走路草香港駐村心得
Walking Grass Agriculture – thoughts on the artist-in-residency in Hong Kong
香港的文化與台灣的文化雖然有許多共通之處，然而在些微的差異中，仍然有著許多有趣且值得探討的地方。錨定效應（Anchoring Effect，或Focalism），是心理學名詞，講的是一種認知偏差，人類在進行決策時，會過度偏重最早取得的第一筆資訊（這稱為錨點），即使這個資訊與這項決定明顯無關。在進行決策時，人類傾向於利用最早取得的片斷資訊，以快速做出決定，在接下來的決定中，再用第一個決定為基準點，逐步修正；然而透過藝術體驗並理解文化，追求的不只是考古式的追本溯源，而是透過當下自身感知的時空限制，去思考當代人的生存處境，換言之錯誤的認知有時候也帶有某種真實性，值得去探究與思考。
走路草農藝首次的香港駐村，從自己長久所關注議題為主要方向，結合過去的創作脈絡與駐村經驗，將觀察的重點放在以下幾個現象的田調與訪查。
第一個部分是從種植探索到土地問題：在台灣即使是在台北，仍然有機會在公園綠地以及安全島上，見到幾分綠地，而許多不被知曉是野菜的野草，也可在某些角落被看到，然而這樣的小確幸在香港也是非常難得的，尋找香港在地的農作物聽起來或許是一種天方夜譚，本次交流預計觀察的市場為土瓜灣的紅蘋果市場，而在進行場勘以前，有幸在牛棚藝術村參觀《土瓜灣之後》社區生活提案一展，已有較通盤的了解，就市場的格局與建築樣式而言，完整的排水系統與防水系統，已經現代化的建築結構，而多數販賣的作物，多數亦來自大陸進口，僅有在部分的海鮮乾貨、中藥材、手工製作的食品（諸如水餃、雲吞、缽仔糕等點心）、燒臘以及不同的魚貨海鮮等「合理」的差異外，其他部分是大同小異的。然而透過香港藝術家朋友的帶領，有機會抵達香港的錦田，錦田在大埔和元朗之間，這裡的風景與台灣的相似性，反而才顯得格外不一樣，一改自己對於香港的刻板印象，田園風光，以及錯落的黑瓦厝，甚至是阡陌縱橫的田埂與水路，至此重新燃起對與香港土議題探討的動力可能，甚至可以思考到台灣目前的局面。
由於駐村期間接近農曆新年，在市街上有看到「通勝」書籍的流通，這個與台灣的農民曆是相同概念的出版物，通勝原名為「通書」，由於「書」的發音與「輸」同，香港、廣東一代的皆以通勝稱之。無論是通勝還是農民曆，這種書籍本身有著節氣的概念，既是判斷並選擇吉凶日子的工具書，也是過去農夫務農，時累積的經驗法則，這讓走路草試圖蒐集亞洲不同地區的通勝，展開另一個系列主題的討論。
第二個部分從上述的焦點所延伸，是地方信仰地方的探查：在台灣的經驗中，廟宇與街市、市集的位置，往往有著地緣的關係，因此在市場的附近，走路草有意識的找尋地緣關係上，屬於出入口位置的廟宇，因此在香港期間拜訪了許許多多有名或是無名的大小廟宇，透過廟宇石碑的閱讀，更可以知道每個地方的變遷，這些廟宇包含街市街、城隍廟、觀音古廟天后古廟，然而除了上述脈絡下的廟宇找尋，最讓走路草為之驚艷的，是三棟屋博物館的造訪，三棟屋位在荃灣，是個客家族群聚落的圍村，透過這個空間改造的博物館，可以從不同的文化脈絡，一窺客家文化與香港之間的關係，包含紙紮、舞獅乃至於各種道教科儀文物的展示，反而讓身處香港的我們，有另一種熟悉感，讓客家文化成為一種穿越港台有趣的文化媒介。此外由當代藝術家林嵐所帶領的團隊，所進行的聲音藝術結合表演藝術的開幕式，也是別開生面的留下深刻的印象，古琴、胡琴以及古調的吟唱，在現代電子儀器的混音下，讓建築體的祠堂成為舞者穿越時空的舞台，這樣的觀看經驗對於台灣的我們而言也是少有的。
在香港期間看過幾個展覽，其中在看完《勞力‧是》與《土瓜灣之後》兩個展覽之後，有著很深沉的省思。
《勞力‧是》由謝至德策展，主辦單位為樂施會、失焦工作室與Quabitat，於香港賽馬會創意藝術中心舉行，參展者為陳巧真、陳嘉興、程展緯、侯紹政、賴憶南、梁祖彝、李紹忠、廖家宜、余在思，以及白雙全「左一計劃」藝術團隊等共十三位藝術家，與此同時，《土瓜灣之後》社區生活提案展，在香港牛棚藝術村舉辦。《土瓜灣之後》為賽馬會「藍屋創作室」文化保育教育計劃，蘇波榮、建生一號、港嘢、軸物行者、瓜瓜報、青春工藝、香港社區規劃學會等，為主辦單位邀請之外，另有25件公開徵集的社區提案，其中12位獲得徵集優異獎的參展者，於2016年8月前往台灣當代藝術館、竹圍藝術工作室進行社區參與的經驗交流。香港在高密度的人口社會結構下，面臨了許多「難題」，從政治與經濟衍生了人口老化、房屋稅制、勞工權益甚至是教育體制的問題，兩個異地同時的展覽在上述的社會問題下，立足在怎樣的觀看視角？或者擁有怎樣的藝術姿態？
勞力與觀看
