I am interested in the conflicts surrounding relational art and the association that the artist/curator has with the outcome of these artistic events. It has been criticized that in working in this realm, as noted by Hal Foster, "the director-curator becomes the star". I wonder how artists working in this manner address this issue. I appreciate that artists acknowledge that everyday human interactions have lost sincerity and understanding in the contemporary world of communication technology, etc. Our world is terribly segregated, and many privileged people do not acknowledge the unjust nature of our global system. I also think that in creating potentiality for unpredictable situations, artists can manipulate or illustrate otherwise disguised realities. What is difficult for me to appreciate is the recognition received by the artist for the outcome of audience participation. Santiago Sierra would be an extreme example of this. I do not think that his work is sincere in its exposing of human desperation. It bothers me when this sort of work is labeled as art. Obviously I am not alone in thinking this way, and the offense that his work generates seems to extenuate his aesthetic. Somehow this reminds me of when I saw the Body Worlds exhibit at the Science Museum when I was young, and I remember being bothered by the fact that the platforms beneath some of the bodies had the name of the anatomist Gunther von Hagens. The bodies had been sculpted and curated in an artistic manner, and it seemed inappropriate that they should be personalized in this way. I feel similarly to some relational art projects. The fact that humans are involved and important in these events makes me feel that the involvement of the artist or curator should be anonymous in some way.