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

Posts tagged ‘艺术 art’

《高山流水》赵天汲

High Mountain, Flowing Water by ZHAO Tianji

(声音装置 / sound installation)

HomeShop recently participated in the exhibition Green Box - Remapping — The Space of Media Reality (organized by School of Intermedia Art of China Art Academy at Media City Research Center 11–29 January, 2013) with a just-in-time newspaper about the other works in the show, silkscreen-printed on-site in the exhibition space.

近期,家作坊参与了展览《绿盒子-重绘形貌-媒体现实的空间》(由中国美术学院媒体城市研究中心举办,于2013年1月11-29日展出),作品为一份关于本次展览中其他作品的即时报纸,在展览现场进行丝网印刷。

两年以来,家作坊通过报纸的形式对公共性与本地性的“内”与“外”进行持续研究,包括《黄边日报》与《北二条小报》。我们意在通过时效性媒介来发表一个具有复调空间的宣言。从时间与空间上来说,报纸的截稿时间给内容强加了一种特定的紧迫感。 

作为这些表演性新闻报道的延续,《绿盒子阜利通》将现身《绿盒子:重绘形貌-媒体现实的空间》群展,并展开探索。家作坊小分队会对其他参展者进行纪录、注解、批评,搜集大量数据、真相抑或流言,以及深入幕后的主观诠释,这些将以红墨印制,在开幕时供人取阅。在个别情况下,参展者可选择自我批判,而不是让作品任由《绿盒子阜利通》支配。最后,我们的社论不仅是指向自我的检视,渗入自身实践的诸多边界,而且是向普遍意义上的展览批评提出质询。

For the past two years, HomeShop has been investigating the ins and outs of publicness and locality through the form of newspapers, including The YellowSide Daily and Beiertiao Leaks. The intention has been to form a multi-vocal space of statement through a medium of urgency. The newspapers’ deadline forces a certain immediacy of content, in both time and place.

Greenbox Leaks is a followup on these exercises in the performance of journalism, turned toward the exploration of the context of the group exhibition in which it will appear. A team dispatched from HomeShop will document, annotate and critique the contributions by all other participants in the show, gathering meta-data, truth & rumour, and subjective interpretation into a special behind-the-scenes critical feuilleton to be printed in red ink and available for the opening. In some cases, the other participants will be offered the choice to self-critique instead of having their work subjected to the treatment of Greenbox Leaks team. Finally, our editorial comprises a self-criticism that not only infiltrates the boundaries inherent to our own undertaking, but also problematizes all future criticisms around the exhibition as a whole.

Printing past the deadline at the opening. 开幕之后的现场印刷


Fellow artist in Green Box, Liu Guoqiang, takes his criticism with admirable humour. 另一位参展艺术家刘国强带着崇拜式的幽默阅读关于他的作品的批评



The presentation also included previous editions of Beiertiao Leaks, YellowSide Daily, and 《穿》Wear journals (now available in Hangzhou while supplies last!). 展览的作品也包括前期的《北二条小报》《黄边日报》《穿》

Counting the hot cakes profits (1 yuan x 66 copies sold = 66 yuan!) 清点我们的收获!(1元*66份=66元!)

     

Read Greenbox Leaks here
在此阅读《绿盒子阜利通》

See more here: 更多信息 http://weibo.com/u/3205118847?topnav=1&wvr=5&topsug=1


As requested, please find above the full audio recording from the last meeting with Grant KESTER. While we did not adhere too closely to the text this time, several common interests/curiosities, those inevitable questions and quite a bit of editorial juxtaposed with self-reflection from an optimist, a “former” artist, a cynic and several foodies provided interesting insight into politicization as a viewing mechanism, “multiple art worlds”, “nomadic agents of critique”, “spontaneity (not) as stupidity” and the weakness of opposition, among other flows…

We’ll continue with the fallout of relational/dialogical practices with a reading suggested by Michael EDDY—Claire BISHOP’s latest book entitled Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship. Chapter 8, “Delegated Performance: Outsourcing Authenticity”, was suggested, but seeing as this book has been in wide circuit since its publishing and given our tendency to stray, perhaps another experiment could be attempted for each participant to read a chapter of interest and then introduce it to the rest of the group, as once attempted during the also relevant meeting “Modes of Activism“. What do you think? If you are interested to join this session of Happy Friends, to be held on

