Anna Gesualdi and Giovanni Trono
Il s’agit de défaire l’espace, non moins que l’histoire, l’intrigue ou l’action.
Held in 11 towns and villages between 9th of April and 13th of May 2018, under the auspices of Valletta 2018 Cultural Programme, Altofest Malta involved residents hosting international artists in their houses, which then became venues that welcomed audiences for various performances. Altofest’s grassroots approach encourages multicultural exchanges, opening people’s mind to fresh ways of thinking about the role of contemporary art in towns and cities.
Altofest inaugurates a dialogue on the profound sense of hospitality, originating a new hybrid experience, which in turn triggers the process of human regeneration, one of the fundamental aims of Altofest.
We think of Altofest as a device, a dispositif that is not only capable of ‘moving’ people and social structures but also generates intimate understandings and visions. The meaning of concepts like ‘property’ and ‘sharing’, ‘private’ and ‘public’, ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ shift and the people involved whether resident space donors, spectators and artists, must reflect anew, on what could be the directions, necessity and responsibility that inspire their action.
The artistic process creates breakthroughs the household daily life which are then incorporated into the artwork produced requiring the artists to commit to reconsidering and reshaping their productions. Altofest uplifts the poetic part of existence, changing the perspective of daily life. The creative urgency of the artist overlaps with the daily necessities of the host, in a dialogue that redefines the work as well the signs that compose it, while the local residents welcome the anticipation that something special it is going to happen. This mutual shock forces us to rethink art’s languages and aesthetics and its role in daily life. Both the artist and the local residents cross the boundaries of the usual way of conceiving the performing arts and way of living and experiencing places and relations.
In the beginning: behind Altofest
What art teaches us, is that changes always pass through a crisis.
The Italian word ‘crisi’ comes from the Latin crisis, Greek κρίσις ‘choice, decision, decisive phase of a disease’, der. of κρίνω ‘to distinguish, to judge’.
In this perspective, we founded Altofest in 2011, in Naples, the city where both of us live.
At that time the whole world was experiencing a global crisis, a ‘perfect storm’. Altofest was born to Give Rise To a community that generates critical thinking, that is continuously alert to every attempt by the system to impose top-down, standardised cultural offerings. A community that can recognise culture as a primary good, fulfilling a daily need. We try to insert our work as a process addressing all the social elements across the urban fabric and connecting them in dialogue. This connection comes from the presence of an external, foreign vision, that expresses itself in the plurality of artistic languages that constitute Altofest’s programme. These semantic interferences give the community the opportunity to speak to each other in a neutral language, to meet in a shared space of risk.
Following this vision, we determined ‘proximity’ and ‘gift’ to be the key concepts in envisioning the structure of Altofest.
Since 2011, every year, in different areas of the city, Naples’ citizens become Altofest space donors, welcoming national and international artists into their private spaces, offering them the gift of their hospitality and accommodation.
These private and intimate places (apartments, terraces, basements, courtyards, whole buildings, artisan shops) become spaces for artist residencies, where each artist will renovate one of their artworks in dialogue with and in accordance with the residents’ daily lived experience. After the residency, the same spaces welcome the audience.
This proximity exposes both the donor and the artist to a mutual lack of ownership: the former losing the possession of objects and spaces, the latter losing the possession of the artwork.
This type of gift originates a mechanism in which one expropriation naturally invokes and claims another expropriation.
The work is, therefore, ‘displaced’, deprived of the expected conditions of the formal space where it was born. The work will inhabit entirely new spaces, geometries and memories, concerning space and all other relations passing through space.
Expropriation and displacement are usually perceived as traumatic conditions, but in Altofest they provide the very groundwork for artistic and human regeneration. What was private is no longer owned, turning instead into shared intimacy.
The audience, also welcomed in this intimate space, is exposed to an encounter in which they, in turn, are called to offer a gift: their responsible gaze.
The whole ‘fest’ is conceived and built as a shared work extended through the space of the city.
As Authors, we set every proposal in relation to residents and their spaces, following a unified dramaturgy, which traces the path of Altofest as one single piece of theatre.
The curatorial approach that shapes the ‘fest’ pays meticulous attention to the one-on-one relationship between artist and local resident.
The generative potential of this encounter can expand to the whole system of relations in which everyone moves: infiltrating the different levels of inhabiting a place – the area, the house, the clothes and the skin of those who lived this experience, infecting the everyday use of words. Altofest gives rise to a shared space, suspended geography, to be continuously re-created.
