I’m re-posting it here since my previous comment that I sent to my peers was completely deleted by the system.
Feedback for Aobing Wang
Aobing Wang’s blog is well-organized and informative, showing his in-depth thinking on curatorial theory and practice. Especially in the article “Dreams and the unconscious mind”, through the compilation and comparison of the three theoretical systems of Freud, Jung and Lacan, it can be seen that the author not only possesses a solid foundation of theoretical reading, but also endeavors to transform complex psychological concepts into curatorial language. It is evident that the author not only has a solid foundation in theoretical reading, but also strives to translate complex psychological concepts into curatorial language. The author’s argument that dreams are not only private psychological theaters, but also symbolic spaces pulled by power structures and cultural memories, is quite critical and provides strong academic support for his curatorial projects.
In addition, when analyzing the cases of ATLAS Arts, Fran Cottell and proppaNOW, the author is able to accurately capture the curatorial strategies and cultural stances of each project, and tries to connect his own experience with the exhibition concepts, demonstrating a good theoretical transfer and critical ability. The only suggestion is that some of the passages are a bit dense in theoretical references, and it would be smoother if the information could be sorted out through subheadings, keyword hints, or more condensed language. Overall, this is a reflective text with both theoretical depth and curatorial sensitivity.
Feedback for Shiming Wang
In your blog post, you establish the concept of nomadic curation as a challenge to the white box model of exhibition, and discuss the openness, non-coding, and new paths of curatorial space that are constantly being generated by drawing on Deleuze’s and Guattari’s theories of ‘smooth space’. Your argument is very solid, especially when you point out that the exhibition space should not be just a physical fixed place, but can flow and morph in digital space, public space, and social interaction, which is highly in line with the trend of decentralisation in contemporary curating. I think on a practical level, you can think further: how does nomadic curation unfold in the dimension of time? Is it disposable and ephemeral, or is it sustainable? How do viewers re-establish their relationship with the work under the model of nomadic curation? Do they merely act as wandering observers, or can they become shapers of the exhibition’s narrative? Possibilities of Nomadic Digital Curation: You mentioned that exhibitions can ‘flow’ onto digital platforms, but how can we create a ‘nomadic’ experience in digital spaces? Could it be a new mode of resistance to the mainstream exhibition system? For example, The Wrong Biennale is a successful case, and I think this is something worth exploring, and you can explore it further. In terms of language and expression, the overall writing is relatively fluent, but there are some areas that could be optimised. For example, the sentence ‘Daydream curation emphasises the non-linear, fragmented, and fluid nature of the exhibition, which makes the artistic experience Daydream curation emphasises the non-linear, fragmented, and fluid nature of the exhibition, which makes the artistic experience move away from a single, rational viewing framework…’ The structure is quite long. linearity, fragmentation, and fluidity, shifting the artistic experience beyond a singular, rational viewing framework.’ This will make the expression more direct. Overall, your curation already has a strong theoretical depth, but it could be further supplemented with practical examples to analyse the limitations and possibilities of curation would be more perfect!
Leave a Reply