mMK

看到Lonely Lonely Planet的潘國靈文章<如果布希亞到香港走一趟>才知布希亞過世了.對此兄過世有何感覺,當然沒有,就似沒有過這個人發生.(?)網頁另又有篇黃國鉅的文<擬仿物都市>,扯到曾蔭權和梁家傑的特首選舉.
過去卡爾都還會湊熱鬧寫這種文章,想穿了其實不過是為抓抓零錢,內容大都說了等於沒說,故現在人更窮卻還是放棄了.

對於布希亞,我較喜歡的書該是The Mirror of Production,而不是那些的擬仿論(論美國那本在去美國前想過要讀完佢,結果卻還是中途放棄了).本來該書以象徵資本批判馬克思的政經批判為過時,價值不一定再是從生產勞動力而來,這點還ok,但問題是,擬仿就是連那mirror反映的真實也去掉,換句話說,就是看不到象徵資本實仍走不出政濟的批判域,反而,政經的批判被象徵域去勢收編成象徵資本的政經同謀.

In film Shawshank Redemption, there was this scene
the old man (played by Morgan Freeman), after all the years in prison, faced an interview to see if he could finally be fit to be released,
but in the course of conversation, he said, rehabitated? ... I think that's a bull shit word. ... stamp the document if you will, don't waste my time. ... to tell the truth, I don't give a shit.

that's some real great philosophy/words of wisdom one come up after so many years behind the bar, regreting every second, for the cost of freedom paid.
I wish the pan democrats learn something from this great scene.
Either you allow me the right to universal suffrage, don't even think I could be grateful, for all the time in my life you have denied me just that.
one could have no universal suffrage but not living without dignity.

http://www.civilreferendum.org/

Hommage to Lawrence Weiner

Instead of buying any new model mobile, I just bought back the first model that I ever used. So there is no camera installed, nor could it store or send any images. All works that artists could like to display in this gallery, must therefore be word based messages.

As inspired by Lawrence Weiner, the artwork could be an idea, a concept. The material this artwork executed in is language, in electronic form. By resorting to text messaging, do hope it could be a bit less high-tech gadget driven, and closer to the democratic spirit of Lawrence Weiner's works.

Artists who like to display work in this mobile gallery, pls send me an email: jaspar@ctimail3.com
I will then supply you with my mobile number, and you could then send in your work.
You could immediately do so if you know my mobile number. But be sure you notify me afterwards, so I won't delete yr work by accident.

(Length of exhibition of each work is temporarily set to be three months.)

This sunday, Leung Chi Wo will be here at my home for the private viewing of his installation Open Home.
Just to calrify, I just saw from some emails, that project coordinator Jeff Leung Chin Fung copied Leung Chi Wo email to send out more invitation by just changing Wo's name at the bottom to his, which might caused some confusion that might think the installation (mentioned in the email as "my installation") was by Jeff Leung, but it should be solely of Leung Chi Wo instead.
I did not help publicized it here myself, for the sunday session is really jammed already. I rather people came later on in the follow two weeks.
Neither do I emphasis on mMK on this project, for it is basically Leung Chi Wo's idea and initiatives. I just lend out my apartment.

旺角老翁撿紙皮被扑頭送院
(明報) 03月 23日 星期五 07:45AM
一名79歲老翁凌晨4時左右在旺角亞皆老街一條後巷撿紙皮時，遭人扑頭打劫，送廣華醫院治理。該名老翁被一名20多歲的男子用木棍襲擊頭部，劫去470元現金逃去。

318遊行人數,
大會話是五千人,
警方說是一千八百人,
這就簡單明白了,
那意思是警方派出了三千便衣.(減除行失散個一/二百人,即那邊他們估其中一百是便衣?)
便衣給遊行人仕的,可不是白色恐佈,
而是遊行人仕隊伍聲勢的幻想壯大.

我終於憑此想到一條飯氣劇場式的畫面.

有一日你可能發現無緣無故自己有十幾條馬,去到邊都好不威風.
你正準備喊大家一二三衝,一切就咁收工.

香港已贏?贏鬼贏馬!
話人分化者,在扣人帽子搞分化,意圖瞞隱,拒絕正視社會分化,話人搞階級鬥爭,在全球化這整個中產階層也在消失的時代,簡直就是既得利益者的代言人.
有得投票你會投俾邊個?票呢!
聽完黃毓民my radio節目,對於這場假選舉論壇再感不到過癮.

