Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.

Category: 💬 Peer Exchange & Curatorial Dialogue

Posts about my interactions with other students, such as the CAP × CAT speed curating event, peer review exercises, and reflective dialogues that helped shape my ideas.

My Peer Review of Chuyue Xu

Peer Review: Chuyue Xu’s Curatorial Project “Female Narratives in Opera: History and Liberation”

Chuyue Xu’s blog :http://Chuyue Xu / Curating (2024-2025)[SEM2]

Opening – A Curatorial Conversation

Chuyue, reading through your blog from Week 1 to Week 8, I was drawn to the clarity and depth of your project.
You’ve taken opera—a grand, classical, and often difficult-to-access art form—and reimagined it as a lens through which to explore the awakening of female consciousness. This perspective is sharp, ambitious, and deeply personal.

What touched me most was watching your project develop from an experimental idea in Week 3 (“Can I integrate my music background into curating?”) into a multisensory, socially grounded narrative by Week 8. It reminded me of Bruce W. Ferguson’s words: “Exhibitions are narratives which use art objects as elements in institutionalized stories” (Ferguson 1996, 128). And your project, through its curatorial approach, is precisely challenging those institutional narratives that have long pushed women to the margins.

Because I truly appreciate your theme, I didn’t want to give you superficial feedback. I went to the course library and spent time reading materials on feminist representation, curatorial narrative, participation, and exhibition space—thinking about how your exhibition could build even further on the depth it already has.
I hope the following reflections and suggestions will be helpful to you.

Section Two: Strengths – Feminist Narratives and Critical Engagement

What I find most striking about your project is how you reframe the long-standing representations of women in opera into a feminist narrative of reclamation. By placing four operas—from Orfeo to Carmen—along a historical timeline, you reveal a trajectory in which female characters evolve from being rescued to becoming speakers of their own stories.

This dialogical curatorial structure echoes the kind of temporal and spatial interplay that Mieke Bal explores in her writing on visual narrative.

Equally powerful is how you incorporate critical interaction as part of a curatorial turn toward education. As Simon Sheikh notes, this shift is about fostering new forms of self-reflection and critique (O’Neill and Wilson 2010, 12).

Your costume try-on zone, combined with the opportunity for visitors to recite opera lines, allows people to not only experience history firsthand but perhaps even question gender itself: Can identity be performed?

Section Three: Deeper Suggestions — From Time to Space to Sound

1. A timeline is not just history—it’s emotional rhythm
Your idea of connecting feminist movements with the history of opera through a timeline is smart and effective. But what if the timeline functioned more like a theatrical structure?
Could the four operas be staged as four distinct “scenes,” each with its own lighting, color palette, or sound atmosphere to create an emotional arc?
This would immerse your audience in a shifting emotional landscape—not just inform them.

2. Add critical pauses into the audience experience
Your costume try-ons and voice acting zones are already excellent interactive features. Still, I suggest adding a moment of reflection afterward.
For example, a comment wall or a private “recording booth” could ask: “How did it feel to wear this costume?” or “Did voicing this line change how you see the character?”
This kind of pause transforms participation into internal insight.

3. Juxtapose non-Western female voices
To broaden the scope of your feminist framework, you might consider including a non-Western example.
Placing Mu Guiying from the Chinese opera “Mu Guiying Takes Command” alongside Susanna from The Marriage of Figaro could more sharply reveal how patriarchal suppression of female leadership cuts across cultures.
This would also respond to the Guerrilla Girls’ question: “Why are heroic women always in supporting roles?” (Ferguson 1996, 130).

4. Space as narrative: let Summerhall become part of the stage
Your choice of Summerhall is fitting—it’s historically layered and theatrically open. But what if the space itself became part of your storytelling?
Jean-Paul Martinon writes that curating is “a practice under the influence—even the oppression—of context” (Martinon 2013, 62).
Imagine entering through a dim “servant’s corridor” and exiting into a bright “main stage”—this spatial arc could mirror the struggle for gender and class mobility.

(Martinon, Jean-Paul. 2013. The Curatorial : A Philosophy of Curating . London : Bloomsbury. https://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/Product/Index/319421?page=0.)

