Joseph Chen

 ̘ ̙ ̜ ̝ ̞ ̟ ̠ ̤ ̥ ̦ ̩ ̪ ̫ ̬ ̭ ̮ ̯ ̰ ̱ ̲ ̳ ̹ ̺ ̻ ̼ ͅ ͇ ͈ ͉ ͍ ͎ ͓ ͔ ͕ ͖ ͙ ͚̳ ̹ ̺ ̻ ̼ ͅ ͇ ͈ ͉ ͍ ͎ ͓ ͔̳ ̹ ̺ ̻ ̼ ͅ ͇ ͈ ͉ ͍ ͎ ͓ ͔̳͇ ͈ ͉ ͍ ̹ ̺ ̻ ̼ ͅ

༒􀀀†Aurora҉ Trip Sitter Videography Manifesto༙྇􀀀༒, 2017-2018

̎ ̄ ̅ ̿ ̑ ̆ ̐ ͒ ͗ ͑ ̇ ̈ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈́†͊ ͋ ͌ ̃†̂ ̌ ͐  †́†̋ ̏ ̒ ̓ ̔ ̽ ̅ ̿ ̑ ̆ ̐ ͒ ͗ ͑ ̇ ̈ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈́†͊ ͋ ͌ ̃†̂ ̌ ͐ ̆ ̐ ͒ ̈ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈͗ ͑ ̇ ̈ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈́†͊ ͋ ͌

 

Gooood morning bois and gurls! It’s such a great pleasure to see you all, and to walk side by side, in such a beautiful day on this piece of paper! Thank you all for joining this Aurora One-day Trip organized by Aurora Trip Sitter. Since the moment I speak I can feel your passionate sight scanning from the cover to the back of the book, friends in the front can see all good right? How about the friends at the back, can you see clearly? No matter you can see or hear clearly or not, are you ready to defy gravity with us?

 

I believe we need not to introduce the background of Aurora Trip Sitter since you guys have already knew it. We are students or graduates from different creative-based programs of higher educational institutes. We are workers of different industries, industrial labor, service labor, creative labor. Our work is not on life-long basis, we work without contracts, as part-time, as temporary, as interns, as freelancers, and sometimes jobless. As McDonalds costs more and more, our pimples grows and grows, and we sleep less and less. 

 

In a global perspective, when capitalism transforms into neo-liberalism, the relationship between employer and employee gradually turned into enterprise and self-employer, the class conflict becomes vague between the capitalist and labor.  Under the social structure dominated by the capitalist ruling class, labourers who gave up their active subject in exchange for freedom and cannot escape from becoming a passive object. It’s like this one-day trip, it cannot be done without all of your support. As we create artworks as artists, we are exercising the agency of the labor. We are not only trip sitter and artist, we are also strike workers, those workers who produced excesively in the beginning of Soviet Union. Under the context of neo-liberalism, our aurora trip sitting and artistic laboring are considered as excessive under the system of capitalism, and as a result will not be financially rewarded.  I draw my sword to cut running waters, still the waters flow; I lift my cup to drown sorrows, still the sorrows sink to new low.  This type of excessive production is a manifestation of the class conflict, the uneven distribution of resources, the capital and bureaucracy domination of the contemporary art world.  As a result, artistic creation is exploited.

 

!s +he game t00 faKe 0r me be!ng s+up!d ? |3ut w3 R n0t buy!ng the appeasement*.} We are not to please the institutions. We are not to dismiss leisures as professionals. We are not to depreciate arts as collections. We are not to commoditialize our art. We are not to create consumer goods with surplus capital value. We are not to decorate the capitalist’s home. The subject of our creation is art in itself. We are not to serve the elitist and capitalist in the art world. We choose a form not to be privatized and belong to the public. Yet, the presentation of materialistic art required physical space, look at you left, spaces are not applicable for individual artist, worksm themes and forms are not decided by the artist, artists are misplaced as passive and weak object. Now look at your right, non-materialistic arts have their own limitations, new media art requires expensive tools while performance art can only be presented live. It’s extremely lucky for you the viewer, and the Aura Trip Sitters to be on the same boat, to continue our adventure together in the form of a compromised breakout, a cheap, non-space-time restricted, dematerialized form of art – Video Trip. 

 

Video~Tripping

 

In the era of Post-Fordism, proletariat’s working space transits from a certain factory to different offices, sometimes out of offices, even at home. We work here and there and end up there is nowhere for them to connect with each other in each other in the physical space, which means proletariat lacking a real space to self-organize. As the working space being brought from wooden desks to mobile phones into the virtual world, the only connection is through the internet; the temporality of jobs put the connection on and off. Can you guys see that nuance of light? That’s the frustration of us not being connected in work, we hope to reach out to other comrades who are creating in respect of that very nuance of light.  We cannot get into the elitist circle, to become the conformists.  We cannot be an actor performing the role of an artist in every exhibition opening and art space, or reenact every small talk social encounter with other art elites.

