During the mus(a)eu(m) workshop three central points resulted from the discussion and oriented the work:

1. The acknowledgement of the recent rise of the notion of collaborative work in the artistic practice—the role of sharing and collective research as forms of making and thinking in contemporary art. 

2. The news ways and places for the display of art. Resulting from the changes in the art practice, the structure of the museum is also being redefined, both in the architectural and the conceptual level. The Museum is being replaced by temporary artistic gatherings like the biennials and other forms of non permanent and collective display, or by small spaces, marginal to the regular circuit. 

3. The museum as publisher. The role of the publication as a new medium and a new curatorial space. A privileged space for speculation and research within the institution. 

One of the central texts discussed was Hal Foster’s “Arty Party”, where he states that the work of art in the age of information as succeeded the work of art in the age of production. That this change of paradigm brings along with it new phenomenas and new ways of doing and thinking about art, such as—the rise of collaboration opposed to individual authorship; the proliferation of huge shows; the “Installation as a default format”; the importance of the process as a form of discussion and social confrontation; the appearance of the figure of the artist-as-curator and the curator-as-artist.

The way art is displayed nowadays is also a consequence of the above mentioned. The XVIII century conception of the museum conveyed ideas like collecting, classifying and caring. Significant parts of the human production and knowledge, mostly in the field of the sciences and the arts, were accumulated in these fixed structures. Nowadays a great amount of exhibitions is not made anymore recurring to fixed collections but to constellations of borrowed pieces from the most diverse proveniences—museums, private collectors, galleries. Frequently these exhibitions result from the vision of a curator or a curatorial team and most of times acquire the shape of a collective installation resulting from a miscellaneous of works.

Having this in mind, the architecture of the museum seems now outdated. Concerning this matter, Elena Filipovic writes in her text entitled “A Museum that is not”, (e-flux):  

[…] Much of a museum’s architecture is precisely in the service of the visual management central to the functioning of the museum-machine. One of the defining functions of the museum, as historian Donald Preziosi has elaborated, is that it “situates all objects within viewing spaces that evoke and elicit a proper viewing stance and distance. Artworks are spaced, arranged, and composed so as to permit the taking up of proper stances: positions for the subject.” […]

New ways of artistic fruition and a new choreography of space are being tested, based in a less rigid way of display and dealing with artworks and also in the new relationships being found within the artistic community. 

Books, are also being understood as small itinerant museums. The role of the publication is not new within the museum, nevertheless there is a growing interest in the potential of printed matter, not only because it allows to register exhibitions that are temporary, but also because the exhibition is also happening inside the sequence of pages. Printed matter also represents an advantage regarding the conventional ways of display. It allows a more open discussion, a more uncompromised way of showing and another way to relate research and work that enables other levels of resonance between parts.