And what about this reaction, or reception in general? One asks, what is the intended reception of a primarily Asian audience to such a show in Bangkok? That is if one can locate it. Two friends went to Bangkok during the show. They saw the exhibition at Tadu Gallery, then went in search of another venue indicated in the map given in the programme. After going round in circles, they realised the map was wrong. It pointed to a wrong place. They report that for them, the encounters of the city overtook the experience of the show. Another friend was there for a few days, but similarly couldn't find any public information about it. By the time I emailed the venues to him, he had to catch the flight back to Singapore. Reception in this case would be difficult. The lack of information, or the inaccuracy of information, undermined the potential of any intended reception.

To the western audience in Europe, Cities on the Move presents a challenging, and one would argue, a re-exoticised view of Asian cities. From the strangely exotic cultures of Asia, to the new sublime 'urban chaos' of sprawling Asian cities, it is a shot along the same trajectory. That trajectory is called 'difference'. With names and works familiar to a largely Asian audience, the exhibition loses some of its appeal of a potential confrontation with the exotically different. It fact, to bring Cities on the Move to Asia, might be strangely perverse.