Beichen Huang’ Blog:https://blogs.ed.ac.uk/s2558598_curating-2024-2025sem2/

Beichen Huang’s blog is well-structured, covering class discussions and SICP with clear PDF inserts. Play and Pay explores how capitalism shapes video games through Narrative, Devices, and Systems, using interactive gameplay to engage visitors and highlight market influences on gaming.

Curatorial Concept and Thematic Structure

I believe Play and Pay successfully establishes video games as a significant contemporary art medium, challenging their marginalization. Beichen effectively addresses this important research gap, linking games to cultural identity, social structures, and capitalism through Daniel Muriel and Garry Crawford’s framework. The exhibition follows an interdisciplinary curating approach, integrating video games, cultural studies, and socioeconomics to explore gaming’s evolution within capitalist structures. The exhibition thoughtfully examines how capitalism shapes gaming through Narrative, Devices, and Systems, clearly illustrating shifts in storytelling, platform accessibility, and monetization models, reflecting broader economic and social transformations.

Beichen rose the concern: “Does the exhibition feel too much like a traditional museum display, lacking curatorial individuality?” I suggest strengthening the argument that video games as a contemporary art medium by clearly defining their connection to art. This can be supported through theoretical analysis and comparisons with other art forms, making the exhibition more curatorial and academically rigorous.

Video games combine video art, experimental short films, and strong interactive art. Unlike traditional linear storytelling, they are directly related to multiple contemporary art practices. Interactivity is their most unique feature, requiring players to actively engage and influence the work’s outcome. This reminds me of key interactive and participatory art examples:

  1. Tino Sehgal’s Constructed Situations (Guggenheim, Artforum)
  2. Rain Roomby Random Internationa  (Rain Room)

Further Analysis: How Capital Shapes the Gaming Industry

I believe there should be a deeper analysis of how capital shapes the artistic aspects of video games. The exhibition mainly explores how capital drives the gaming industry’s growth, but could it refine this discussion by examining Narrative, Devices, and Systems in more detail?

Narrative expands through IP and transmedia storytelling, increasing brand value. Devices shift to cross-platform and cloud gaming, expanding users and moving from one-time purchases to services. Systems focus on microtransactions and games as a service, ensuring long-term updates and continuous spending. A deeper analysis would enhance the discussion.

Exhibition Presentation and Audience Interaction

I believe Play and Pay enhances audience engagement through interactive gameplay and a timeline-based structure. Visitors play games directly, aligning with contemporary curatorial trends. This shows that Play and Pay incorporates relational aesthetics theory, enhancing the exhibition’s playability. The approach aligns with contemporary curatorial trends. The 1970s–2020s timeline helps non-specialist audiences understand video games’ historical development under capitalism.

However, three areas need improvement:

  1. Accessibility – Non-gamers may struggle to understand the content. Game explanation videos and background on gaming culture could help.
  2. Feasibility – The exhibition requires 12 spaces, raising concerns about scale. Merging rooms and increasing thematic interactions could improve execution.
  3. Operations & Maintenance – Interactive gameplay may cause overcrowding. Strategies to control audience flow are needed. Technical failures are common in interactive exhibits, so a maintenance plan and support team would ensure smooth operation.

Comparison and Reflection on My Curatorial Practice

Both my curatorial practice and Play and Pay emphasize audience participation, but in different ways. Beichen uses playability to explore capitalism’s impact on gaming, while I focus on video, sound, and installation, examining Ghost Art’s fluidity. Beichen structures the exhibition with zoned curation, while I adapt to Telfer Subway’s spatial constraints.

This comparison makes me reflect on curatorial methods and audience experience. Interactive exhibitions attract specialized audiences but may limit accessibility—should I incorporate immersive narratives? Spatial strategy also shapes curation; Beichen’s zoned approach contrasts with my need for modular curation. Lastly, medium selection influences engagement—video games are inherently interactive, while my focus on marginality and fluidity raises the question: Could digital media enhance accessibility?

Theoretical Support

Linking ro DiscoverEd:

  1. Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship(Link)
  2. Installation Art(Link)
  3. Participation(Link)
  4. Relational Aesthetics (Link)
  5. Live Performance and Video Games: Inspirations, Appropriations, and Mutual Transfers (Link)
  6. GameScenes: Art in the Age of Videogames – Matteo Bittanti (Link)
  7. Videogames: Design/Play/Disrupt – V&A Museum (Link)
My Peer Review of Beichen Huang’s Blog and SICP Play and Pay / Yiran Gu / Curating (2024-2025)[SEM2] by is licensed under a