The city as a Lab
A city is a human and architectural system: an arrangement of spaces, a presence or absence of services, and a daily transit of people through different places. All these elements come together to make up ‘the city’.
Altofest positions itself into this system as an experimental socialization project, continuously retracing the boundary between what is public and what is private, to create an area of non-ownership. In this new, floating city, the field of possible relations is fertilised by the intrusion of strangers bringing with them their artistic ‘corpus’; artists and ‘space donor’ residents live together, sharing time and space.
It is not simply a matter of hosting an artist in a private home: the daily presence of a working artist will ‘contaminate’ the point of view of everybody living there, usually or occasionally originating a new gaze on the poetic potential immersed in what is considered to be ordinary. The audience is linguistically infected as well: while on “pilgrimage” from one house to another, it is welcomed into environments that are unknown, though they may be recognisable thanks to their ‘domestic’ features. The ordinary objects are freed from the usual structure: name-function-meaning.
The resident is the essential element of the Altofest project, he/she is the core of its structure and foundation, playing the role of the maker of the process. His/her role is never user/consumer or addressee. What happens during Altofest is that the host takes care of the artwork, and the artist, in turn, takes care of the host and all his/her community.
The choice of intimate, domestic space, shared by residents harkens back precisely Roberto Esposito’s concept of community, in Immunitas (Esposito, 2002). The word ‘community’, indeed, derives from cum-munus, where munus is the gift that is donated, and not the one that is received, which in Latin is donum.
Esposito writes: “This means that the members of a community are tied by a mutual duty of donating, more than by a sense of belonging. This duty stretches them out, in order to reach the other, almost expropriating themselves in favour of the other”. This principle leads to a real invasion, where the one who is invaded opens the door to the invader, offering his/her own identity with the clear intention of dissolving it. This invasion and infection is the origin and the conclusion of Altofest’s community in its continuous becoming, its effects are disseminated and the whole city becomes an open lab. The residents experiencing this process expand the limits of their horizon. Imagination becomes concrete, and so does the autonomy of thinking and acting. The action of Altofest begins the creation of a transversal community, infected by the ‘barbaric’ power of art. Poetry takes place at the base of existence, of subsistence. Art becomes a primary, universal, necessary, irreplaceable and inalienable good.
A comfort zone is a dangerous place
Each edition of Altofest comes with its own dramaturgy involving various kind of communities. For the first time, Altofest is now being displaced abroad. We want to raise questions about the need to originate new values, to reshape the relation with persons and places radically, subverting the use of spaces and the assignment of fixed roles, to dare forms of trespassing (of discipline, responsibility, action) that have never been done before.
For this reason, we call on artists not to focus on easily adaptable artworks, as Altofest creates the condition for a possible new elaboration of the structure, of the essence and the direction of each work.
Altofest focuses on the ‘aesthetic experience’ as a policy driver.
We invite artists to reflect, relate their project to the principle that generated the festival: To Give Rise To.
An invitation to meet on a common ground of risk, to build together a space for reflection and critical thinking, a multicultural, international meeting, able to rethink the role of contemporary art in society.
This book represents more than just two years of work, spent building the special edition of Altofest, in Malta. It is the concrete trace we leave after nine years of efforts we engaged in to generate an extraordinary dimension, that every kind of person could inhabit. The attempt to share with all ‘people of Altofest’ the same philosophy that drives our artistic practice. What we learnt during many years of theatre is that crisis is a turning point, an opportunity, and therefore a necessary part of a creative process. Reconsidering the meaning of words such as, crisis, limit, displacement, that are commonly perceived as dangerous, what we did in these years was to create a dispositif, a device, a machine that put us in a trap, leading us out of our comfort zone.
If by any chance, I told you a story, would you revoke my sentence?
by Neville Borg – Aidan Celeste – Graziella Vella
Displacement is the outcome of a radical change that has already taken place through external forces, a change that once processed, cannot be reversed.
Displacement, Intimacy and Performance in Altofest Malta 2018
This essay examines three artistic experiences held throughout Altofest Malta to bring forth some reflections on the subjective experience of displacement in Malta by means of intimacy and performance. This concept of displacement will be examined within the context of the functions of property, particularly in light of the type of sites in which the performances took place. These constitute three types of properties: an old townhouse in Sliema functioning both as a home and a hostel, a small apartment in Gżira’s concrete jungle that functions as a temporary household, and a warehouse that functions as a boat-workshop on the other side of the port, in the impoverished town of Bormla in the Cottonera.
