Stella Sideli is an independent curator, writer, mentor and researcher working in the UK, Europe and the Mediterranean. She is concerned with the intersection of institutional programmes and feminist/queer theories, decolonial practices and ethics of curating; the relationship between curator and artist; emerging technologies, capitalism and the aesthetics of digital culture, with attention to interdisciplinary practices.
Recent curated projects include: Nuova Orfeo programme since 2021, in Palermo Italy; Temporary Compositions, with Abbas Zahedi, Phoebe Davies, Joe Namy, Sonya Dyer; Create, Capture, Organise, Pluralise, with Josiane M.H. Pozi, Majed Aslam, Ilona Sagar, Col Self (2021); I Should Be Doing Something Else Right Now, with Maeve Brennan, Vivienne Griffin, rkss & Laura Fox, Rhea Storr, Sam Williams & Roly Porter (2020-2021); Bonds, with Laura Grace Ford, Anna Mikkola, Imran Perretta, Hannah Perry, Nick Ryan and Flora Yin-Wong (all at Somerset House, London UK); The Distance is Nowhere, with Paul Maheke, Sophie Mallett, at GAM Palermo IT (2018); A Gesture Towards Transformation with Aimar Arriola, Nicole Bachmann, Omer Fast, Pedro G. Romero, Paul Maheke, Amalia Pica at Tenderpixel, London, UK (2017); Unknown Tongues, off-site sound event at Five Miles, London UK (2017); Tropical Hangover, with Salvatore Arancio, Zuzanna Czebatul, Rowena Harris, Laure Prouvost, Suzanne Treister at Tenderpixel, London UK (2017).

---

Breakthroughs: on Laziness, Difference and Belonging to public programmes is a platform that collects curatorial perspectives on practices and methods against the tokenisation of minorities and voices of difference in public cultural programmes, in institutions (mostly in a western context).

With the aim to challenge the sometimes lazy curatorial methods typical of contemporary art institutional spaces that often still uphold the gender division as the organising principle of cultural production, this platform or anthology of best curatorial practice features conversations with international, institutional and independent contemporary art curators, producers, programmers and directors, on the themes of curating, tokenisation and feminist and queer methods for a more ethical, inclusive, representative, meaningful, impactful, active curating.
A kind of ongoing archive- a toolkit for ethical and alternative curatorial methods that can truly articulate positions of difference.

At the start of the research, the term Difference originally carried female-identifying, non-binary and queer perspectives, which in most instances of public programming are rarely given a voice¹. Starting from there, the research has then naturally adopted an intersectional approach, given its own nature and entanglements and therefore refers to elements of female-identifying, queer, trans, POC, working class, migrant neuro-diverse and disabled voices in the context of cultural production and programming. The idea of Belonging is at the core of this research, as an objective for curators and world-makers, aware that it's not enough to achieve 'representation' in public programmes in order to understand how institutions can be part of an entire constellation helping people to live a healthy and fulfilling life, and to participate in society and in an effective way².
And while, as curators, creating a sense of belonging is key, Laziness is certainly a feature to let go of. It's documented that most of the institutional art exhibitions so far have narrated the 'postcolonial Others' as long as they speak of their Otherness, therefore being tokenistic and curatorially lazy³. Even after Black Lives Matter that is still an issue. At the 2014 Whitney Biennial as well as at the reopening of Tate Modern in 2016, there was a lack of poc and queer artists, despite decades of campaigning by organisations such as Iniva. Things are getting better though, and it's with this spirit that Breakthroughs collects epiphanies and other lightbulb moments as tools and suggestions to consider in practice in order to go in the right direction.

This chapter is an introduction to the Breakthroughs anthology; a sum, light touch, of what has been explored up to this point in different chapters by different contributors to the research.
Here, I'll articulate the aim and modalities of the research, highlight some definitions of the issues and some solutions.
Important to note that there definitely can't be an absolute exhaustion of the solutions to this issue; not to mention that new related issues will arise over time as well, as history, politics, economic, political systems, culture and identity become more and more intertwined and affect each other in new ways.
Problems and solutions to the problems, as well as the terms in which they are articulated and situated, will always change, evolve, adapt. This much was clear even before the research.

The aim of this research was to challenge the curatorial methods typical of contemporary art institutional spaces that still uphold the gender division as the organising principle of cultural production (as explored by De Beauvoir; Butler), often excluding or otherwise tokenising marginalised voices eg female-identifying, non-binary, queer. More at large and intersectionally, the research has collected, from its participants and their contexts, some proposals for ethical and alternative curatorial methods that can truly articulate positions of difference. This is all presented on this platform: a kind of growing archive, a toolkit for ethical curating, that keeps looking inwards and outwards, constantly and critically.

The starting point was my own positioning and my context. After several years of work running intensive programmes in the contemporary art industry in commercial galleries and institutions, I became preoccupied with the consequences of the idea of creating 'diversity'. What is diversity exactly? Despite numerous attempts of creating diversity by the bodies I worked for, some successful, some not, my general feeling was that creating diversity often just stays on the surface. Shouldn't (creating) diversity also mean (creating a sense of) belonging?
My own position in this is that often I have seen an invitation, say to non-binary artists, to be part of a programme for the sake of diversity, while the actual legacy of that programme in terms of long term support to that group hasn't taken place necessarily in a constructive way. The needs of the invited community have not been met, the sense of belonging has not been created, and useful tools for the future have not been given (while often these are conditions to receive specific grants for supporting communities). 'Diversity' is therefore connected to 'representation' as a kind of ultimate goal, rather than inclusion or 'belonging'. The risk of creating diversity with this approach is to tokenise certain groups of people, only causing their alienation, marginalisation, polarisation of their voices of difference.

