51¶ÌÊÓƵ

In 1964, rumors had it that the U.S. government, dealer Leo Castelli and art world insiders rigged the Venice Biennale so their chosen artist, Robert Rauschenberg, would become the first American to win the prestigious international art exhibition’s coveted Grand Prize.

Sixty years later, “Taking Venice,� Amei Wallach’s documentary created with the cooperation of the Rauschenberg Foundation, dispels those rumors in fascinating fashion, telling the story of how the government became involved with the biennale, why Rauschenberg was the favored artist, and what really happened in Venice during the early weeks of June to land him the prize.

It tells that story through interviews with those who were there, including critic Calvin Tomkins, insider Alice Denney, who became the U.S. deputy commissioner at the biennale and Christo, the late artist known for his large environmental installations, who was at the biennale.

Their accounts are augmented by recorded interviews with Rauschenberg and Castelli and a voiceover actor providing the account of Alan Solomon, the U.S. commissioner. There are also views from contemporary international art historians and a pair of American artists who represented the U.S. at recent biennales.Ìý

Visually, the story is told via lots of footage from the ’50s and early ’60s, photographs, newspaper and magazine clippings (with the Italian headlines translated to English when necessary) and surveys of Rauschenberg’s artwork via slides and as seen in recent exhibitions.

“Taking Venice� isn’t just about Venice. It also details Rauschenberg’s groundbreaking career, including his relationship with Jasper Johns, his time at Black Mountain College in North Carolina, and his work with dancer Merce Cunningham and composer John Cage.

Andy Warhol, Roy Lichtenstein, George Segal and other prominent early ’60s artists and their work are also briefly glimpsed in the film to set Rauschenberg’s work in the context of its time. That also includes Kenneth Noland, who was suggested as the compromise winner when the controversial selection of Rauschenberg split the biennale’s jury.

The controversy came at a time when the U.S. government was using art and artists as essentially propaganda tools in the Cold War culture war with godless Communism. Those efforts included not only the ’50s abstract expressionists, whose work was circulated globally, but also musicians like Duke Ellington, who is seen performing in Iran on a government-sponsored tour.

The Rauschenberg selection, however, wasn’t overly political. Solomon, after being appointed commissioner, was determined to have an American artist win the grand prize and wisely chose Rauschenberg.

That decision set into motion the “conspiracy� that involved using Denney's connections to get military planes to fly over the giant canvases of Rauschenberg and other artists, turning the old U.S. Consulate into an exhibition pavilion, throwing giant parties and working the judges through the press.

There’s more drama involved in the machinations that led to Rauschenberg’s selection, which anyone familiar with the controversy will know going into the film. Those who know something about Rauschenberg and his career will, however, learn a few things from the film that will put a more informed spin on works like the Sheldon Art Museum’s “Scrape" (from the series “Hoarfrost�).

“Taking Venice,� which was filmed over a period of years dating back to at least 2017, was made at the last possible moment to get eyewitness testimony from those who were there. Denney died at age 101 last November, Tomkins is in his 80s and Christo died four years ago.

And that testimony is, in large measure, the heart of the documentary that will stand as a revelatory film of Cold War art history and Rauschenberg, one of the true game changers of 20th-century art.