Altofest has applied its own variation of displacement as a modus operandi in Italy, one of the four major European countries (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain) heavily impacted by the housing and migration crises (OMA, 2018). This festival originated in the city of Naples, where the directors invite performers to take residency in private homes. The festival’s objective is to experience how such a condition – displacement – is first and foremost, a personal encounter that goes beyond any global narrative (such as migration or homelessness, for instance). Placing these external factors aside, Altofest presents the artistic decision to displace as yet another force majeure for society, whereby communities are invited to reconnect by focusing on the present situation and living with one another’s vision of a household.
The house that was once a home, the office that was once a workplace, is engaged for a performance by the artistic directors of Altofest. If properties were to be considered an object for the purpose of art, there are three variations for a single property: (i) the original intent for which the space was occupied by the donor (ii) the artists’ intent to use the space for a performance, and (iii) the curator’s narrative to displace for an encounter with art as a force majeure. The space itself has a pivotal role in this tripartite structure, it is at the centre of the dynamics between the imagination of the artists, the curators/artistic directors, and the house donor. However, while the original function of each household is exchanged for that of an artist during the final performance, the physicality of a house and its artifacts remain constant, along with the meaning they carry for the house donors.
For the purpose of authenticity, the performative arts are preserved as a combination of two types of elements, namely distinct elements which are not allowed to change, and variable elements which are open to reinterpretation (Laurenson, 2006). To mention one example, the constraints of an original musical composition are understood by the performer and assessed for their level of variability at specific instances in a conservatory. In a similar manner, the variability of a household is studied by the artists for Altofest and certain constraints are identified over a period of incubation by means of a residency. Once a relationship is established and an artist understands the limits of a household, including its possible variations, the constraints are stretched for their artistic intent under the guise of a performance. Thereby, even though a specific performance might have already been produced on stage, its rendition will change according to the composition of a house and the authentic values of its community.
With the suspension of a household’s typical function for the purposes of hosting a temporary event (in this case, a performance) an unspoken arrangement is made between each party, namely the artist and the house donor. The original function of each household is suspended on behalf of the director’s notion of displacement as an artistic event for communities elsewhere. Much like the titular feasts in each locality across the Maltese Islands, whereby the main streets become pedestrian only zones, communities gather in ad-hoc spaces, and structures are built for the duration of a single week, Altofest also breaks the rules that separate private from public spaces by inviting the public to visit a select number of areas across the island. However, while the titular feast presents an accepted tradition with strict procession of structure and content, Altofest provides a precarious gamble by allowing the artist to develop the content according to their subjective experience. It is not the scope of this essay to make a comparative analysis of every community by each performance, however it will present the application of displacement in three different communities in the Maltese Islands.
It is never easy for an artist to let go of a creative vision and its distinct elements, let alone for a family which has been living in the same space and plans to do so for a lifetime. The privacy of a household allows for a safe space to create and build a personal rapport between each artist, house donor and their peer community. Once the door is open to the public, be it in the hustle and bustle of a street in Sliema or the winding roads of an old town such as Żejtun, the intimacy of a household is exposed to other communities and their territory. House donors often remark how, for the first time, they felt as if they were a guest in their own home (Altofest Web Radio, 2018). The process of creation is followed by the exposure of a household for a public performance. It is in this penultimate step that a significant break occurs, as the private space, by definition, no longer remains private. This type of controlled intrusion into the intimate, private space is mediated through the Altofest Open Talk, whereby house donors and performers are brought together to share their experience of this process in an open and reflexive manner.
Altofest falls under a new kind of curatorial treatment which developed in the late Noughties, one that facilitates a local connection with global politics by working amongst communities on the ground. The scene thrived through the creation of nomadic biennales such as Manifesta, and bridging the showcase of an international festival with the participation of workshops, discussions, and artists laboratories, whereby audiences from diverse communities are brought together to participate directly and commune for civil engagement. However, rather than engage with the aggression of political displacement through violent or confrontational means, their power lies in stimulating creativity in unconventional settings and amongst audiences who do not typically engage with artistic productions.
