Abstract
The contribution aims to explicitly demonstrate how the often-cited futuristic slogan - saying that one should bring the beholder "into the centre of the image" - is embodied in specific artworks. The study concentrates on two plastic works by Umberto Boccioni. In each case it is shown how the audience is situated in spatial and dynamic terms respectively by conducting detailed formal analyses of the sculptures (as these works are lost, the surviving black and white photographs serve as primary sources), comparing them to paintings from the same period and consulting the artist s writings as well as secondary sources. In the case of the plaster sculpture Sviluppo di una bottiglia nello spazio (1912) the artist foresees a certain reception by the beholder who is integrated into a swinging circular flow. This circuit originates from the plastic ensemble and is only completed when the beholders fill the gap left for him/her in the given situation. In contrast, with the mixed-media sculpture Testa + casa + luce (1912) beholders are invited to imaginatively expand the plastic structure in all spatial directions and thus procure themselves a place within it. Boccioni tries to involve the viewers and allow their active participation by using a variety of creative means: cutting the objects shown, using colours in the two modes of sfumature and colorazioni, and adding inscriptions. In both cases the sculptures are constructed in such a way that they exceed their mere physical borders and spread out into their surroundings. Moreover, it can be shown that Sviluppo di una bottiglia nello spazio was not meant as a bozzetto for a version in a nobler or more durable material or for a monumental work such as a fountain. It is central to Boccionis intention that the depicted items correspond in size to real objects and that they can be painted in a sophisticated way to foster the impression of fading into space. Thus the generally held view that the two versions of the still life (of which only one is documented in a photograph) are identical in form and differ only in their monochrome coloration must be questioned.