Pussy Riot and FEMEN stage protest at Russia’s Venice pavilion

The Venice Biennale is supposed to be an art spectacle. This week it turned into a fight over whether a national pavilion can ever be just about art when the state behind it is still waging war. On Wednesday, May 6, activists from Pussy Riot and FEMEN rushed the Russian pavilion, set off pink, blue, and yellow smoke, and forced a brief closure. The protest was aimed at one thing — Russia’s return to the Biennale after sitting out the last two editions following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. ### Why did this blow up now? Because Russia’s pavilion had just reopened in Venice, and that reopening was already controversial before anyone lit a flare. The 61st International Art Exhibition is the first Biennale since Russia withdrew in 2022 after artists and the curator tied to its pavilion stepped away in response to the invasion. This year, the pavilion came back — and critics saw that as normalization, not neutrality. ### What exactly happened outside the pavilion? Roughly 50 protesters gathered outside the Russian building during preview days, many in pink balaclavas or with bare chests painted in FEMEN’s signature style. They waved Ukrainian flags, chanted slogans, and released smoke in the colors of both protest theater and the Ukrainian flag. Police blocked access, and the disruption briefly closed the pavilion before it reopened. ### Why those two groups together? That pairing is the point. Pussy Riot is a Russian feminist protest collective. FEMEN is a Ukrainian feminist movement. A joint action by them says this is not just “Ukraine versus Russia” in a simple national sense — it is also anti-Kremlin Russians and Ukrainians acting together against what they see as forces in a protest. ### What were they actually accusing the Biennale of? Basically, laundering politics through aesthetics. The chant that cut through the crowd — “Curated by Putin, dead bodies included” — made the argument brutally plain. The protesters were not saying the pavilion was merely in bad taste. They were saying a Russian national pavilion, in the middle of an ongoing war, cannot be separated from the government it represents. ### What is Venice’s defense? Biennale president Pietrangelo Buttafuoco has defended the decision in almost philosophical terms. His line is that the Biennale is a place for dialogue and peace, “not a court” passing judgment on states. That sounds high-minded, but the catch is that national pavilionness inside a format built on national symbolism. ### Why is the Russian pavilion so sensitive? Because it is not some temporary booth. Russia has had a national pavilion in Venice since 1914. That history gives its return extra weight — it reads less like a new invitation and more like the restoration of a long-standing place in one of the art world’s biggest stages. For opponents, that makes the decision feel consequential, not procedural. ### Is this only about one protest? No — it is about the rules of cultural legitimacy during war. Human rights groups had already condemned Russia’s participation, and critics have pushed the Biennale to treat a national pavilion as political by definition, not as a neutral container for art. Wednesday’s smoke and chants just made that argument impossible to ignore. ### Bottom line The real dispute is not whether the protest was disruptive. It was designed to be. The real dispute is whether a Russian state pavilion can return to normal before the war does. Venice says art should stay open. The protesters are saying that, in this case, “open” looks a lot like “forgiving.”