+油漆行臉書++由此進<<

更新日期+2014+12+08
     

一個房間計畫網頁建構中....請參閱..影片連結..(中文版)..(英文版)

 

 

關於文賢油漆工程行的「一個房間計畫」

 

文 / 林煌迪

在台灣,我們已經習慣在閱讀藝術的時候,關注著屬於藝術家個人的獨特觀點、洞察力或創造力,並試著將閱讀的瞬間視為永恆。一般而言,主流的意見並不鼓勵觀眾去捕捉屬於作品展呈以外的其他脈絡;除了作者已作古,我們才會有興趣去挖掘那些並不完整的傳說,當成是個浪漫卻容易消化,或可以輕鬆消費的商品。因為日常生活已經有那麼多無法解決的難題了,藝術不就該是個提供暫時逃避的救贖嗎,至少也要易於消費? 我相信有很多人是這麼想的。不只面對藝術,在面對現實生活的時候,這也是大多數人遇到複雜事物所採取的策略;包括社會各階層中很多握有強大權力的人物,應該也都是如此吧? 那麼,這些屬於藝術創作者的創造力與洞察力是不是僅僅被期待留在藝術家個人身上,還是我們期待這一切可能發生什麼社會影響力?

特別是在近代,以個人的主體作為啟蒙的基本單位,已經是一種普世價值,在這種時代再提出「倫理」這兩個字,就顯得落伍與反動,「社會」則是一種體制形式的代名詞。但事實上,當大家都「被迫」適應依靠著各種體制來尋求資源,並且磨練回應體制的技巧,讓以個人為社會基本單位的我們,其實沒有太多因為個人背離體制的獨立,而可以引以為傲的事;生活中少了很多個人隨性的發展,少了很多閒聊打屁的時間,少了很多自發性合作與互助的機會,因為很多時間得用來因應現實的體制。

現實之所以會成為現實,就是因為大家覺得理當如此。當一人一票已經是民主僅剩的實質內容,政治人物最關心的會是得票的技巧,不太想浪費資源在其他曠日廢時的社會改造;被這一種體制控制著的教育工作者們,關心的也大多是回應體制的檢查,過多的檢查讓人無力或無心關心教育。而藝術家相對是一群本來就比較不被期待對社會有貢獻的人,所以當藝術家談起「社會」總是顯得可疑,但也因為無關緊要,卻保留了一些可能性。比較奇怪的是,這所有的人都依賴同一個社會,希望從社會獲得一些什麼。

2012年我到美國洛杉磯第十八街藝術中心駐村,在與當地藝術家Yvette Gellis互動的機緣之下,發展出一個藝術合作計畫藍圖,並且在回到台灣後與藝評人陳寬育,閒談當下藝術體制的種種所引發的突發奇想,再加上與文賢油漆工程行的駐地藝術家們多年來的合作關係,這個交織於藝術家之間慵懶的日常交流與隨性發展的契機,展開了2013年「台南-洛杉磯 對飛計畫」。並且得到了台南老牌的專業畫廊「東門美術館」的支持,與新興藝術空間「齁空間」的協助,楊思嵐將以影片拍攝介入對話,張晏慈則從攝影記錄發展出一個網頁計畫,還有很多親朋好友數不完的大小不一且不求回報的協助,其實這一切都僅僅來自於日常對話的相互回應。而這個因日常閒聊而架構出來的藝術計畫,也獲得國家文化藝術基金會的補助,整體看來這是一個跨國、跨種族、跨性別、跨世代、跨專業、跨部會,跨越許多不同領域的合作;但是,不是再日常不過的實踐嗎? 何需特別提出來? 事實上,當創作者在追求個人無止盡的獨特創作時,可能逐漸的就忽略了這些再日常不過交流與互助,和所有參與者相互的支持與貢獻。

此次的交流計畫分別在台南與台北兩地各有不同的展呈。「一個房間計畫」是這個交流計畫中的一個子計畫,我將台南「文賢油漆工程行」的二樓空間改裝成為一個可提供日常生活機能的房間,並將陸續邀請相關藝文人士「夜宿油漆行」,藉此策動某種關於藝術生產後台的真實對話,更多元與非正式的意見交換。這個計畫並不期待僅是去展呈任何個人的觀點,而是關注在ㄧ個較完整的生態脈絡中,不同觀點的交互作用,有異於正式展演場上的政治性演出與量化的點交,我希望這個計畫能夠製造更多屬於日常性的對談。在這個集體創作中,並無法預設完成的狀態,只能在不同創作者加入對話後,各以自身的專業,逐步展開對於彼此的影響。