Multitude e.V. und Unfriendly Takeover Frankfurt/München/Graz/Berlin
Juni 2006 – Februar 2007
DICTIONARY OF WAR

lc說他也去了看天工開物,覺得算很唔錯,我其實也是這樣想吧?又或者不是.我不知.
我凡事都是從自己的負面世界睇出來,所以經常說那是個人意見,而且是偏頗的,希望大家明,唔會傷害大家.
或者我應該先申明,或回到我的老問題,就是我從來唔太識接收話劇的形式.又或者劇場太多時候對我太人工,太假,我就是無那種塑造另一世界的想像力.
進念用那些bar,那些燈,我覺得就是舞台.
至於戲味,我或者寧通過劇本的文學文字功架,演員一出現反易把我拉回真假身份上.

雖然陳炳釗其對香港的論述也是我的興趣位, 但決定去睇,當然已是種支持的表態,尤其但支持對我何嘗不也是一種奢侈?

記得有文如是寫過董啟章,找回來,因也可說明我的境況:

「我試過在一個月中旬的時候身上就只剩下一百塊錢，覺得不大保險，於是跑去按提款機，但卻提不了款，原來我的戶口只剩下五十多塊了。」
...
我問：「你算是全職作家嗎？」「很尷尬，我的確是全職在家寫作，但是『職』這個字意味著有一份可以餬口的職業，事實上寫作卻又養不起我的生活。」
...
董啟章是個好爸爸，每天起床就帶兒子上學，然後做家務和寫作，下午再去他母親那裡把兒子接回來做功課。黃念欣現在是中文大學中文系的高級導師（還沒當上助理教授），收入勉強夠兩夫婦開銷。「我一沒錢就問她，所以我到處跟人說自己靠老婆養。她並不喜歡我這麼說，覺得我寫書是件非常棒的事。但事實如此，又有什麼不好對人說的呢？」

幸好今時今刻,我還是有餘力,買張票支持一下社會裡如此一個人,也希望從中得到點受益.

反而梁寶在inmedia引發了一堆藝術要如何生存的討論,看了我都唔知大家拗乜,我就信h君的邏輯多一點,覺得問題太複雜,根本駁不來.
記得那天看戲,想支持多一點,半場看了藝術節問卷,本想填份回應,點知看落根本沒有一條問題是關於演出如何的!
我最深印象的問題,是問機構資助藝術節會助建立機構正面形象嗎?(如此的問題要求的,簡直不是你的意見)就像晶螢在inmedia辯說藝術資助可改善機構形象如出一轍.
另有條問題又問藝術節是否香港最出色的藝術節目云云,我真擔心填了會不會等於害了更多找不到錢的藝術工作者?
結果,我就唯有罷手唔填.

下年的藝術節,
若不再放特首在首頁,說服廣告商唔需落大版廣告,唔要彩色精美印刷,場刊沒有夾著多餘單張,把所有節省的,用回在本地藝術上,那我就會上你藝術節的網站填張答案如你希望的問卷.
當然,也希望問卷有給藝術家feedback一欄.

全國人大委員長吳邦國說:香港政治體制決定權在中央
難怪曾蔭權只講會反映策發局搜集的所謂民意.

忽然想起,是beyond的荒謬:

寒冷世紀 奇妙的風氣 你在改寫我日期
遙控是非 誰在玩把戲 你再創造我傳奇
某天 人生多麼優美 這天 人心肚滿腸肥
荒謬 身處迷亂氣候 閃閃生輝的引誘 無聲一一接受
荒謬 想到前後左右 自問踏入這年頭 真的知己有沒有
狂妄自卑 陳舊的心理 對著惡夢說別離
完了世紀 無盡的希冀 不腐不朽變神奇
寒冷世紀 奇妙的風氣 你在改寫我日期

社會民主連線--「政治培訓班」短期課程
日期﹕30/3/07、13/4/07、20/4/07及27/4/07，合共四個星期五
時間﹕晚上8時至9時30分
堂數﹕4堂
請員﹕黃毓民先生(社會民主連線主席、資深時事評論員)
陳士齊教授(社會民主連線常委、浸會大學宗哲系高級講師)
地點﹕社民連會址 (尖沙咀金巴利道78金輝閣2A)
合資格報讀者﹕會員
名額﹕30名(已接受報名，詳情請稍後公佈)
費用﹕全免
課堂內容﹕
1) 淺談香港政治形勢
2) 社會民主主義簡介
3) 社會民主連線政綱研讀
4) 香港傳媒現況

See Lawrence Weiner show at Para/Site yesterday cos wanna write about it.
The chi translation of the work is a bit disappointing. But that could be hard work I guess.

here, i gave it a shot
撥邊 或撥走
邁核 邁月 邁星

But the (obviously translated) chi press release is not really up to the job, one is forced to keep returning back to the English version to get what it meant. If Lp is complaining about org lack of decent respect towards the artists, I think it lacks some here too.
The English one also falsely combined "Statement" with "Declaration of Intent" resulting a "statement of intent". {Lawman, let's remake conceptual art history starting from here!}
(btw, one version states statement as published in year 1969, I am not sure who's more correct though).