Sunday, 2 December 2012
18:00 at HomeShop

please send us an e-mail or leave a comment to this post in order to receive a copy of the reading, and let us know which of the following chapters floats your boat:

  1. The Social Turn: Collaboration and Its Discontents, p 11
  2. Artificial Hells: The Historic Avant-garde, p 41
  3. Je participe, tu participes, il participe . . . , p 77
  4. Social Sadism Made Explicit, p 105
  5. The Social Under Socialism, p 129
  6. Incidental People: APG and Community Arts, p 163
  7. Former West: Art as Project in the Early 1990s, p 193
  8. Delegated Performance: Outsourcing Authenticity, p 219
  9. Pedagogic Projects: ‘How do you bring a classroom to life as if it were a work of art?’, p 241

《丽江工作室壁画故事》一次当代艺术在中国农村的实践
新书发布 + 艺术家对谈

Lijiang Studio Mural Stories: Contemporary Art Episodes in Rural China, book launch and talk

日期/时间 date__ 8月19日周日,晚上7点 | Sunday, 19 August, 19:00
地点 location__ 家作坊 HomeShop [地图map


对谈艺术家:胡嘉岷,雷磊,刘斌,刘传宏,那颖禹,汤艺,吴俊勇
“壁画项目”策划+《丽江工作室壁画故事》主编:李丽莎
丽江工作室“新农村实验室”项目总监:正杰

participating artists: Hu Jiamin, Lei Lei, Liu Bin, Liu Chuanhong, Na Yingyu, Tang Yi, Wu Junyong
“Mural Project” curator & “Lijiang Studio Mural Stories” compiler: Li Lisha
Lijiang Studio “New Countryside Laboratory“ director: Jay Brown

本书是对非营利艺术机构丽江工作室在旅游城市丽江纳西族农村所做的一次当代艺术实践的全面记录,展现出艺术家和农民合作壁画的各种故事,用创造力试探当代艺术创作在农村的活力。

“新农村实验室”之”壁画项目”
丽江工作室2008年主持的“壁画项目”旨在参与中国社会主义新农村建设。在城市化进程加快的背景下,“新农村”一词显示了新时代的建设要求,其具体意义在农民心中各有侧重。

丽江工作室
从2005年开始,丽江工作室一直在位于中国西南边陲的云南省丽江市一个叫“吉祥村”的小村庄进行与农民日常生活互动的艺术实践。我们希望通过艺术家进驻项目创作作品,为到访艺术家和当地居民提供有益的经验。所有活动均不以营利为目的。假如你有意加入,请与我们联系:lsirlisa@gmail.com。

This book is a thorough documentation of one art project that Lijiang Studio, a not-for-profit arts organization, did in a Naxi village near the tourist city of Lijiang. It tells the story of local farmers and artists collaborating to paint murals. It is an attempt to probe the possibilities of creating contemporary art in a rural area.

New Countryside Laboratory Mural Project
The “Mural Painting Project” run by Lijiang Studio in 2008 aims to get involved in building the Chinese “New Countryside” (xin nongcun jianshe). The “New Countryside” is a term that has come up in recent years to describe the new status of rural China in the context of urban China. In our experience the specific application of the term varies greatly.

Lijiang Studio
Lijiang Studio has been making experiments relating to art and village life in this Jixiang (meaning “auspicious”) village near Lijiang, in Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, since 2005. We run an artist-in-residence program with the aim of making art that is as interesting to the visiting artist as it is to local people as it is to us. We have indulged in this in a strictly not-for-profit way. If you have any ideas you think would be interesting in our context, please contact us at lsirlisa@gmail.com.