「窮的只剩份工」是《勞力‧是》視覺藝術展的副標題，貧富差距在該展中成為被探討的對象。展覽藝術家的作品，多數聚焦在保安員、清潔工、速遞員等社會基層的職位，作品中透露冀望著社會資源的重新分配與工作環境的改善。穿越賽馬會創意藝術中心中庭，用掃把、竹簍、看守亭等各類陪伴工作的道具後，才開始進入展場。入口處程展緯作品《給保安員椅子運動》在形式上呼應觀念藝術家約瑟夫‧科蘇斯 (Josepf Kosuth) 《一個和三椅子》，此作在呼應該展覽主題之餘，似乎也道出了一個無法回避的命題：藝術的位子在哪？當藝術專注社會問題時，目的並非是要解決問題，即使以「喚起對於貧窮的關注」做為目的都可能是危險的；勞動與觀看關係在藝術範疇提問下，才有機會既是對峙也是對質的。王錫欽作品《更亭外的詩隱》截取了在更亭(守衛室)向外看的文字，集結成「保安員字典」，再以字典中的字寫成詩句，用隱形墨水寫在該展場作品的陰影處，待觀者拿紫外線手電筒照射與找尋。觀看的勞力在找尋中被彰顯，為觀看付出勞力成為「負責」觀者得「履行」的「專業」，在藝術的陰影背後，藏有更多等待被發現的「心聲」，若無付出勞力，將會忽略陰影背後的故事，無法完成整個藝術作品的脈絡交代。換言之，藝術何嘗不是一種付出勞力的過程？
勞力與教育
十三街是街道的統稱，位在香港九龍馬頭角牛棚藝術，由13條街道組成，而交織舊有的人情在《土瓜灣之後》中一覽無遺。例如民間團體織織團，以纖維作為交流的技術，在共同創作時，讓「土家人」成為一種地方認同。香港理工大學以「把脈」為題，為土瓜灣的十三街進行望、聞、問、切的田野調查，針對地方產業結構、族群結構與人口結構進行簡明的耙梳，同樣的是一種勞力的付出。《土瓜灣之後》一展中的參展者，似乎面對著不純粹是藝術姿態的問題;在面對未來可能重劃的街區中，這些提案是否能有所作為？或者可以阻止被開發？上述這些問題如同教育一般，無法因為預設而決定執行與否，無私的付出僅能是執行者所仰賴的動力來源，實踐藝術的同時，亦是一種教育過程，教育是需要勞力付出的。
結語
兩個展覽不約而同一體兩面地，反應了香港現階段迫切的社會問題，香港藝術家身在其中，無論參展者是否以藝術家自稱，當這些「提案」或者「物件」被展示時，都勢必遭遇到展示與觀看的過程。多數人熟悉的展覽，展示的是藝術的結果，而多數人不熟悉的藝術，展示的是事件的過程。藝術是社會消化系統的酵素梅，催化了事件發酵，亦催化了旁觀者的「感性」運作，勞動與觀看的關係在展覽空間中是暫時的，在與人的合作與溝通中，提案的築夢，築的是想像力的開發，殘酷社會的夢田，藝術家無法獨自一人開墾。「窮的只剩份工」不是最窮的窘境，藝術與教育都殆盡的「窮」或許是另一個社會值得思考的問題。
走路草農藝首次的香港駐村，從自己長久所關注議題為主要方向，結合過去的創作脈絡與駐村經驗，將觀察的重點放在以下幾個現象的田調與訪查。
第一個部分是從種植探索到土地問題：在台灣即使是在台北，仍然有機會在公園綠地以及安全島上，見到幾分綠地，而許多不被知曉是野菜的野草，也可在某些角落被看到，然而這樣的小確幸在香港也是非常難得的，尋找香港在地的農作物聽起來或許是一種天方夜譚，本次交流預計觀察的市場為土瓜灣的紅蘋果市場，而在進行場勘以前，有幸在牛棚藝術村參觀《土瓜灣之後》社區生活提案一展，已有較通盤的了解，就市場的格局與建築樣式而言，完整的排水系統與防水系統，已經現代化的建築結構，而多數販賣的作物，多數亦來自大陸進口，僅有在部分的海鮮乾貨、中藥材、手工製作的食品（諸如水餃、雲吞、缽仔糕等點心）、燒臘以及不同的魚貨海鮮等「合理」的差異外，其他部分是大同小異的。然而透過香港藝術家朋友的帶領，有機會抵達香港的錦田，錦田在大埔和元朗之間，這裡的風景與台灣的相似性，反而才顯得格外不一樣，一改自己對於香港的刻板印象，田園風光，以及錯落的黑瓦厝，甚至是阡陌縱橫的田埂與水路，至此重新燃起對與香港土議題探討的動力可能，甚至可以思考到台灣目前的局面。
由於駐村期間接近農曆新年，在市街上有看到「通勝」書籍的流通，這個與台灣的農民曆是相同概念的出版物，通勝原名為「通書」，由於「書」的發音與「輸」同，香港、廣東一代的皆以通勝稱之。無論是通勝還是農民曆，這種書籍本身有著節氣的概念，既是判斷並選擇吉凶日子的工具書，也是過去農夫務農，時累積的經驗法則，這讓走路草試圖蒐集亞洲不同地區的通勝，展開另一個系列主題的討論。
第二個部分從上述的焦點所延伸，是地方信仰地方的探查：在台灣的經驗中，廟宇與街市、市集的位置，往往有著地緣的關係，因此在市場的附近，走路草有意識的找尋地緣關係上，屬於出入口位置的廟宇，因此在香港期間拜訪了許許多多有名或是無名的大小廟宇，透過廟宇石碑的閱讀，更可以知道每個地方的變遷，這些廟宇包含街市街、城隍廟、觀音古廟天后古廟，然而除了上述脈絡下的廟宇找尋，最讓走路草為之驚艷的，是三棟屋博物館的造訪，三棟屋位在荃灣，是個客家族群聚落的圍村，透過這個空間改造的博物館，可以從不同的文化脈絡，一窺客家文化與香港之間的關係，包含紙紮、舞獅乃至於各種道教科儀文物的展示，反而讓身處香港的我們，有另一種熟悉感，讓客家文化成為一種穿越港台有趣的文化媒介。此外由當代藝術家林嵐所帶領的團隊，所進行的聲音藝術結合表演藝術的開幕式，也是別開生面的留下深刻的印象，古琴、胡琴以及古調的吟唱，在現代電子儀器的混音下，讓建築體的祠堂成為舞者穿越時空的舞台，這樣的觀看經驗對於台灣的我們而言也是少有的。
在香港期間看過幾個展覽，其中在看完《勞力‧是》與《土瓜灣之後》兩個展覽之後，有著很深沉的省思。