剛看完pearl播minority report,當未來先知不是機械而是有歷史的個體,當tom cruise預知自己殺人而殺人發生,就可以證明防止殺人預知系統失敗.hollywood的編劇在這裡好像進入了系統論的自我反思(第二次現代性)層次,但其實殺人若可以因預知而預防,不就經已是預知的失敗?(戲中的minority report{譯作未來報告}到底就是人類自由意志)
另而見到cruise未來行到那裡,店舖自動會認得你,廣告行過就會喊你個名,最後要換眼改變身份,忽然就是想到要狗隻植入晶片,其實也是何等不人道.當年身份證要加張晶片,人們就已嘈了很久,天星示威時警察堅持要抄被圈的示威者身份證,示威者不肯,也就為此僵持了大半晚.現在狗一被植入晶片,彷彿就是成為某人的財產,就是牠不喜歡主人要出走,都會被送回主人處.想到這裡,忽然唔想帶身份證出街.

友人send來幾個link,其中包括上年已提及過的the bridge.片講金門橋與自殺,結果在san fran的電影節當然如料的爆滿沒法看到.
可是那次電影節,我也看了幾齣戲,雖Iberia結果像當年在英倫看edward ii一樣太累而睡著了.但那次我也就乘一個人在外,在kabuki cinema看了怪片The Glamourous Life of Sachiko Hanai.將來有機會看看湯幀兆的書有沒有介紹過這條友.

今晚真是次有意思的遊行,

未入維園就遇到一批一批警察,數不清多的警告banner,指遊行非法.入了去就被四周的警員欄圍出不了來,加上插隊拿talkie的便衣,還有更多解散後留下來的便衣.香港就是一個淪陷了的police state.

看著毓民3月1日到行政長官選舉答問大會會場外抗議的片段,就想起tsw話佢陷於的中年危機.但若果現在的理論界口口聲聲要保持reflectivity,那中年危機不是比抱著熊貓喊得意的,拿著掃把做垃圾隊長都無反省的高官與特首見優?

要到處處被人刻意邊緣化,
連遊行獲准通知書都沒有,
才覺出嚟行真不容易,
大家要力撐.

「譴責假選舉」大遊行

日期﹕2007年3月10日（星期六）
集合時間﹕晚上七時
集合地點﹕維園南亭廣場（近銅鑼灣入口噴水池）
遊行路線﹕維園至遮打花園

民主派人士參與小圈子選舉，
雖或令曾蔭權難堪可能收到微效，
卻令小圈子選舉貌似具有競爭性，
市民迷戀於對候選人評頭品足，
小圈選舉偽得合理化。
這實在是撿了芝麻，丟了西瓜，
為不義制度寫下背書。

衡量梁家傑參選是否達標，
關鍵之處在於它能否鼓動風潮，
動員港人上街表態鞭撻小圈選舉，
為雙普選而吶喊。

梁家傑的神奇旅程，
終點卻是群眾抗爭之衰落。

管它小圈選舉假戲真做，
無權、無錢、無票的六百萬市民沈默，
只會令弄權者之笑聲更加響亮，
使官商勾結更形猖狂﹗
就讓我們開創潮流，大聲說不﹗

社會民主連線邀請大家
在星期六（3月10日），
下午七時，到維園集合，
反對小圈選舉，
重申爭取普選之志。

到時見﹗

寫這篇blog,可能會得罪很多人,卻仍是無妨一寫.
近期愈來愈發覺很多人愛寵物愛得使我覺得有些人的生存境況比那些幸運的動物也不如.
我大概又是一上就無限上綱,一想就想起那些無人愛護的孤兒.
但也的確有些新的虐待動物的刑罰,比最近幾單家長虐兒的判刑還重.
最近就看到一文章,說早上起來,寵物等你起身,有如子女在床邊說聲我愛你的甜,難度這是一種養寵物人的填補心理?
近日得知一個香港編舞,寵物老了而減了外遊演出,這是個人選擇,何況都已是老伴了.
但開始這種關係時,真的好請停一停想一想,這其實已是一門如何的國際大生意.
每日散步或玩耍,就像親子時間,要付出,但有限時間的人生放在什麼上有意思,我個人就總不太會選寵物.
話口未完,看著泰國出品的再見.流浪犬,就miss了六點半新聞.
也就算我沒有愛心.
至於要把熊貓送來港作禮物,不如取消珠江新大橋救救白海豚算把啦.