       

茶壶里生长“最北端的Mojito
壶里的土来自漠河,中国的最北端
王尘尘

northernmost mojito in the teapot
with earth from Mohe, China’s northernmost point
by Wang Chenchen


更新 update 2012.08.18

 

 

 

哈楼各位朋友,密集音乐会已经第9回了,很高兴经常在观众席看到熟悉的面孔,而舞台上总是焕然一新。

最近和《黑衣人3》的制作人谈了一下,给我们做了个植入广告。看到O探员讲外星话的时候,你也许已经意识到,这就是密集音乐的广告:这次我们迎来了人声即兴泰斗,菲尔明顿老爷爷,还有美籍华人陈皓伊,他们都是外星派来的。

北京站有一个工作坊(20号,家作坊,晚上7点开始),一个音乐会(21号,两个好朋友,晚上8点半开始),本地阵容也很强大,有李剑鸿和火星即兴委员会,请注意不要迟到,否则会被外星人抓去做实验。

工作坊请报名联系,支持家作坊的30元求帮忙~

除了北京,还有上海、深圳、西安,一个小巡演。请不吝扩散。

他们的中国巡演得到了英国大使馆文化教育处的资助,这是“艺述英国”活动的一部分。

 

Dear all:

Good to know you are still in town (despite of the PM 2.5 and traffic jam) and are stronger (that’s why you are here, i guess).
We spent some money in Hollywood for advertise our Miji Concert. You will see it from the scene of “agent O speaking alien language” in Men in Black 3.
So we present Phil MINTON and Audrey CHEN, masters of voice improvisation. You will know how human body extending to a magical instrument.
And LI Jianhong, and MARS IMPRO COMMITTEE.

On June 20th at HomeShop there is a workshop for anyone who are interesting on voice, hold by Phil and Audrey. We start at 7:00 PM sharp.

On June 21st, at 2Kolegas. we start at 8:30 PM sharp.

Pls check attachment for details. Registration for the workshop is required, small pls help donation fee of 30 RMB.

Pls tell your friends in Shanghai, Shenzhen and Xi’an as well. It’s a great news for new music lover. Pls make them happy.


家-工-作坊第13回由撒把芥末与家作坊组织。Home-Work-Shop No. 13 is organised by SUBjam and HomeShop.

Jonah Brucker-Cohen 艺术家讲座和Drawbot工作坊

Jonah Brucker-Cohen artist talk and Drawbot workshop at HomeShop

时间:周四,五月31号,晚上7点至9点
材料费:15元
Time:  Thursday, May 31st 7:00 pm ~ 9:00 pm
Material cost:  15 元

Drawbot工作坊__
Drawbot是一个大家都能使用的绘画的系统,不必学电子技术。它是一个很简单的机器,这个机器是由标准的绘画材料,配重了的马达以及塑料杯组成。当杯子震荡时它们根据全部重量和动力画出圈和线。欢迎来家作坊学习制作你自己的Drawbot!

Drawbot Workshop__
Drawbot is a drawing system that anyone can use without having to learn electronics. It is a simple bot that mixes standard drawing materials (in this case magic markers) with weighted motors and plastic cups. When the cups vibrate, they draw circles and lines depending on their overall weight and power. Come to HomeShop and learn how to make your own!
http://www.coin-operated.com/coinop29/2010/05/02/drawbot-2001/

Talk Description__Dr. Brucker-Cohen will discuss his projects and work in the theme of “Deconstructing Networks” in both physical and online instantiations. He will introduce his projects that attempt to challenge and subvert accepted notions of network interaction from software manipulation and rule-based systems to translating virtual processes and conventions into the physical world. Some projects he will discuss include “BumpList”, an email community for the determined, “Alerting Infrastructure!”, a website hit counter that destroys a building, “PoliceState” a fleet of radio controlled policecars who’s movements are dictated by keywords sniffed on a local network, “Wifi-Hog” a portable system for regaining control of public wireless networks, “Wifi-Liberator” an open source toolkit to broadcast free access to pay-per-use wireless networks, “America’s Got No Talent” a data visuzliation he co-created with Katherine Moriwaki that ranks American Reality Television shows based on their exposure to social media such as Twitter, “SimpleTEXT” a dynamically generated performance that is controlled by participants through texting messages from their mobile phones, and several more projects. These projects deconstruct and challenge the foundations of network connectivity and social experiences online and offline.

