two years, especially considering that this exhibition presents eight works produced entirely for the occasion and shown here for the first time. Taking time means allowing artists to get to know the Ospedaletto, to understand its architecture and historical complexity. For over five hundred years, this place has hosted thousands of lives, at the beginning and end of existence, through births, deaths, pain and joy. Artists thus have the opportunity to build a profound relationship with the space and to develop works that engage with it both conceptually and formally. At the same time, we ourselves can allow the project to evolve alongside the works. For this reason, we never start from a rigid theme, but rather from an atmosphere, from an open condition that is defined over time. The idea of building a long-term project in Venice was present from the outset; the form of the trilogy, by contrast, emerged gradually, as we observed the artists’ responses and the complexity of the dialogue generated by this place.
MS – At this year’s Venice Biennale, moving images seem more present than ever, occupying a central role across national pavilions, exhibitions and collateral events. The Fondazione In Between Art Film has been working with this medium for years, closely following its evolution, experimentation and transformation. If you were to take the pulse of moving-image practice today, what picture would emerge? How would you describe the moment this artistic language is experiencing on the international contemporary art scene?
AR – I believe that today many artists work with moving images, but in ways that are profoundly different from the past. For a long time, video was conceived as something to be experienced within a black box and primarily as a frontal projection. The exhibitions we have realised in recent years approach this medium through its many possibilities and implications, considering it as something that can expand into space and become a tactile and spatial experience, at times even sculptural and architectural. Many artists construct narratives that do not unfold solely through the projected image, but also through sound, light and the physical relationship with the environment. The way we conceive of video has changed and, consequently, so has the language itself.
Today, this kind of research is probably more frequently encountered in institutions and biennials than in the market, although there are galleries that do not shy away from engaging with this medium, despite the difficulty of establishing it commercially. It should also be considered that many artists do not identify exclusively with video, but integrate it within broader practices. Artists are fully aware that today we can access moving images at any time and anywhere, through any device, such as our phones. For this reason, they increasingly seek to offer experiences that can only be fully lived within a tangible space, engaging multiple senses simultaneously.
MS – Leonardo, would you like to add something?
LB – In my view, moving images undoubtedly represent the artistic language of our time. Last October, during Frieze London, we presented an exhibition by Karimah Ashadu at the Camden Arts Centre and, during the same period, almost all of London’s major institutions were hosting artists working with moving images. I am also reminded of a recent selection published by The Guardian dedicated to the most significant artworks of the 21st century: among the top ten, five are video works by the artists Ragnar Kjartansson, Jeremy Deller, Christian Marclay, Wael Shawky and Yael Bartana.
It is a language that continues to prove particularly effective in addressing and representing contemporary life, and it has an extraordinary ability to evolve. Over these six years, we have also witnessed some very significant technological transformations. I am thinking, for example, of the LEDs we can see behind us: only a few years ago, they were difficult to source or prohibitively expensive. Artists’ ability to appropriate these technologies continually opens up new possibilities for experimentation and for engaging with space.
MS – Speaking of space: from the first exhibition to today, I have seen this place gradually transform, becoming increasingly recognisable as the “home” of your project. Visiting “Canicula”, I had the impression that this expansion of the image has ended up redefining the perception of the Ospedaletto itself. What will happen after “Canicula”? Will you look for a new venue or do you imagine continuing to develop your work here?
AR – These exhibitions were born out of a very close relationship with the emotional dimension of this place. I do not think the Ospedaletto has exhausted its narrative potential, and for that reason it would be difficult to give a definitive answer today. I can say, however, that we are working on new projects, new narratives and new visions in order to continue being present in Venice. This space continues to reveal unexpected possibilities. It is a deeply cinematic place, and we are reflecting a great deal on what it might still generate.
MS – So one could say that the Ospedaletto has become something of your Venetian home?