清理舊hk mag,在一期的last week in reality發現一宗關於植樹的荒謬事件.

看了藝術節天工開物.
從來不甚曉欣賞看過的陳炳釗作品(97那批,跟藝術展覽一樣,我沒有看過).董啟章也非特別吸引我的作者,於是其同名新作也未有去讀或翻.
或是因近陣子陪父母多番些,這次第兩幕臨尾如是一場現實感重點,是我最看得自在點的一節.至於人-進化-機械幾線結合在錄像中人們在天星以自己扮鐘的點子,則是整劇給我(使兩樣o野重新變番)有趣位.
然而這或也點出,v城裡,藝術/劇場-社會的位置似乎亦已改變了.
(正如最近一次被香港文學吸引,我會選潘國靈版的i城.)

roundtable組團北韓遊,友人說想去,我緘默.
這旅遊使我想起看到過篇陳冠中文章,指大家湧到北京,就是唔想miss the big time,那跟黃碧雲那時四處跑,不同在於跟團跟大圍.
剛在am730卻見沈旭輝提到北韓金正日排在十大獨裁者爆冷只有第二位.真不明白大家想點.
在有線看了希特勒的最後十二日(Der Untergang) ,片的前後(2:45)也有一真人訪問片段,那受訪者說她當初不覺得自己有責任,因為納粹黨殺人她不知情.要到後來一天遇到一個跟她同年出世的受害死者紀念碑,才猛醒到,自己不去嘗試了解事情真相,也是一種罪過.
過去60 minutes+或還是同類的節目,就訪問過些從北韓逃出來的人,講到北韓依仍留有政治犯的集中營,那時一個受訪者就提到我們可能會說當年的德國人不知有集中營和屠殺,所以沒有行動過,可是現在我們知道了北韓如是,世界/大家又做了點什麼?相比,我們比那時真的不知情的德國人豈非還糟糕?

查知講者Nicolaus Schafhausen今屆Venice Biennale德國館選的是Isa Genzken,本來這星期二晚打算回老家吃飯,不去歌德聽talk(6 Mar, 7pm).但看了下引文章,看到以下抽引一段,還是覺得可以有趣吧.
Schafhausen's preference for working with small institutions
stands in marked contrast to the practices of today's free-roaming curators; ever on the lookout for new contexts and picturesque sites, they have contributed to an event culture that increasingly frustrates meaningful artistic and critical production. From Rotterdam, Schafhausen will also continue to direct the European Kunsthalle initiative in Cologne, a research project investigating the possibilities and problems of Kunsthalletype spaces in contemporary urban culture, created in response to the closing of the old Kunsthalle in Cologne and the general erosion of the city's art scene.
我長期寧支持Kunsthalle (辦展覽而沒收藏的展館),甚至Kunstverein(城市/地方性單位的藝術家同盟會/展場)方案,而非又多一座博物館,看的或正因那是depenedent curator成為可能的地方.
文章續下去處,竟還少有評價Catherine David上手攪WdW的問題:
Compared to this provisional think tank, Witte de With seems like a secure and established institution; but the situation Schafhausen faces in Rotterdam, and in the Netherlands as a whole, is nonetheless difficult. David's program at Witte de With was greeted with a mixture of disinterest and hostility bordering on xenophobia (yikes, a Frenchwoman who uses difficult words!), and she left the Netherlands denouncing the country's populist and anti-intellectual climate. The fault was hardly all on one side, however. It is true that the reception of David's activities demonstrated the near-total absence of serious discourse in Holland, but her departure might also be reasonably linked to her communication skills, or lack thereof, and to her distant attitude toward the town and country in which she worked.
In truth, David and the cultural and political context in which she had to operate were a mismatch from the start, and following her directorate was like watching a traffic accident in slow motion. Although she created a cogent program--highlights included shows by David Goldblatt (2003), Ulrike Ottinger, and Alison and Peter Smithson (both 2004), as well as the series "Contemporary Arab Representations" (2002-2003), consisting of ambitious but poorly installed shows focusing on specific cities--there were fewer exhibitions than in the past. David regarded Witte de With as a center for artistic production and critical reflection, not necessarily as an exhibition space. But Witte de With's cultural-political legitimization, and consequently its funding, are crucially dependent on its shows--the institution's most visible side. In the end, David's credit was virtually zero; when withdrawal of municipal funding seemed imminent, the novelist Van den Brink was appointed interim director. While his intimate knowledge of the Dutch cultural bureaucracy was crucial during this transitional period, it was clear from the beginning that his directorate would be an interregnum ending with the appointment of a new director steeped in contemporary art. Like David, Schafhausen also places great value on creating a strong theoretical foundation and uses art institutions to create a space for critique; but he has demonstrated a far greater awareness that support for such critical institutions is fragile and must constantly be rekindled through a variety of activities, including the mounting of convincing exhibitions.
搞藝術不展覽,似乎仍是當代藝術策展思想其一欲發展的死症,manifesta的壯烈犧牲經已是一單.

