French Academy in Rome - Villa MediciDeadline: Apr 24, 2026 Studiolo 22: HETEROCHRONIES

Published by the French Academy in Rome – Villa Medici, Studiolo is an annual art history journal dedicated to European and international artistic production and exchanges in the modern and contemporary ages. It provides a forum for the latest research in art history, both in terms of subjects and methods.

Each issue consists of a thematic dossier and several sections: the Varia section, open to off-theme articles; Debates, devoted to historiography; Villa Medici, history and heritage, dedicated to the history of the French Academy in Rome, as well as to research activities, and restoration projects monitored by the Department of Art History; and finally Champ libre, which welcomes proposals from the current year's fellows.

DOSSIER: HETEROCHRONIES

Time does not pass at the same speed in different parts of the world. This is an obvious fact highlighted by cultural anthropology studies and historical research, which since the early reflections of Ernst Bloch, have contributed significantly to the development of this critical perspective. Over the past thirty years, in the field of art history and art criticism, the cultural diffraction generated by an asynchronous experience within a presumed objective synchrony of events has become a crucial issue. This has been clearly demonstrated by the postcolonial turn, which led to the “spatial turn” and, as a consequence, to considering all of its sociopolitical implications. While science had demonstrated this a century earlier, art history also had to redefine the category of “space-time”. It did so by referring to the status of the image or of the artistic object as a container for reciprocal references between modes of production and reception.

Reflections on the “anachronism” of images as palimpsests of latent survivals were successively led by Carl Einstein, Aby Warburg, Walter Benjamin, and Georges Didi

-Hubermann, was then theorized in Anachronic Renaissance by Christopher Wood and Alexander Nagel. It proposes a stimulating reversal of perspective, marking the end of the Vasarian and Hegelian models applied to an evolutionary and teleological art history. But a new definition gradually emerged. With the research of Norman Bryson, Michael Ann Holly, and Keith Moxey, as well as that of Terry Smith and Mieke Bal, the notion of “heterochrony” gained ground as the field of visual studies broadened. Contrary to the apocalyptic vision of “achrony”

— an end of history with postmodern implications, tending toward the flattering of any otherness

— heterochrony seems to reveal the current essence of our condition: a multiplicity of contiguous temporalities, oriented in several directions, following an asynchronous simultaneity of differences that short-circuit each other in constant and reciprocally interfering diffractions. According to Tim Ingold's intuition, history does not pile up: it unravels, like a braided rope.

Going beyond a simple multiculturalist approach, heterochrony confirms, that it is not enough to include new narratives within the canonical Western narrative to establish equal relations. Instead, Michael Baxandall's reflection on the period's eye highlights the need to break away from the historicity of our gaze. Heterochrony thus consists of a confrontation that aims to be equal, non-hierarchical, between cultures coinciding in time. This new condition cannot be ignored: the myth of network technology, with its proliferation of information and acceleration of time, illustrates this. But the network can also be an effective indicator of resistance, activating and giving visibility to “other” creative cultures, cultures which are differently established and stimulated.

This new issue will address the question of heterochrony from the following perspectives, among others:

- Heterochrony and PowerWhile it is true that all historiographical efforts are result from a reading and interpretation of the world, and are ideological in nature, the power relations that underlie them cannot be ignored. For instance, one must examine the case of experiments operating in a context while being foreign to it. How was the realization of emerging artistic languages ​​experienced, while staying invisible to the established system of exhibitions, market and critical literature? And how is it experienced today? What are the consequences of such processes? What is happening in non-Western contexts, where temporalities are often imposed by the West? Finally, what are the effects of more recent asynchronies on competing artistic practices in the globalized art system?

- Heterochrony and MaterialityAs Georges Kubler has demonstrated, works of art contain a kind of paradox of which traces are both detectable and constitutive: they occupy a specific place in time, while retaining their own temporal dimension. At the same time, they are constantly attributed an intrinsic ontological value that transcends history. How, and with what results, can chronologically contiguous but mutually foreign cultural eras coexist in the same work? The discourse on heterochrony, as the substance of the present, has gradually established itself, particularly thanks to the development of computer networks and their ahistorical logic of connections. How has digital technology led to working with a conflagration of heterochronies in contemporary art?

- Heterochrony and Art HistoryArt history demands learning to compromise by translating multiple forms of experience of time into a single narrative that is constantly subject to revision. The differences between contiguous and multiple temporalities have an objective basis, but they are revealed according to the mutability of present-day priorities. Temporal periodizations are the first scapegoats of this realization. What renegotiations can be introduced by historical reconstructions in terms of heterochrony?

- Heterochrony and CollectingBeyond the center-periphery relationship that develops in specific geographical areas, it is worth questioning the coexistence, within the same chronological context, of different artistic cultures. Each artistic culture has its own temporal references of choice — particularly in the case of aggregation hubs such as urban areas. Thus, in the “high” culture of Roman patrons at the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries, the Villa Medici, the Carracci Gallery in the Farnese Palace, the Ludovisi archaeological collection in the Altemps Palace, and Caravaggio's paintings in the Church of St. Louis of the French coexisted within a limited spatial radius. What are the effects of this geographical contiguity between different intentions and, consequently, between different experiences and representations of time? In what ways can heterochrony be reflected in the heterogeneity of contemporary collections?

- Heterochrony and curatorial practicesFrom a more global perspective, the transition from modern to contemporary has occurred at varying speeds and in different ways.

Within the framework of an unprecedented relationship between artists and communities working according to cultural approaches with their own temporalities, we have witnessed a proliferation of localisms. What is the significance of this prevalence of a form of present “thickened” by other times — as Terry Smith writes — on the modes of operation of curatorial practices? To what extent do exhibition projects such as Biennials, Documenta, or museum acquisitions and hangings reflect this? What are the consequences for the art market? How can we re-evaluate, for example, the practice of reenactment?

We are pleased to announce that Maria Grazia Messina (University of Florence) has been invited as Joint Editor for the thematic session of issue #22 of Studiolo.

Articles may be published in three languages, French, Italian, and English, and must not be published or under consideration elsewhere. In the Dossier, Varia, and Debates sections, articles must be between 30,000 and 65,000 characters (including spaces and notes). In the last section, Villa Medici, history and heritage, articles must be between 10,000 and 45,000 characters (including spaces and notes).

Reproduced works must be provided by the authors and be royalty-free.

Authors are responsible for formatting their articles according to author guidelines.

Articles must be accompanied by an abstract of approximately 800 characters and a short bio-note of the author (max 800 characters), presenting their rank and affiliation, current research, and recent publications, and include their email address. This abstract and biography should be sent in a separate document.

Images of reproduced works must be provided with the articles, previously authorized or royalty-free, in a quality suitable for printing (minimum 300 dpi), and accompanied by the corresponding credits and captions.

All these documents should be sent by email, in Word format, to these email addresses: histoiredelart@villamedici.it and patrizia.celli@villamedici.it.

Submission deadline: April 24, 2026

Publication date: Spring 2027