 

Tripping~Priest/Sitter/Guide

 

Based on the disconnection of reality, we found our art and connection on the internet instead, where minds intersects rhizomatically with endless networks, it is virtual but real. This mindset exists within our group, rejecting tree as an archetype of thought. Hierarchy and fixed roles doesn't exist, each member is an atom scattering in the world, crushing with bonding spontaneously, new thoughts are created through the repetitive reconstruction. With the belief in a labor union’s power to negotiate with the capitalist, we choose to work as a collective instead of individuals, to fight with the capitalist in the system in our art scene.  Our art group is more similar to an ethnic-based labor union, than an international labor class, we stand here in the lower class of the art world, doing unpaid artistic labor continuously, we see ourselves as an imagined heterogeneous commune, we share a common art language of heterogeneity, a common ideology of heterogeneity. 

 

We disagree with the monotheist mainstream art world, idolizing the artist as a figure with aura,  or to place an artwork a holy relic. We are ҉the ҉priests҉of ҉Shamanism҉, only to connect art and audience, to transform audience’s wishes into arts, to transfer the spirit of art to the audience. We do not make art to earn a living, as we publish this book without receiving any artist fee, without elevating above audience, we are side by side with the audience. The notion of authenticity does not apply to our creations, it can be copied infinitely. As the sacred instrument buried together with the priests among their deaths, the sacred instrument will be reproduced and used by the new priest and so on. ♥♥♥

 

Please read the guide before entering the video activity room at the lowest:

 

//Suggested Code of Tripping//

 

When the trip begins, the tour guides takes up the role of trip sitters, to support the tripper by their sides, providing help anytime. We let them drink when thirsty, we cover them with blanket when cold, we give them a bucket when they want to puke, and we grab their hands when they freak out, we will do everything to make their trip safe and sound. Sitters are DJs as well, they play the comforting background music to help trippers accommodate and keep them out of the terror zone. Once the trip is over, we should reserve more time to relax, the tripper can take a shower (damn cool), hangout a bit, eat something (delicious), and discuss the experience, thoughts and feelings during the trip, exchanging ideas and inspiring each other.

 

Please follow "Suggested Code” clearly to know to show the true colors of tour guide. Of course, you keep it in a free flow! After all, we can't use your muzzle to face your head, forcing you to obey. Let’s officially begin the guided tour section:

 

Unreadable Readability

 

We are born in the early 90s, we are raised in the transition period of mass media from television broadcast to internet, we are evolved from the passive consumer of closed circuit of the media, to the active-and-passive prosumer in the open media. The information was delivered to us from television broadcasting, and now is liberated on the Internet through editing, commenting, translating and re/co-producting. When we read information as a textual analysis, we refuse to identify the hierarchical demarcation of the author at the top and the reader at the bottom. In the perspective of phenomenology, the author’s consciousness is not a transcendental existence, we refuse to integrate the author’s intentionality, and refuse to submit to the author’s dominated way of thinking. We realize it is not an equal sign between the readers’ noesis and the readers’ noema, text is not the passive object, we emphasize the integration of readers and the text itself, where the reader and the text become an intersubject. In the perspective of semiology, signified is not embedded only by a single signifer, they are not necessarily related, the signified is the amalgamation of friction between the author and the reader’s created différances and differences.  We emphasize the random operations of signs, where signifiers are spontaneously represented as multiple signifieds without orders. By contextualizing the information before creating artworks, we create a heterogeneous logic to the readability and the unreadability, and present this very logic in different art forms and movements, as Dadaists and Surrealists’ collages created by ready-made images and objects, instead of the binary aesthetics there, synthesize a third aesthetics between the dialectic of art and non-art. 

 

Invisible Visibility

 

As the progressive development of technology capitalism, the altitude of visual-audio media invention has approached and almost raises beyond the limitations of human being – MIT has invented a camera with 1 trillion fps that can capture the movement of light waves. While the human eyeballs can only process 60fps, we certainly can slow down and watch the 1 trillion fps moving images, yet we can never perceive the spatial and temporal transcendence within. Samsung is inventing an 11K screen which has a resolution of 2600 dpi at most; The resolution of human eyeball can reach 2600 dpi within 10 centimeters. We could see that in a near future technology could present the high-resolution illusion that our eyeball cannot realize.

 

Images has become too real to deny our reality. If we focus specifically on the medium of video itself in the perspective of formalism, we will turn our back against the nature of cinematography as a transparent and popular medium, only  subjective feelings are all that are left after we go beyond the objective illusions of video. This subjective feeling comes from a self-fulfilling harmony, a beauty of purity and serenity. This means that, arts, as free will, is at the state of pure existence. Video as a medium exceed the mere production of retinal experience, isolates art as an autonomous entity, detached from the public’s expectations of the visible arts.