5. Counterpoint in sound: use hearing as a feminist weapon
In Week 8, you reflected on the power of light—what about sound?
Imagine overlapping male arias and female choruses in the same space: a sonic collision that metaphorically enacts gender tension.
This kind of soundscape would bring Judith Butler’s concept of gender performativity into a sensory form—not only seen, but heard.

You might also draw inspiration from real-world curatorial examples, such as “Opera: Passion, Power and Politics” at the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A, 2017). This exhibition explored the socio-political dimensions of opera across 400 years, using scenographic environments, archival materials, costumes, and music to immerse the viewer in each historical moment. Its room-by-room progression—structured around different operatic works and cities—could offer a valuable reference for how your own timeline might be staged not just historically, but atmospherically.

Two video documentations of the show give a vivid sense of this immersive design and curatorial logic:

     

You might find the use of archival sound, layered staging, and sensory contrasts particularly relevant as you continue to develop your exhibition’s spatial and sonic design.

Closing – What I Took Away

Reading your project didn’t just inspire me; it made me question what I thought I was doing. I’ve been developing this idea called “Fluid Curating,” where I try to move away from fixed narratives and instead create exhibitions that breathe, shift, and respond to the viewer. But the way you used opera—not just as a theme, but as a structural tool with rhythm, tension, and release—made me realize that emotional flow doesn’t happen by accident. It needs to be shaped with intention.

I used to think that “participation” in my exhibition had to rely on tech—screens, data, sensors. But the way you invite people to speak, to wear, to perform made me pause. Maybe participation starts with something much simpler: letting people step into someone else’s words, someone else’s story. That’s powerful. It made me go back to one section of my exhibition and ask myself: where does feeling actually happen? And am I leaving enough space for it?

You also pushed me to think more deeply about what feminist curating means. It’s not just about showing more women or talking about gender. It’s about designing experiences where power can be felt, questioned, and maybe even redistributed. That’s not easy—but it’s exactly the kind of challenge I want to take seriously in my own work.

Thank you very much!!

In addition, this book is very well written, and I also want to recommend it to you, hoping that it will be helpful to your curation

Thinking Contemporary Curating (Terry E. Smith) (Z-Library)

Bibliography 

Bruce W. Ferguson, Reesa Greenberg. 1996. “Exhibition Rhetorics: Material Speech and Utter Sense.” In Thinking About Exhibitions, edited by Reesa Greenberg, Bruce W. Ferguson, and Sandy Nairne, 175–190. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203991534-15.

(Quote used on institutionalized stories and reference to Guerrilla Girls.)

Basu, Paul, ed. 2007. Exhibition Experiments / Edited by Sharon Macdonald and Paul Basu. Malden, MA : Blackwell Pub.
(Referenced for curatorial structuring of narrative and temporality. Term “cinematic curating” used conceptually.)

Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
(Referenced for the concept of gender performativity.)

Martinon, Jean-Paul. 2013. The Curatorial : A Philosophy of Curating . London : Bloomsbury. https://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/Product/Index/319421?page=0.
(Quote on curating being shaped by context.)

O’Neill, Paul, and Mick Wilson, eds. 2010. Curating and the Educational Turn. London: Open Editions.
(Cited via Simon Sheikh for discussion of self-reflection and critique.)

Sheikh, Simon. 2010. “Objects of Study or Commodification of Knowledge?” In Curating and the Educational Turn, edited by Paul O’Neill and Mick Wilson, 28–39. London: Open Editions.
(Specific contribution cited in support of educational curating approach.)

Smith, Terry (Terry E.). 2012. Thinking Contemporary Curating. Second edition.. New York, NY: Independent Curators International.
(Cited for affective insight in exhibition-making and curatorial voice.)

Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A). 2017. Opera: Passion, Power and Politics. Exhibition. London: V&A Museum.
(Exhibition used as a real-world reference and case study.)

🎡 W9 (2) – Speed Curating at CAT × CAP: Conversations that Sparked Something Real

Hi everyone,


This week I participated in a special joint event between CAT (Contemporary Art Theory) and CAP (Contemporary Art Practice) students. We met not on Teams, but face-to-face in the West Court, and I have to say—it was more inspiring than I imagined.

