Category: Article and coverage

  • The Conditions of an Art That Bakes Life: Silas Fong’s Kitchen Notes

    English · 한국어 원문

    Silas Fong was born in Hong Kong, studied there and in Cologne, Germany, and has lived and worked in Korea for the past eight years. His path as both an educator within Korea’s art institutions and a foreign artist forms the ground and point of departure for his practice. Growing up in Hong Kong, he experienced the cultural hybridity of the British colonial period firsthand. In an international art environment, he encountered the identity of the migrant artist and the language of institutional critique; in Korea, he has worked as an artist and teacher within an unfamiliar social and linguistic context. These layered experiences explain why his projects dissect the gaps between art institutions and everyday life: his own identity and experience stand within those gaps.

    Fong’s work has consistently experimented with twisting the boundaries of art institutions and the social conventions surrounding them. From the SAD School of Artists Development project to art-rental broadcasts borrowing the format of home shopping, and the sound installation Greetings for Artists, he appropriates institutional forms, parodies them, and builds fictional systems that draw viewers into participation. As a result, the languages of artistic production and consumption, education and institutions cease to appear self-evident or natural. They emerge as structures that can become unstable and be overturned at any moment. Kitchen Notes likewise places the artist at an intersection of migration and identity, labour and care, through the everyday medium of food.

    Held at Daechumoo Fine Art in Gangneung in 2025, Kitchen Notes reveals both continuity and a shift in Fong’s practice, extending his longstanding concerns into everyday labour and care. Working from the locality and lived experience of Gangneung, he learned directly from local bakers and a sausage maker, and presented site-specific installations and performances centred on baking and sharing bread. By sharing bread and sausages with visitors, he brought into the exhibition an attitude of returning skills learned locally to the local community, allowing viewers to experience the “rules of the institution.” The exhibition’s central concern becomes a more layered experiment in the rhythms of life, the time of labour, and the conditions of forming relationships through food and consumption.

    During this process, Fong learned directly from two bakers and a sausage maker in Gangneung. To record these learning relationships and the transmission of skills, he designed and printed his own certificates of completion. These are not qualifications issued by a state or accredited institution. Yet they bear the actual names of the workshops, their proprietors and addresses, together with the handwritten signatures of all three craftspeople. They are therefore not a performance of “false certification,” but real documents grounded in relationships and places. By appropriating the document’s form—its layout, language and signature—outside institutional authority, Fong shows that authority need not descend vertically from above: it can be constituted through agreements made on site and the testimony of relationships. This certification based on autonomous relationships makes visible where institutional trust arises. The fact of learning and a signed relationship can offer stronger evidence than regulations and official seals. Through these documents, viewers see that institutional authority cannot be reduced to a binary of official recognition and its absence. It is established on multiple levels through a social process: who transmitted what to whom, how it was transmitted, and who took responsibility by signing to confirm it. What viewers encounter is not a fictional device, but the recognition that institutional character itself is constituted through the enactment of documents, signatures and relationships. Rather than parodying a lack of institutional authority, these documents are a form of record-performance that experimentally reassembles the conditions under which authority is produced. They demonstrate how the boundary between the accredited and the unaccredited can move according to the ways social trust is constructed.

    Within this structural experiment, Kitchen Notes foregrounds the material and social qualities of food. The series of cross-section drawings of gaedureup bread and sourdough bread on the gallery wall provides a representative example. The drawings show life-size sections of loaves made during the artist’s baking practice. Attending to the relationships within a bread-making process carried out by machines operated through computer programs, Fong relates bread’s contrasting associations with programmed production, warmth and hospitality to meticulously delineated drawings. Beyond simple representation, these works function as a visual language that translates food’s material structure into a metaphor for social and institutional order. They reveal that making a living and giving things visual form do not occupy separate realms. Alongside the drawings, wall texts listing bread ingredients and preparation processes recall the schematic charts and graphs that Fong has long used as installation devices. Just as the SAD project presented “how to become a successful artist” through diagrams and statistical graphs, he repeatedly makes institutional structures unfamiliar by visualising language and numbers. In Kitchen Notes, the arrangement of wall texts, drawings, worktops and tools evokes a laboratory or research institute, explicitly showing the process through which food becomes a subject of artistic experimentation.

    In preparing the exhibition, Fong’s research involved approaching craftspeople he did not know, learning production processes directly from them, and practising those processes himself. This desire to learn firsthand confirms that his intention lies beyond simply reproducing dishes. It centres on acquiring local knowledge and traditional skills through the body and translating them into the exhibition space. Such “learning by hand” demonstrates how art can connect with social experience through labour, learning and care, rather than remaining an autonomous act of creation. Another important recipe he introduces is the egg tart. Baking this familiar Hong Kong snack and tourist favourite is a gesture that intersects his identity as a Hong Kong-born artist living in Korea with the context of place. The egg tart carries traces of the colonial period while also functioning as an everyday dessert representative of Hong Kong today. By bringing it into the Korean context of Gangneung, Fong reveals the movement of identity and the transfer of memories of place. If making bread and sausages serves to explore locality and labour, the egg tart instead calls upon his own cultural origins. Encountering a Hong Kong dessert in a gallery in Gangneung, viewers experience the multiple layers through which place and identity intersect.

    The exhibition also includes SAD Kitchen Chef Kits, which reproduce egg tarts, sausages and bread through imitation meal-kit packaging, large posters and logo branding. Appearing to be consumable products, these packages condense the compressive logic of contemporary capitalist consumption. Meal kits presuppose the speed of immediate preparation and consumption, sealing labour and time within a commodified package. Although their glossy printed surfaces resemble commercial products, Fong also reflects on the disappearance of home cooking in Korean society. He focuses on contemporary anxieties about “cooking from scratch” and the convenience of the meal-kit industry that has emerged in response. Every box was printed and folded by the artist, and each ingredient was individually sorted and packaged by hand. The finished products are therefore not factory-produced goods but surfaces of labour made through the artist’s hands.

    In this way, the exhibition reveals both continuity and transformation in Fong’s work. He still draws viewers into the contradictions of institutional structures through fictional institutions and participatory devices. Here, however, food allows him to interweave the conditions of life, labour, consumption and identity on multiple levels. Art no longer remains solely within institutional critique. It expands into a device for testing the possibilities of new social relationships through concrete actions and sensations of living. Ultimately, Fong’s acts of baking bread, making sausages, and preparing and sharing egg tarts ask whether art, through the memories of a migrant, can become a means of experimenting with and reconfiguring the conditions of life. They invite us to reconsider the boundary between life and art itself.

    한국어 원문 · 삶을 굽는 예술의 조건

    삶을 굽는 예술의 조건: 실라스 퐁의 ‘키친노트(Kitchen Note)’

    실라스 퐁Silas Fong은 홍콩에서 태어나 홍콩과 독일 쾰른을 거쳐 학업을 마친 뒤 지난 8년간 한국에 거주하며 활동해온 작가다. 한국의 미술 제도 안에서 교육자로, 동시에 외국인 예술가로 자리를 잡아온 그의 궤적은 작업 전반의 토양이자 출발점이라 할 수 있다. 홍콩에서 성장한 그는 영국 식민지 시절의 문화적 혼종성을 몸으로 겪었고, 다국적 예술 환경 속에서 이주자 예술가의 정체성과 제도 비판의 언어를 배우며, 다시 한국으로 와서는 낯선 사회적, 언어적 맥락 속에서 예술가이자 교직자로 활동해 왔다. 이러한 다층적 경험은 작가의 프로젝트가 예술 제도와 일상의 틈을 해부하는 방향으로 전개되는 점에 바로 작가 자신의 정체성과 경험이 그 틈 위에 서 있기 때문이다.

