0312 開幕茶會&藝術家座談0312 Opening & Artist Talk

 

開幕茶會與座談:2016/03/12(六) 14:00
地點:台北數位藝術中心 噪音咖啡廳

策展人:劉星佑
與談人:曾鈺涓
藝術家:吳芊頤、巫思萱、李冠宜、涂皓欽、許哲瑜、陳漢聲、張湛、湯羽彤、賴宗昀

Time: Saturday, 12 March, 2016, 14:00

Venue: Changee Cafe, Digital Art Center, Taipei

Curator: Liou, Sing-You

Attendee: Tseng, Yu-Chuan

Artists: Wu, Chien-Yi; Wu, Ssu-Hsuan; Lee, Kuan-Yi; Tu, Hao-Chin;
Hsu,Che-Yu; Chen, Han-Sheng; Zhang, Zhan; Tang, Yu-Tong; Lai, Tsung-Yun

 


展覽論述Curatorial Statement

 

文/策展人 劉星佑

時至今日,不可否認地,我們正處在一個大量複製、無中生有、空穴來風,可以形構與被形構的影像世界之中;了無新意,處處破綻,無從溯源卻又開啓鑑定般愉悅的欺眼法時代,面對數位影像,觀者已從眼力的培養,變成參與者式的,需要五感交互搭配使用。鋪天蓋地、同步即時是今日影像顯現的節奏,然而在鋪天蓋地與同步即時的節奏下,身體已從「適應」邁向另一種狀態,或者說,是從未真正的適應過,除了「既視感」(Déjà vu)的出現,更多時候仰賴著「腦補」的方式進行調節。

「既視感」意指「曾於某處親歷某個畫面,或者經歷一些事情」的感覺,也就是「似曾相識」,然而這個大腦中知覺系統和記憶系統相互作用的結果,在數位影像乘著數位媒介的今日,不僅止於「既視感」的萌生,更有著「腦補」的狀態出現,倘若「既視感」是時序錯亂當下的影像交集,那「腦補」或許可以說是面對時序錯亂時的造像運動,觀看是參與既視感的起點與終點,而感官的全面啟動讓腦補充滿各式的途徑與可能,影像成為運動過程中的藍圖與完稿,不斷的生滅增減、修正增生。

影像築構的巴別塔,無論是蜃景還是實景,觀者總能在「見山是山,見山不是山,見山還是山」的禪語中找到梅比烏斯之環的狀態,樂此不疲,前仆後繼,形象、記憶、回憶、圖像、映像、印象、觀想、想像,上述種種是影像的自我衍生,而衍生過程中,尚未顯影,卻已成像的片刻是將至的腦補,對於同步即時的嚮往,讓影像的欺眼法任務,在藝術史的浪潮中被失速的解放了,即便同步與即時永遠只能是嚮往,身體也不至於因此毫無向性可言;影像的網羅,增加了觀者的觀看式參與,增加了身體式參與的匱乏,因為匱乏,讓這將至的腦補有機會成為新的創作領域,藝術家在將至的腦補之前有更多的作為。

參與本展的藝術家利用不同的方式,專注各自身體的脈絡下將至的腦補,影像成為一種預設,亦成為一種未知,而預設與未知的「影像」判讀不僅止于眼睛的觀看,而是各種數位生活經驗下的身體慣習,至此腦補不再只是一個服膺現實的情節想像,亦非將懸置視為腦補的效果,讓觀者重新思考自身的現實狀態,而是亦步亦趨的利用現實,讓尚未清晰的腦補永遠候補,終成先發。

Text/Curator Liu, Shing-You

We have undoubtedly entered a world comprised of massively reproduced images created out of nothing. Such a world has the power to shape our lives, yet it can be shaped by external powers as well. The run-of-the-mill, seriously flawed and untraceable characteristics of the world ushered in an era of legerdemain in which people take delight in authentication. In face of digital images, viewers have metamorphosed from connoisseurs into participants who must use and coordinate their five senses with skill. Widespreadness, synchronicity and immediacy collectively constitute the rhythmic pattern of the emergence of today’s images. Influenced by the rhythmic pattern, however, the human body has reached a new state distinct from adaptation. Or, the human body has never actually adapted to anything. In fact, we tend to rely heavily on personal supplementary imagination in addition to the feeling of déjà vu.

The term “déjà vu” refers to “the phenomenon of having the strong sensation that an event or experience currently being experienced has already been experienced in the past;” to wit, “a feeling of familiarity.” Nowadays, digital media spread digital images across the world, making the result of the interaction between sensory system and memory system of human brain more than déjà vu but also supplementary imagination. If déjà vu represents the intersection in chronological disorder, supplementary imagination may be an image-making action in such disorder, if you will. Viewing is the departure and terminal of engagement in déjà vu, while the full-use of human senses offers supplementary imagination various approaches and endless possibilities. Images ergo become the blueprints and finished pieces in this continuous movement, a repeating cycle of transmigration.

Admiring the Tower of Babel built with images, be it a mirage or real scenery, the viewers tend to undergo the Zen process of “perceive as you see, believe not what you perceive, then accept what you see as they are,” in which they take delight in finding something like the Möbius strip and never get tired of it. An image has a riotous profusion of derivations, such as form, memory, recollection, picture, projection, impression, visualization and imagination. In the derivative process, the moment at which an image has been made before its appearance will be supplemented by personal imagination. Our yearning for synchronicity and immediacy has emancipated images from their task of legerdemain, making them unbridled and sweep along on the waves of art history. Even though we have no way of reaching synchronicity and immediacy, our bodies are unlikely to go so far as to be disoriented. The emergence of images not only increases viewers’ visual participation, but also exacerbates the paucity of their physical participation. Such paucity has made it possible for the “supplementary imagination to come” to thrive as a budding field of creation. Nonetheless, artists still have many things to do before the arrival of the very moment.

Employing different approaches, the participating artists focus on their respective “supplementary imagination to come” within their own physical contexts. Images therefore exude a paradoxical aura of predestination and unknownness. The interpretation of the predestined and unknown images relies not simply on the visual sense but on the physical inertia developed by extensive experiences of digital life. In this sense, supplementary imagination is no longer the imagination of plots that bear resemblance to the reality; nor does it treat suspension as its effect on viewers, prompting them to reflect on the real state they live in. Rather, it dances to the reality’s tune, moving the unclear supplementary imagination from bench to the starting lineup.