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.

Tag: artist-as-curator

Blog 2 – Curatorial Thinking & Theoretical Framework|Decentralisation Is a Practice, Not a Concept

Curating Is Not a Job Title, It’s a Way of Listening

When I began planning Fluid Curating, I kept asking myself: what does it really mean to decentralise curatorial authority? Initially, I imagined decentralisation as a concept—something theoretical, perhaps even technological. But through our course readings and field experiences, I realised: decentralisation is not something you announce. It’s something you do.

It’s a shift in posture—from holding the frame, to holding the door open.

In Week 4, we discussed curatorial ethics, including the redistribution of narrative authority, especially in postcolonial and feminist contexts. I was drawn to the idea that curating can be a collaborative composition of context and meaning. The Week 6 seminar on artist-led initiatives further deepened this view. When artists become curators—not to replace the role but to redefine it—it opens up the field. This echoed in the Artist as Curator volume (Jeffery 2016), which reframed curation as part of artistic practice.

The more I read and witnessed, the more I understood decentralisation as a verb—a series of gestures, choices, and systems that invite others in, not as guests but as co-authors.


From Command to Collaboration: What My Research Changed

The readings from The Curatorial: A Philosophy of Curating (Martinon 2013) and Curating and the Educational Turn (O’Neill & Wilson 2010) challenged me to think beyond “the exhibition” as an end point. They suggest curation is an epistemic practice—a way of producing knowledge collectively.

Especially helpful was Aneta Szyłak’s concept of “curating context”, where the curator doesn’t impose meaning but hosts overlapping interpretations within a site-responsive framework. This helped me reframe my own curatorial role—not as a selector of fixed content, but as a facilitator of meaning in motion.

Rather than positioning myself above the artwork or audience, I began designing structures that shift attention horizontally. For example, in my project, audiences co-write curatorial texts, contribute sound responses, and alter spatial routes. These are not symbolic gestures; they’re core structuring methods.

This approach was affirmed by models like Documenta 11’s multi-site “Platforms”, Gwangju Biennale’s roundtable curating, and the Manifesta 6 art school model. All these positioned education, conversation, and collectivity as curatorial tools—not add-ons.


The Artist as Curator: An Anthology – Almine Rech Editions

(Book Cover: The Artist as Curator: An Anthology

(Manifesta 6 was set to take place in Nicosia, Cyprus from 23 September to 17 December 2006.)

(Gallery: Transmission Gallery, Glasgow)

So, Why These Changes?

In Week 9, when we discussed curatorial methods and publishing as curating, I saw that language and access also shape curatorial power. If the only text in a show is written by me, then it doesn’t matter how many QR codes I place—authority hasn’t moved. That realisation led me to include textual co-creation and anonymous reflection stations.

I also returned to the work of artist-run centres (Transmission Gallery, City Racing), which taught me that infrastructure can itself be a curatorial act. By choosing simple, accessible tools like Woolclap, and a flexible venue like ECA’s lobby, I was building the kind of distributed, non-expert, generous framework I believed in.


What I Learned

  • Decentralisation isn’t an outcome—it’s an ongoing curatorial method.
  • To shift power, you must also shift authorship, visibility, and voice.
  • Artist-led models, collective formats, and non-hierarchical texts offer not just references but models for practice.

As I continue developing Fluid Curating, I hold this central idea:
The best curation doesn’t make meaning—it makes meaning possible.


Selected References 

  • Jeffery, Celina, ed. The Artist as Curator. Bristol: Intellect, 2016.
  • Martinon, Jean-Paul, ed. The Curatorial: A Philosophy of Curating. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013.
  • O’Neill, Paul, and Mick Wilson, eds. Curating and the Educational Turn. London: Open Editions, 2010.
  • Szyłak, Aneta. “Curating Context.” In The Curatorial, edited by Jean-Paul Martinon, 217–226. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013.

Blog 1 – Project Title & Narrative|From Authority to Co-Creation: Why I Curate “Fluidly”

Curatorial Narrative: From Top-down Authority to Distributed Dialogue

When I first imagined Fluid Curating, I wasn’t interested in simply organizing an exhibition. I wanted to challenge something deeper: the invisible lines of power that often define who gets to choose, explain, and validate meaning in art. Traditional curating—though rich in historical methods—often centers on a single authoritative voice. What if we reimagine this voice as a chorus? What if meaning could emerge from conversation rather than instruction?