    퐁의 작업은 언제나 예술 제도의 경계와 그것을 둘러싼 사회적 규범을 비틀어온 실험으로 기억된다. 예술가직업훈련학교 SAD 프로젝트에서부터 홈쇼핑 형식을 빌린 아트 렌탈 방송, 사운드 설치를 통한 ‘작가를 위한 인사말’까지, 작가는 제도의 형식을 빌려와 그것을 희화화하고, 가짜 시스템을 구축해 관객을 참여자로 끌어들인다. 그 결과, 예술의 생산과 소비, 교육과 제도의 언어는 더 이상 당연하거나 자연스러운 것이 아니라, 언제든 불안정하게 뒤집힐 수 있는 구조임을 드러낸다. 전시 《키친노트Kitchen Note》 역시 음식이라는 일상적 매체를 매개로 하여, 이주와 정체성, 노동과 돌봄의 언어가 교차하는 자리에 작가 자신을 투사한다.

    2025년 강릉 대추무 파인아트에서 열린 《키친노트》는 실라스 퐁 작업의 연속성과 전환을 동시에 보여주고, 일관된 관심사가 일상적 노동과 돌봄의 차원으로 확장된 전시다. 작가는 강릉의 지역성과 생활 감각을 바탕으로, 강릉 현지에 있는 제빵 장인과 소세지 장인으로부터 소세지 만드는 법을 직접 배우고, 빵 굽기와 나누기라는 행위를 중심에 둔 장소 특정적 설치와 퍼포먼스를 선보였다. 전시장에서 빵과 소시지를 직접 관객과 나누는 행위는 지역으로부터 배운 기술을 다시 지역 주민들에게 환원하는 태도를 전시 안으로 끌어들이는 작가는 ‘제도의 규칙’을 체험하도록 한다. 이번 전시에서의 핵심은 삶의 리듬, 노동의 시간, 음식과 소비를 매개로 한 관계 맺기의 조건을 탐구하는 보다 다층적인 실험으로 자리매김한다.

    이 과정에서 작가는 강릉의 두 제빵사와 한 소시지 장인에게서 직접 배우고, 그 학습 관계와 기술 전수의 사실을 기록하기 위해 작가 본인이 직접 디자인 및 인쇄한 수료증(증명서)을 제작했다. 이 문서는 국가나 공인기관이 발급한 자격증은 아니지만, 각 공방의 실제 상호와 점주의 성명, 주소가 명기되어 있고 세 장인의 자필 서명이 들어간다. 다시 말해 이것은 ‘가짜 인증’의 연극이 아니라, 관계와 장소에 근거한 실재의 문서다. 퐁은 제도적 권위의 외부에서 문서의 형식(레이아웃, 언어, 서명)을 전유하여, 권위가 위에서 부여되는 수직적 구조가 아니라 현장에서의 합의와 관계의 증언을 통해 구성될 수 있음을 보여준다. 이러한 자율적 관계에 기반한 인증은 제도의 신뢰가 어디에서 발생하는지—규정과 도장보다 배움의 사실과 서명된 관계가 더 강력한 증거가 될 수 있음을—전시장 안에서 가시화한다. 관객은 이 문서를 통해, 제도적 권위가 법적 공인과 비공인의 이분법만으로 환원되지 않으며, 누가 누구에게 무엇을 어떻게 전수했고 누가 그 사실을 책임 있게 서명했는가라는 사회적 절차 속에서 다층적으로 성립됨을 확인하게 된다. 이때 관객이 마주하는 것은 허구의 장치가 아니라, 제도성이 문서-서명-관계의 수행을 통해 구성된다는 인식 자체다. 다시 말해, 작가의 문서는 제도 권위의 결핍을 드러내는 패러디가 아니라, 제도 권위의 생성 조건을 실험적으로 재조립하는 기록-퍼포먼스로서, 공인과 비공인의 경계가 사회적 신뢰의 구성 방식에 따라 이동 가능함을 보여준다.

    이러한 구조적 실험의 《키친노트》는 음식이라는 매체가 지닌 물질성과 사회성을 전면에 내세우는 점에 주목한다. 예컨대, 전시장 벽면에 걸린 개두릅과 사워도우 브레드 단면 드로잉 연작은 그 대표적 사례라 볼 수 있다. 빵을 굽는 연습 과정에서 실제 크기의 빵 단면을 보여준다. 작가는 컴퓨터 프로그램을 바탕으로 작동하는 제빵 기계로 만들어지는 빵의 과정의 관계성에 주목하면서, 프로그램을 통해 발현되는 따뜻함과 환대를 상징할 수 있는 빵의 상반된 이미지를 선적으로 치밀하게 묘사한 드로잉에 빗댄다. 이는 단순한 재현을 넘어, 음식의 물질적 구조를 사회적, 제도적 질서의 은유로 번역하는 시각적 언어로 기능한다. 즉, 먹고 사는 문제와 시각적 형식화가 별개의 층위가 아님을 드러내는 방식인 것이다. 드로잉과 더불어, 빵의 재료와 조리 과정을 텍스트로 정리한 벽면 문구는 이전 작업 방식에서 구현되어 왔던 도식화된 도표와 그래프들의 유사 방식으로 퐁이 과거부터 즐겨 사용해온 설치적 장치다. SAD 프로젝트에서도 ‘성공하는 예술가가 되는 방법’을 도식과 통계 그래프로 제시한 바 있듯이, 그는 언제나 언어와 수치를 시각화하는 형식을 통해 제도의 구조를 낯설게 전시한다. 《키친노트》에서도 벽면 텍스트와 드로잉, 조리대와 도구의 배치는 마치 실험실 혹은 연구소를 연상시키며, 음식이 예술적 실험의 대상으로 번역되는 과정을 명시적으로 드러낸다.

    실라스 퐁은 이번 전시를 준비하면서 리서치를 통해 낯선 장인들을 통해 제작 과정을 직접 배우고 연습하는 과정을 거친다. 이렇게 손수 배우고자 하는 경험은 단순한 요리 재현이 아니라, 지역성과 전통적 기술을 몸으로 습득하고 전시장 안으로 번역하는 행위에 방점을 두고자 한다는 작가의 의도를 확인할 수 있다. 이처럼 ‘손으로 배우는’ 과정은 예술이 자율적 창작 행위에 머무르지 않고, 노동과 학습, 돌봄의 차원에서 사회적 경험과 접속할 수 있음을 보여준다. 작가가 소개하는 중요한 또 하나의 레시피는 에그 타르트다. 홍콩의 대표적 간식이자 관광 명물인 에그 타르트를 작가가 직접 굽는 행위는, 한국에 거주하는 홍콩 출신 작가로서 자신의 정체성과 장소적 맥락을 교차시키는 제스처로써 에그 타르트는 식민지 시대의 흔적을 품은 음식이자, 오늘날 홍콩을 대표하는 일상적 디저트로 작동한다. 작가는 이를 강릉이라는 한국의 맥락 속으로 옮겨옴으로써, 이동하는 정체성과 장소적 기억의 전이를 드러낸다. 빵과 소시지의 제작이 지역성과 노동을 탐구하는 장치였다면, 에그 타르트는 오히려 자신의 문화적 기원을 호출하는 방식으로 기능한다. 관객은 강릉의 전시장에서 홍콩의 디저트를 마주하며, 장소와 정체성이 서로 교차하는 복합적 층위를 경험하게 된다.