《勞力‧是》由謝至德策展，主辦單位為樂施會、失焦工作室與Quabitat，於香港賽馬會創意藝術中心舉行，參展者為陳巧真、陳嘉興、程展緯、侯紹政、賴憶南、梁祖彝、李紹忠、廖家宜、余在思，以及白雙全「左一計劃」藝術團隊等共十三位藝術家，與此同時，《土瓜灣之後》社區生活提案展，在香港牛棚藝術村舉辦。《土瓜灣之後》為賽馬會「藍屋創作室」文化保育教育計劃，蘇波榮、建生一號、港嘢、軸物行者、瓜瓜報、青春工藝、香港社區規劃學會等，為主辦單位邀請之外，另有25件公開徵集的社區提案，其中12位獲得徵集優異獎的參展者，於2016年8月前往台灣當代藝術館、竹圍藝術工作室進行社區參與的經驗交流。香港在高密度的人口社會結構下，面臨了許多「難題」，從政治與經濟衍生了人口老化、房屋稅制、勞工權益甚至是教育體制的問題，兩個異地同時的展覽在上述的社會問題下，立足在怎樣的觀看視角？或者擁有怎樣的藝術姿態？
勞力與觀看
「窮的只剩份工」是《勞力‧是》視覺藝術展的副標題，貧富差距在該展中成為被探討的對象。展覽藝術家的作品，多數聚焦在保安員、清潔工、速遞員等社會基層的職位，作品中透露冀望著社會資源的重新分配與工作環境的改善。穿越賽馬會創意藝術中心中庭，用掃把、竹簍、看守亭等各類陪伴工作的道具後，才開始進入展場。入口處程展緯作品《給保安員椅子運動》在形式上呼應觀念藝術家約瑟夫‧科蘇斯 (Josepf Kosuth) 《一個和三椅子》，此作在呼應該展覽主題之餘，似乎也道出了一個無法回避的命題：藝術的位子在哪？當藝術專注社會問題時，目的並非是要解決問題，即使以「喚起對於貧窮的關注」做為目的都可能是危險的；勞動與觀看關係在藝術範疇提問下，才有機會既是對峙也是對質的。王錫欽作品《更亭外的詩隱》截取了在更亭(守衛室)向外看的文字，集結成「保安員字典」，再以字典中的字寫成詩句，用隱形墨水寫在該展場作品的陰影處，待觀者拿紫外線手電筒照射與找尋。觀看的勞力在找尋中被彰顯，為觀看付出勞力成為「負責」觀者得「履行」的「專業」，在藝術的陰影背後，藏有更多等待被發現的「心聲」，若無付出勞力，將會忽略陰影背後的故事，無法完成整個藝術作品的脈絡交代。換言之，藝術何嘗不是一種付出勞力的過程？
勞力與教育
十三街是街道的統稱，位在香港九龍馬頭角牛棚藝術，由13條街道組成，而交織舊有的人情在《土瓜灣之後》中一覽無遺。例如民間團體織織團，以纖維作為交流的技術，在共同創作時，讓「土家人」成為一種地方認同。香港理工大學以「把脈」為題，為土瓜灣的十三街進行望、聞、問、切的田野調查，針對地方產業結構、族群結構與人口結構進行簡明的耙梳，同樣的是一種勞力的付出。《土瓜灣之後》一展中的參展者，似乎面對著不純粹是藝術姿態的問題;在面對未來可能重劃的街區中，這些提案是否能有所作為？或者可以阻止被開發？上述這些問題如同教育一般，無法因為預設而決定執行與否，無私的付出僅能是執行者所仰賴的動力來源，實踐藝術的同時，亦是一種教育過程，教育是需要勞力付出的。
結語
兩個展覽不約而同一體兩面地，反應了香港現階段迫切的社會問題，香港藝術家身在其中，無論參展者是否以藝術家自稱，當這些「提案」或者「物件」被展示時，都勢必遭遇到展示與觀看的過程。多數人熟悉的展覽，展示的是藝術的結果，而多數人不熟悉的藝術，展示的是事件的過程。藝術是社會消化系統的酵素梅，催化了事件發酵，亦催化了旁觀者的「感性」運作，勞動與觀看的關係在展覽空間中是暫時的，在與人的合作與溝通中，提案的築夢，築的是想像力的開發，殘酷社會的夢田，藝術家無法獨自一人開墾。「窮的只剩份工」不是最窮的窘境，藝術與教育都殆盡的「窮」或許是另一個社會值得思考的問題。
Despite the many commons between Hong Kong and Taiwan cultures, there are small and interesting differences worth exploring. Anchoring effect or focalism is a psychology term referring to cognitive bias, where human usually overly relying on the first piece of information (the anchor), even that information is obviously irrelevant. Human tends to overly make use of the first information to decide quickly. Subsequent decisions making will then be based on the first decision made, and during which human will revise their cognition gradually. Nevertheless, to understand culture through art experience we are not trying to act like an archaeologist digging deep back to the past. Instead, through recognising the time limit we review and rethink on our current living environment. In other words, even wrong cognition to some extent represents a kind of truth that worth exploring and contemplating on.