 

Simultaneously, we are living in an era of the pursuit of retinal excitement.  The society of today faces the same problem of the 60s, an over saturated production of spectacular images.  The 60s had an over saturation of consumption driven images, the production of knowledge through images was triumphed by the capital ruling class.  Although now the knowledge of image production are in everybody’s hands, we still live in a society of the spectacle. It seems that we should not continue to interpellate the capital ruling class and political elitism with sarcasm, irony, parody, which is same as detournement, which the Situationists had used extensively.  This type of critique is similar to Marcel Duchamp’s perceptual distortion. Duchamp once said: 3very+h!ng b3c0m3$ @ c0nc3p+, d@+ !s, rely!ng 0n d@ th!ng !t$3lf, not da re+!na. Duchamp paved a new road, emphasizing the unknowability of thing-in-itself, but was misread as a critique towards the meaning of objects and images. Using the language as a tool to shift the perception towards ready-mades and images is to direct the viewer from one phenomenon to another.  This type of critique becomes a democratic consumerist semiotic criticism, seen in high and low brow art. Art fairs become populated with consumable works in detournements with capitalist critique, and the capital ruling class indulge in the purchasing of artworks with the hopes to repent their sins, similar to a devoted catholic in the medieval times. On the internet emerged a new public art form - Memes. It became a mass controlled ideology and political propaganda.  It presents a fictional negation that negates ideology, revolting against the inauthentic free choices in the democratic system ruled by the capitalists. For example, the 2016 US presidential election, the infinitely generative fictional memes replaced the objective coverage of the mainstream media as a major force to sway public opinion. An objective approach to ideology overwhelmed by a new era of post-truth and alternative facts. The art of memes is based on the distortion of the image, imposing the pain from a sense of fear to the audience that is unimaginable and infinitely large.  This pain stems from the infinitely large suppressive power from the capital ruling class and the political elite towards the commoner.

 

Before the twentieth century, "resemblance" has always been regarded as the major concern of Western art. Photographed image replace painting as the most realistic media has become the most popular popular art form. However, technology continues to present an opaque hyperreality, while Formalism still follow the ontology as the fundamental. The society is full of sublime pleasure-in-pain for the false critique of the spectacle images, and the ideology behind the spectacle can be overthrown by epistemology. The former creates an non-perceivable objective and invisible form; the latter promotes an non-perceivable subjective and invisible content. Our works are the dialectics between the invisibility from the resemblance of Formalism and the invisibility of non-resemblance of Conceptual Art, both are negated the dialectical negation, synthesize an alteration of resemblance. By returning to the unconscious thing-in-itself, a kind of dissemblance operation can represent the invisible reality into visible.

 

Identification of Heterogeneity

 

With the popularization and facilitation of audiovisual technologies, the portability of video camera and the accessibility of the production knowledge of moving images have led to the liberation of image production. That is seen in the multifuction of smartphones and mobile applications, that covers recording, saving, editing, disseminating, commenting, and re/co-creating. The liberation of images has encountered the era of individualism; most young people has been converting art into daily life everyday, in a practice of intimate image creation. The aesthetic experience has hence become similar to other forms of daily life and are hence intermingled, leading to an overproduction of images. (๑• . •๑) Taking the cloud storage of our friend as an example, over several ten thousands of photos and videos are stored. The starting point of the image production is a coincidental intuition, solely to record and narrate a private video archive and ethnography, constructing an individual, subjective, and visualized writing of microhistory. This creation, however, has always reflected the own visibility of an individual, as if a subject erroneously recognized a mirror image as the ego, which is actually a narcissist homogenous image, without the directivity towards otherness. 

 

In addition, consumerism encourages the aestheticization of politics through the hierachy of images. As lower-social workers situated in highly developed countries like us, to be able to afford Hollywood movie with budget up to billions of dollars, cameras and equipment to deliver 1920 x 1080 HD video quality, 0 blindspot disruption electronic monitors, under these high-end economic circumstances, such visual consumption has already blurred its initial capitalist ideologies based on exchange values, in result of a simulatively satisfying aesthetics. Contrastingly, we strongly emphasize rebellious҉revolutionary҉low-endi҉aesthetics. We insist to produce video art in low-budget and 1-person or multiple-person production team; low definition, low resolution, and low video quality with background removal and glitchy texture; low-finishing with subjects out of focus, unstable frames, non-continual editing, and unsynced audio and video.  Our low-end video aesthetics stresses on the politicification of art, which inherits the aesthetic of Imperfect Cinema and Third Cinema from the 60s. Aiming to overcome the dilemmas of working class, eliminating the disparity between producers and consumers, authors and readers, for the sake of popularity but not consumerism, bearing proletarians' duties but not being bureaucratic. Therefore, this type of videography does not serve artists, but bearing the otherness into an identification of heterogeneity.  This aesthetics is a form of political rebellion. The political potential of this aesthetic detach art from other activities, and resist transforming art into a form of living. Therefore, our art is based on a identification of heterogeneity. It is a collective clause between the artist and the public, an open creation for the public to copy collaboratively, an heterotopia that can be reached by identification.