Throughout the final weekend of Altofest Malta, performances were taking place across the Grand Harbour and its immediate periphery, in the towns of Sliema, Gżira, Birgu and Bormla. The Frantic’s Dance Company took residency in a sizeable townhouse and the home of Tony Terribile, while James and Laura were playing host to Soluciones Dramaticas in Gżira. This area covers a territory which is earmarked for substantial high-rise development in the near future, stretching from the old town of Gżira up to the coast of Sliema. In contrast, the other performances were taking place on the other side of the harbour, in the Cottonera area. Following Sliema, the Cottonera waterfront was one of the first territories to experience radical development of apartment blocks in the 60s, followed by a redevelopment project in early Nineties (Cutajar, 2008).
Hype: Personal space beyond displacement
Before Hype began, house donor Tony Terribile guided the viewers to the front room of the house, a lounge-like-office space heavily adorned with Melitensia. A locally-renowned religion historian, Terribile introduced himself as an enthusiastic collector and published author with an avid interest in ecclesiastical architecture and a history of the Maltese. Huddled around a sofa, surrounded by all manner of bric-a-brac and personal mementos, Terribile guided the audience through the history of the house. Having been raised in the house and having lived in it all his life, he spoke with disarming honesty of both its tangible and intangible history – the damage sustained during Second World War; the long and laborious rebuilding process; the constant reshuffling of furniture and home decor; but also childhood memories of playing in the garden; exploring the neighbourhood with friends; the gradual passing of neighbours. Although not strictly part of the Altofest performance, this introduction can be read as a performance in itself, transforming a dispassionate performance space into one imbued with different layers of personal histories and meanings.
The performance itself started in a small open space at the back, a tiny garden filled to the brim by a sizeable audience. As the music started, the performer claimed a path by making direct eye contact and repetitive movements, signalling his direction with the slightest manoeuvre of a limb. The artist gracefully weaved his way around the crowded garden, fixing his gaze on the different audience members. The unusual setting – the garden of a traditional townhouse – served to exacerbate the intensity of the performance and the sense of unease amongst the audience. Gathered around the well, the crowded audience was in constant close proximity to the performer as he accidentally brushed past them, his deep breathing and the patter of his footsteps on the cold stone flooring adding a further aural element to the performance.
Once they were engaged as physical objects with a certain agency, the performance became subject to the attitude of the audience members. Be it stoic, friendly, or engaged, the audience members were central to determining the tension of the performance alongside the artist. This allowed for the household, with all its echoes of history and heritage, to disappear and create a personal space beyond any grand narrative of displacement. At once, there was a clear separation between the performer, the audience, and their own national or historical background.
For the second part of the performance, the audience was guided to the upper floor of the house, to a living room that had been cleared for the occasion. This rendered the space somewhat more familiar, as it served as a more traditional performance space. Antique furniture and mirrors adorned the walls, with the traditional patterned tiles providing a hypnotic counterpart to the performer’s motion. Noticeably, two chairs had been placed facing each other on opposite sides of the room, in a manner reminiscent of a psychoanalyst’s office. Once again, the performance was characterized by a certain sense of unease and discomfort. As the artist glided around the room establishing eye contact with audience members and gazing at them intently for minutes on end, many audience members averted their eyes and shuffled nervously, clearly unaccustomed to this nature of intimate and emotional connection within a performance.
This was ever more evident when the artist selected an audience member – seemingly at random – and invited her to sit in one of the chairs. Sitting cross-legged in the opposite chair, the artist fixed his gaze upon her for some time, sometimes smiling, occasionally grimacing, before rising again and inviting a second audience member to take his place in the second chair, as he proceeded with the performance in their midst. This scenario played out in the manner of a small psychodrama, with the two audience members sitting face to face, their expressions betraying a mix of confusion, bewilderment and bemusement, as the rest of the audience stood and watched this unfold.
This segment of the performance in particular shed light on the ways in which the personal emotional baggage of each audience member contributed to the performance. Every awkward shuffle, every nervous cough, each wry smile did not take place in isolation, but was shaped by the brief physical and conceptual journey through the house that preceded it, as well as the personal connections and discomforts that each audience member had experienced.