This is the first artist-in-residence experience for Walking Grass Agriculture (“WGA”) in Hong Kong. With our experience in art and in other residence programme, we tried to look at Hong Kong through certain topics we have long been paying attention to. We focused on the following phenomena during our field visit and investigation.
The first one is to look at land problem through the lens of plantation. In Taiwan, even for its capital Taipei you will have a chance to find greenery in parks and on pedestrian islands. Wild grass that some are actually vegetables can also be found in some of the city corners. To have found these in Hong Kong is incredibly precious. While it might sound unrealistic trying to look for local agricultural product in Hong Kong, the plan for WGA’s stay in Hong Kong was to observe the red apple market in To Kwa Wan. Before we started, we were lucky to have visited the “The Day After Tokwawan” Community Living Approach Exhibition in Cattle Depot Artist Village, which gave us an overall understanding of the market. For the layout and architectural style, this is a modern market featured with comprehensive sewage treatment and waterproofing system. Most of the products are imported from Mainland China and they look just identical. Only slight “comprehensible” differences are discovered on some of the dried seafood, Chinese herbs and handmade food (such as dumplings and sweet puddings), barbecued food and fresh seafood. However, every impression turned around when Hong Kong artists brought us to Kam Tin, a place in Hong Kong between Taipo and Yuen Long. In Kam Tin, because it looks like Taiwan, the place is outstandingly different. It has changed our rigid impression of Hong Kong. Here one can find farmlands, interlocked black tile rooftops, and even intricately laid farmland footpaths and water channels. The visit has triggered our imagination on discussion of land issue in Hong Kong, and even shed lights to situation in Taiwan.