My project stems from this desire to shift away from the curator as sovereign. I was inspired by early discussions in Week 1 and Week 2 around institutions, platforms, and authorship, and began asking: who really holds curatorial power, and who gets to speak? These reflections led me to decentralisation, not as a purely technical gesture, but as a curatorial attitude—one that opens space, redistributes authorship, and invites collective meaning-making.

This shift isn’t just conceptual. It has emotional and ethical stakes. My vision for Fluid Curating is built around co-creation: an ecosystem where artists, audiences, and curators share responsibility for shaping not only the content of the exhibition, but its rhythm, its routes, and its interpretation.


Curatorial Questions Driving the Exhibition

  • Can meaning be co-authored rather than delivered?
  • What happens when audiences don’t just observe, but write, vote, and narrate?
  • If we design for decentralisation, does power truly move—or just appear to?

These questions echo many discussed in our course, especially those explored during Week 4 (Curatorial Ethics), Week 9 (Publishing as Curating), and Week 10 (Publics and Participation). They continue to guide my decisions—from spatial design to media choice, from participation structure to the ethics of attribution.


What Fluid Curating Means in Practice

Fluid Curating is not only a name, but a structure—one that puts decentralisation into curatorial action. It proposes an exhibition framework that cannot be completed without the audience. It is not “for” them, but “with” them.

The space is designed as a rhizomatic grid rather than a linear pathway, enabling visitors to navigate freely, remap meaning, and even rename spaces using coloured tape trails. The artworks—primarily participatory installations by CAP artists and invited collaborators—remain open-ended until activated by audience interaction. Visitors become necessary co-authors in bringing the work to life.

Interpretation is equally decentralised. Audiences can scan a QR code to access a shared platform (via Woolclap) where they co-write curatorial texts, share voice notes, and reflect in real time. These contributions are updated and projected daily, forming a “living wall of meaning” that evolves with each visitor’s presence.

Display arrangements are not fixed. Every three days, works are reconfigured based on audience feedback, voting, and engagement metrics. Exhibition design becomes fluid—data-driven but people-responsive.

After the show, audience-created content will be compiled into a collectively-authored Zine, capturing curatorial texts, sound fragments, and reflections. A summary market report will also be generated to visualize interaction heatmaps, keyword clusters, and value perception trends—offering emerging artists and institutions new insights into participatory demand.

This is not a spectacle of participation—it is an invitation to redefine curating itself.


Case Studies: Inspirations That Changed My Curatorial Lens

Several exhibitions and curatorial models became reference points:

  • Documenta 11’s “Platforms” (2002) replaced one curatorial voice with many.

  • Gwangju Biennale’s “Roundtable Curating” model reimagined curation as circular and collective.

  • Manifesta 6 and its offshoots like Night School transformed exhibition into experimental schools.

  • Copenhagen Free University and Tania Bruguera’s Arte de Conducta redefined artists as curators of knowledge and experience.

Together, these cases helped me see how fluid, participatory, and educational models decentralise curatorial control and share authorship with artists and publics.


Soft Reflection: From Concept to Commitment

Rather than offering a separate reflection section, I believe my project’s material and structural changes speak for themselves. Through studio visits with CAP artists, peer review exchanges, and in-class provocations, I came to see co-creation not as a supplement to curating, but as its generative core.

The move away from speculative technologies (NFTs, blockchain, AI) toward something more grounded—student-led, low-cost, audience-responsive—wasn’t a compromise. It was a choice. A choice to center experience over infrastructure, participation over programming.

As Rancière reminds us in The Emancipated Spectator, the act of seeing is never passive—it is interpretative, active, and political. Fluid Curating doesn’t just accept this—it designs for it.


Citations

  • Jeffery, Celina. The Artist as Curator. Bristol: Intellect, 2016.

  • Macdonald, Sarah. Exhibition Experiments. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007.

  • Martinon, Jean-Paul. The Curatorial: A Philosophy of Curating. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013.

  • O’Neill, Paul, and Mick Wilson. Curating and the Educational Turn. London: Open Editions, 2010.

  • Smith, Terry. Thinking Contemporary Curating. New York: Independent Curators International (ICI), 2012.

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