I am invested in understanding and contributing to solving the problem of the tokenisation of female-identifying, non-binary and queer people, and explore the good that 'feminist and queer curating' can do in this sense. As a female-identifying, queer professional in the arts and a migrant as well I believe I have something to contribute to the conversation. How to place artists, cultures and subject matters in programmes in a way that they won't just be some tokens and that can actually go beyond simple representation? Can queer and feminist approaches to practice help in that?

The conversations I had so far with other professionals have been very open and informal; the semi-structured interviews usually revolve around a series of questions, like the ones below:

• Why did you become a curator? Were you interested in a specific topic and why? In relation to this research area have you ever perceived the danger of false inclusion and tokenisation within the art system, where institutions should be at the forefront of inclusivity?
• Have you ever experienced tokenisation of identities/certain groups as a problem in your practice? Have you questioned that?
• Did you develop any organisational or curatorial tactics to overcome this problem and really support the communities that were important to you and your programmes?
• What does feminist and queer curating mean to you?

Not all of these questions have been answered by each participant; at times the exchange would highlight different issues that felt more relevant in context.
Surprisingly (or not), almost everyone I have talked to so far has some reservations towards the term curator, to start with. That is because some of the interlocutors are trained for example as artists, and carry out curating in their artistic practice; in other cases, the term curator evokes a kind of power-play, especially to the working class professionals. We have also defined terms such as inclusion, tokenisation and support; discussed shifts and differences in perceiving the phenomenon of tokenisation, and all the related issues especially connected with the idea of representation. We have talked about 'tokenising' usually taking place for a number of reasons that have to do with existent, unfair structures of all kind (bias, funding, audience engagement etc), the lack of understanding, time and empathy, the board of trustees, locality, funding constrictions, binaries and other power structures, greediness. Some of these issues, especially the ones related to funding and reporting have emerged as key in the way institutions represent and platform minorities, however this was and is beyond the scope of the research, and is impossible to solve at this stage. However this research might influence new policies in relation to that, so it remains an important point.

I really do think that as curators and cultural organisers we have the task to change the narrative, in institutions and other cultural contexts. Personally, with many others who have contributed to the conversations documented on this platform, I find it all has to start from practices like paying artists fairly, in all phases; not just fee and production but also research. It has to start from positioning ourselves and understanding our privilege, our needs and limits; from being self critical, and critical of context at all times, actively listening to the needs of others and always being open to receiving feedback and requests. It starts from creating time to engage in conversations that can be more human, more connected to the work itself and where it is coming from. Other curatorial methods of impact have included creating a sense of community around something, or carrying active open ended research collectively; putting policies in place that can regulate (power) relationships, dynamics and use of space; producing labels, bios and descriptive texts closely to the artist to consult on what is important to mention, in relation to identity, ability and more.
Space is a crucial resource, to support communities long term, that communities need and institutions have plenty of. Showcasing and celebrating a group or culture is a great place to start from but support might also mean to simply create an environment for those group members to meet and organise. Diversity and inclusion have to come with belonging: I believe that also happens with audiences- why would it be different for artists and culture makers?

Some limitations came up for me in this research.
The most important limitation is constituted by systematic factors outside the research.
These have led to an absence, or, better, to a heavy, disconcerting presence of an absence, which speaks volumes to the issue I have been trying to challenge here. Specific sets of professionals (female-identifying and POC) didn't feel safe enough to speak 'against' a present or past employer, and wanted their contributions removed from the platform before the launch.
The fact- a lived reality issue and not an abstract, theoretical, or data related one- that individuals that identify with one or more marginalised/tokenised group feel like they are in such an extreme vulnerable position that they can't imagine referencing, let alone dissenting with, the way of operating of an institution they work in, is topical. It shows the need to talk about the situation we are in, recognise our privilege, speak out when we can and others cannot.

Other limitations include the limit on time and of course funding, to collect, analyse and draw conclusions, at least periodically, together with a more rigorous quantitative and qualitative research approach; a bigger pool of interlocutors from the globe would have provided more cues, and I am hoping to achieve that slowly in time.

Hoping that these conversations- some dreamy, some serious, some not so much, might lead to further solutions in this sense. I am carrying out some research on "Queer", which presents a challenge to the museum as a normalising, heteronormative, meaning-making entity.
Could 'queer' be the answer to the problem of tokenisation in museum practices? What change can queer bring about in the museum?

And together with this, I hope more ideas and solutions can come our way to make sure that kindness, compassion, sisterhood, respect, support and belonging become pillars in a new world with inspiring and life changing public programmes, after watching (to quote Gramsci) the 'old world' and its 'monsters' die.

---

¹ Katz, J. And Söll, Ä. 2016, Queer Exhibitions/Queer Curating, in On Curating, Feminist Thought, Issue 29, pp. 2-4

² Archey, K., 2022, After Institutions: Care and Change in Times of Crisis, Studium Generale Rietveld Academie, (link)

³ Reilly, M., 2018, Curatorial Activism: Towards an Ethics of Curating, Thames and Hudson UK



ART  ARTISTS  BELONGING  BINARY  CHARGE  COMMUNITY  CURATING  CURATOR  CURATORIAL  DIVERSITY  FEMINIST  INCLUSION  INSTITUTION  JOB  METHODS  NON-BINARY  QUEER  SUPPORT  TOKENISATION  WORKING