    이와 더불어, 전시장에는 에그 타르트, 소시지, 그리고 빵을 가짜 밀키트 패키징과 대형 포스터, 로고 브랜딩으로 재현한 ‘SAD Kitchen chef kit’가 놓여 있다. 소비 가능한 제품처럼 보이는 이 패키지는 오늘날 자본주의 소비 구조의 압축성을 집약하고, 나아가, 밀키트라는 것이 즉시 조리, 즉시 소비라는 속도를 전제로 하여 노동과 시간을 상품화된 패키지 안에 봉인한다. 표면은 유광 인쇄로 마감되어 상업 제품처럼 보이지만, 작가는 오늘날 한국 사회에서 집밥의 문화가 사라져가는 현상을 반영했다. 퐁이 주목한 것은, ‘처음부터 요리를 만드는 것’을 두려워하는 현대인의 심리와 그 결과로 등장한 밀키트 산업의 편리함이다. 모든 패키지 박스는 작가가 직접 인쇄하고 손으로 접었으며, 각 재료 또한 손수 분류, 포장되었다. 따라서 이 완성된 상품은 공장에서 대량 생산된 제품이 아니라, 작가의 손을 통해 만들어진 노동의 표면이다.

    이렇듯, 전시는 실라스 퐁 작업의 연속성과 전환을 동시에 보여주므로 여전히 허구적 제도와 참여적 장치를 통해 관객을 제도적 구조의 모순 속에 끌어들이지만, 이번에는 음식이라는 매체를 통해 삶의 조건과 노동, 소비, 그리고 정체성을 다층적으로 직조한다. 예술은 더 이상 제도 비평의 차원에 머무르지 않고, 삶의 구체적 행위와 감각을 통해 새로운 사회적 관계의 가능성을 실험하는 장치로 확장된다. 퐁이 빵을 굽고, 소시지를 만들고, 에그 타르트를 만들어 나누는 행위는 결국 이주자의 기억을 통해 예술이 삶의 조건을 실험하고 재구성하는 장치가 될 수 있는가라는 질문을 던지며, 우리로 하여금 삶과 예술의 경계 자체를 다시 사유하게 한다.

    View Kitchen Notes – Three Attempts in Gangneung

  • What Makes Art Art?

    SAD School of Artists Development: Silas Fong

    Leeji Hong (Curator, National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art)

    2020

    There is a Korean expression ‘nunchi (literally eye-measuring)’ commonly used by Koreans. Similarly, in Japan they say ‘read the air’. It means sensing the atmosphere of a situation and gauging others’ mind or attitude without being awkward. In an artistic category as well, we try to measure others’ mind. Nunchi for success, nunchi for relationship – Silas Fong has constantly been interested in certain contexts that have been accepted and tacitly agreed in the name of the art. Such interest may be derived from the fact that he is multilingual; his mother tongue is Cantonese, he teaches students in English at a Korean art school, and speaks German at home. Understanding language, culture and sentiments requires highly developed concentration and experience to read the air and measure minds subtly. This is similar to habits of the art. The atmosphere and context, intrinsic to art, is hard to be explained in letters or words or to be grasped at once, and presupposes comprehensive understanding and information. One step away from the representational thought and subjective value judgement of art, Fong tried to suggest an objective index based on very realistic and rational judgment on art, in order to objectify the process of analyzing the meaning and value of art. For many years, he has been interested in the expressions suitable for each situation and the conversation method to set up relationships for social life, and also produced small publications in that matter. <Small Talk> (2018) and <Vocabulary> (2019) contain the expressions adapted to each situation, to lead the atmosphere avoiding awkwardness. Through this work, the artist observed the expressions that people use commonly and inertially to set up a relationship, and suggested a sort of guideline to get adapted to a circumstance without being awkward. This interest of Fong in language and attitude has evolved into his concern about the formal expression method and representation of the intrinsic attributes and meaning of education and art, which he has experienced as a professor of an art university in Korea in 2017.        

    SAD School of Artists Development

    Silas Fong’s SAD (School of Artists Development, hereinafter ‘SAD’) was first introduced at <SAD Info Days> held at Seoul Art Space Geumcheon in 2019. <SAD Info Days (hereinafter ‘Info Days’)> is planned to announce the beginning of the SAD project and deal with the role of artist and the ambivalent aspects of art through this. <Info Days> held on 19 – 31 July 2019, provided the SAD programs such as the basics for portrait of artist, how to complete application forms, international art English class, and specialized course for SAD career development. During the event, SAD also arranged a portfolio review session for rising artists and students who are aspiring artists. To objectify and analyze ‘visual artist’ and also to play that role, Fong attempted to divide his role into educator, observer and performer, eventually to reconsider the fundamental meaning of art. Through <SAD Info Days>, subtitled ‘For a Better Success’, Fong questioned ‘Can art and artist be developed by education and learning?’ and intended to examine the essence of art as well as the other side of art. The artist suggests the exhibition space as a platform to perform ‘the way to be a successful artist’ and asks back the viewers/participants the hidden essence of this project and the critical judgment on it. Furthermore, he also proposes the figure of an artist, which other people think ‘an artist should be’, the steps to succeed as an artist, and the basic survival skills to be adapted to the ecosystem of Korean art world. Then he asks again whether these things can be acquired through education and information.      

    Silas Fong presented the new curriculum and program of SAD during his stay as artist-in-residency at Cheongju Art Studio in the year of 2020. At this second edition of SAD, Fong went forward to the next level from how to become an artist and the basic conditions for an artist to possess, to expand his interest to the artwork and its collection, the production of value of artwork as goods. Organizing spaces according to 3 works, Fong installed a studio where the students participating in SAD can practice the skills to promote and sell the art rental service through home shopping TV channel. Silas Fong, the founder of SAD who has been constantly dealing with the ecology of art and the nature of art since 2019, sometimes directly yet subtly, proposed <SAD Theory> and introduced his way of revealing the phenomenon by twisting the snobbish attribute of art and the social convention around it, taking the art collection as an example. He expresses with humor, but by adopting indirect methods and attitudes, he points out the excessively standardized conditions to become successful as an artist, and paradoxically reveals that now it is time to reexamine the practice of such series of processes which are so familiar that we got tamed with them. The second work <Greetings for Artists> is a sound installation work that Fong created to learn the general knowledge commonly used in art world. It aims to reconsider the nuance of Korean language and the ‘greeting’ culture. Fong describes the delicate nuance and culture that are so familiar to us that we never mention. He experienced them living in Korea since 2017, through his dual status of a foreign artist who should present his works and persuade the Korean art world, and at the same time a professor who teaches art to students in English, which is not the mother tongue for him. Lastly, he presented <SAD Shop> which is a window exhibition where we can also buy various artworks. The Shop consists of <The Artist’s Plant>, <Artist Career Map>, <Media Artist Starter Kit> and <Greeting Tote>. The public can actually purchase the goods proposed by the artist and also the Shop itself is an artwork. The work implies the ambivalent and paradoxical aspect and prejudice often found in the contemporary art which divides the commercial and non-commercial, with an ambiguity between pretense and sincerity. Through this experiment, the artist urges to rethink about how the hegemony of an exhibition space is created. An exhibition is a place to evaluate a posteriori the act of the artist and the artwork that has already left the workspace, where innumerable ideologies and political discourses indwell.

    What Makes Art Art?

    After all, Silas Fong prompts to maintain temporarily the ideological conflict and irony in the context of art, rather than to accept the position of artist and the place for art to stay in a metaphorical, inertial way. By this, he urges eventually to reveal the snobbery through the space of white cube – as Brian O’Doherty suggested in ‘Inside the White Cube’ – and to reexamine the persistent habit of self-definition. The artist stated in his explanation of the exhibition that “SAD is the result of a continuous observation of artists in the art world and the result of self-awareness and criticism.” These experiments and trials of Fong remind us of the words of Arthur Danto: “to see something as art requires something the eye cannot descry – an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art: an artworld”. The most important lesson we learned from the 21st century, is that if we don’t do anything, there is no change. Witnessing the things taken for granted disappearing and collapsing instantly, wouldn’t Silas Fong like to say that, if we act and think in an inertial way without any doubt in the matter of creation, the place of art, in which we have believed so firmly, would also be easily fading, and that it is the reason why our choice has a great importance?     