As evident throughout the performance, Hype opened up a caveat to Altofest Malta whereby anyone in the audience can take agency and influence the value of a space through a clear invitation to act. This provides a level of awareness which redefines the role of the audience into one of participant, able to choose, determine, and negotiate what comes next. However, it also exposes a certain vulnerability, whereby the ability to anticipate a performance from a safe distance dissolves. In such a state, most commonly associated with the art scene in Frankfurt, including the work of performers such as Anne Imhof, Nora Turato, amongst others, the audience is disarmed and placed in a precarious situation, displaced, and exposed for their subjectivity. However, while the Frankfurt scene is usually a guest of biennale’s such as that of Venice in 2017, or Manifesta in Palermo 2018, Altofest is geared toward an audience of local communities as opposed to the global art scene in itself.
Viviré aquí: Intimacy and voyeurism in private space
The second performance took place in Gżira, a short ten minute walk from the site of Hype. The setting for this performance was dramatically different – unlike Tony Terrible’s traditional townhouse, the audience met on a rooftop in an apartment building surrounded by a new type of structure, one that threatens to make the townhouse obsolete. Concrete shells, high-rises, low-rises, and construction sites surround the view at the apartment in Gżira, and the audience fraternised around workshop table, drank wine, and sat waiting for the performance to begin.
This performance, titled Viviré aquí, began by blocking the outside view with a large white sheet that was crossed the length of a flat roof over a clothing line. A trio of performers started to hum a lament and released the sheet from each peg and its wire, laid it flat, and lifted it above their heads with the main performer at its centre. The audience circumnavigated the main actor, Griselda Layno, and held the same canvas above their heads, enveloping the whole performance under a soft white light. Children followed the audience, stretching their arms upward. This was the prologue to a personal story told by the performers of Soluciones Dramáticas and Griselda Layño and its development of three scenes across this apartment and its rooftop. The performer elicited a note about the audience’s subjective experience of time and how our perception of it can change through the intervention of an irreversible catalyst. For the next hour, she allows the audience to join her in mourning and “to the best of my ability” share “what was revealed to me after the unjust death of my mother”.
Throughout this performance, the physicality of the house was used as a tabula rasa, and much like a hospital’s mortuary, there was nothing to identify the space except platforms, walls, and the heaviness of a secondary body, left at the end of one room and on display, as if in a showcase, by the audience. The performance took place across this showcase, using a song to cue the lead actress, and allow her to cross the space as the audience sat down and watched through the frame of a door. Except for the weight of each body, the space was left devoid of any other object. This is a sharp change of experience from the distinct qualities of the previous performance. While Frantic’s Dance Company had to engage the audience directly, and separated their experience from the history of an old townhouse and its heritage, soluciones dramáticas reused the framing of a small apartment to create a showcase. Much like in cinema, in the way in which a camera veers into the distance, across arcades, windows, and every other wall, the lack of sudden movements presented by the artists, provided for an intensive experience, as if definite actions are taking place beyond the frame of a screen in itself.
In borrowing a phrase from Gabriel Garcia Marquez – “Everyone has three lives: a public life, a private life, and a secret life” – we can begin to understand these multiple layers of intimacy revealed throughout the Altofest process. By welcoming the audience into a person’s home, a space defined by its very boundaries and sense of closure, the audience is offered a glimpse into a previously unexplored and untouched private space. Peeling away at the public facade to reveal personal idiosyncrasies – the framed holiday snaps methodically placed in the living room, the bookshelf teeming with well-worn novels – we are told a personal story that is neither curated nor manufactured. Instead, it is an imagined personal story pieced together by these fragments of memories only partially revealed – what lies behind that curtain; where does that staircase lead to? We may never know, but as we wander through the house, we cannot help but wonder.
This raises questions on the audience’s role not only as a spectator, but as a voyeur. Much has been written about this (particularly in relation to cinema, with Hitchcock’s Rear Window being a notable case study within this discussion), however the immediacy of Altofest – with the audience not only viewing the private space, but actively maneuvering through and interacting with it – adds an unusual dynamic to this discussion. In the case of Altofest, this sense of voyeurism is part of the attraction of the performance itself. The opportunity to peer into and experience the private and secretive space of the space donor creates an element of curiosity that renders the experience unique. Both Hype and Viviré aquí played upon this sense of voyeurism in distinct ways. Whereas Hype, perhaps inadvertently, presented the ornate household as an object of voyeurism separate from the artistic performance itself, Viviré aquí made the audience’s experience of voyeurism more explicit through its presentation of the body in the vetrine as a central focus of the performance.
However, the questions remain: to what extent does this voyeuristic impulse flow into the experience of the performance itself? How does the intimacy of the home setting shape the audience’s experience of the performance? What emotional and psychological baggage do audiences bring to the performance?