 

Well, the guide ends here. I believe that everyone has been travelling in the aurora for a day with a certain sense of the historical background and dialectical methods of Video Trip and have a deep understanding of the role played by the Aurora Trip Sitter

​

Translated by Bobby Chan, Joseph Chen, Leo Cheng, Kylie Lee, Kelvin Yiu

​

Aurora Trip Sitter

Aurora Trip Sitter are combined with neurasthenia patients and deep internet users, including nice girl anna, xyzki, fotan laiki, Derederek Lam aka j/awesome and joseph2015chen aka yungseph2015.

 

The spirit of sited trip: everything in reality is messed up, we can chill only by crossing the predetermined boundaries of the society and showing a solid and honest confession. We will guide you to search for the path to aurora, enjoy the subtropical aurora under A Symphony of Lights, feel the joy and healing of losing independent thinking through contemplating the extreme society.

​

 ̙ ̜ ̝ ̞ ̟ ̠ ̤ ̥ ̦ ̩ ̪ ̫ ̬ ̭ ̮ ̯ ̰ ̱ ̲ ̳ ̹ ̺ ̻ ̼ ͅ ͇ ͈ ͉ ͍  ͉ ͍ ͎ ͓ ͔̳͇ ͈ ͉ ͍ 

༒􀀀†極 ҉ ༙྇光 ҉༙྇導༙྇ ҉賞༙྇ ҉團༙྇錄༙྇ ҉像༙྇宣 ҉༙྇言༙྇􀀀༒, 2017-18

 ̈́†͊ ͋ ͌ ̃†̂ ̌ ͐ †̋ ̏ ̒ ̓ ̔ ̽†͊ ͋ ͌ ̃†̂ ̌ ͐†̋ ̆ ̐ ͒ ̈†̋ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈͗ ͑†́ ̇ ̈ ̊ ͂ ̓ ̈́†͊ ͋ ͌

​

大傢早丄ぬ！很高興在這張風和日麗的紙上看到大家！同時也很榮幸今天能與大家同行，首先感謝各位朋友參加由我們極光導賞團組織的這次極光一日遊活動。一開口我就感覺到大家熱情的目光，在書本上下掃描，可能前面的朋友看得清楚一點，後面的朋友看得清楚嗎？不管是看得清也好，看不清也好，聽得清也好，聽不清也好，總之你們準備好跟我們一起離地了嗎？

 

相信在坐各位都已經知道極光導賞團的背景，那我就不介紹了。我們均於大專院校不同創作科目畢業或在學，有從事工業性勞動，有從事服務性勞動，有從事創作性勞動。我們的工作不是終身的，沒有合約，有時是兼職，有時是臨時工，有時是實習生，有時是自由工作者，有時是無業者。麥當勞越來越貴，我們臉上的暗瘡越來越多，睡眠時間越來越少。

 

放眼整個地球，當資本主義演變成新自由主義，僱主與僱員間被偷換概念成企業與自僱人士，資本家與勞動者的階級矛盾亦逐步模糊，放棄勞動者的能動主體換取勞動者的自由，但無法改變無產者於資本者支配的社會結構下成為受動客體。正如沒有各位的支持，這一日游是不能成團的。當我們以藝術家身份創作藝術品時，正正突顯了勞動者的能動性。我們不單是導遊和藝術家，還是黑特·史德耶爾（Hito Steyerl）筆下的一群震驚／突擊工人，意指是蘇聯初期過度生產的工人。在新自由主義的語境下，我們的極光導賞與藝術勞動於資本體制下被視為過剩，並不會得到可維持生計的回報。正所謂抽刀斷水水更流，舉杯銷愁愁更愁。這種過度生產正正體視當代藝術界階級矛盾，藝術界的資源分配不均，資本與行政的壟斷，而創作卻被剥削。

 

s'游戏呔叚. 还s'自己呔儍.ゞ？但莪們不會採取綏靖主義**}，為了討好藝術建制，將閒餘貶斥為專業，將藝術墮落為收藏。不甘將我們的作品商物化，拒絕創作具剩餘資本價值的消費品，因為我們的創作並非資本家的裝飾品。因此，我們的創作為藝術主體。大家能與極光導賞團坐在同一條船上是極其幸運的，因為我們不願服務藝術界的精英與資本家，我們選擇是一種屬於公眾不被私有化收編的形式。同時物質化的藝術形式需要實質空間展示，但望望你們的左邊，藝術體制內的大多數空間不容藝術家自行申請展覽，展覽的作品、主題、形式均由策展人定斷，藝術家被錯置成被動弱勢的客體。而望望右面，眾多非物質化的藝術形式皆有自身弊端，新媒體藝術的生產工具過於昂貴，行為藝術只能現場觀賞。所以，錄像旅行，這種廉價又不受時空限制的去物質化藝術形式，於我們來說是一種節衷的突圍。

