This weekend started early for me. Friday evening I accompanied my older daughter to see Massive Change at the AGO. She was impressed by the show much more than I was. Maybe it was a design thing. She mentioned something about the "fonts" afterwards and tried to convince me that there was some "design" to the madness we saw. (Yes, I'm being hard to get.)

I took a very dim view to the show. Massive Change was underwhelming. It seemed designed for mass consumption by a general public (GP) nurtured on fast food and having the attention span of a TV remote. I'm not being elitist. If I had to put together a similar show for the GP, it would probably resemble the junk food for the brain that Massive Change is. How else to stimulate the numb intelligence of the GP?

As I thought more about it, I realized that I didn't so much as have a problem with the show than I did with what the show had to be for the GP consumption. It had to be browser pop-ups to lure the GP in -- the few second soundbite that served as content was annoying. It painted too much of an optimistic view of the innovations trying to save the world -- and could only result in a complacent GP. Instead of serving as a wake-up call for the GP, it reassures the masses that everything is OK, we should feel good about ourselves, because the world will be saved. Further, complex issues are dumb down to simple black and white options for the GP.

The show seemed to expect a dimwitted public -- and in serving those expectations did itself and the public a disservice. It failed to challenge the intellect and spur open debate on the massive change rippling across the globe. A missed opportunity. Like the public, the show was an opportunity for a bunch of artsy organizers to feel intelligent, pretend they knew something and feel good about themselves. For me, it was just shit. I wouldn't know how better to reach the public -- but I know I wouldn't feel good if that show was what I accomplished.