John James Marshall thesis.pdf - OpenAIR @ RGU - Robert Gordon ...

12. What could have been done better?
Creative I still think that the choice of venue meant that it was quite
Director hard for people to go in… I think there really was a barrier
with that and with the reception and with the whole notion
of it being in an office space… I think that what we did with
the space ultimately was really successful. I felt that in the
middle of the show that there was a bit of a lull. That really
open, large space in the middle could have had more impact
and powerfully used I felt that that bit kind of dipped and
then picked up again and I felt that that was a bit of a
wasted opportunity.
Programme We didn’t energise the lobby or the façade of the building
Manager and I would have very much liked to see something happen
there… The only thing that I would have done differently was
change the entry sequence. Our Council partners were
reluctant for us to do anything in that space
The researcher asked what could have been done better in the exhibition. CD
indicated the issues with the nature of the space again and suggested the
reception space of the building was an impediment to the public access of the
exhibition. The reception area functioned as usual for the technology-based
start up companies located on the upper floors of the building throughout the
exhibition and this could be perceived as a barrier to open, public access. CD
also pointed out the installation of ‘Morse’ in the central break out space 125 was
a ‘wasted opportunity’. PM also indicated the reception area of the building as
problematic. It just didn’t look like the public was welcome to wander in off the
street. Also the façade of the building 126 was pointed to as a missed opportunity
to indicate to the public that the exhibition was inside.
125 This is a corridor as opposed to a room and as such there were many Health and Safety and Fire regulations that
limited what could be installed in this space.
126 During the selection process PM had advocated the inclusion of the graphic work of Alex
Hetherington possibly to be applied to the glazed wall in the front of the building. This
proposition was rejected on the basis that Hetherington’s work did not fit the brief for the
exhibition. http://www.alexhetherington.com/
- 251 -