Monica Sassatelli’s research while affiliated with University of Bologna and other places

The European Pavilion (EP) program is an initiative of the European Cultural foundation; since its first ideation in 2020 the EP has developed a series of events, supporting artistic and research activities involving several other institutions and individuals. Initially sparked by the idea of adding a European Pavilion at the Venice Biennale, the EP developed into an independent program that aims at becoming established as “a new cultural reference” for the European public sphere and at “driving the debate on the future of Europe”. In this chapter I will present an analysis of its rationale, actors and outcomes so far, in the framework of current debates on how a European identity and imaginary are emerging, in discourse and practice, as a new layer, or perhaps type, of cultural allegiance (and repertoire) along with local, national, regional and global. Through a detour to the Venice Biennale exhibition park, the presentation considers the pavilion’s role as a mapping device for the representation of collective identities and the creation of repertoires or canons indicative of both dominant paradigms and struggles for access, inclusivity and de-centering.

The dismissive stance of thinkers towards fashion is often the starting point for those theories of fashion that are increasingly contributing to overcoming it. However, very rarely do even philosophies of fashion dedicate as much as a single thought to the fashion of philosophers. This neglected aspect of the everyday life of intellectuals, people of the mind, provides a new interpretive key. This article explores two prominent cases of intellectual celebrities, to whom we turn especially in times of crisis, personal or public. Diderot famously underwent a personal crisis as a result of a beautiful new silk dressing gown. Marx, on the other hand, often on the verge of destitution, repeatedly pawned his coat – which poignantly also featured at the beginning of Capital as the epitome of the commodity that does not keep you warm – affecting his capacity or otherwise to go and study at the British Museum. These two cases take us directly to the clothed body of two intellectuals and to the struggle – of mind and body, private and public – that led them, via practice, to theory.

An important viewpoint on images of Europe can be gained analysing the idea of “unity in diversity”. This motto is enshrined in the European institutions official discourse and is a recurring element of contemporary narratives of European identity. This chapter traces, first, the emerging of that narrative, both in official discourse and in scholarly interpretation. Subsequently, the chapter develops a case study of one main embodiment of the narrative of “unity in diversity”: the images representing Europe on the common currency, the Euro. By analysing the process and context through which the Euros have come to symbolise Europe in a series of abstract bridges and doors, as well as the critical reception they have sparked, a specific perspective can be gained on the models of identity that are relevant to Europe today.

European institutions have long been concerned with how citizens perceive them and how this is connected to shifting notions of Europe and collective identities. This article contributes to the analysis of EU narratives as revealed by the design of the euro banknotes, their intended institutional meaning and the debate they raised. The seven denominations’ main images are bridges and doors, inspired by European architectural styles, but representing abstract symbols and not actual landmarks. In the public debate, this has attracted more criticism than praise; scholars, too, have generally been dismissive. In this article, I aim to provide an interpretation of how currency iconography becomes the medium of both accepted and occasionally contested narratives of identity. First I consider how the euro was designed and officially promoted; then I advance a critique of the main interpretations, as an indicator of accepted (or unacceptable) representations of Europe. Available narratives will finally be rethought through an analysis of the significance of the bridge and the door as cultural symbols, following Georg Simmel’s essay on the subject. The significance of this will emerge in relation to the wider relevance of architectural metaphors of Europe as tropes in narratives of European identity.

Biennials – periodic, independent and international exhibitions surveying trends in visual art – have with startling speed become key nodes in linking production, distribution and consumption of contemporary art. Cultural production and consumption have been typically separated in research, neglecting phenomena, like biennials, sitting in between. Biennials have become, however, key sites of both the production of art’s discourse and where that discourse translates into practices of display and contexts of appreciation. They are, this article argues, key sites of art’s symbolic production. Symbolic production is what makes a work, an artist, or even a genre visible and relevant, providing its sense in a system of classifications and, in an exhibition like a biennial, literally giving it a place in the scene. This article proposes a cultural analysis of biennials, focusing on the Venice Biennale, founded in 1895 and the first of the genre, through which we can trace biennials’ rise and transformations.

A contemporary overview of festival activity from around the world based on over 30 case studies drawn from every continent. Through its case-study focus it examines different types and genres of festival across the world; considers in detail specific festivals in specific contexts; looks at management and organisational issues in festival provision, and illustrates debates and theories pertaining to festivals throughout the world.

A powerful and unique case-study focused, theoretically rigorous and pan-European approach to our most ubiquitous cultural phenomena - festivals.

The Euro-crisis that began in 2010 has shown that, ultimately, legitimation for European integration is sought in a ‘common identity’ and consequent solidarity: in public discourse, bailouts and confidence-boosting packages are presented as possible, sufficient or justifiable in as much as they are intended to benefit the common good of the EU as a whole, and therefore assume a common identity, that could then be organized and represented in ways comparable to the national one. To critics, the on-going crisis is final proof that such an identity is lacking. So, precisely now that the public debate is full of economic and political analysis and ‘hard’ data and arguments, the relevance of soft, cultural aspects of ‘being European’ has never been more crucial. Understanding identity remains central — in Europe as elsewhere — because no matter how flawed the concept might appear (see Brubaker and Cooper 2000 for an oft-cited critique), it remains a politically diffuse category, as well as a ‘practical’ or ‘lay’ one. Notably it is one that may remain ‘unflagged’ in everyday situations, but is invoked in times of crisis.

This monograph is based on the research carried out by the Euro-Festival project ‘Arts Festivals and the European Public Culture’ supported by the Seventh RTD Framework Programme of the European Union and specifically the latter’s ‘Social Sciences and Humanities’ (SSH) Programme.What do arts festivals have to tell us about European society, its culture, politics and the role of cultural policy? How do arts festivals mediate, present and celebrate diversity? And what is the role of arts festivals for their specific locations but also for the exchange of ideas across borders and boundaries? These are some of the questions of the Euro-Festival project.