Anu Menda on Why Indian Patronage Must Move from Transaction to Stewardship

"We need to stop thinking of art as an event or an acquisition and start thinking of it as an infrastructure." That is Anu Menda's position, and it has been the same for a decade. As the chair of RMZ Foundation, founded in 2015, she has spent that time placing art where it was not expected to be: In office campuses, urban corridors, and mixed-use spaces across more than six cities in India, with a reach that extends to London, South Africa, and Asia. The foundation's curatorial programme includes works by leading Indian and international artists, with a foundational commitment to supporting women artists and integrating India's craft traditions into global art discourse. 

Beyond RMZ, Menda serves on the Global Council of the Delfina Foundation in London, the Advisory Council of the Kochi Biennale Foundation, and is among its Platinum Benefactors, alongside being a patron of the India Foundation for the Arts. She is also an institutional member of Bangalore International Centre, a life member of The Crafts Council of Karnataka, and a member of the World Crafts Council. Robb Report India speaks to Menda about conviction, infrastructure, and what the Venice Biennale 2026 signals about where Indian art is headed.

Robb Report India: When did the work stop being about prestige and start being about conviction?

Anu Menda: For me, the conviction came through understanding what art could do beyond the art world itself. My learning was entirely experiential. Growing up, and later through travel, I experienced art in public spaces, sculpture parks, streets, and shared environments where art was democratic and accessible. That exposure shaped a deep belief that art's real transformative potential lies not in confined spaces but in everyday life, where people engage with it consciously or subconsciously. Once you understand that, the work stops feeling like a choice and starts feeling like a responsibility.

RR: What does India's showing at the Venice Biennale this year tell you about where patronage has taken us?

AM: What feels truly significant this year is that you can actually see the results of long-term patronage coming into focus. India's presence at Venice this year is remarkably strong across the pavilion and beyond, with artists working across very different forms but with a shared depth and seriousness of practice. You have figures like Dayanita Singh, Amar Kanwar, and Anish Kapoor presenting across major international venues, each contributing to a larger narrative. It doesn't feel like a series of isolated moments anymore. It feels connected, intentional. This is what sustained, long-term support makes possible. At RMZ Foundation, stewardship has never been about a single commission or a single stage. It is about building an ecosystem where moments like the Venice Biennale 2026 become not an exception, but an inevitability. That is the shift Indian patronage must make — from transaction to stewardship, from visibility to lasting cultural infrastructure.

RR: Was the ecosystem you sit within — Delfina, Kochi Biennale, India Foundation for the Arts — built deliberately, or did it reveal itself?

AM: My relationship with the Kochi Biennale began as a visitor. Over time, I came to understand its importance within the cultural ecosystem. It is one of the most democratic platforms for contemporary art in India, offering access, dialogue, and opportunities for artists across stages. Despite its challenges, it has consistently contributed to placing India on the global cultural map. The decision to deepen that involvement was never about visibility. It was driven by alignment in values, particularly around accessibility, education, and long-term impact. That principle of values alignment is what connects all of these engagements. Each one began not with a strategic plan but with a genuine resonance and a shared belief in building long-term cultural infrastructure.

RR: Critics say embedding art in commercial real estate aestheticises corporate space. Believers say it is the most democratic access point there is. Which argument do you find harder to dismiss?

AM: Sculpture and large-scale public art lend themselves naturally to public engagement because they are accessible, tangible, and interactive, allowing people to experience art without needing prior knowledge or intent. In mixed-use environments, art becomes part of everyday life. People encounter it while walking, eating, or simply spending time in the space, and that repeated exposure creates familiarity and deeper engagement over time. That, to me, is the most democratic argument: That it reaches people who would never seek it out. Our intent has never been transactional or decorative. We see ourselves as custodians of culture rather than commercial curators. Art becomes an integral layer of the experience rather than an addition. It creates meaning, connection, and a sense of place.

RR: What is the one thing about how we engage with art that needs to change most urgently?

AM: The one thing I would urge to change is a genuine commitment to long-term cultural infrastructure — moving art beyond confined spaces like galleries and museums and embedding it into everyday life. We need to stop thinking of art as an event or an acquisition and start thinking of it as an infrastructure. It has the power to humanise complex socio-political realities, build empathy, and create shared understanding. Today, Indian artists are gaining global recognition, and there is real momentum building. But sustaining that requires patrons who are in it for the long term, who support artists at all stages, who build ecosystems rather than collections, and who understand that the goal is not visibility but impact.