So does this apply to all arts I wonder? Is it always better to experience than just view? How is this interpreted by my friends in visual arts? Exhibitions and live art can manifest themselves in such a way if the curator can walk the spectator through the experience. I'm not an art but, but I like to consider the emotions and stories a piece of work tells and I recently came to understand the importance of the curator role. This struck me as I was whizzed around an interesting exhibition mounted by the Ikon gallery in Birmingham.
Apparently there wasn't a specific order in one room because actually the artist started again, going in a different direction each time - showing some as having more detail in certain areas of the painting than others. This inquisition and thoughtful approach seems to be equally as immersive and engaging as a real live art piece. Perhaps you can't beat the interactiveness of some spoken word pieces such as the one I reviewed from earlier in the year: The oh f*** moment. But this clearly isn't the only way to be engaging.
So maybe you'll be considering combining art forms, making a piece with friends or alone, perhaps in the style of 'fright nights', a destination theatre piece or simply a shock factor when you open the door to a trick or treater. All these could make wonderful leadership projects, and some very entertaining blog posts. So we really do look forward to hearing from you!
And before I end I would like to congratulate Lucca on completing his Arts Award. He was one of the first 100,000. I'm proud to be in that number too. Will you be in our next 100,000?