The convenors of this conference understandably aim to inspire a multitude of art professionals with diverging expertise to participate, which their wording facilitates. Such wording, nevertheless, appears to present art as a vacant site to be used for purposes outside its bounds, which gain credence when presented within its bounds, its ‘site’. Either this, or the wording casts art as an independent entity, a Giacometti sculpture for instance, wandering a bygone Paris near, say, Place de la Bastille in search of a ‘site’ to ‘offer’ for ‘political alternatives’. Admittedly, the alignment between art and words is difficult in anyone’s conveyance of art’s occurrence. By splicing the convenors’ words this way, anyone might equally splice mine. That being said, the convenors’ alignment of art with ‘site’ prescribes the ‘use’ of space in art as metaphor, as a vacant place to be filled with external content. While most recognise a variegation of this form/content split in most types of visual art, its occurrence in spatial art is hardly discussed and remains, thereby, unrecognised. This panel session therefore seeks papers that discuss, for instance: particular instances of this in art; space as a ‘thing’, not a metaphor in art; the politics of a gallery’s intersubjective space in view of curatorial prerogatives (e.g. the politics of sight-lines that determine the reception of individual works in group exhibitions); a history of spatial art; the differentiation of space and place in art; and tools used in creating spatial art that give it visibility.