  • 成功藝術家指南

    Media. 信報
    Date. 2020-09-02
    Text. 張綺霞

    https://www1.hkej.com//dailynews/culture/article/2567721/%E6%88%90%E5%8A%9F%E8%97%9D%E8%A1%93%E5%AE%B6%E6%8C%87%E5%8D%97

    在韓國教書後,Silas對藝術教育有更多反思,例如他要教導學生如何將創作變成事業。「我也不算很成功的藝術家,卻要教學生如何去『成功』。韓國藝術家很依賴資助,因此一些藝術家會教學生寫計劃書的技巧,卻讓學生的作品不自覺地迎合這些資助的要求和喜好。」

    他以此創作了一個虛構藝術學校,裏面全是可笑的「成為成功藝術家指南」。「究竟什麼才是成功?某程度上,所謂成功也是運氣使然,因為時機適合,讓他們的作品能在重要的展覽展出,有重要的藝術評論和策展人寫文章推介。但這是否成功唯一的定義?」

    雖然未算成功,但他在韓國的創作機會愈來愈多,太太在語言和生活上幫助他不少,他笑言,兩人之間也有良性競爭。「例如清州駐留計劃,我們各自也有申請和入選。」雖然她是畫畫為主,但兩人也會經常看對方的作品,給些意見。他笑道:「通常都是她請我說我才說,說到某些位見好就收,讓對方自己想一想。所以我們從未為作品問題吵架。」

    早前方琛宇在首爾衿川藝術空間舉辦個人展「SAD Info Days」,為嘉賓講解作品。(受訪者圖片)
  • Case #22 — Flat D, 6/F, Aldrich Garden

    Prof. Beate Gütschow
    2016

    Silas Fong zeigt in seiner Ausstellung fünf Arbei­ten, die sich mit Ineffektivität, Langeweile undIsolation beschäftigen. In einer Fotoinstalla­tionist ein lebensgroßes Modell von Fongs eigenem leeren Schlafzimmer zu sehen, Besu­cher müs­sen in dem kahlen Zimmer 10 Minuten verwei­len. In einer fotografischen Arbeit zeich­net Silas Fong das Licht auf, das sich auf einer leeren Wand im Laufe eines Tages suggestiv verändert.In drei weiteren Arbeiten dokumentiert der Künst­ler Situationen, in denen er sich selber sehr langweilt: eine Busfahrt, ein Seminar an der KHM und seine Tätigkeit als Aufsicht im Museum Ludwig. Silas Fong macht in diesen Situationen lapidare Fotos mit einer Kompakt­kamera und schreibt seine Gedanken akribisch auf, ebenso die Handlungen seiner Mitmen­schen. Ein Aspekt dieser Arbeiten mag ein institutionskritischer sein, denn es wird durch­aus ironisch aus dem Betrieb einer Kunst­hoch­schule oder eines Museums erzählt. Jedoch reicht Silas Fongs Anliegen über das Reflektie­ren dieser Gegebenheiten hinaus. Es ist ein Blick eines Fremden, der in alltäglichen Handlungen der anderen eine versteckte Ablehnung ver­mutet, der gewünschte Dialog findet nicht statt oder endet im Nichts. [BG]

    ————————————————————————————————————
    In his exhibition, Silas Fong shows five works dealing with inefficiency, boredom and isolation. A life-size model of Fong’s own empty bedroom can be seen in a photo installation, and visitors must spend 10 minutes in the bare room. In a photographic work, Silas Fong records the light that changes suggestively on an empty wall in the course of a day. In three further works, the artist documents situations in which he is very bored: a bus ride, a seminar at the KHM and his activity as a supervisor in the Museum Ludwig. In these situations, Silas Fong makes succinct photos with a compact camera and painstakingly writes down his thoughts, as well as the actions of his fellows. One aspect of this work may be more institution critical because it is quite ironically told from the operation of an art school or a museum. However, Silas Fong’s concerns extend beyond reflecting on these realities. It is a look of a stranger who suspects a hidden rejection in the everyday actions of others, the desired dialogue does not take place or ends in nothingness. [BG]

    [English version translated by Google Translate.]
    ———————————————————————————————————–

    Text written on the exhibition Flat D, 6/F, Aldrich Garden

  • 探索藝術之道 專訪方琛宇校友

    Media. The BUddy Post, Alumni Affairs Office, Hong Kong Baptist University
    Date. 09-2017
    Text. Steven Cheung

    每當觀賞藝術品時,我們總會思考藝術是甚麼?「藝術是一種思考方法,給予藝術家和鑑賞者新的角度理解世界。」這是香港新一代藝術家方琛宇校友(視覺藝術)對藝術的定義,也正是他希望透過藝術創作表達的意念。以藝術創作為志業的方校友,其作品屢次於中外展覽中展出,獲得各方讚譽。方校友憑其獨特的創作,作品《販賣偷來的時間》先後於2008年獲得第十四屆香港獨立短片及錄像比賽(互動媒體組)金獎,及於2009年獲得香港當代藝術雙年獎的青年藝術家獎。「承蒙浸大的老師啟發了我,對我日後的創作也有深遠的影響」方校友說。

    難忘啟迪 投身藝術事業

    方校友在入讀香港浸會大學初期,修讀了助理教授蔡仞姿及副教授梁美萍博士執教的課程,從此決意開展藝術之路。「蔡仞姿老師在課程中介紹了很多她在美國學習期間知道的前衛藝術,啟發了我的創作思路。梁美萍博士執教的『當代藝術概念』課程,以例子教授藝術思想,解釋藝術家向世界表達了甚麼,而所表達的對世界構成什麼影響。那時我才明白到原來藝術是思考和觀察的方法,而這種方法是可以培養的。」

    旅歐生活 啟發創作靈感

    為進一步了解藝術世界,方校友選修不同人文學科,吸收更多藝術史的背景知識,並以本科生身份前往荷蘭交流,歐洲生活對他啟發甚深:「我有部份藝術品的主題如空間、時間、金錢、另一種生活的可能性等,也是源於這段外國的生活經驗。」他認為外國生活的經驗非常寶貴,故後來修讀碩士時特意選修德文,並赴德留學。

    方校友認為,歐洲國家的藝術氣息濃厚,當地人從小接受哲學、歷史和人文學訓練,故懂得欣賞藝術的人較多。此外,歐洲投放於藝術的資源充沛,例如德國學院會於各個藝術範疇均設有專家提供指導,專家會仔細教導各項技術。對方校友而言,這些知識終身受用,亦為其藝術發展奠定基礎。

    舉辦展覽 反思人際溝通

    方校友回港後便投身藝術創作,於2013年曾以《陌生人訪問服務》為題作展覽,備受好評,今年五月更載譽重展。方校友闡釋其創作意念:「都市生活很有趣,陌生人之間經常因為不同原因而展開對話,溝通不再以『大家互相認識,並於相同時間和相同地點對話』為前提,現代人可以利用社交網站和留言功能開展和延續討論。我希望凸顯這種特質,於是構思了這個展覽。」在展覽中,參加者可以向陌生對象以文字提問,對象以影像回覆;參加者再評論有關影像,有關回應則會以字幕方式於片中播出。

