Artist Alma Allen has again accused art publicist David Resnicow of working against Allen’s controversial U.S. Pavilion at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after months of criticism surrounding the project.
In an Instagram post published Monday afternoon, Allen wrote that “two of the three galleries that withdrew their support for my pavilion informed me that they did so on the advice of David Resnicow,” referring to the veteran art-world publicist whose firm has represented the US Pavilion six times before this year’s edition.
“I have never met Mr. Resnicow,” Allen wrote in the post “But his name came up frequently from individuals who told me he had warned them not to support this year’s American Pavilion. This included arts writers, museum directors, funders, curators, and two of the three galleries that withdrew support.” Allen’s post marks the second time he has publicly identified Resnicow by name. The first was in a New York Times article in March announcing that Allen had gained representation with the international gallery Perrotin after Kasmin and Mendes Wood DM, both of which represented Allen, and reportedly cut ties with the artist following his decision to represent the US at this year’s Venice Biennale.
In a statement previously provided to the Times, Resnicow denied attempting to discourage support for Allen, adding that he had voiced concerns about whether the American Arts Conservancy was capable of successfully realizing the project, citing his experience working with the commissioning institutions behind six of the past seven US pavilions. In a statement Monday about the escalation of Allen’s allegations, Resnicow told ARTnews that Allen’s claims were “baffling.”
“[He] keeps perpetuating this narrative…it simply isn’t true,” Resnicow said. “I’ve never told anyone not to work with him or spoken with anymore about funding for the pavilion.”
Allen’s Instagram post adds a new chapter to one of the most contentious Biennale cycles in recent memory. Since the artist was announced as America’s representative last November, criticism has focused as much on his work as on the process that put him there. In the same post, Allen said he did not apply for the commission. Instead, he said curator Jeffrey Uslip told him he was one of five artists shortlisted by a committee made up of representatives from the National Endowment for the Arts, Arts in Embassies, and the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. According to Allen, the other artists under consideration were Julie Mehretu, Barbara Chase-Riboud, Kennedy Yanko, and William Eggleston.
“I assumed the selection process would be made public, but it wasn’t,” Allen wrote. However, one source who asked for anonymity told me that Allen very much knew the reputational risks, and was advised by multiple people close to him that accepting Uslip’s invitation to represent the US in Venice could be disastrous.
Still, the negativity pointed in Allen’s direction appears to be at the heart of his frustration. In March, he told the Times that Uslip—who also serves on the board of the American Arts Conservancy, the nonprofit commissioner behind the pavilion—called him last October and offered him the project. Allen has since repeatedly argued that he became the public face of decisions he neither made nor fully understood at the time.
The backlash began almost immediately after his selection was announced. Critics questioned the role of the newly formed American Arts Conservancy, while others argued that Allen’s abstract sculptures were an odd choice for a Biennale taking place during President Trump’s second term. In a sharply critical ARTnews opinion piece, critic Alex Greenberger wrote that Allen’s selection was “deeply dispiriting” and argued that his work had “nothing to say about the state of our country at the moment.”
The criticism continued after the pavilion opened. Yet Allen has suggested that much of the debate had little to do with the work itself. Earlier this spring, he told ARTnews that he worried people were defining the sculptures for him and projecting politics onto work that was never intended as a political statement.
Speaking with ARTnews on Monday, Allen said the experience in Venice had been overwhelming. “It was very difficult,” he said. “People on the street there came up to me and gave their opinion about whether I should or shouldn’t have done the pavilion.” Allen said he ended up leaving Venice after just two days, skipping dinners, parties, and official events.
He also said he was frustrated that the selection process as he knew it was never publicly clarified. Despite the controversy, Allen said he does not regret doing the exhibition. “I’m still happy I’ve done it because people are seeing the work,” he said. “But I’m not sure I would want to be much involved in the art world going forward.”
Later on Monday, the artist told ARTnews over text that the three galleries that withdrew support were Kasmin, Mendes Wood DM, and Pace. Kasmin has since transitioned to a new gallery, Olney Gleason, which declined to comment on the post, as did Mendes Wood DM. Multiple sources previously told ARTnews that Pace had explored representing Allen after he was dropped by Kasmin and Mendes Wood DM following the pavilion announcement. Though Pace did not end up representing Allen, a gallery representative told ARTnews that Resnicow “did not advise us against working with Alma Allen.”