Omertà: Ritual and performance in one space
The third performance analysed in this essay, titled Omertà, took place in a non-residential site, at a regatta workshop, in the town of Bormla. Traditionally known as a somewhat impoverished and working class area, this is also the site of one of the more extensive recent late regeneration projects in Malta. Matteo Marfoglia Dance Company were invited to develop such a performance for the town on the penultimate day of the festival. Being the only performance of the three discussed to take place in a non-residential setting, this performance focused less on the intimacy of the space itself, instead finding intimacy in the patterns through which the space itself is used by its regular tenants.
Let us for a moment picture the choreographer’s main actors at a regatta workshop in the Grand Harbour. Three women dressed in black lace disembark from a boat and break onto land carrying a stocky block of wood. Holding one in each hand, this wedge was used to keep the weight of any man’s boat from slipping back into the shore on a windy day. Among other objects, such as a large set of oars for rowing, wooden-pallets, buckets of water, and metal chairs, the women walk through the audience and into the regatta club, a community space frequented by men, boys, and their grandpas. A boat hangs upside down and at an arm’s length away from the audience, ever unnoticed, each performer slips right under it. The noise is scattered and changes from a dry pitch to the band of metal hitting kneecaps, elbows, and shoulders as each limb pulls a body out from under the cover of an upturned boat. While on stage, each performer is given a spotlight at the warehouse, they shudder to let go of the boat and labourers pass by without flinching, one of the guys comes to a halt at the boat and starts to wash it off as the women hang down just underneath.
Evidently a local and regular at the workshop, he was invited by the choreographer to wipe the boat clean and completely ignore the performance. This moment is representative of the relationship in the making throughout the four weeks of their residency. There was a certain level of respect for the performers, as well as for the labourers to continue their work in the same space which depended on a certain distance. Nonetheless, they were both picking up sounds, stories, and objects to appropriate into the process up until their actions were synchronized and exposed to the audience. Up until discussions were open over a sobremesa, a period of gestation, discussion, and rapport after every meal, it would have not been possible to integrate the boat keeper’s vision of such a space and its tools along with the performer’s output into a common space by means of a performance and its acoustics. The same applies to the performances Hype and Viviré aquí, as discussed earlier. However, while the space used for Hype was somewhat overwhelming and excluded from the performance itself, the apartment in which Viviré aquí took place was emptied of any personal assets in order to use the apartment as a means to frame the experience of an audience.
By placing a community’s way of life on equal footing with that of a contemporary artistic performance, Altofest enables the community’s subjective experience to be appreciated for its distinct qualities. This can alter our perception of real estate from one based upon its objective qualities, such as its monetary value, to one centred upon its subjective qualities, particularly its use-value (to adopt a Marxist term), as established by the communities that frequent it. Be it a band club running of an abandoned Palazzo around Valletta, or a vacant shop turned into a performance space for an annual festival, one of the major outcomes of Altofest Malta is the necessity of a human relationship to mediate such forces of change beyond the lifetime of an individual, set differences aside, and identify the true value of our common experience of displacement.
Altofest Web Radio (2018). Episode 30 & 31 – The third Open Talk. [Online]. Available at: https://www.teatringestazione.com/altofest/malta/altofestwebradio/ (accessed 1 August 2018).
Cutajar, J. (2008). “Community involvement and the revitalization of Birgu”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.academia.edu/12119813/Community_involvement_and_the_revitalization_of_Birgu (accessed 1 August 2018).
OMA [Office for Metropolitan Architecture] (2018). Palermo Atlas, Milano, Humboldt Books.
Laurenson, P. (2006). “Authenticity, Change and Loss in the Conservation of Time-based Media Installations”, Tate Papers, 6. [Online]. Available at: https://www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/06/authenticity-change-and-loss-conservation-of-time-based-media-installations (accessed 1 August 2018).
 Quote taken from the film Arabian Nights, by Miguel Gomes (2015).
Paintings in the photo gallery serving as cover for the article are:
1) FORME/SHAPES, Acrylic on paper by Federica Terracina.
2) INTIMACY, painting technique frottage. Charcoal, ink, pastel and acrylic on paper, by Federica Terracina .
3)RIFLESSI- painting technique frottage Charcoal, ink, pastel and acrylic on paper, by Federica Terracina .