 

錄像～Tripping

 

後福特主義盛行的年代。過往，無產階級以工廠為工作場域，現今，勞動性質轉變，我們經常在不同公司工作，有時不在公司工作，有時甚至在家中工作。當工作空間不停的轉換，我們與其他勞動者無法在真實空間上連繫，也就是說無產者缺乏自我組織的真實空間。因為工作空間亦逐漸虛擬化，由辦公桌變為手機，只有在網絡上才得以連結，但連繫都隨著工作的短暫性而經常斷鏈。大家看到那道光了嗎？正正是工作上無法真實連結的無力感，我們希望在創作上可與其他同志連繫，基於我們注重那道光，我們無法進入藝術精英的小圈子，成為他們的同流者。我們不能如演員般，在展覽開幕或是各種藝術場域中操演藝術家這個角色，或不斷重演與其他藝術精英的閒聊交際。

 

Tripping～祭司／保姆／導賞員

 

基於藝術現實中的斷鏈，我們在網絡中找到我們以及我們創作的連結，一種如同塊莖樣式，縱橫交錯無盡連結的思維模式，縱然虛擬卻是真實的。這種思維表現於我們團體的模式中，呈視非現實中如樹狀的思維階級，我們的團體中沒有上下分層，也沒有固定分工，各人的位置像粒子移動，彑相衝擊再結合，不斷重組連結成新的思想。同時，我們會選擇組織起來而非獨自創作，因為我們知道藝術家個體面對藝術界體制的渺小，如同一個工人對抗資本家的力量很少，但一個工會卻與資本家有議價能力。我們的藝術組織如同一個民族本位工人組織，而非國際本位工人階級，因為除了我們身處藝術界的下層階級，經常作出無償的文藝勞動之外，我們視自己為一個想像的異質共同體，我們擁有一套共同的異質性藝術語言，共同的異質性意識形態。

 

我們不會認同如同信奉一神論的主流藝術界，將藝術家視為帶著光環的佈像或明星般的個體的崇拜，將藝術品視為如同保存聖人靈光的聖物的珍藏；我們如同 ҉薩 ҉滿 ҉教 ҉的 ҉祭 ҉司，只是藝術與觀眾之間的聯絡人，我們將觀眾的祈願轉達為藝術，也可以把藝術的意志傳達給觀眾。同時我們的勞動沒有實質報酬，如同出版此書中，我們並沒收取任何藝術家費，也沒有超越觀眾的權限，處於與觀眾平等的地位。我們創作的藝術品，在我們的創作不具本真性，均可以複製再複製，就如祭師的神器，人死後也隨他陪葬，但將會有新的祭司繼任並重製神器再供使用，不停延續。♥♥♥

 

在深入底層的錄像 / 影像活動室前，請大家閱讀以下的指引：

 

//Tripping 的建議守則//

 

當Trip已經開始，導遊就變成純粹Trip Sitter的角色，在Tripper身邊支持，隨時提供援助，例如口渴時讓他喝水，覺得冷就替他蓋被子，想吐就給他一個桶，驚慌的時候抓住他的手等等，讓他trip得安全又放心。除此之外，Sitter亦扮演DJ的角色，為他的Trip播放寧靜舒適的背景音樂，並於適當的時候轉歌以配合Tripper心情或帶他離開恐怖地帶。Trip完之後，大家應預留較多的時間relax。Tripper可以洗個澡（超爽）、出去逛一逛、吃東西（超好吃的），討論一下trip裡面所見所聞，幫助他整合體驗，大家交流，互相啟發。

 

請大家好好依照「建議守則」展現導賞的真締。當然，你也可以自由發揮！畢竟我們也不能用槍口對著你的頭，迫你遵從吧。好！我們正式進入導賞部分：

 

不可讀的可讀性

 

九十年代初期出生的我們，成長於一個由電視轉移到網絡的主流媒體過渡期，我們由封閉媒體中被動的消費者進化為開放媒體中主被動合一的生產消費者。我們由純粹在電視中接受資訊，解放成編輯、評論、翻譯、（再）／（共同）創作在網絡上資訊。我們拒絕二元對立的作者與讀者的關係，當我們將資訊以文本方式閱讀時，我們反對作者於上層而讀者於下層的階級性身份認同。以現象學的角度，作者的意識並非先驗的本體，我們抗拒與作者的意向性合一，不會服從作者支配的思考模式；我們意識到讀者的能思並不等同所思，文本亦非被動的客體，我們強調讀者與文本合一，互為主體的思考模式。以符號學角度，文本中意符均沒有一個單一意指，而意符與意指之間亦沒有必然關係，意指中的概念充斥作者與讀者共同創作的延異與差異，所以我們強調對符號的任意操作，將意符自由地理解再表現成無秩序的眾多意指。這種閱讀資訊再創作藝術品，產生出一種混合可讀性與不可讀性的異質性邏輯，在不同藝術類型流派中體現，如達達主義與超現實主義中運用現成圖像與現成物創作而成的拼貼藝術品，當中呈視出一種非二元對立的美學，而是藝術形式與非藝術形式的辯證，合成第三種的美學。