(本文原載於台灣教會公報3204期)2012.5

 

 

 

 

One Room Project in Paint House Studio

 

By Lin, Huang-Ti

InTaiwan, we have become accustomed to concerning about the artists’ personal unique perspectives, insights and creativity, and attempting to consider that moment of reading as eternal when it comes to reading art. Generally speaking, the audience is not expected to actively capture the meanings outside the scope of an art display. Unless the author has passed away, we are then interested in digging into the incomplete legend of an artwork and turning it into a commodity, which is romantic yet easily understood, or which can be consumed effortlessly. When there are so many unresolved problems in the everyday life, art should play the role as a temporary escape from the reality, or at least be available for an easy consumption, shouldn’t it? I believe that many people have such a thought. Not only on art, this is also the strategy adopted by many people when they come across complicated situations in real life. Many of those who have power and influence in the society share this same thought, don't they?Are artists the only ones in the society who are expected to have creativity and insights? Or do we expect something else to happen to exercise an impact to the society?


Particularly in recent years, indivdualism has become a basic, universal value. Talking about ‘collective family values’ sounds outdated and reactionary. ‘Society’ has now become a synonym of an institutional form. But in fact, when all of us have been ‘forced’ to rely on different institutional forms for resources and trained to respond to the institutions, there are not many things about the moral worth of the individual that we could do or be proud of. There are less chances for a free personal development, chitchats, or self-initiated opportunities of collaboration and mutual assistance when most of the time is spent on dealing with the institutions.

Reality is being called ‘reality’ because all of us take it for granted that it is such a thing. When universal suffrage has become the only component of democracy, the politicians are only concerned about how to get the votes and not willing to waste any resources in realizing social reforms. Educators who are controlled by this kind of institution are busy with dealing with their required duties and inspections given by the institution. Excessive inspections kill educators’ passion in teaching. Artists is a group that is not considered as the contributing members in the society and therefore it is always questionable when artists talk about ‘society’. This group is, however, more likely to contribute when they receive lower expectation from the society. Interestingly, all people rely on the society and expect to take advantage from it.

In 2012, I participated in the artist-in-residence program in 18th Street Arts Center in Los Angeles USA during which I co-developed an initial art collaboration plan with the local artist Yvette Gellis. Upon my return to Taiwan, I came up with some spontaneous thoughts after discussing with the art critics Kuan-yu CHEN. Together with my collaboration with the Paint House Gallery’s resident artists in the past few years, which is about the lax, daily exchanges and spontaneous development among the artists, I started the ‘Round-Trip Ticket, Tainan-LA’ project in 2013. With the support of Licence Art Gallery and the assistance from the newly established Howl Space, Yang, Szu-lan uses motion pictures to initiate dialogue, Zhang, Yan-ci develops a website project from photographic records, and many other friends who have offered different kinds of unconditional supports. These are actually the results of daily interactions and conversations. This art project, which is initiated and developed from causal daily conversations, is funded by National Culture and Arts Foundation. This is a cross-border, cross-racial, cross-gender, cross-generational, multi-disciplinary, inter-ministerial collaboration across many different areas. It is an ordinary realization in the everyday life, isn’t it? Why does it require special mention? In fact, when an artist is pursuing his or her unique artistic goals, he or she may pay less attention to these mundane daily exchanges, mutual assistance, support and contribution of other participants of the project.

This exchange project has different exhibitions in Tainan and Taipei respectively. ‘One Room Project’ is one of the projects of this exchange project. I converted the space on the second floor of ‘Paint House Studio’ in Tainan into a guest room to invite artists and intellectuals one by one to ‘stay overnight at the studio’, through which the real dialogues behind the art could be motivated and more diverse and informal exchanges could take place. This project is not about displaying any personal perspective but a rather comprehensive ecosystem and the interactions between different perspectives, which is different from the political performance or quantifiable business exchanges in official exhibitions. I hope that this project motivates more conversations that belong to the everyday life. In the process of this collective creation, it is impossible to achieve a status of completion but wait for the different participants with different expertise to impact on each other.

(This text was originally published in Taiwan Church News, Issue 3204)