In IMMA’s newest exhibition Technologies of Peace: Art and Transition in Contemporary Europe (1989–2026), peace is imagined not simply as the absence of war, but as a fragile ongoing process requiring critical dialogue, generative practices and civic engagement. The 59 artists represented in this multimedia exhibition consider what peace means, what it looks like, and how it can be built and sustained through a lens that is equally critical and creative. Focusing on Europe in the period from 1989 to the present, Technologies of Peace thoughtfully situates Ireland’s complex history within a broader framework of international relations and cultural shifts across the continent.
Led by IMMA Director Annie Fletcher and curated by Mary Cremin and Johanne Mullan, the exhibition is the first public presentation of a five-year research initiative exploring technologies of peace through exhibitions, symposia, artist residencies, co-commissions, research and publications between 2025 and 2030. The project responds to a gap in peace and conflict research, where significantly more attention has traditionally been given to war and violence than to peace. The exhibition is not without risks: its broad focus can raise questions about current human rights atrocities or idealise traumatic experiences; nevertheless, this refreshingly ambitious and thoroughly research-based project shows how art institutions can move beyond mere aesthetics and toward cultural leadership amidst our greatest existential issues.
The exhibition is divided into five thematic chapters: Technologies of Peace, Language & Translation, Trauma & Reverberation, Ecology & Architecture and Imagining Futures. Although each chapter is thematically distinct, conceptual and aesthetic throughlines shared among the show’s artworks prevent viewing the chapters as isolated studies. Despite the exhibition’s scale and weighty subject matter, its installation and curation create a strong sense of balance, allowing greater accessibility for visitors. Walking through the galleries, I find that the show move seamlessly from white, airy hallways to closer, more intimate side rooms. Some may feel disoriented by this relative lack of structural uniformity, but the equilibrium between dark and light, formal and abstract, and density and openness unifies the show’s aesthetics into a comprehensive project.
That so many of the individual works can stand as thematic representatives of the larger exhibition is a testament to the careful consideration on the part of the curators. Frances Hegarty’s video installation Turas (Mothertongue) meditates on how language can be used as a tool for healing after division. Made during a time of political negotiation and hope in Ireland, Hegarty considers the possibility of reclaiming the Irish language as a way to remedy generational trauma and renew a cultural and personal identity. Greek artist Ileana Arnaoutou similarly considers how healing can begin within one’s own body: in A Series of Healing Part-Objects, semi-amorphous porcelain slip casts are imagined as fragments of a body that can be used for self care, a selection presented on a vertically oriented steel frame.
Towards the back of the exhibition space, a series of photographic prints by Anthony Haughey examine how the histories of violence continue to occupy landscapes long after the physical violence has ended. Titled Disputed Territory, Haughey’s vividly colored documentary-style photographs depict physical remnants of conflict in border regions in Ireland, Kosovo, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The presence of shotgun cartridges littered along the Armagh–Louth border, for instance, shows not only how periods of peace are directly informed by histories of conflict, but that communities on opposing sides of borders experience conflict in different ways.
In addition to more than 100 artworks included in the exhibition, Technologies of Peace dedicates a significant amount of wall space to a highly detailed visual timeline of international events spanning the past 58 years. The timeline, which is divided into two sections (Part 1: 1968–1999; Part 2: 2000–2026) situates a selection of political, social and cultural events in Ireland and Northern Ireland against those from around the world. Despite being visually overwhelming, I observed a handful of visitors carefully reading the descriptions of every single event listed on the walls. Represented events from Ireland and Northern Ireland include the civil rights march in Derry (1968), the Good Friday Agreement (1998) and the launch of the Basic Income for the Arts Scheme (2026). Situated physically beneath these events, like a reflection in water, the international timeline includes the signing of the Camp David Accords (1978), Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine (2022) and the formal recognition of the State of Palestine by Ireland, Spain and Norway (2024). The accompanying wall text states that the timeline is not comprehensive, and visitors are encouraged to email the curators if they believe a specific event should be represented.
When museums endeavor to address peace in the contemporary moment, there is undoubtedly more room for error than success. An exhibition can be deemed tone-deaf or insensitive for choosing not to display images of violence and suffering, and can simultaneously be called out as simply virtue-signalling when it opts to address sustaining peace. But there are no peace signs or rainbows to be found in Technologies of Peace, and for this I thank the curators. The exhibition brilliantly reveals how — contrary to what we may (want to) believe — it is war and political conflict that has long been the norm, and periods of peace and compromise are the rare exceptions. The show’s artists don’t merely advocate for peace, but propose a multitude of creative tools for sustaining the ongoing peace process through recovery, remembrance, decolonization and intersectional education. Technologies of Peace’s aesthetic and political engagement with peace creatively invigorates research on preventing conflict before it happens, and offers to transform how we see cultural institutions as potential agents for change.