    寄語同業 為藝術共同努力

    一直全情投入藝術創作,皆因興趣所在,若能獲得賞識,更錦上添花。今年初,方校友收到一封由韓國某學院寄來的邀請函,邀請他擔任客席教授。教他驚喜的是,這次機遇竟與七年前的一場展覽有關。「我很好奇,為甚麼這位韓國教授會邀請我,他如何認識我?原來是在2010年利物浦雙年展時,他看到我展出的一段影片,並留下了深刻印象。剛巧最近學院有職位空缺,他便立即想起了我。」方校友欣然答允對方邀請,在藝術領域上作另一新嘗試。(註:刊登這段專訪時,方校友已前往韓國發展。)

    是次機遇讓方校友有更深反思:即使創作者不曾與外界溝通,觀賞者也可以讀懂作品及記於心中,多年後仍有迴響。「藝術是世界語言,不同的人看到同一作品,也可以收到相同訊息,引發思考。」對於香港的藝術發展,他坦言路不易走。雖然如此,若能裝備好自己,當機會來到,便能隨時迎接新挑戰。「我期望能夠和其他浸大藝術畢業生共同努力,在這片土地栽種出藝術之花。」

    方校友以自己作為裝置品之一。
    裝置藝術作品
    方校友的展品

    http://thebuddypost.hkbu.edu.hk/web/sep17/chi/people_wisdom.php

  • Art: A Way of Thinking Interview with Alumnus Silas Fong

    Media. The BUddy Post, Alumni Affairs Office, Hong Kong Baptist University
    Date. 09-2017
    Text. Steven Cheung

    Very often, when we look at an art piece, we may come up with a question: What is art actually? “Art is a way of thinking, facilitating us to see the world from another angle,” a definition given by alumnus Silas Fong (Visual Arts) who, through his art work, has been delivering this message to the public. The unique style of Silas’ work has not only brought him opportunities to hold exhibitions in Hong Kong and overseas, but also awards. For his work “”Stolen times for sale”, he won both the Young Artist Award at the Art Biennial Awards in 2009 and the 14th Independent Short Film and Video Award in 2008. “The compliments owe to the inspiring teaching of the professors at HKBU, which has far-reaching impact on my work,” said Silas.

    The Road to Art

    Silas recalled that during the early days at HKBU, he was already very much inspired by Assistant Professor Choi Yan-chi and Associate Professor Dr. Leung Mee-ping. “Ms. Choi has told us many things about avant-garde art which has broadened my horizons; while Dr. Leung has taught me much about concepts on contemporary art, provoking my thoughts on what art was.” Silas then realised that art was actually a way of thinking and observation, and reflected on how artists have used art to deliver their messages to the world.

    Inspirations Gained from Living Abroad

    Silas reckoned that for a better understanding of the meaning of art, he had to learn its history and know its background; and taking humanities classes could be a way. Yet, this was not enough, he thought, as increasing his exposure was equally important to develop his creativity. During the time at HKBU, he had a chance to go to the Netherlands as exchange student. After graduation, he also spent a year in Germany to further his study. “Living in Europe has brought me much inspiration. Some of the themes of my work, like ‘time’, ‘space’, ‘money’ and ‘alternative way of living’ were actually reflections of my days in Europe,” said Silas. He treasured much the experience he gained during that time.

    “Europeans value humanity and art. People learnt about philosophy, history and humanities since young and hence it is no surprise that Europeans know how to appreciate art more, when compared to Hong Kong people,” commented by Silas, “not to mention that European countries have put more resources on development of art culture. For example, the art institutes in Germany have expert in each specific art field, advising students and transferring knowledge on specific skills.”

    Exhibition Reflects Uniqueness of Work

    After returned to Hong Kong, Silas has fully devoted himself to art work. In 2013, he held his first exhibition with a theme “An Interview with Stranger” and owed to good response, the same exhibition was re-run in May this year. The success was a showcase of his creative thoughts. Silas explained the concept behind, “I observed that people nowadays might start a conversation even they do not know each other. Communication is no longer limited to people you know, or space and time, and this is obviously seen in social media platforms. This exhibition is to bring audience a new concept on communication.” Silas continued, “First, I invited participants to raise questions in writing. I then went to a stranger and videotaped his/her response to those questions. Next I would show this video to the question originator and ask him/her to give feedback which would be displayed in the same video. The final outcome of the video showed a well-communicated conversation between two strangers, though the sequence of this communication was not in the original order of time.”

    Prepare for Opportunities to Come

    Always do your best as you never know when opportunity will come. This is exactly what Silas has recently experienced. Early this year, he received a letter from a Korean professor, inviting him to be visiting professor of their Academy. Silas was very surprised that this Professor knew him. He then found out that his work exhibited in Liverpool Biennial 2010 has impressed this Professor a lot, who therefore wrote to invite Silas. “I have never thought that an exhibition held seven years ago could bring me new opportunities,” said Silas, who has delightedly accepted the offer. (Remark: Silas is already in Korea now.)

    As a concluding note, Silas said it was not easy to pursue a career in art in Hong Kong; yet, it would be important for us to always equip ourselves and get prepared for opportunities and challenges. “I hope graduates of HKBU Academy of Visual Arts could joint efforts to help cultivate the art culture in Hong Kong,” Silas grinned.

    Silas makes himself as part of the installation exhibits
    Installation exhibit
    One of Silas’ exhibits

    http://thebuddypost.hkbu.edu.hk/web/sep17/eng/people_wisdom.php

  • 論香港藝術的「小」

    文 – 黄韻然
    日期 – 2018年1月5日

    原文刊登於同名 M+ Stories  博文集 第1期: 視覺文化

    在藝術品面前,一個城市的居民如何知道自己看見的是藝術?如何明瞭他們已經失去並遺忘了藝術?又如何得知藝術已再度回歸?香港自開埠起,就被視為容不下高雅藝術的城市,然而,自十九世紀建立成港口城市開始,這裏就有藝術家從事創作,他們的作品不一定引人注目,更多是被人忽視。即使藝術品的文化與商業價值與日俱增,但藝術在香港的發展卻背離常態,甚至愈見低調,有時幾近消失。香港當代藝術呈現出一種獨特的兩難之境──迴避賞識、不求譁眾取寵的一套實踐與感性,同時渴求認同,期望被視作一種獨特文化形態。我們如何能認同游離於我們視線以外的事物?

    在珠江三角洲的背景下,香港的藝術看來從缺;跟歷來充滿挑釁的創意並以此為傲的文化姊妹城市──廣州相比,這種缺席更加明顯。的確,即使兩地在區域內共有一種自謙和隨性的風格,但是廣州與香港的藝術文化卻大相逕庭。廣州藝術家林一林(1964年生)於1990年代中期嘗試在這兩個城市的公共空間作同一行為展演時,切身體驗了當中的差異。首個行為展演在1995年於廣州進行,當時市內正展開至今廣為人知的大規模城市改造。在興建中的高樓大廈所投下的影子裏,林一林用數小時將一道煤渣磚牆的磚,從牆的一端到另一端逐塊搬運,最後跨越數條繁忙的行車線搬到馬路對面,這項費力耗時的都市介入行為,名為《安全渡過林和路》,體現了都市建設的體力勞動和無情的城市流動。Richard Serra(1938年生於美國)在1981年創作具爭議的公共雕塑藝術《Tilted Arc》, 突兀地將紐約的聯邦廣場分割,令人無法穿過廣場;林一林的作品,就像《Tilted Arc》的臨時、肉身和透明版本,搬磚的他艱難前行,與迎面而來的行車作對,在快速都市化和匆忙的日常生活中,作品要求一個短暫但不能避免的停頓。