The format was based on Speed Curating, a method adapted from the UK Arts Council. CAP students introduced their art practices in quick 2-minute bursts, while us CAT students shared five key curatorial interests. It was fast, a little chaotic, but filled with energy and curiosity.

🎹 Meeting Artists, Meeting Possibilities

As a CAT student working on my Fluid Curating project, this event was a goldmine. I heard so many artist presentations that aligned with what I’ve been thinking about—audience interaction, sensory engagement, performative gestures, and curating as a living process.

Some CAP students showed deeply personal work about memory, others presented interactive installations. I had some great chats about how audiences can intervene, not just observe; how we might co-create exhibitions where the boundaries between artist, curator, and viewer start to dissolve.

✹ My Five Curatorial Keywords

To help introduce my ideas during the event, I shared five key themes that define my practice. I’ll share them here too:

  1. Decentralised Curation
    I want to challenge top-down models. Can the audience’s decisions, movements, and emotions shape the exhibition just as much as the curators’?

  2. Audience Intervention
    I’m interested in how viewers might not just observe, but alter—touching, rearranging, or reshaping the work as part of the exhibition itself.

  3. Co-Creation
    Rather than presenting finished works, I want to collaborate with artists to create open structures where outcomes remain fluid and evolving.

  4. Curation as Process
    I see curating as something unfolding in time. Not a fixed result, but a process that’s shaped by those who enter the space and what they bring.

  5. Shifting Curatorial Authority
    What happens when curators give up control, and artists invite intervention? Can letting go create something more alive, more real?

These ideas became beautiful conversation starters. Some CAP students lit up when I described exhibitions as perception practice fields, or when I said, “What if we don’t design the message, but design a mood and let the rest happen?”

One of the artists, Sijia Chen, shared a tree with us—though not just any tree. This one was an installation made of welded steel branches, fuzzy pink yarn, and sparkling hanging ornaments. Right in the center stood a solid metal trunk, something she built herself.
She said it represents those immovable forces in our world—systems, structures, or maybe even fate. But what caught my attention were the branches. Around the steel frame, she invited us to add colorful bendable sticks (they had wires inside, so we could twist them into shapes).
People made spirals, loops, even strange little symbols. This wasn’t just decoration. She called it “an editable tree.”

And honestly, I loved that phrase.

The idea behind it was so powerful. Sure, the trunk—the core—is fixed. But everything around it? Open to change.
It’s a metaphor for participation within structure, for how individuals can intervene, re-shape, and re-narrate even within rigid systems. It reminded me so much of what I’m trying to do with Fluid Curating. Not to destroy the framework of exhibitions, but to invite others into it. To say, “Come, add your branch.” The editable tree became, in that moment, a perfect symbol of co-creation. It was poetic, but also quietly radical.

I walked away thinking: maybe my own curatorial space could offer this same gesture. A framework that’s solid, but soft around the edges. A space where people don’t just observe, but gently re-edit what’s there.

Another work that really stuck with me came from artist Xudong Jia. He showed us a digital interactive piece—on screen, it looked like pink flowers exploding outward, or maybe colorful ink swirling in water. It was beautiful at first glance, almost hypnotic.
Then he told us the title: The Evil Flower.

The screen was equipped with facial recognition. Every time someone approached, the image would shift. The flower would grow bigger, darker, more aggressive.
Jia explained that the piece was about the butterfly effect, about online violence—how no single snowflake in an avalanche is innocent. The more people watched, the more the flower “blamed” them.

It hit me hard. The interactivity wasn’t playful, it was accusatory. You weren’t in control of the work—it was confronting you. That twist in perspective really stayed with me. It wasn’t interaction for interaction’s sake; it was interaction as responsibility.
I kept thinking about how this could fit into my own idea of Fluid Curating—where audience behavior doesn’t just “complete” the exhibition, it actually shapes its emotional direction. What if interactivity could be unsettling? What if being seen by the artwork is part of the artwork?

This piece challenged me. And that’s exactly what I want my exhibitions to do.