It was about time to Chinese Lunar New Year during our stay, so “Tung Shing” (a fortune-telling calendar based on lunar days) was everywhere. Tung Shing and the farmer calendar in Taiwan are basically compiled on the same concept. Originally, Tung Shing was called “Tung Shu”. However, the pronunciation of “Shu” can also mean “losing/lost” in Chinese and Cantonese. Thus in Hong Kong and Guangdong, everyone is calling the book “Tung Shing” instead. Both Tung Shing and farmer calendar, represent the concept of seasonal changes. It is a tool book to judge and choose the day of luck, as well as a book of experience accumulated by farmers. We are encouraged to start collecting Tung Shing in different Asian regions to start a new discussion in WGA.
Secondly, based on the discovery on Tung Shing we extended our enquiry into local religion. In our experience in Taiwan, locations of temples and markets are usually geographically linked. Whenever WGA explores around a market, we deliberately look for temples that serve as the entrance of the market. In Hong Kong, we visited many famous and unknown, big and small temples, including those on Market Street, the Shing Wong Temple, the Kwun Yam Temple and the Tin Hau Temple. Through reading the temple stone tablet, we have learnt the changes of each place. While all the above temples are found close to the markets, we are deeply surprised by Sam Tung Uk Museum transformed from a Hakka walled village in Tsuen Wan. We could peep into the relationship between Hakka and Hong Kong through various cultural exhibits such as paper effigies, lion dance props and various Taoism ritual items, which felt like we were back home. The two different places, Taiwan and Hong Kong, are now linked up by the one common Hakka culture. The sound performance brought to us by artist Jaffa LAM and and her team during the opening ceremony also gave refreshing impression. Guqin, huqin and classic singing style with the help of modern audio mixing technique, created a space that transcends time, where dancers travelled in this ancestral hall. This is a rare experience even for us who are from Taiwan.
Several exhibitions we visited in Hong Kong have encouraged deep thoughts, especially for “Poverty. Full-time” and “The Day After Tokwawan”. “Poverty. Full-time” was curated by Ducky TSE; organised by Oxfam HK, Outfocus Group Workshop and Quabitat, at the Jockey Club Creative Arts Centre (JCCAC). There were thirteen participating artists, including CHAN Hau-chun, CHAN Ka-hing, Luke CHING, HAU Siu-ching, LA Yat-nam, Joey LEUNG Cho-yi, Joe LI, LIU Ka-yee (Miss FAT), PAK Sheung-chuen with LH01, and Jonathan YU. At the same time, “The Day After Tokwawan“ took place at Cattle Depot Artists Village, under the Jockey Club “Blue House Studio” Cultural Heritage Education Programme. Invited exhibitors were So Boring, Kin Sang Ichiban, Kong Yeah, Wheel Thing Makers, Gwa Gwa Post, Ching Chun Warehouse and The Social Planning Institute of Hong Kong. Meanwhile, the organiser also called for proposal submission with 12 out of 25 submissions selected. The winning candidates had gone to the Museum of Contemporary Art Taipei and Bamboo Curtain Studio for an experience exchange on social participation. Many difficult problems emerge in Hong Kong under its highly intense population and social structure: because of politics and the economy the city is facing problems in aging population, housing tax system, labour right as well as education system. What are the perspectives in these two exhibitions that held at the same time in different locations? What are the respective art presentations of the exhibitions?
Labour effort and the viewers
“Some people are so poor. All they have is only a job.”, this is the subtitle of the art exhibition “Poverty. Full-time” that discusses the wealth gap phenomenon. The work of exhibitors mostly focuses on jobs taken up by the grass-root level, such as security guards, street sweepers and couriers. The exhibitors are trying to advocate for a reallocation of social resources and for an improvement of the work environment. To enter the exhibition, one has to walk across the atrium of JCCAC where you can find items used by the workers such as bloom, bamboo baskets and guard booth. Right at the exhibition entrance placed the work “Please give chairs to seceurity guards” (給保安員椅子運動) by Luke CHING. His presentation resonates with that used by conceptual artist Joseph Kosuth, and has raised an inevitable question beyond the exhibition theme: where is the place for art? When a piece of art is looking at social problems, it might not be trying to solve the problems, because it can be risky even to “arouse attention on poverty”. In reality, the problems and the viewers perhaps have no common ground. Only when it is under the domain of art will there be a chance for social problems (poverty) and viewers to stand on the same ground equally, to face off and question each other. WONG Shen-Yen’s (王錫欽) “The hermit-poet outside of a guard booth ” (《更亭外的詩隱》) recorded texts that can be seen when you are sitting in a guard booth. He extracted words to compile “the guard’s dictionary” and wrote poems using those words. Poems were painted in the shadow of the exhibit with invisible ink, awaiting viewers to discover with their ultraviolet torches. The effort to guard and monitor is now being honoured during search and discovery; it becomes the “profession” to be “obliged and performed” by the viewers. Behind every piece of art are hidden messages to be discovered. If one does not bother about it, he will not be able to understand fully. So isn’t art a process that requires effort?
