opography, etc.  Perhaps this was intended to show how technology offers many possibilities, and will not homogenize our endeavors.  But emphasizing criteria of "visual or physical  differences" to define the exhibition undermines its tenor, diminishes its muscular power, takes all the scariness out.  This may be secondary to the fact that there were wonderful works in the exhibition and that it was very much worth seeing, but it will be interesting to see how wonderful works sit in the context provided for