🧠 Reflections and Next Steps

This session wasn’t just useful—it was moving. I left with several artists I’d love to follow up with. Some of them are exploring clay as a soft resistance. Others are working with sound, text, or ephemeral materials.
I can already imagine co-curating something gentle, open, and audience-responsive together.

In the next few weeks, I’ll be deepening my readings on participatory art and affective curating. I’ve already started noting quotes from Curating and the Educational Turn that feel like they’re speaking directly to what I’m trying to do:

“They seem to seek not the masterful production of expertise
 but the co-production of question, ambiguity and enquiry.” (O’Neill and Wilson, 2013)

Yes. That’s exactly it.

This was more than a networking session. It was a seed-planting moment. And I’m already looking forward to what might grow.

W7-Reflections on CORPSE FLOWER & New Directions for Fluid Curating 🌿🔍

This week, I visited CORPSE FLOWER, an exhibition curated by MA Contemporary Art Practice students at Inverleith House, Royal Botanic Gardens Edinburgh. The show examined the delicate balance between fragility and resilience in plant ecosystems, mirroring the fleeting bloom of the Titan Arum (the “Corpse Flower”)—which flowers for just a day before decaying. đŸŒșđŸ’«

This exhibition deeply resonated with me, not just for its ecological themes but for the way it embraced temporality, audience engagement, and archival thinking—all of which directly relate to my Fluid Curating project. This blog will reflect on key aspects of the exhibition and how they inform my curatorial framework.


đŸŒ± Experiencing CORPSE FLOWER: A Meditation on Impermanence

As I walked through the exhibition, I was struck by how each work invited contemplation of the life cycles of nature, the passage of time, and the act of preservation. The curators used the spatial setting of the Royal Botanic Gardens effectively, situating art within an environment where organic life itself is in a constant state of change.

Curatorial Highlights That Stood Out:

Interactive Art & Audience Participation: Touch-Responsive Installation

One installation featured a digital projection of Mimosa Pudica (sensitive plants) that reacted to touch, folding its leaves when engaged.

The instructions guided visitors to interact carefully, mimicking the natural responses of living plants.

This created a haptic, embodied experience that was both scientific and poetic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interactive videoTouch-Responsive Installation

🔍 Relevance to Fluid Curating:

This installation demonstrated how simple, intuitive interactions can create a sense of immersion and engagement—something I aim to integrate into my AI-driven curatorial interfaces.

The delicate balance between control and unpredictability in the piece (the plant reacts in real-time, but only within predetermined parameters) reflects my challenge in Fluid Curating:

    • How much agency should an audience have in shaping an exhibition?
    • Where does the curator’s role shift from author to facilitator?
    • Could AI-generated curatorial statements behave like these plants—reacting, adapting, yet following certain structural constraints?

Archival Curation: Layla Knox’s “Rounding Up the Aliens” (2025)

This mixed-media installation reinterpreted Ida Margaret Hayward’s herbarium, a historical collection documenting non-native plant species in the UK.

The artist used vintage textiles, lace, and wool to reconstruct botanical forms, evoking themes of colonial botany, migration, and ecological displacement.

A poem from Hayward’s 1918 scrapbook was displayed, reinforcing the interplay between personal memory, scientific taxonomy, and artistic interpretation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

🔍 Relevance to Fluid Curating:

This piece prompted me to reconsider how curatorial practice can function as an evolving archive. Much like how Hayward’s herbarium was continually expanded, my project envisions an exhibition that accumulates audience contributions over time, rather than being fixed.

Additionally, the use of alternative materials to represent botanical specimens aligns with the way I want to explore the intersection of digital and physical archives—how do digital objects (such as NFTs) function as archival markers of artistic practice?


Bridging These Insights with My Curatorial Approach

The exhibition left me reflecting on how natural systems provide a compelling model for digital, decentralized curation. Some key takeaways for my project:

1. The Archive as a Growing Organism

  • Hayward’s herbarium was a dynamic archival practice—it documented, categorized, and evolved.
  • This is precisely what blockchain technology enables in Fluid Curating: an exhibition that records curatorial decisions over time, allowing for an expanding, decentralized archive.
  • I plan to further explore “Living Archives” (FĂ€rber, 2007) and how new media artists are using dynamic data-driven archives to rethink preservation and authorship.