Labour effort and education
13 streets is the name for the thirteen streets nearby the Cattle Depot Artist Village in To Kwa Wan. The neighbourhood bonding is extensively laid in the exhibition “The Day After Tokwawan“. For example, civil group Jik Jik Team offers an experience in fibre weaving. When we participate in the making of an art piece, we have created a sense of recognition for the place and become a member of To Kwa Wan. Hong Kong Polytechnic University has chosen the theme of “pulse check” in Chinese medicine to conduct their field investigation of 13 streets, through the four diagnosing techniques in Chinese medicine: to see, to listen, to ask and to touch. The result is a simple summary on the industrial structure, clan structure and population structure of To Kwa Wan. This is another kind of effort paid. To us, exhibitors of “The Day After Tokwawan” are facing problems beyond the search for an art form; can their proposals make a difference in the possible neighbourhood redevelopment in the future? Can they stop the incoming exploration and development? Regardless of the answer, they cannot stop; like education, we cannot stop just because we have an assumption in mind. The only driving force for those who carry on raising proposal is a selfless belief in the greater good. When they practise art, they are also educating others, and education requires effort.
Epilogue
Two different exhibitions have coincidentally focused on the same object but have given their own perspective. Both reflected the urgent social problem faced by Hong Kong nowadays. No matter if the “proposals” and “objects” in the exhibitions are presented by exhibitors who regard themselves as artists or not, all these exhibited items would still be viewed in the same way in an exhibition space. Most exhibitions, that many are familiar with, showcase the art products. It is rare to have exhibitions showing only the process of events. Art is the yeast in society that brews events and the emotion of the viewers. An art exhibition constructs a temporary relationship between the labour and the viewer. When we collaborate and communicate with each other to raise proposals, we are trying to expand our imagination of the future. However, changing this cold society takes more than solely artists’ effort in cultural cultivation. “Some people are so poor. All they have is only a job.”. This is not just about poverty in life, but poverty in art and education. This perhaps is another question that worth contemplating in society.
This is the first artist-in-residence experience for Walking Grass Agriculture (“WGA”) in Hong Kong. With our experience in art and in other residence programme, we tried to look at Hong Kong through certain topics we have long been paying attention to. We focused on the following phenomena during our field visit and investigation.
The first one is to look at land problem through the lens of plantation. In Taiwan, even for its capital Taipei you will have a chance to find greenery in parks and on pedestrian islands. Wild grass that some are actually vegetables can also be found in some of the city corners. To have found these in Hong Kong is incredibly precious. While it might sound unrealistic trying to look for local agricultural product in Hong Kong, the plan for WGA’s stay in Hong Kong was to observe the red apple market in To Kwa Wan. Before we started, we were lucky to have visited the “The Day After Tokwawan” Community Living Approach Exhibition in Cattle Depot Artist Village, which gave us an overall understanding of the market. For the layout and architectural style, this is a modern market featured with comprehensive sewage treatment and waterproofing system. Most of the products are imported from Mainland China and they look just identical. Only slight “comprehensible” differences are discovered on some of the dried seafood, Chinese herbs and handmade food (such as dumplings and sweet puddings), barbecued food and fresh seafood. However, every impression turned around when Hong Kong artists brought us to Kam Tin, a place in Hong Kong between Taipo and Yuen Long. In Kam Tin, because it looks like Taiwan, the place is outstandingly different. It has changed our rigid impression of Hong Kong. Here one can find farmlands, interlocked black tile rooftops, and even intricately laid farmland footpaths and water channels. The visit has triggered our imagination on discussion of land issue in Hong Kong, and even shed lights to situation in Taiwan.
It was about time to Chinese Lunar New Year during our stay, so “Tung Shing” (a fortune-telling calendar based on lunar days) was everywhere. Tung Shing and the farmer calendar in Taiwan are basically compiled on the same concept. Originally, Tung Shing was called “Tung Shu”. However, the pronunciation of “Shu” can also mean “losing/lost” in Chinese and Cantonese. Thus in Hong Kong and Guangdong, everyone is calling the book “Tung Shing” instead. Both Tung Shing and farmer calendar, represent the concept of seasonal changes. It is a tool book to judge and choose the day of luck, as well as a book of experience accumulated by farmers. We are encouraged to start collecting Tung Shing in different Asian regions to start a new discussion in WGA.