不可見的可見性

 

隨著科技資本主義的急速發展，影音媒體研發的高度已接近或超越人體極限：麻省理工大學已發明了幀速率達每秒一兆幀的攝影機，可以拍攝到光波的移動，當人眼能運算一秒六十幀的同時，你有沒有想過，我們可以將一兆幀影像放慢觀看，但當中空間與時間也非我們能感知得到；三星正研發11K的屏幕，解象度可達每英吋二千二百五十像數，在十厘米的距離，人眼的解象度可達每英吋二千六百像數，可見在不久將來，科技將顯示人眼也無法分辨的清析幻象。

 

因此，影像已變得過度真實，以真實的否定去否定真實，如果強調錄像本質的形式主義面向，將突顯錄像無法感知的客觀幻相，背離攝影作為透明可見的大眾媒體，剩下的，就只有主觀感受。這種主觀感受來自一種安穩自足的和諧，一種單純與寧靜的優美，它代表著藝術作為自由意志處於一種未受干擾的存在的靜穆狀態，而這狀態正正脫離錄像作為與我們視網膜經驗的相似時空的投射，這是將藝術限制成一個自主個體，脫離社會大眾渴求藝術的可見性。

 

與此同時，我們身處一個對視網膜過度追求刺激的年代，現今社會面對如同六十年代的影像過度生產的問題。六十年代是一個充斥商品消費的景觀影像泛濫的年代，影像所生產的知識被資本階級所壟斷；至於現今，影像的生產知識已民主化至平民也基本上掌握，我們卻仍繼續身處景觀社會 (society of the spectacles) 之中。看來，我們不應採取或停留於國際情境主義者的批判方法 – 即異軌，以嘲笑、諷刺、戲仿等手法 – 質詢資本階級與政治菁英生產的影像。這種批判與馬塞爾·杜尚（Marcel Duchamp）的被扭曲的觀念路徑近似。他曾言：「對，①苆嘟變晟觀淰，即媞倚賴亊粅夲裑，侕卟媞視網膜。」杜尚開啓了觀念藝術的路徑，強調物自身的不可知性，卻被扭曲成對現成物／影像的意義的批判，以語言的操作改變觀眾對現成物／影像本身的意義的觀念上轉變，是將觀眾由一個現象繞圈回歸至另一個現象。這種歪曲的批判亦已演化成一種民主消費者式的符號批判，諸見於高等與低等藝術。在藝術博覽會上充斥著聲稱批判資本主義的異軌式消費藝術品，資產階級收藏家如同中世紀的天主教信徒般向畫廊購買贖罪卷減少自身的罪惡；而在網絡中一種大眾新藝術形式－模因（memes）[1]，演化成一種由一般人大量操作異規式的觀念的政治宣傳，一種以虛構的否定去否定意識形態，否定資產階級民主社會的虛假自由選擇，就如二零一六年美國總統選舉中，特朗普與希拉里的虛構模因以無限數量化取代了主流媒體的有限寫實報導影響選民的意向，將對意識形態客觀的認知顛倒為主觀的後真相與另類事實的年代。Memes這種藝術操作來自一種對形象的歪曲，引起觀眾對無法想像的表象的無限大的恐懼產生的痛感，而這種痛感來自平民對政治被資本和精英階級所壟斷的無限大的力量的無力感。

 

二十世紀前，「相似」一直被視作為西方藝術的核心關注，影像代替繪畫作為一種最寫實的媒體，因此成為最受歡迎的流行藝術。但科技不斷呈現一種不透明的過度真實，而形式主義仍教條式地視本體論為原教旨主義。社會充斥著對景觀影像偽批判產生一種夾雜痛感的祟高快感，自欺欺人地願景著景觀背後的意識形態可以為認識論所推翻。前者催生一種無法感知的客觀、不可見的形式；後者催生一種無法認知的主觀，以至不可見的內容。我們的作品辯證在形式主義上的相似的不可見性以及概念藝術的不相似的不可見性，都以辯證式的否定去否定，合成一種相似性的質變，回歸到物的無意識的自身，一種被稱為離似的操作，才可將現實的不可見再現為可見。

 

異質性的認同

 