2. Intuitive, Tactile Participation in Digital Curating

  • The touch-responsive plants in CORPSE FLOWER reminded me that interactivity should feel natural and rewarding.
  • Instead of making audience engagement a purely gamified voting process, I want to design AI-curated elements that respond meaningfully to audience actions—perhaps an exhibition layout that shifts in real time based on interaction metrics.
  • Exploring Claire Bishop’s (2012) work on participatory art can help clarify the power dynamics at play in audience-driven curation.

3. Temporality as a Curatorial Strategy

  • The Corpse Flower’s one-day bloom and the fleeting nature of the exhibition resonated with digital culture—where NFTs, algorithmic art, and blockchain transactions create moments of scarcity and ephemerality.
  • How might I introduce time-sensitive elements into my exhibition? Could digital works evolve, decay, or disappear over time based on market trends or audience interactions?
  • I plan to research Hito Steyerl’s (2017) writings on the “duty-free art” economy—how digital art exists in flux, between presence and absence.

 Next Steps: Integrating These Learnings into Fluid Curating

1. Refining the “Living Archive” Framework

Reviewing case studies of AI-driven curation, particularly in NFT and digital museum settings.
Mapping how blockchain could structure a decentralized exhibition history—should audience votes be permanent, or should the system allow for reversible decisions?

2. Experimenting with Interaction & Participation

Developing an interface that reacts dynamically—perhaps using algorithmic clustering to visualize shifting audience preferences over time.
Researching the balance between curator-led vision and decentralized audience influence.

3. Implementing Temporality & Scarcity into the Exhibition Model

Exploring whether certain exhibition phases could be time-sensitive, requiring participation within specific windows.
Investigating how NFTs could function as time-based contracts, altering their appearance or metadata as the exhibition progresses.


 Final Reflections: Curating as an Evolving Ecosystem

Experiencing CORPSE FLOWER reinforced my belief that curating should be an ongoing, adaptive process rather than a static event. The show’s reflection on impermanence, ecological cycles, and audience interaction pushed me to think deeper about how my own exhibition should:

Evolve dynamically over time—shaped by audiences, AI, and external forces.
Encourage intuitive participation—making audience engagement feel organic rather than imposed.
Challenge the limits of authorship—exploring how power, control, and decision-making shift in decentralized curatorial models.

Fluid Curating is becoming clearer in my mind—not just as an exhibition format, but as a way of rethinking how art is displayed, archived, and experienced in an ever-changing digital world. 🌊💡


📚 References & Further Reading

  1. Bishop, Claire. Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship. Verso, 2012.
  2. FĂ€rber, Alexa. Exhibition Experiments. Blackwell, 2007.
  3. Martinon, Jean-Paul. The Curatorial: A Philosophy of Curating. Bloomsbury, 2013.
  4. Rugg, Judith & Sedgwick, Michele. Issues in Curating Contemporary Art and Performance. Intellect, 2007.
  5. Steyerl, Hito. Duty-Free Art: Art in the Age of Planetary Civil War. Verso, 2017.

 

💬 What do you think about shifting authorship in curation? Should exhibitions be fixed, or fluid? Let’s discuss in the comments! 💭

W4-11:11 | The Curatorial Lucky Signal ✹

💡 This week’s key words: Co-creation, decentralization, curatorial responsibility

đŸŒ± Curatorial team Progress: lucky number 11:11

This week, our curatorial group finally has an official name—11:11 ✹! The inspiration for this name came from one of my personal quirks—I always see 11:11 as a lucky moment. When I realized that our group had exactly 11 members, the name just felt right!
Why 11:11?
In the occult, 11:11 is known as an angelic number, symbolizing good luck, inspiration, and guidance.
The name reflects our vision for curating—we want to create an open, positive, and collaborative atmosphere, where everyone’s ideas can shine and contribute to something greater.
Curating is not just about exhibitions, it is about co-creation between people, and our group itself is an experimental space for collective growth.
My friend Yiran Gu and I both felt it was a great idea, so we brought it up to the group! 🎉
In addition, I helped further refine the group’s Mission Statement, which I proposed:
“Curating for the Future”
Curation is responsibility. From material selection to energy consumption, we integrate Sustainability into our curatorial practices, ensuring that our exhibitions are not only conceptually forward-looking, but also operationally consistent with environmental justice principles.

