Creative arts organisation ActionSpace has produced a timely and much-needed series of short videos that aim to assist curators, critics and the general public in their encounters with art by people with learning disabilities.
In one sense, it is a pity such guidance is necessary, as art by people with learning disabilities should be viewed in the same way as art by anyone else.
But we all know that when those magic words “learning” and “disability” find their way into the museum captions, a fog descends that blurs perceptions and introduces a raft of assumptions that get between the viewer and the art.
The films were produced this year as a collaboration between the Stavanger Art Museum in Norway and ActionSpace. They were sparked by the gallery holding a solo exhibition of the work of ActionSpace artist Nnena Kalu (Artists in their own right, Winter 2026). Each film is short (around two and a half minutes), very digestible and to the point.
In Action Space’s words, they “highlight how… institutions and audiences can meaningfully engage with artists with learning disabilities”. They also provide “a rare behind the scenes look into the world of [these] artists”.
Each film is focused on a particular topic. These are:
- The nature of a supported studio (based on ActionSpace’s Studio Voltaire space in London)
- How art institutions can work with artists with learning disabilities
- The importance of showing each artist’s process
- What audiences should know
- Misconceptions held by institutions.
- Wrong ideas put right
The misconceptions are interesting. People often ask whether ActionSpace made the work rather than the artist.
As well as being incredibly disrespectful and undermining, as the film states, it reveals a disturbing subtext – if something is really good, it couldn’t have been produced by a person with learning disabilities.
Not all questioning is so crass. Many critics feel they need to know about or understand disability to write about the work, which means it doesn’t get the coverage it should.
But there is no need for such knowledge – as is pointed out, some of the best writing is by artists and curators who simply have a sense and feeling for the art.
It is also stressed that work by learning disabled artists should not sit in a box called “learning disabled art”. It is contemporary art that sits to be judged alongside any other contemporary art. And don’t even think about calling it outsider art.
There is a lot of content in these films, such as how to support people in their practice, making a creative space that frees people to flourish, and the importance of public exhibition. There is also a constant need to challenge the insularity and exclusiveness of the art world.
The steps that institutions can take to open themselves up to learning disabled artists are really quite straightforward, and they will then be gratified to see how the public respond enthusiastically when given the chance to engage with the art simply as art.
The art will do the magic that art can do only if it is allowed to escape that learning disability box in which it is so often confined.
As a learning disabled artist is nominated for the Turner prize and others exhibit in prestigious institutions around the world, it is time to move on from the tired old cliches about nice-to-do art activity, “co-creation” and “collaboration”.
Great art is being produced by great artists. Let’s hope the art world and the public don’t miss out on this exciting sea change – these films will help them not to.
