Reflections on the second and third Intervention：Facilitating Dialogue through Iterative Co-Creation
The second Intervention marked a pivotal turn in the research, moving beyond the limitations of the first intervention. By shifting from a one-to-one model to a small group setting (one sculptor with three villagers) and introducing paper clay—a more tactile and accessible medium—the dynamic fundamentally changed. Crucially, the artist was explicitly repositioned as a facilitator rather than an authority. This deliberate dismantling of the traditional artist-novice hierarchy was intended to redistribute agency and encourage villagers to draw from their own lived experiences. The result was profound: villagers’ creativity flourished, producing sculptures rich with narrative and personal history that often surpassed the artist’s contributions in their authentic whimsy. The intervention demonstrated that with the correct supportive structures—a familiar group setting, a non-intimidating medium, and a redefined artist role—co-creation could successfully generate a shared language and dismantle preconceived barriers.
Building on this success, the third Intervention (painting the sculptures) was designed as an act of consolidation. The shared ownership of the physical objects created in the previous session provided a natural and comfortable foundation for continued collaboration. The atmosphere was noticeably different—relaxed, focused, and mutually respectful. This iteration underscored a critical finding: the quality of the process is paramount to the outcome. Resilience is built not merely through a shared final product but through the nuanced negotiations, shared moments, and mutual vulnerability experienced during the act of creation itself.
The primary learning from this iterative cycle was the necessity of critical reflection-in-action. The failure of the first intervention necessitated a re-evaluation of power structures and social dynamics. The success of the subsequent ones confirmed that effective co-creation is less about artistic skill transfer and more about carefully designing the conditions for equitable dialogue and shared ownership. This approach aligns with participatory action research principles, where the researcher’s role evolves into that of a facilitator who empowers participants to become co-researchers in their own right. These interventions proved that meaningful connection is achievable, but it requires humility, adaptability, and a commitment to ceding control over the creative outcome.
However, at the same time, the artists, from their perspective of creation, pointed out more areas that could be improved for this collaborative work.
The two artists, Luo Chaoyi and Wu Yutong, both mentioned during the interview after the collaborative creation was completed that this event had exceeded their expectations. Their impression of the villagers has also undergone significant changes. However, at the same time, although the process design this time avoided the suppression of creativity due to certain rights, the weak foundation of villagers’ art skills would still be a key factor limiting the upper limit of the collaborative works between the two groups. This requires continuous cultivation of artistic literacy among communities and group integration.
Leave a Reply