隨著影音科技的普及化及便利化，攝錄機的可攜性和影像的生產知識的易達性助產了影像生產的解放，可見於智能手提電話以及流動應用程式的多功能，由拍攝、儲存、編輯、傳播、 評論、到（再）／（共同）創作。影像的解放遇上個人主義高倡的年代，大部份年輕人每天均實踐著私密的影像創作，將藝術變為日常生活，將美學經驗變得與其他日常生活的形式相似並溶接在一起，導致影像的過度生產。(๑• . •๑) 以我們的一位朋友的雲端為例，當中儲存了過十萬張照片與影片，影像生產的起點是偶然的直觀，單純紀錄並記叙成個人的錄像庫與民族誌，構建主觀個體的視覺化的微歷史書寫。但這種創作總是反射個體自身的可見性，如同主體基於觀看鏡像錯誤認同為自我，帶有一種自戀傾向的同質性影像，缺乏對他者性的指向。

 

另外，消費主義鼓吹將政治美學化在影像階級中呈現。身處高度發達國家的低端勞動者如我們，消費得起高預算上億的荷里活電影、高解像度如1920 x 1080的攝錄機材、高完成度無盲點干擾的電子屏幕，這些高端經濟下視覺消費品模糊了背後以資本為交換價值的意識形態而成的滿足擬像的表面美學。與此相反，我們強調極端的 ҉反 ҉叛 ҉式 ҉革 ҉命 ҉式 ҉的 ҉低 ҉端 ҉美 ҉學 ҉，堅持低預算一人而至數人的製作團隊生產的錄像藝術；低傳真、低解像度、低質素的去取背景等具失真與毛刺的錄像質感；低完成度如不聚焦被攝者、不穩定畫面、不連續性剪接、不同步聲畫等不完美的錄像技術。我們這種低階的錄像美學強調是美學的政治化，承繼六十年代的不完美電影或第三電影，尋求克服勞動者於社會分層下階級矛盾，消除生產者與消費者和作者與讀者之間的分野，為了大眾流行但非消費主義，為了承擔對無產者的義務而不至官僚主義。因此，這類影像並不服務於藝術家，而是對他者的一種承載，乃是一種異質性的認同。而這種美學表現了一種反抗形式的政治，這種美學經驗政治潛力來自於藝術與其他形式的活動的分離，以及它對任何轉變為生活形式的藝術的抵抗。因此，我們的藝術建基於一種異質性的認同，是藝術家與公眾集體構句，一種開放創作予公眾共同複製，一種只要認同便可到達的異托邦。

 

嗯，導賞說到這裡。相信大家在極光中穿梭了一日，對錄像旅行的時代背景與辨證方法都有一定的認識，並深入了解極光導賞員所扮演的角色。

​

極光導賞團 

​

極光導賞團，是一個新成立的本地年輕藝術家團體。創作媒介橫跨錄像、表演、裝置、及新媒體。導賞員為神經衰弱病患者及網路重度使用者的結合，包括nice girl anna, xyziki, fotan laiki,  wateva aka j/awesome 及 joseph2015chen aka yungseph2015。導賞團的精神：現實一切都一團糟，唯有越過社會的規定界限，展示顛實不虛的坦誠自白，我們才可以放鬆。我們將引領各位團友尋找通往極光之道，在幻彩詠香江下欣賞亞熱帶極光，靜觀極端風景的過程中將感受失去獨立思考的快感與療癒。

​

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​（Chinese Only）

 

影評人 登徒：「文筆流暢，結構完整，評論採取仔細的文本結合文化研究的分析，心思值得肯定。」

吸引力電影的回歸：《哭喪女》的中國藝術美學的面向, 2014

優異獎 | 短文組 | 影評有度徵文比賽2014 | 香港電影評論學會

哭喪女是一種只由女性從事的職業，是一種在遍佈世界各地的職業，責任是在喪禮上為死者哭喪 。在嶺南文化圈中，哭喪女被稱為「喊口婆」，在香港六十年代仍見「喊口婆」，但此職業現已絕跡於香港[1]。她們的職責是在喪禮上至少每天要哭靈三次，早喊茶，午、晚喊飯，呼喚魂魄回家享用飯菜，。而「喊口婆」在哭喪前需和主人溝通好挽詞的內容，了解死者與主人的關係，從而代替喪主表達對死者之情[2] 。縱然許雅舒導演的《哭喪女》並沒展現哭喪女喊飯或挽詞，改以一種𠵱𠵱呀呀的吟唱代替，利用一種非一般情況下可溝通的語言與亡者溝通，但目的卻為呼喊一種已逝去的早期電影風格歸來，並與已退卻的中國藝術美學交流。

 

《哭喪女》的片首引用《真誥》卷十六的《說世界》，以明言世界有三界，「上則仙，中則人，下則鬼。」但觀眾無從判斷空間與界的連繫，只可分辨密集壓迫的城市空間與寬廣遼闊的郊野山水。在影片前中段，觀眾可能以為前者是為人界，後者是為仙界，惟獨鬼界沒有出現。人界可理解為一個劇情片的空間，而仙界是一個實驗片的空間。人界展現出一個故事（fabula）按照時間和因果順序排列的事件，它按照古典荷里活敍事公式為：情節（syuzhet）=安寧→擾亂→鬥爭→平定擾亂[3]。《哭喪女》的情節則為：＝綿正常地進行哭喪儀式→靈附綿身→師傅和歐陽醫生拯救綿卻失敗→綿從精神病院離開後並成了靈。仙界則強調是以電影作為吸引力（ attraction）的系統，嘗試重拾早期電影（1906年前的電影）的特質，直接吸引觀眾，通過令人興奮的奇觀（spectacle）——激起視覺的好奇，並提供快感[4]。

