请登陆我们的网站首页  VISIT THE MAIN HomeShop SITE

Posts tagged ‘录像 video’


Seven one-on-one recorded dialogues between HomeShop organizers took place in the autumn of 2014, to accompany and reflect on some of the objects included in the 「我的负能量是你的正能量,or,或者,The Grin Without The Cat」 archive. Topics included: the question of rules as a common ground, the initiation and dissolution of artist projects, community-based participatory art vs. community-based social work, art as service, finding one’s role within the open platform and the role of a dead cat in democracy.

关于民主,怎么埋猫 about democracy and how to bury a cat
关于饮食和“在一起”性的实验 about eating together and being together, the experiment
关于家作坊“万物库”和服务 about the HomeShop “Ten Thousand Item Treasury” and service
关于规则和伦理关系 about the rules and ethics of self-organization
关于艺术与社区 about art and community
关于参与性和结局性 about participation and ending
关于厨房分用和个体角色 about sharing the kitchen and individual roles

请点这里查看更多关于「我的负能量是你的正能量,or,或者,The Grin Without The Cat」项目。

Click here for more information about the 「我的负能量是你的正能量,or,或者,The Grin Without The Cat」project.

即兴MV:White Hinterland乐队的“Vessels” (或者叫“家作坊的冬天”)
“Vessels” by White Hinterland, an instant music video (or, HomeShop in winter)

This comes in the after effects of our reading group discussing Claire Bishop today, a contestable figure in the realm of participatory art practices today, we fall in and out of line. We discussed quite a bit about the different politics of maker/audience relations, the possibilities and limitations of criticism (or the lack thereof) amidst the alternating roles of curator, artist and audience. Whether it’s about critique or pure naiveté, what necessarily emerges in this triangulation is the question of community. Who is speaking to whom, and does that relationship generate community, make it elitist, or raise propositions to completely unpredictable others? We move from the Argentinians who use socially engaged art to motivate participants to push forward in the realm of the socio-political, to the Eastern Europeans and Russians who evade the directly political for a meta-political alter-realm of the sensible, to ourselves. Dialogue evinces a form of self-reflexivity that cannot conceptualize self without other, a 对方. Is that 对 antagonistic, or, like the best love letter i ever received, simply… “Yes.”? 对 Duì, in that Chinese sensibility, pragmatic, like its ‘寸 hand’ on the right and in the traditional 對, where on the left 业 industry stands over 王 rulership. Our being in place is oppositional, but insofar that we do in order to be relative to others (power). And if those power struggles are not finite, we have a form of agonism that does not value one way over an other, but in its perpetual instability, the way itself. This ‘way‘ is meta-politics, it is aesthetics, and perhaps, it is from here the beginning of a research into style. Style here cannot be separately conceived from its actors or audiences, and perhaps, it may be one of the last remaining realms where the spectator possesses the most valuable rights of critique towards an author who does not see him/herself (is that democratic?). So who is the curator here? The media, the mob, or the system itself? That which cannot be critiqued in and of itself is power, is the stampede sparked by inadvertent incident, where action supersedes any one intention or attempt to communicate. Style is only manifestation, it is the superficialness of the masses, it is a form of representation that both critiques (bitchy) and evades critique (inessential). So to go from there, it seems possible to start from two cultural forms of analysis: one, fashion and semiotics, starting from Barthes and moving forward, and then, translation as a mediator of meaning. Maybe thereafter, something more spiritually or politically charged, but that will come upon further introspection of what that “we” really meantUntil then…

“Ray studies English, Orianna studies Chinese”, an instant educational video by Céline LAMÉE (“HomeShop, a contemporary tower of Babel, where, in the enthusiasm of learning each other’s languages, strange new lifeforms of languages emerge…“)

material captured during our Saturday deliveries of WEAR journal in Beijing city, otherwise known as 217.6 km later…:

早上 9:30 AM | 吴思远 Ray & 高灵 Ling | 菊儿胡同 Ju’er Hutong、左家庄 Zuojiazhuang、汉庭酒店(东直门外分店)HanTing Express Hotel (Dongzhimen Outer branch)

早上 10:00 AM | 何颖雅 Elaine & 小欧 Orianna | 清华大学美院 Tsinghua University, Fine Arts Department

早上 11:00 AM | 天汲 Tianji & 左罗 Zoro | 东直门外大街 Dongzhimen Outer Street

中午 12:00 PM | 王尘尘 Cici & 王大川 River | 东四八条 Dongsi8tiao、地安门 Dianmen、旧宫地铁站 Jiu Gong subway station

下午 1:00 PM | 高蓓 GAO Bei & 七朵云 Pilar | 苹果派社区 (东5和6环之间) Apple Pie Estates (between the 5th and 6th East Ring Roads)

下午 1:30 PM | 王若思 Rose & 森林 Céline | 望京 Wangjing、草厂地 Caochangdi

下午 2:00 PM | 欧阳潇 Xiao & 小欧 Orianna | 幸福西里 Xingfu Xili、东直门内 Dongzhimen Inner Street

下午 3:00 PM | 曲一箴 Twist & Katharina | 鼓楼西大街 Drum Tower West、鼓楼后面 Drum Tower North、鼓楼东大街 Drum Tower East

下午 3:00 PM | 张献民 Frank & 何颖雅 Elaine | 卢沟桥 Marco Polo Bridge、东五道口 Wudaokou、奥林匹克公园北门 North Gate of Olympic Park

摄影 photo courtesy of // 米店 Detour

i remember a very specifically grilling moment one night at 米店 Detour, when we brought new friends from the U.S. over for dinner, and although there existed a humour in the fact that they were sitting in the low sofa next to the window that makes guests look like shrimps across the table from us, sitting on the higher wooden bench, C asked very directly, “So what is HomeShop in a word? What’s your goal, your thing, your manifesto?” It seemed shocking at the time that one could still talk in the arousing tense of the manifesto, but it is difficult to squirm so easily from the high bench out of such forthrightness, so I tried a word:


i think my answer and explanation sufficed at the time—a thinking in terms of different reaches of time: from the passing details of an everyday to the affective time of love, collaboration and friendship, to an environmental question that reaches somewhere beyond our own lifetimes. It was a spontaneous answer compiled from previous considerations not vocalised before, but since that evening the motions of passing detail, collaboration and trying to keep up with the compost build-up have pushed manifesto-like considerations to the wayside. This has been just as 自然而然 a passing of the year though, as I learned from 2007 at Xiaojingchang, so all of the openings, miscommunications and bump-stops that we’ve experienced so far at Beixinqiao cannot be considered regretful, but it is certainly now a moment to reconsider a certain form of temporality after settling into certain other kinds of situatedness, the stickiness of labels, unwanted routines, or the hearing of gossip come round.

Why sustainability and time in a discourse that has previously been dominated by considerations of place, city and the local context? They are not unrelated, of course, but I wonder how these two could have been so independently stressed among certain historical trends of socio-cultural study, from Heidegger to Sloterdijk. Today, three films put me in a sort of stylo-anachronistic quandary, but at the same time, as works or projects, they remind us of a certain specificity of place that cannot be isolated from any form of artistic production. The first two come from CCD Workstation’s Folk Memory Project, and the third was Michael MADSEN’s Into Eternity. In both place and time and somewhere in between, I cannot help but try to place the work of our own little HomeShop.

