The exhibit One Good Thing is simple, almost primitive, structurally similar to a folk song, and all about whatever meets the eye. People, objects, and events, experienced personally or re-told by someone (even better if retold for the 10th time) or overheard somewhere. These are mainly things not worthy of the attention of a sophisticated and jaded viewer, let alone of in-depth examination. Nevertheless, like the picture itself, by current standards discipline is not required; it's optional, lacking its own individual place in the media pantheon. And, of course, it is powerless in assuming any sort of relevancy. It makes you want to stamp it with Viewing is optional.
These are separate works, obviously not connected by theme or scenario, each of which can be discussed separately. So how do they end up in the same exhibit, and why are they pulled together in a single space?
If we look more intently at the structure of the exhibit, we can try to sort out this misunderstanding.
