Whilst I respect the curators’ aim to set out clear parameters in dealing with those complex and institutional issues mentioned below – such as the portrayal of a British art, the survey show infrastructure, setting guidelines for their collaboration – those parameters weren’t opened up in the discussion. In describing their conditions of approach – albeit with the caveat that these aren’t interesting for discussion in themselves – the conversation that followed could have developed to focus on the art in the show or the strands running through their curatorial approach. Perhaps we should have started out by talking about art, rather than the construction around it? Against the highly complex set of arrangements binding it, this exhibition intends to reinforce a validity of encounter between people, ideas and objects in a defined public space (gallery), free from obstacles that interrupt looking at artwork, such as the spectre of theory. However, the political potential can only be talked about when the parameters that are set around the exhibition don’t preclude from discussion of the space, the work and the people that are left within.