Secondly, based on the discovery on Tung Shing we extended our enquiry into local religion. In our experience in Taiwan, locations of temples and markets are usually geographically linked. Whenever WGA explores around a market, we deliberately look for temples that serve as the entrance of the market. In Hong Kong, we visited many famous and unknown, big and small temples, including those on Market Street, the Shing Wong Temple, the Kwun Yam Temple and the Tin Hau Temple. Through reading the temple stone tablet, we have learnt the changes of each place. While all the above temples are found close to the markets, we are deeply surprised by Sam Tung Uk Museum transformed from a Hakka walled village in Tsuen Wan. We could peep into the relationship between Hakka and Hong Kong through various cultural exhibits such as paper effigies, lion dance props and various Taoism ritual items, which felt like we were back home. The two different places, Taiwan and Hong Kong, are now linked up by the one common Hakka culture. The sound performance brought to us by artist Jaffa LAM and and her team during the opening ceremony also gave refreshing impression. Guqin, huqin and classic singing style with the help of modern audio mixing technique, created a space that transcends time, where dancers travelled in this ancestral hall. This is a rare experience even for us who are from Taiwan.
Several exhibitions we visited in Hong Kong have encouraged deep thoughts, especially for “Poverty. Full-time” and “The Day After Tokwawan”. “Poverty. Full-time” was curated by Ducky TSE; organised by Oxfam HK, Outfocus Group Workshop and Quabitat, at the Jockey Club Creative Arts Centre (JCCAC). There were thirteen participating artists, including CHAN Hau-chun, CHAN Ka-hing, Luke CHING, HAU Siu-ching, LA Yat-nam, Joey LEUNG Cho-yi, Joe LI, LIU Ka-yee (Miss FAT), PAK Sheung-chuen with LH01, and Jonathan YU. At the same time, “The Day After Tokwawan“ took place at Cattle Depot Artists Village, under the Jockey Club “Blue House Studio” Cultural Heritage Education Programme. Invited exhibitors were So Boring, Kin Sang Ichiban, Kong Yeah, Wheel Thing Makers, Gwa Gwa Post, Ching Chun Warehouse and The Social Planning Institute of Hong Kong. Meanwhile, the organiser also called for proposal submission with 12 out of 25 submissions selected. The winning candidates had gone to the Museum of Contemporary Art Taipei and Bamboo Curtain Studio for an experience exchange on social participation. Many difficult problems emerge in Hong Kong under its highly intense population and social structure: because of politics and the economy the city is facing problems in aging population, housing tax system, labour right as well as education system. What are the perspectives in these two exhibitions that held at the same time in different locations? What are the respective art presentations of the exhibitions?
Labour effort and the viewers
“Some people are so poor. All they have is only a job.”, this is the subtitle of the art exhibition “Poverty. Full-time” that discusses the wealth gap phenomenon. The work of exhibitors mostly focuses on jobs taken up by the grass-root level, such as security guards, street sweepers and couriers. The exhibitors are trying to advocate for a reallocation of social resources and for an improvement of the work environment. To enter the exhibition, one has to walk across the atrium of JCCAC where you can find items used by the workers such as bloom, bamboo baskets and guard booth. Right at the exhibition entrance placed the work “Please give chairs to seceurity guards” (給保安員椅子運動) by Luke CHING. His presentation resonates with that used by conceptual artist Joseph Kosuth, and has raised an inevitable question beyond the exhibition theme: where is the place for art? When a piece of art is looking at social problems, it might not be trying to solve the problems, because it can be risky even to “arouse attention on poverty”. In reality, the problems and the viewers perhaps have no common ground. Only when it is under the domain of art will there be a chance for social problems (poverty) and viewers to stand on the same ground equally, to face off and question each other. WONG Shen-Yen’s (王錫欽) “The hermit-poet outside of a guard booth ” (《更亭外的詩隱》) recorded texts that can be seen when you are sitting in a guard booth. He extracted words to compile “the guard’s dictionary” and wrote poems using those words. Poems were painted in the shadow of the exhibit with invisible ink, awaiting viewers to discover with their ultraviolet torches. The effort to guard and monitor is now being honoured during search and discovery; it becomes the “profession” to be “obliged and performed” by the viewers. Behind every piece of art are hidden messages to be discovered. If one does not bother about it, he will not be able to understand fully. So isn’t art a process that requires effort?