郵輪瑪麗皇后二號來港要在貨櫃碼頭才夠泊,上船的富豪們說這是香港之恥,是他們的面而已吧?星島忍不著大肆報導一名香港遊船客投訴一名英國歷史及考古學家在船上一介紹香港的講座中連番批評香港,我看才是港人之恥.專家講座指香港空氣污染嚴重,山頂遊無甚睇頭外,又指"在尖沙嘴的藝術博物館亦不值一去,因為水準比區內其他館,如上海都要差",這都算是否誤導?

雖然很想鼓勵新寫文的人,也知自己也唔係寫得好,
但對於jeff的新文,我愈來愈覺另有寫作動機,讀者對象?
於是開始放棄原想的指指點點.
jeff於06回顧其一提到的,是蔡仞姿回顧展而出版的場刊《又，物聚》

最近看了Jae Emerling的Theory for Art History.再想香港藝術史,對於蔡仞姿回顧展《又，物聚》終於有了一個去理解佢的統一想法,就是覺得linda lai採的理論實踐方式,和回顧展藝術史是相衝的.
於是結果只能現在如是般:[Re-]
Deleuze/Guattari無疑成了藝術史要面對的家常理論,但兩人雖或不認同把自己歸入後現代性陣營,但rhizome要去除正是歷史本身aborescent mode的論述,那實是很後現-無歷史感的.
仍是要借來不同的著作對於香港藝術年代劃分的框架,築成multi-linear的歷史書寫,不代表就不是linear.
pamela談hypernated是object-activity起,那在中文的東西遊戲中是整全卻歧義/誤導的(換句話說,英文反起分裂而澄清的作用).[Re-]Fabrication,蔡問是否雖要加括號,反是今天的一個[後現]理論問題.
有[-]my point自覺的歷史書寫本是好事,但梁寶在座談提到展覽的非歷史線性對其有所啟示,但於我此特標年份之舉,正是一種介乎歷史和理論,林克歡所說在建構就遇著解構的香港問題.
或者多元,後現代的發展期就是藝術史的終結?
實在很想看到從香港藝術歷史研究提出來的想法,甚至理論.

jeff於06回顧另還提到亞洲藝術文獻庫(魂游負責)的「香港行為藝術研究報告」(和我上次談其撰的藝發局報告不同),下次有機會,我又是要講講所見的問題.

Isabel Hilton: Surfing the dragon
當代西方批評論述的中國圖像?
當西方批評中國的自我圖像論述?

看了有線頗無聊的分析答問大會節目,
聽了一班人說,發覺大家俾梁家傑政制方面超低分,
就是連曾蔭權的教育分也不如,
換句話說,支持2012普選,變成了負資產,不會加而反是要扣分.
香港人這種知不能為就不為
就是以務實懲罰自己的怯懦

真的唔理解香港人,傍晚看過行政長官候選人答問大會,我感到我的簽名支持(雖踢了毓民那邊一腳)是值得的,可以直接通過電視入到人們家中讓人們分辨是與非.
用我自己的俾分,勝取的問題回答可能是曾2:梁50之比.可奇怪民調計數曾反有賺.難怪佢唔想搞好教育佢,等個個成為其順民.
務實戰,可能真在下一代的教育.

it is really difficult to predict what on the blog people will be interested to respond. upon my dislike of my own name, Edwin points to a larger social phenomenon, while wo links up another artist.
Interesting my nephew has an English name I am not sure how to spell, but a common Chinese name my mom thought a bit like the chinese nun.
While talking with lc earlier, he brought to my notice, how Jasper Johns could or make sense to him as a respond to Duchamp, as a painter. This demonstrates again how so little patience I have to continue to think of art in medium based, despite what duchamp did, as tdd argues, opens up rather than closing down possibilities.
Jesper Just is one artist that I came across twice, and both times his short films leave me a very positive impression. Its stylistic overtone doesn't got me annoyed as camp, the high production value seems to serve well the intense emotion. The only thing that I have reserved for, is that I still do not know if it is addressing universality or specificity in sexual performativity, just as how a hetero likes Fredie.