 

《哭喪女》的仙界充斥著實驗性影像，當中沒有關聯的情節，也沒有人物角色的塑造，僅僅透過鏡頭的變化：如上下倒置如鏡像的海水影像、極淺景深以至矇朧背景的森林影像，均營造出一種夢幻仙境的感覺，用以對比寫實的人界。另外，所有在仙界的影像均以超慢鏡拍攝，正正對比人界中實時的鏡頭，以兩種節奏提醒觀眾仙界的實驗片空間與人界的劇情片空間的分別。仙界中種種的視覺風格可歸納為奇觀的風格，以震撼美學與刺激美學衝擊觀眾的視覺，打破他們對故事的期待，以期他們重新注意電影的原點——流動的影像。

 

攝影而成的流動影像是承襲西方的繪畫傳統，因此電影影像的構圖是建基於文藝復興以來的單點透視繪畫，亦即是一個中心點不斷延綿的透視空間，嘗試在二維平面空間製造一個三維立體空間的幻覺。然而，這種只有一個消失點的框架限制觀眾的視點。《哭喪女》嘗試打破這種西方傳統，改以向以散點透視為主的中國山水畫取經，就如電影中掛在師傅辦公室的由山水畫畫家李鵬繪畫的《羅酆山》，當中在仙界中有一個以特效將多個畫面連接而成的滾動影像，但並非一般的橫搖鏡頭全景圖，因當中畫面的空間並不是實質上連接，而是多個不同空間的畫面將畫面邊界以特效模糊化並連在一起。這個滾動鏡頭的特性為由多個不同消失點的鏡頭重組而成，猶如一個中國山水畫卷呈視當中的散點透視美學，一幅畫內具有多個消失點，容許觀眾從多視點欣賞壯麗的景觀。這種打破時空的限制，將不同時空的景物重新佈置在同一空間內，猶如早期電影，專注開拓電影此媒體的潛力，而非純粹模仿自然的活動。

 

《哭喪女》對中國藝術的借用不僅限於山水畫的散點透視的特性，電影中的文字插入亦是承襲中國文化——書畫同源。電影主要引用多部道教經典的經文，如《真誥》、《太平經》、《持戒制六情》等六段經文，分別訴說對世界、鬼、人、慾、仙、羅酆山等電影主題的看法，這六段文字除了像章回小說的回目般，將電影劃分成一個個章節，更重要的，它發揮了題字的功能。傳統中國藝術中強調書畫同源，亦即是中國書法與繪畫同樣取材於世間萬象，而前者傳其意，後者見其形。因此，在中國繪畫具有一個特點：在畫上題詩，使詩書與繪畫混成藝術的整體。《哭喪女》的引文亦類近題字的作用，扮演與影像相輔相成的作用，將只見形態的影像，加上具意味的經文，築構更完整世界觀。同時地，書畫互文（intertext）令電影不限於劇情叙事與吸引力電影的層式，讓觀眾可閱讀的層次提高到另一個維度。

 

雖然《哭喪女》的人界與仙界劃分出兩個截然不同的影像導向，但兩個導向在中後段開始重疊，如在人界中的靈堂和綿的家出現左右對反的影像，但最為明顯的是影片後段有一段從羅酆山的繪畫與城市空間與大海景觀溶接在一起的蒙太奇，並通過女主角綿的獨白說出「每一道門，每一個世界都係酆都，都係地獄」。除了人界與仙界，導演並沒有忘記建築出鬼界，因為地獄早已在現世，三界早已混雜一起。從混合的三界可見，導演刻意在現世——亦即一般主流劇情片——努力開拓出一個混合劇情敍事、早已式微的初期吸引力電影與傳統中國美學的可能。雖種取向非一般觀眾所容易消化，如像𠵱𠵱呀呀的吟唱，可能只可與死者溝通，但至少在說故事以外，擴闊流動影像的可能性。

​

[1] 梁家強，《祭之以禮》， （香港：梁津煥記，2011）。

[2] 朱鋼，「穗城風俗之喊口婆」，南方都市報，二零一零年一月十三日，

http://gcontent.oeeee.com/8/f2/8f2964feece20703/Blog/2f6/b381e4.html。

[3] 大衛·波德威爾（David Bordwell），李迅譯，《古典好萊塢電影：叙事原則與常規》，世界電影，一九九八年第二期。

[4]湯姆·岡寧（Tom Gunning），范倍譯，《吸引力電影：早期電影及其觀眾與先鋒派》，電影藝術，二零零九年第二期。