Labour effort and education
13 streets is the name for the thirteen streets nearby the Cattle Depot Artist Village in To Kwa Wan. The neighbourhood bonding is extensively laid in the exhibition “The Day After Tokwawan“. For example, civil group Jik Jik Team offers an experience in fibre weaving. When we participate in the making of an art piece, we have created a sense of recognition for the place and become a member of To Kwa Wan. Hong Kong Polytechnic University has chosen the theme of “pulse check” in Chinese medicine to conduct their field investigation of 13 streets, through the four diagnosing techniques in Chinese medicine: to see, to listen, to ask and to touch. The result is a simple summary on the industrial structure, clan structure and population structure of To Kwa Wan. This is another kind of effort paid. To us, exhibitors of “The Day After Tokwawan” are facing problems beyond the search for an art form; can their proposals make a difference in the possible neighbourhood redevelopment in the future? Can they stop the incoming exploration and development? Regardless of the answer, they cannot stop; like education, we cannot stop just because we have an assumption in mind. The only driving force for those who carry on raising proposal is a selfless belief in the greater good. When they practise art, they are also educating others, and education requires effort.
Epilogue
Two different exhibitions have coincidentally focused on the same object but have given their own perspective. Both reflected the urgent social problem faced by Hong Kong nowadays. No matter if the “proposals” and “objects” in the exhibitions are presented by exhibitors who regard themselves as artists or not, all these exhibited items would still be viewed in the same way in an exhibition space. Most exhibitions, that many are familiar with, showcase the art products. It is rare to have exhibitions showing only the process of events. Art is the yeast in society that brews events and the emotion of the viewers. An art exhibition constructs a temporary relationship between the labour and the viewer. When we collaborate and communicate with each other to raise proposals, we are trying to expand our imagination of the future. However, changing this cold society takes more than solely artists’ effort in cultural cultivation. “Some people are so poor. All they have is only a job.”. This is not just about poverty in life, but poverty in art and education. This perhaps is another question that worth contemplating in society.
台灣策展人簡歷
Biography of Participating Taiwan Curators
走路草農藝工作室(以下簡稱走路草)成立於2016年，成員分別是劉星佑與陳漢聲，兩人皆來自台灣高雄，將策展、設計或是藝術創作視為不同的實踐方法，關注自然環境議題與土地議題。走路草並非單單意指「會走路的草」，自己常常注意到「走路」時，在腳邊所忽略的「草」，這份細微的注意力，是「走路草」希望努力推廣，並將之實踐，落實在自己所生長環境中的方法。劉星佑與陳漢聲兩人都來自務農的家庭，「農藝」二字的意涵，並非單指各種關乎農業的技藝，而是希望結合劉星佑與陳漢聲兩人對於一直以來所學的藝術，提出「治本於農」與「以農入藝」的想像。
劉星佑的求學背景以藝術史學基礎，目前在團體中以策展與藝術評論的發表居多，陳漢聲從視覺傳達設計背景出發，轉向動力裝置與數位動畫藝術的創作。
Walking Grass Agriculture (“WGA”) was established in 2016 by two members LIU Xin-you and CHEN Han-seng from Kaohsiung, Taiwan. WGA spells out their concern on natural environment and land issues through curation, design or artwork. The name “Walking Grass” is more than the analogy of a grass that walks; it is about promoting a way of living that pays close attention to our environment, just like how we spot out the unobvious small grass when we walk along the road. LIU and CHEN are both from farmer families; agriculture to them is more than the agricultural skills but direction for them to practice art they have learnt. They have a vision to “flourish a state through agriculture, intervene art through agriculture”.
LIU’s academic background is in art history and he is mainly taking up the role of curator and art critic in WGA; meanwhile CHEN makes use of his visual communication design knowledge to create interactive installation and digital animation.
劉星佑的求學背景以藝術史學基礎，目前在團體中以策展與藝術評論的發表居多，陳漢聲從視覺傳達設計背景出發，轉向動力裝置與數位動畫藝術的創作。
Walking Grass Agriculture (“WGA”) was established in 2016 by two members LIU Xin-you and CHEN Han-seng from Kaohsiung, Taiwan. WGA spells out their concern on natural environment and land issues through curation, design or artwork. The name “Walking Grass” is more than the analogy of a grass that walks; it is about promoting a way of living that pays close attention to our environment, just like how we spot out the unobvious small grass when we walk along the road. LIU and CHEN are both from farmer families; agriculture to them is more than the agricultural skills but direction for them to practice art they have learnt. They have a vision to “flourish a state through agriculture, intervene art through agriculture”.
LIU’s academic background is in art history and he is mainly taking up the role of curator and art critic in WGA; meanwhile CHEN makes use of his visual communication design knowledge to create interactive installation and digital animation.
翻譯 Translated by：
謝凱淳 TSE Hoi-Shun, Jeffrey
謝凱淳 TSE Hoi-Shun, Jeffrey