    數個月後的1996年初,林一林有機會在香港再次展演這個作品,這次展演名為《驅動器》(1996年)。林一林回想,最初想在香港地下鐵路逐個地鐵站搬磚上下車廂,但也許是知道地下鐵路公司大概不會允許如此干擾運作的行動,這個意念在徵求地下鐵路許可前,已遭邀請方香港藝術中心否決。他不情願地妥協,在香港藝術中心附近的灣仔行人天橋上開始了歷時四日的展演。今回他為表達對香港主權即將移交予中國大陸之觀感,在煤渣磚上手寫了香港各政府部門的名稱。展演首日,由於磚牆比廣州的更大型,搬砌過程更艱難,有香港藝術家自發加入。然而,翌晨林一林到現場卻發現磚牆已完全改變,被移到地面,正好擋住了上行人天橋的樓梯。他以為這是協助他的那些藝術家的一場惡作劇或者對他作出的一種批判,便又將磚搬上行人天橋,重新開始搬砌。正當他這樣做的時候,一名路人拿出電話致電相關部門,路政署遂派員驅趕林一林,並拆除了他的磚牆。林一林之後被迫將磚搬回藝術中心地面門前,但這也帶來了新的問題,當時有許多香港人到附近的灣仔入境事務大樓,趕辦英國為部分居民提供的屬土公民護照。故此展演最後一日,他用寫有香港政府部門名稱的磚砌成牆,阻塞排隊的人,令已經焦灼不安的市民更感沮喪。翌日林一林的磚牆終於被路政署清除,展演以失敗告終。廣州的藝術介入行為,有悠久的歷史,即使受到諸多限制,依然含蓄有力;對於來自廣州的林一林而言,這次活動和當中的種種失策,進一步證明了在本應自由的香港,藝術卻是不可能的事。在這裡,藝術家的行動受當局、市民和藝術界同儕的排斥。

    <p>一個男人搬着兩塊白色磚塊,旁邊有一道以相似磚塊疊起的牆,磚塊上寫有漢字。</p>

    林一林,《驅動器》,1996年,行為展演照片。照片由藝術家提供。

    林一林的「搬磚」行為完全切合當代行為藝術的傳統,把漫長時間、毅力勞動,以及挑釁性的公眾參與奉為圭臬。他的行為在後毛澤東時代的中國,會像在倫敦、紐約市那樣受到一定的認同,但在香港則不然,這說明香港的美學空間,與毗鄰的珠江三角洲或其他追求認同的文化重地截然不同。伴隨文化認同的是特定期待,可見於現代社會主義藝術的傳統或先鋒派對資本主義的批判,前者崇尚大型和華麗感,後者則渴求逾越和挑釁。香港文化在這兩個意識形態傳統之下,從未融入自如。

    與此相對,在過去數十年間,當代香港的藝術一直迴避這些期待,並採取一種截然不同的態度:在形式、尺寸、規模和表達上,以「小」為上。這個趨向在香港成為一種現象,部分原因在於香港人受狹小的生活和工作空間的實際限制,以及藝術製作和展示方面,相對缺乏空間、市場和支持。不過,這個形式上的趨勢已發展成一個更廣泛的美學論述,我們或會將這個論述與文化研究學者馬文彬(Ackbar Abbas)所謂「遁」的美學,或者法國哲學家德勒茲(Gilles Deleuze)提出的更廣及全球、1968年左翼運動後的微觀政治關聯起來。香港藝術的微渺,很有可能是一個徵象,顯示社會對於簡化的地緣政治的普遍抗拒,而香港居民和藝術家(以及全球各地眾人)就是在這種簡化的地緣政治中生活運作;或者亦有可能是一種正在冒起的全球美學之產物──間接、短暫、個人、感性, 有論者視之為政治能量的新形式。

    但是香港藝術之「小」,除了可以用國際和本地的關係來解釋,亦有地域因緣。作為一種文化感性,香港藝術之「小」是更廣泛的廣東感性的變調,這種感性低調、自謙,表達在各個方面;例如作為廣東流行語言機智靈妙的基礎,或者在日常對話中疑問句以懶洋洋的語氣結尾。在香港流行文化中,最精湛又經得起時間考驗的例子,莫過於周星馳的幽默。他以最為誇張的手法所演繹的小人物角色,往往自吹自擂,展現不應有的自戀。這是一種日常、低下、卑微的感性;但凡得到好處,都大肆慶祝,不管那好處少得可憐;令每個小動作搞怪討好,即使那小動作是何等無謂;用貼切的俗語,調侃最嚴肅的話題。這並非弱者的文化策略,而是除了以荒謬作為虛飾,拒絕給予正式權力(formal power)任何認許的人之政治。換言之,在最理想的情況下,「小」,毫不費力就能做到最深刻的批判。

    廣式生活的虛靜恬淡,大量融入到香港當代藝術中,尤其是新一代年輕藝術家,當中包括我在本文論及的林東鵬、李傑、白雙全、方琛宇和麥影彤的作品。這些藝術家屬於中國推行改革開放(1978年)期間出生的世代,童年生活在英國殖民統治末期(英治於1997年結束)。這段時期,是超現實的倒數時期,一個晚期資本主義的地域,準備接受共產黨的管治。他們在由大陸管治的特別行政區成長為藝術家,適逢中國當代藝術冒起,並在全球藝術界極富有影響力。這些藝術家在香港大學體制下中規中矩的藝術系畢業,正值藝術界急劇國際化、北京在一夜之間成為文化重地的千禧年代中,建立自己的事業。這是歷史倒轉、矛盾深刻的數十年。

    <p>一張矮桌子,上面放滿玩具,前面放着色彩繽紛的塑膠凳子。</p>

    林東鵬‬‬,《島嶼上發生的事》,2013年,塑膠彩、炭筆、鉛筆、縮型模型及木製玩具木本,300× 700厘米。照片由藝術家提供。

    如果將「小」歸為形式上的尺寸,那麼我們可以留意到它在畫家林東鵬(1978年生於香港)作品中的漸次變化。在過去十年中,林東鵬的作品帶領觀者「由巨入微」。他採用多種混合媒材於夾板上創作,其立意顯然取自中國山水畫與香港平面設計(可愛型、線性、扁平化,常作擬人化)。即使這些作品大部分是在大幅夾板上完成,但氣氛平靜、色調舒緩,以柔和的筆觸呈現出人性或擬人的層面。他於2008年旅居北京時,在數塊夾板上以炭筆繪畫山脈,之後將畫完的山峰的一部分擦除,作品題為《移山者,愚公也》。這是一件形跡疏落、近乎抽象的作品,令人聯想到上了油墨、被鑿刻過的木版畫。雖然這是一件大型作品,但它卻留下印象派的畫風,轉瞬即逝。2011年,他將這一大型風景畫母題,發展成一系列小幅面的混合媒材的山景畫,畫中的摩天大廈群以粉色起稿後塗繪於夾板上。這次還將微型塑膠模型,包括孤單的人像和日用品,附於畫上作浮雕狀,有時放在小盒內,混合着水墨畫的古風與極為當代、非比尋常的小裝飾。在那個時期,林東鵬亦在自己的工作室書桌抽屜做實驗,在細小、隱蔽的空間內放置小裝飾,擺設出不同場景,彷彿是他為繪畫而設計的草圖。到2013年,他這種浮雕元素在平面作品中的應用,在多媒體作品《島嶼上發生的事》中發展成一個完整、現成的縮微立體佈景,在另一幅非常大的風景畫上,加上橫檔,放置玩具。作品的繪畫部分是多山的島嶼,上有一群群孤單的高樓大廈,與吸引兒童在畫前拿來把玩的迷你玩具車和道路模型形成對比。相較早前在北京完成的作品,用大幅山水來思考留痕與擦除的關係,而這組比較近期的作品,則對這個相當常見的藝術主題輕描淡寫,將稚氣的迷你城市風景,名副其實「放置」(也實在是一種「投影」)到前景的位置。林東鵬作品中可見的物件,大小尺寸各有不同,呼應了他對形式的追尋:在那些多山風景畫的面前,找尋一個可以連繫的合適比例。