剪图 still image from // 章梦奇 ZHANG Mengqi’s 《自画像:47公里 Self Portrait: At 47 km

The two films I saw from the Folk Memory Project were 邹雪平 ZOU Xueping’s 《吃饱的村子 Satiated Village》 and 章梦奇 ZHANG Mengqi’s 《自画像:47公里 Self Portrait: At 47 km》. Visually consistent with 吴文光 WU Wenguang’s insistence upon “100% Life, 0% Art”, the two documentaries were unprofessional, sophomore attempts to make film based upon the project call to return to one’s hometown village to document the personal experiences of senior citizens who had lived through the Great Chinese Famine between 1958-61. An explicitly historical documentation is complicated by the personal subjectivities of the filmmakers, mostly born in the 80s with no real connection to the depth of suffering undergone by their elders, who—despite being family or not—were very often unwilling to lay bare the humiliation experienced by the Chinese people. As the camera shakes or the sound is drowned out by wind in the microphone, we are moved to look past the films themselves to their significance as a project, and here we can either see 老吴 Old WU’s genius or his excellent distribution of labour (we could go further into this question in another conversation). Is this a form of looking into history to redress wrongs from the past, or is it a way to recontextualise the things gone astray in our present condition? Both are equally valid, and similar to the activist work of 艾未未 AI Weiwei, it is possible to analyse the mechanics of a microsystem that make such a consideration of time possible. Documentation is important insofar as there is  a longer conception of time, whether it be in 章梦奇 ZHANG Mengqi’s decision to edit more footage of a particular woman into her final piece because of a certain personal connection to her spirit (这个讲“气场”或者“fa’r”或者“气质”?), or if we consider the importance of a generation of memories to be lost in the propaganda of a school history book.

剪图 still image from // 《Into Eternity

After biking from 798 and coming back to the comfort of HomeShop, I passed through the ghetto set-up of black trash bags covering the windows into the completely calculated time-space of MADSEN’s documentary about the world’s first permanent nuclear waste repository located in Onkalo, Finland. The irony of design calculation to be considered in the extremely controlled camera shots, editing and beautiful composition (could only keep thinking, “how many times did they have to rehearse that shot so that his speech was perfectly timed with the lit fire of the match?”) are set in stark contrast to the gross horror of nuclear disaster and MADSEN’s questioning of the human capacity to consider life “never” or “forever” amidst the limitations of technology. Can we design for  “permanent” to preserve all future lifeforms, by a machine set into water or one deep underground, and what markers above ground could be able to communicate this? Can we trust communication or should we rather trust ourselves to the oblivion of forgetting?

摄影 photo courtesy of // 刘畅 LIU Chang & 高灵 GAO Ling

Where do we place ourselves amidst history and guesses and predictions into the future? Can time only be a point of view, and do our differences about these considerations make us unable to live together in the present? To talk about sustainability in this sense is an attempt to address different scales of time, but yes, we are limited, and there will always be something neglected despite all carefulness. HomeShop is not about “forever”, you’re right. But time is relative, and all we have to go on at this point is the concreteness of a three-year contract and the temporality implicit in any of the localities we may find ourselves at any given moment. This may be the hutong, the value and “success” of our work, or the waking up in a bad mood. How much do we let go when faced with the extremes of 大自然 and 设计生活, and is trust merely a question of time?

Film : Into Eternity by Michael Madsen (79min)

English and Japanese subtitled

Date: Saturday 31st March 19:00~ / Saturday 7th April 19:00~

location: 家作坊 HomeShop[map]

cost: 60yuan (with Hot sandwich and drink)
money will support running cost of HomeShop and a Japanese documentary filmmaker who works on nuclear power issues in Japan

The 2011 earthquake and resulting nuclear power disaster in Fukushima, Japan showed that the world’s resources are finite, while causing long-term dysfunctions of current social systems in the cities, where life with Cesium will have to be confronted for extended and indeterminate periods of time. And who imagine that nuclear waste are stored for 100, 000 years!

Recent HomeShop visiting friend Vera Tollmann has written a review:

nuclear waste must be securely stored for 100,000 years due to its potentially lethal radioactive radiation. But where? How are we to relate to such an immense period of time? Is anyone at all in a position to take on the responsibility for this length of time?… more

Contact: NGO fu-jin Network Beijing and HomeShop