LB – We definitely feel at home. Venice continues to offer extraordinary opportunities, both in terms of narrative potential and the international visibility of artists. It is a unique context. Here you can truly encounter the entire ecosystem of contemporary art, from emerging initiatives to major international institutions. It is something priceless. We feel deeply connected to this city, which we love profoundly.
MS – Looking at the three exhibitions as a whole, what stands out is their ability to bring together very different artists without the project losing its cohesion. This leads me to ask what criteria guide your choices. What do you look for in an artist when imagining a new commission? And how important is their ability to engage with a complex site such as the Ospedaletto?
LB – When selecting artists, we are always drawn towards practices that are able to challenge the existing limits and formats of moving images. Personally, I often find myself gravitating towards artists whose work does not emerge exclusively from a rigorous conceptual research process, but in which a strong personal and emotional engagement is also evident.
At times, the invitation to develop a new project stems from research that artists are already pursuing, and which naturally resonates with the conceptual and thematic framework of the exhibition. In other cases, the collaboration is the result of a dialogue that has developed over time, nurtured by years of exchange and by a deep understanding of their creative practice.
Rather than focusing on what an artist already knows, we seek to identify a creative urgency, creating the conditions in which uncertainty, intuition and vulnerability can become productive elements of the process.
We certainly also work to ensure that artists engage with the history, architecture and identity of the Ospedaletto. In many cases, this dialogue has proved particularly intense, giving rise to works that explore themes such as vulnerability, memory, care and mortality.
MS – Now that the trilogy concludes with “Canicula”, I would like to try to look at it as a whole. What distinguishes this final chapter from “Penumbra” and “Nebula”?
AR – “Penumbra” was an exhibition about the interstitial space between shadow and light, so the forms of uncertainty it explored were connected to human experience as a spectrum of greys rather than as a clear opposition between black and white. The works staged the ambiguous space that exists between memory and event, between the document and its falsification, between health and illness, between tragedy and hope, between the known and the unknown.
Nebula addressed the difficulty of finding one’s way through fog, directing our attention towards those forces capable of engulfing human experience in a nebula that threatens its permanence. It was an exhibition that explored those moments when things are at risk of disappearing, addressing themes connected to migration, the exploitation of resources, dispossession and genocide, collective amnesia and the mystery of death.
“Canicula”, on the other hand, focuses on the erosive effects of excessive heat and light, presenting a present marked by forms of political, social, environmental and inner collapse but, paradoxically, revealing what resists and endures despite this process of consumption. It is therefore an exhibition about our time as an overwhelming era, but above all about how inner lives and communities move through it, finding pockets of survival.
The development of this narrative arc has also been expressed through the succession of scenographies created for each exhibition, for which the 2050+ studio conceived a different spatial experience each time. If Penumbra was characterised by a unifying and homogeneous scenography of semi-darkness, “Nebula” materialised a sense of disorientation through the heterogeneity of materials and spatial interventions. “Canicula”, instead, makes a narrative use of scenography, evoking a space threatened from the outside and therefore retreating into itself. Light is a highly present element, appearing in feverish chromatic forms, while materials convey exhaustion and erosion, or alternatively, strategies of defence.
Credits:
1. Janis Rafa, Baby I’m Yours, Forever, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artist and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
2. P. Staff, Terminal Lucidity, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artist and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
3. Massimo D’Anolfi and Martina Parenti, 24 Landscapes + A Vision, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artists and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
4. Lawrence Abu Hamdan, 450XL: The Story of a Fugitive Sound, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artist and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
5. Yuyan Wang, Boring Billion, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artist and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
6. Wang Tuo, The Experimental Paradigm of Ownership and Autonomy, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artist and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
7. Roman Khimei and Yarema Malashchuk, Wishful Thinking, 2026 in “Canicula,” Fondazione In Between Art Film at Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Venice, 2026. Courtesy of the artists and Fondazione In Between Art Film. Photo © Marco Cappelletti and Giuseppe Miotto / Marco Cappelletti Studio
