Art Responds to 14 QKs -many people show / 藝術回應拾肆個 QK

Art Responds to 14 QKs -many people show

藝術回應拾肆個 QK - 多人展

Exhibition: 17 November 4pm to 24 November 7pm

展期：十一月十七日下午四時至二十四日晚上七時

Participating artists: Nadim Abbas, APART.hk (Joe.C and Daniel Chau), C&G, KY Chan, Cheung Tit Leung, Luke Ching, Ger Choi, Cornelia Erdmann, Helen Grace, Frog King, Christopher Lau, Lam Laam Jaffa, Michael Lee, Lee Chun Fung, Lee Kit, Roy Lee, Leung Chi Wo, Leung Po Shan, Tim Li, Jack Lui, Phoebe Man, Machi, Fion Ng, Ellen Pau, tamshui:\, Yuk King Tan, Tsang Tak Ping, Adrian Wong, Doris Wong, Justin Wong, Magdalen Wong, MCYan, Anthony Yeung, Samson Young, Yuen Cheuk Wa, Yuenjie and more

參展藝術家：Nadim Abbas、APART.hk(Joe.C 及Daniel Chau)、C&G、陳啓賢、程展緯、蔡芷筠、Helen Grace、Cornelia Erdmann、蛙王、劉柏基、林嵐、Michael Lee、李俊峰、李傑、李錦棠、李民偉、呂振亮、文晶瑩、馬仔、費安尼思、鮑藹倫、淡水、陳玉瓊、曾德平、黃慧妍、黃照達、黃頌恩、楊我華、楊嘉輝、袁卓華、梁志和、梁寶山、張鐵樑、MCYan、丸仔、Adrian Wong等等

(中文版於英文版末)

Public participation:

If you have or have made a tee with prints that you find is a form of cultural expression, please wear them to the opening of the exhibition on Nov 17 or bring them to be exhibited. (Please kindly come back on Nov 24 to collect it)

About the exhibition:

“QK” ( qiao qi 蹺蹊 ) is an adjective in Chinese that has been colloquialized to mean something weird or unreasoning. Art finds the recent G.O. D. incident utterly QK. It decides to present itself as an organized/ disorganized, directional/ non-directional exhibition to multi-channelize the one-sidedly infernal affairs.

There are at least 14 QKs at work:

• What is the core problem for culture? Who decides what is or is not a problem?

• Does exercising authority solve problems?

• How are the limits of “Security” and “Purification” to be drawn?

• What is a “taboo”? Who decides? Why? What are its histories?

• When does taboo become a tool that controls cultural expression?

• Can creative practices be evaluated with a certain standard? Are there good and bad creative practices?

• How is this standard defined? How is the good and bad articulated?

• What are the cultural meanings of humor?

• What does cultural expression mean in a commercialism-driven society?

• What more can mass produced creativity and products mean other than profit making tools for corporations?

• Who draws the line for cultural expression and cultural control?

• Does the appropriation of cultural symbols require control?

• Must the goal of social order be attained at the expense of cultural expression?

• What kind of a cultural life are we living?

Art responds to the 14 QKs by affirming the importance of discussing them in specific contexts and revealing the complexity that governs these questions. The aim is not to liquidate or becloud black and white. Rather, in face of the already beclouded black and white, art looks for colors that are deeper and sediment in cultures and histories.

Please contact Yeung Yang at 9040-3877 or yy@culturejam.net for any inquiries.

公衆參與 :

歡迎公衆於 17/ 11/ 2007下午四時穿起(各人自行選擇或製造)帶有文化表達字樣的T-恤來臨展場，參與開幕。你又可以把T-恤帶來展出。 (敬請於展覽最後一天24/11/2007到來領回你的展品。謝謝。)

有關是展 :

就最近涉及 G.O.D.品牌的事事非非, 藝術家們發現其中事態 QK(蹺蹊), 特設又無又有組織、又有又無導向性的展覽, ?求對事態的思考能打開多間多道的討論.

拾肆個隨意也可舉出的 QK問題如下:

其一 , 事件的文化問題核心在那裏 ? 誰决定甚麽是問題或不是問題?

其二 , 用權威解决問題其實有沒有解决問題 ?

其三 , 怎樣釐定「保安」和「淨化」的上限 ?

其四 , 「禁忌」是甚麽? 是誰定的? ?甚麽定? 它的歷史怎樣?

其五 , 禁忌甚麽時候成?控制文化表達的工具?

其六 , 創作有標準的嗎? 有好有壞嗎?

其七 , 如何决定這標準, 如何陳述好與壞?

其八 , 幽默有甚麽文化意義 ?

其九 , 在香港這個商業社會, 文化表達意味著甚麽?

其十 , 大量生?的創意和創作的意義就止於?商人賺錢的商品 ?

其十一 , 誰决定文化表達和文化控制的界綫?

其十二 , 文化象徵挪用要控制嗎?

其十三 , 要社會安定是不是就要控制文化表達 ?

其十四 , 我們過著怎樣的文化生活?

藝術對拾肆個 QK的回應是:

肯定要釐清問題討論的特定語境，肯定要呈現 QK事態背後的複雜性，目的不是否定或混淆黑白，而是要在已經混淆了的黑白之中找更深更沈澱於文化歷史的色與彩。

如有查詢請電9040-3877 或電郵到 yy@culturejam.net 與楊陽聯絡。

Back