    林東鵬曾經與另一位香港中文大學藝術系畢業生合租了一個位於火炭的工作室,這位室友每天在工作室一角的雙層床睡到很晚才起床。他們的工作室裏經常有一大堆看來是隨意摺起的床單。那位工作室室友就是藝術家李傑(1978年生於香港),那些「床單」,其實是他繪畫實踐的產品:他在頭尾相連的長方形布料上畫上普通的條紋和圖案,驟眼看去令人以為是褪色的起居布料,這是他在香港中文大學修讀碩士課程時發展出的創作手法。值得留意的是,他畫在布上的圖案,並無具體指涉,不是重複某些商業設計,亦非複製經典的香港、英國或中國產品,故此這些圖案既非懷舊,亦無歷史性,甚至不為人熟悉,只是看上去有些稀鬆平常。不久,李傑將這一繪畫手法拓展成一種全面的藝術生活實踐:他獲邀參展或駐地時,會暫居藝廊,並在自己駐地期間使用的所有家用布料(床單、枕袋、碗布)上作畫。換言之,這個最初是繪製起居布料圖案的模仿行為,後來還是融入到那些布料的日常功能當中。這是一種本質上無從覺察的行為藝術,將形式、功能二元一位轉向個人內在。

    <p>桌子蓋上藍色桌布,表面有污漬,上面放着碗、電熱爐、鍋子和茶杯。</p>

    李傑,《Hand-painted cloth used in pantry》,2009年,塑膠彩布本。照片由藝術家提供。

    因而,林東鵬和李傑是兩位直接、象徵地、從功能上將傳統西方藝術媒介拉入日常形態和物件的香港藝術家。然而他們的指涉難以捉摸,屬於偶然的選擇──既不是有目的的挪用,亦不是為表明抗拒而徹底隱退。反而,他們使用日常符號的能指時,有一種隨意性,暗示他們沒有意願或興趣,甚至有避免參與挪用的文化策略。此外,這種偶發的漫不經心,是其作品在形式上增加感染力不可缺少的環節。他們作品的吸引力繫於那細微、不精確且顫動的線條,或者逐漸滲入夾板表面的濃色,反映出個人化、定製式工藝美學的感染力,而這種美學是當代繪畫摒棄技巧的氛圍的表現。這樣看來,那是屬於後工業時代工藝美學在全球的冒起,這是一種物質文化,推崇那些都市隱士的微觀製作,他們的都市已停止密集生產,並尋找新方式去重新審視「製作」的價值。

    充分利用香港這個密集都市景觀的另一種概念藝術,是藝術家身為市民大眾的一員,參與極為私人(時或有創意)的行為。這種概念藝術在白雙全(1977年生於福建)的作品中尤為明顯。他的作品是典型的行為表演和概念創作,當中不外乎是藝術家在都市場合中的私人行為,觀者只有要透過藝術家的陳述或紀錄,方能接觸其作品。白雙全透過一個非比尋常的項目發展出這種手法──在兩年間每週於讀者眾多的香港報章《明報》發表兩版內容。他受時任編輯黎佩芬邀稿,後者任他自由發揮,在專欄定期回應香港時事。白雙全獲編配的題目當中許多明顯具政治性,然而他選擇藉改變角度,提供名副其實的「另類觀點」,將政治的對抗特性消弭,例如從出人意表的角度拍攝一場示威,同時將擦肩而過的日常生活攝入鏡頭。

    白雙全在《明報》的作品,長期、定時地以報章專欄為形式、結構與展出的場合,這在當代藝術史上是前所未有的。整整兩年間,他受薪擔任每週專欄作者,跟其他專欄作者一樣,獲分配「報導」,並在數日內,提交一份圖文兼備、詳盡易懂的主題作品。如其他專欄作品那樣,報紙亦會收到讀者對白雙全跨版作品的來信。白雙全的這個創作習慣,成為報導藝術家自身紀錄與閱報公眾的反應,兩者層疊而成的每週一場的對話。他的作品既非藝術家為嘲弄大眾傳媒而製作的戲仿「報紙」(如情境主義者和超現實主義者的製作),亦不是藝術家為了以概念主義的模式向公眾發表藝術宣言而付費刊登的臨時廣告。相反,白雙全和編輯創造了一個另類場合,在不必憂慮被現有權力架構收編的環境中展示藝術。白雙全自豪地形容他的創作手法,是將自己放在一個跟其他不在辦公室工作的香港人沒甚分別的位置:不能整天留在狹小的家中、要到市內閒蕩、希望可以與其他市民有一場無虞而間接的對話。他對公共空間的關注,使他反思公民身分和常規化的都市生活的意義,進而在那個空間採取極微細、含蓄和短暫的介入,或者至少將公共空間與個人思考之間那個也許尚有發揮餘地的縫隙,發展為素材。

    <p>四張並排的照片。其中三張照片中,人們在地鐵站內或站或走。 第四名照片中,兩名男子面對鏡頭微笑。</p>

    白雙全,《等一個朋友》,2006年,行為展演,九龍塘地鐵站,香港。照片由藝術家提供。

    其中一個尤為關注香港都市環境的專欄作品,是《等一個朋友》(2006年)。白雙全在人聲鼎沸的九龍塘地鐵站站着。九龍塘地鐵站是香港最繁忙的轉車站之一,在這裏找一個佇立的位置都有困難,而白雙全卻等了近四小時,終於等到一個他認識的人剛好路過。這位朋友問他:「你怎麼知道我會經過這裏?」他答道:「其實我並不知道,只是我等了你很久。」

    這是一次美好的交流,不僅因為短暫,亦是由於這略略反常規的對話,成為輕輕插入香港無休止繁忙時空中的一幕。這個插曲本身當然只是暫時中斷了都市流動的節奏和等候、期待與巧合等時間界域。設想有一對朋友,僅僅談兩句,就回歸到都市地鐵的洪洪人流中。將這一行為視為「藝術」,也許只有在香港這種高度理性化的地方才可行。這裏的大多數居民無法想像,在沒有約定的情況下,於地鐵的任一主要轉車站,等到一個剛好經過的朋友。在別的城市,則或許要等長得多的時間才會成事,而在其他地方,碰到一個沒有約定的朋友,也是平常不過的。在現代主義者的語境下,「等待」總帶有一種存在的沉重,但白雙全不像卡夫卡小說的角色,等了一輩子,最終面對的卻是同一個無動於衷的官僚,亦不像林一林重建磚牆時那些等候領護照的港人;白雙全的行為以相對短暫的等待時間,和等到最後遇上一位朋友的喜悅與樂趣,舒緩了等待的沉重感。

    在高效率的香港日常生活中,即使數秒的延遲,都別具深意,至少方琛宇在作品《販賣偷來的時間》中是如此刻畫的。方琛宇(1985年生於香港)亦是香港中文大學藝術碩士課程畢業生,他的錄像裝置紀錄了他自陌生人處「偷來」的數秒──他在住宅大廈升降機內隨機按動按鈕,為的是捕捉升降機開門時搭客的反應。這種微型中斷的效果,有時藉搭客的反應記錄下來,大部分時間他們泰然自若、或感到煩擾、沉悶、困惑,但不久就會有人與鏡頭對質,投以挑釁目光。每個反應都是精彩的揭露時刻,鏡面升降機門打開時,我們看得見升降機內的人及其反應。之後,方琛宇在畫廊展出錄像,任參觀者選購片段帶走,並在重新播放前剪輯錄像,將已售出的片段換成空白畫面,並標明出售價格。如是者,在極小的空間內極短暫的曝光,最終回復不為人所見。可以想像,出售行為到最後,作品將僅餘一段段價格標在黑色畫面上停留數秒的連續片段。

