Queer is a painting by Derek Jarman that depicts a heart and the word queer scratched across a red canvas. This piece was painted not too long after Jarman was diagnosed with HIV, after which, his works became centralised around sexuality and the human need to be expressive. Though the word Queer was originally a derogatory term or slur, it was reclaimed by the LGBTQ + community and is now a powerful umbrella term that embraces inclusivity and self - expression. This painting feels liberating, as if it is showing that living non -normatively (i.e. living outside of the ideals of toxic masculinity) is completely healthy and invaluable to our society whilst living restricting yourself to societal standards or stereotypes is impossible.

This is a painting by Tony Bevan that Bevan states holds an expressive power that reveals the isolation, emotion and inner physchology of human existence. The beings in his paintings exhibit strained gestures and agitated expressions all that shed light on the frustrating restrictions that are applied to human existence. This piece communicates how tiring life can become when society is demanding individuals to fit into its boxes and groups when perhaps they would just like to be considered themselves as an individual given the fact that not one human is exactly the same as another.

This piece by Nina Sanders depicts an armchair made of concrete and stainless steel, in a public spot in Central London. There is a distinct contrast between the two armchairs and their surroundings which imposes the question of displacement and the idea that the objects presence in the piece is unnatural. By putting these domestic objects in a situation that is not typically associated with them, the viewer is encouraged to question what belonging means to them and where the boundaries are drawn between domesticity and domestication (domestication being often regarded as a forceful process, just as the armchairs presence in the piece seems somewhat forced).

This sculpture made by Hew Locke is composed of a range of Locke's possessions including : fake leather handbags, plastic flowers, doll parts, chains and toy weapons. The scuplture is symbolic of an imaginary ruler inspired by overly extravagant depictions of European rulers in historic portraiture. The use of fake designer items and plastic guns ridicules the facade that these rulers created for themselves using their wealth and lethal power. This piece undermines the idea that our possessions somehow give us value or identity and confronts the shallow nature and superficial representation of the rulers that it mocks. Their finery only makes them appear ignorant and insensible to the people who suffered under their rule.

This scuplture of Raimi Gbadamosi by Taslim Martin is made of cast iron and has no inscriptions or embellishments unlike the vast majority of sculptures of historical figures. The artist has not written any context regarding the sitter's notable acts on the piece perhaps to keep it symbolic, so that it may represent the long history of struggles faced universally by black communities and the monumental artwork that emerged from within them. The rust patina adds to the idea of the piece having historical significance and contributes to its timeless nature (both in a physical and political sense). Martin is known for referencing situations of racial inequality in his works, something that this piece is thought to be partially inspired by.

This sculpture by Anthea Hamilton takes inspiration from pop art and design history, taking the format of a chair with its legs molded to recreate the shape of Hamilton’s own legs and angled in a way that references an infamous photo of a model named Christine Keele taken in 1963 in which, Keeler had posed with her legs astride an Arne Jacobsen chair. As a Black woman, Hamilton has spoken on the importance of having black female bodies presented more often in museums so that they may eventualy be in the public view as often as white females bodies are in the artistic world. The piece feels assertive and confrontational, perhaps it is supposed to challenge the viewers perceptions of womanhood and feminity.

This piece was one of eight paintings that Gaugin completed on his second trip to Tahiti. The works are based on his philosophy of life, civilisation and sexuality, his phlosophy asking questions like: Where do we come from?, What are we? and Where are we going?. Gaugin, through his works, deals with the human race as a whole and explores the idea that we are all on some sort of journey together as a collective. With this human phylosophy in mind, human constructed labels seem to become almost purposeless in the discussion of identity.