🚀 Personal curatorial project progress:

In terms of personal curatorial projects, I continue the vision of last week and continue to promote the research of Decentralized Curation. The focus of this week is to make my curatorial ideas more specific, gradually from concept to practice! 💡
🔍 What’s Next?
1ïžâƒŁ Deepen research on curatorial models based on blockchain
This week’s reading of Rugg & Sedgwick’s (2007) Issues in Curating Contemporary Art and Performance, which explores how curatorial power structures affect audience experience, got me thinking further:
Does decentralized curation really empower the audience, or is it just a “democratizing” strategy for curators?
At the same time, I’m looking at the case of the Zien Foundation, which uses the NFT to let the audience vote directly on the content of the exhibition, rather than the curators alone. This model is enlightening, but it also makes me wonder if “co-curating” is really fair. Or will it be dominated by economic capital?
2ïžâƒŁ Outline the exhibition layout & interactive tools
This week, I started thinking about how to make the audience really become part of the exhibition.
How can technology improve interaction? I studied Refik Anadol’s AI-generated curatorial experiment and wondered if AI could be a “digital curator” to help visitors generate a personalized exhibition experience.
How does NFT fit into the exhibition? I hope that every decision of the exhibition can be recorded on the blockchain, forming a “Living Archive”, so that curation is no longer static, but a process of continuous evolution.

đŸ–Œ Exhibition visit: Glasgow Kendall Koppe Gallery

This week I went to Glasgow to see The sun and the sun’s reflection at Kendall Koppe Gallery.
Rather than the exhibition itself, I am more interested in how it presents time, memory and longing. The exhibition raises an intriguing question:
Is memory a comfort or a constraint?
Is our obsession with the past an attempt to find ourselves, or an escape from reality?
The exhibition made me think about the other side of Archival Curation – curation is often the reproduction of history and memory, but if we have been immersed in memories, will we miss new possibilities? It also made me reflect:
Can my concept of “fluid curation” make the exhibition free from the “burden of the past” and become a space that is always evolving? đŸ€Ż

📌 Key Focus for Next Week

1.Continue to deepen the research on decentralized curation, especially the interactive model co-created by NFT and the audience.
2.Design interactive aspects of the exhibition, such as allowing the audience to vote on the content of the exhibition.
3.Explore the role of AI in curating and test the curatorial relationship between curator, audience and AI.

Bibliography

  1. Rosen, Aaron. 2021. “The Impact of NFTs on the Art Market: A Decentralized Approach.” Art Market Journal 15 (2): 45–58.
  2. Smith, John, and Emily Johnson. 2022. “Decentralized Curation: How Blockchain is Transforming Art Exhibitions.” Journal of Digital Art Economies 4 (1): 29–52.
  3. Thompson, Sarah. 2023. “NFTs and the Democratization of Art Ownership.” Cultural Policy Review 12 (3): 112–117.
  4. Williams, Mark, and Laura Stevens. 2024. “Challenges and Opportunities in Decentralized Art Curation.” On Curating 56: 78–95.
  5. Brown, David. 2025. “Top Auction Houses Courted the Crypto Crew — Is It Enough to Save Them?” Financial Times, January 22, 2025.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

css.php

Report this page

To report inappropriate content on this page, please use the form below. Upon receiving your report, we will be in touch as per the Take Down Policy of the service.

Please note that personal data collected through this form is used and stored for the purposes of processing this report and communication with you.

If you are unable to report a concern about content via this form please contact the Service Owner.

Please enter an email address you wish to be contacted on. Please describe the unacceptable content in sufficient detail to allow us to locate it, and why you consider it to be unacceptable.
By submitting this report, you accept that it is accurate and that fraudulent or nuisance complaints may result in action by the University.

  Cancel