Processo?

Processo? turns the square into an unstable courtroom of the public imagination, where the monumental duration of Rome and the media image of Giulio Andreotti are measured against each other without producing a definitive verdict. In the Squares series, the urban site is not a recognizable setting, but a device through which history, power, and communication become mutually legible. Zampogna thus extends the method of contamination developed after Artmedia: the appropriated image no longer refers only to an artistic repertoire, but intervenes in the perception of the present, making the city the support of a memory already traversed by information. The question mark in the title keeps the nature of the judgment open and prevents the work from becoming illustrated news.

The triple sequence of Giulio Andreotti reduces political presence to a reiterated frame, subjected at once to exposure, scrutiny, and media consumption. Repetition does not consolidate the subject’s identity, but converts it into a public formula, almost as if it were evidence repeatedly displayed yet never sufficient to conclude the case. Meanwhile, the Colosseum immersed in orange loses the documentary neutrality of the monument and becomes a mental scene, suspended between historical persistence and chromatic artificiality. The disproportion between the mass of the architecture and the small inserts does not make them less important. On the contrary, their discontinuity fractures the unity of the view and forces the monument to coexist with the short duration of media circulation. The upper insert, although not identifiable with certainty, acts as a further interference, detached from any perspectival continuity.

The work therefore makes two forms of authority interchangeable, one sedimented in the monument and the other produced through political visibility. Neither retains an intact position: the first becomes a surface available to current events, while the second survives as a serial image. Within this friction, the square does not gather a present community, but organizes the distance between urban experience and mediated knowledge. Processo? adds a specifically judicial dimension to Zampogna’s investigation of vision: to observe is to compare heterogeneous clues, knowing that montage directs judgment without being able to close it.