    <p>多張照片,拍攝不同人站在 電梯內。 每張照片都有一個項目代碼、時長、拍攝日期、時間和價格。</p>

    方琛宇,《販賣偷來的時間》圖錄,2008年。照片由藝術家提供。

    花上一點時間,做一些看來是差事但又不是工作的事,只為探問日常用途和價值這種做法,在麥影彤(1989年生於香港)的作品《Sterilization》(2013年)中有着極富感染力的實踐。麥影彤在這個作品中,用牙籤將草莓表面的瘦果(種子)挑出;這個手法跟她後來的作品《Disarming》(2013年)相關,這次她用一把鑷子將一棵小仙人掌上面的刺拔出。《Sterilization》有數種變化,經多次實行、展演和裝置,記錄成不同錄像。在錄像版本中只見一雙手,專注地用牙籤處理放在透明培養皿的一顆草莓,這個行為初看像做手術,再看像在美容,草莓鮮紅色的尖頭令人難以不將它想像成為人,因為香港的護膚品廣告經常將有待清出黑頭的鼻子與草莓拉上關係,台灣則將千禧年代出生的人稱為草莓族。但隨著畫面中的手挑、挖、揉、戳草莓上的每顆瘦果,手指最後滴着紅色液體,可愛的草莓慢慢變成了難以辨認的果茸。正如其作品題目所示,這個行為說明了美與潔淨,在很大程度上是植根於生物繁衍和社會再生產的過程。控制繁衍和再生產的強制過程,在瘦果被逐顆挑出所營造的恐懼中,變得戲劇化。

    影片中有一雙人從牆上的洞伸出來,用牙籤挑走草莓上的籽。

    麥影彤,《Sterilization》,2013年,錄像。

    雖然在行為藝術的歷史中,常常將時間和強迫式的重複神話化,而且上述所有的香港藝術家作品,亦在一些環節應用了長時間和重複的元素,但是細看之下,在上述作品中,花費長時間或發展為長期持續實踐的其實不多。白雙全等了「許久」,其實不足四小時;方琛宇中斷鄰居搭升降機的時間,是以秒計;麥影彤和李傑都有重複動作,但兩者皆不涉及費勁的體力勞動,作品亦不要求觀者參與相關(且莫說艱難)的體驗。林東鵬的作品規模較大,有時亦會邀請觀者參與,不過觀者所接觸的,是真正的小玩意。

    整體而言,這些作品沒有在財產、法律或權力架構上有實質性的冒犯之舉;事實上,方琛宇偷時間、白雙全創作《明報》跨版專欄,都完美地切合商業藝術和大眾傳媒體系的期望,這些作品在公共空間或日常生活中創作而成,但從來不妨礙兩者。最後,雖然這些香港藝術家是如此自覺地創作,他們往往不表明自己是這個城市、家園或藝術界的介入者;從這一意義而言,正是他們的文化感性迥異於概念藝術和行為藝術的傳統、現代主義或社會主義藝術的宏大政治敘述,甚至廣州的當代行為藝術。

    然而,僅將這些偏離之象視為一個新世代屈從商業化或去政治化微觀美學的徵象,未免太簡單。因為在這些年輕藝術家生活的時空中,所謂的逾越與宏大,已被巨型的、地緣政治的、甚至普世主義的權力鬥爭觀念所篡奪。在這種情況下,細小、隱匿、短暫的事物,形成一種微觀藝術製作的美學,同時將權力跟可見性所帶來的問題分隔。他們反而提出一個方法,不帶競爭或批評地反思和細想何謂規模。在此,變質、形成、推緩、延遲的過程,就是為了尋找合適規模和空間,去表達一種不作阻擾的聲音。


    本文由梁煥茵從英文原文翻譯。

    文章頂部圖片:林一林,《驅動器》,1996年,行為展演照片,香港M+,管藝捐贈,2013年。

    黄韻然現於美國加州大學柏克萊分校任修辭與美術史副教授,為現當代藝術與視覺文化的歷史學者,專研假冒、偽造、欺詐、複製、贗品等挑戰藝術品原創性的現象和行為。她的研究以華南地區的廣州、深圳和香港為重點,寫作題材包括中國及西方美學、人類學、知識產權法與流行文化,著作《Van Gogh on Demand: China and the Readymade》(2014年芝加哥大學出版社出版)獲2015年「列文森中國研究專書獎」(Joseph Levenson Book Prize)。

     

  • 方琛宇 誰不是陌生人的世界

    Media. U Magazine
    Date. 2017-05-19
    Page. 40 – 41 (Life + Weekend)
    Text. Ida
    Photo. Pow, Silasfong.com

  • 沉靜的日常

    Media. 明周
    Date. 2016-06-04
    Page. 24
    Text. 蔡倩怡
    Photo. 梁俊棋

    方琛宇: 沉靜的日常

    第一次看方琛宇 (Silas) 的錄像作品,是在展覽裏佔據整幅牆的投影幕,三個畫面並置,以定鏡長時間拍攝扶手電梯。偌大的畫面將電梯上行人的漠然神態表露無遺,同時也擷取了日常片刻,緩慢的流動影像如同將時間靜止凝固。

    我們在他的最新個展《比哥羅米尼街316號》(歌德學院主辦) 採訪,其中一件作品,是模擬半夜無眠坐在家裏沙發的經驗,如窗影的錄像投射在壁上並反覆移動,沙發下也放了喇叭,隱約能聽到夜半的竊竊私語。我們就坐在黑暗中談錄像。

    Silas畢業於香港浸會大學視覺藝術院,早年已專注於錄像創作。「因為video是time-based 的媒介,與時間有關而我喜歡探索日常經驗中時間是如何度過的。」因此我們不難看到Silas早期的作品總注視日常。《當門打開》以長鏡頭拍攝地鐵月台幕門前時間的瞬間流逝。《等待》悄悄拍下在時代廣場上等待着的人。Silas檢拾城市的時間碎片,再放大呈現。「我在拍攝時花很長時觀察,看着影機時也好像變得抽離了,在日常的場景裏靜待事情的發生,所以我的作品也有紀錄的成分。而利用錄像記錄日常生活也更能觀影與了解自己。」

    異殊的城市經驗

    Silas深諳時間在城市的特質──快速而珍貴,於是他便拍攝升降關門前的數秒,再將作品出售,每段片段只販賣一次,錄像中已出的部分會換成「已售—xx秒xxx元」的畫面。作品便稱作《販賣偷來的時間》。「錄像對我來說不是單純的形式,而是思考的媒介,讓我可以思索與日常生活的關係。」時間與日常秩序、以至商業的關係密不可分,他透露其中一件「不存在的作品」:「我曾經想過在亞視買下廣告時段,但不播放任何影像。因為我們平常收看電視上的廣告、新聞等,都不會思考,沒有對日常生活的自覺。」

    Silas的早期作品,除了與時間有關,也跟人很有密切關係。好像《跟踨陌生人》便探索網絡時代社交媒體上的「陌生人」是一種什麼概念。「我過去的作品確是充滿着人,但現在的作品不會直接拍攝人,只會感覺到人的存在。影像呈現的是經驗與感覺,以至腦內幻想。所以video可以說是全面的,不論虛實的形式,或立體與無形等所有事都能包納。」

    曾到德國唸書的Silas,對於生活經驗也更敏銳。現在的作品仍圍繞日常,更擅長探索日常的內在肌理。「有時在街上看到很多人拿着手機看片便會感到很有趣。我會想流動影像與外在空間的關作。從前我曾旁聽葉旭耀的課,他提到"Pre-cinema”的概念,例如皮影戲。而這亦啟發到我思考錄像藝術──它是整體的經驗,探現實空間與影像空間如何重疊。」