____

Jonah Brucker-Cohen is a researcher, artist, and writer. He received his Ph.D. in the Disruptive Design Team of the Electronic and Electrical Engineering Department of Trinity College Dublin. His work and thesis is titled “Deconstructing Networks” and includes over 77 creative projects that critically challenge and subvert accepted perceptions of network interaction and experience. His work has been exhibited and showcased at venues such as San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, MOMA, ICA london, Whitney Museum of American Art (Artport), Palais Du Tokyo,Tate Modern, Ars Electronica, Transmediale, and more. His writing has appeared in publications such as WIRED, Make, Gizmodo, Neural and more. His Scrapyard Challenge workshops have been held in over 14 countries in Europe, South America, North America, Asia, and Australia since 2003.

链接 Links
Interactive Networked Projects__www.coin-operated.com
Scrapyard Challenge Workshops__www.scrapyardchallenge.com
Twitter__http://www.twitter.com/coinop29

(非常感谢高源翻译的英文原版 Chinese translation of the original post in English thanks to 高源鸿!!! 谢谢!!!

几个月之前,有位在2011光州设计双年展(主题为图可图非常图)非定名设计单元工作的朋友介绍了几位她的同事给我认识。他们在对祭奠用品进行研究, 大概这些用品是他们非定名设计的研究对象。我的朋友知道,我在和附近寿衣店的邻居有交流,制作了一些纸质物件,所以她研究祭奠用品的这几个同事想知道,这些店在哪儿。我给他们发了几张我制作的纸件和研究的照片,但其实我都没有给寿衣店内部拍过照。不过,我确实故意没告诉他们这些店的具体位置(其实就在我们工作室的正对面)。

这听着有点傻,但是我想声明一下,我这么做并不是因为想独占我周边的文化资源。我只是想研究这些小店同时不影响它们的真实性。这些小店从一开始,就笼罩在一片神秘之中。一年之前,我们在准备北二条小报第一期的时候,老萧和我特地去和问过开寿衣店的山东母子,要不要在我们的报纸上打个免费广告。两人拒绝了我们的提议,理由是做这种“迷信”的广告是不吉利的。政府对这种迷信产业进行着严格的监管,而同时又垄断着殡葬业。比如, 从我们对门邻居店里购买的骨灰盒,是不能进入公墓的,因为我们的邻居没有官方的批准。我想,这可能和他们本身不稳定的处境有关。他们在回答问题时,彬彬有礼而小心谨慎。所以,我们写了一篇短文,发在北二条小报上,仅向英语读者介绍这一现象。

不过,这篇短文的标题上用中文写了“寿衣”二字。所以在我们这份杂七杂八的报纸创刊号发行的第二天,就遭到了一些邻居的责怪,认为我们不应该提及这方面的内容。从他们的反应当中我感受到的是,不仅对门寿衣店与政府的关系难以说清,连关于人们离世后的仪式也是不可轻启的话题。

11月的时候,我们看了Brendan McGetrick的演讲,他本人是“未定名设计”的馆长之一。他以让人耳目一新的方式,向我们呈现出了各种创意与作品。他运用简单质朴的日常物件,科技产品,甚至社会现象来扩展设计的定义。比如:“政治抗议手册,DNA条码,死刑执行程序,跨洲货币体系”等等。那么这些如何成为设计的范例呢?McGetrick写到:“本次展会的目的,就是对“设计”进行重新的定义。设计是满足人类需求的各种战略解决方案,不是艺术家为了标榜自我而造出的主观产物”。

祭奠用品的设计可谓是McGetrick理念的反义词。这些用品悉数列举了日常生活的所有物件,通常涵盖我们文化当中的奢侈商品,比如:钱、汽车、高档衣服、手机和大楼。这些用品并非照搬物品原来的样子 ,也不是按照“山寨”的理念进行的。在某种程度上说,山寨好于原装产品,有的时候山寨机还会微妙而幽默地改变原机的功能。决定祭奠用品的外形的还有另外一个实际原因:为了便于焚烧,它们是用纸做的。因为这样的最终目的,设计当中的其他元素往往不被考虑在内。制造材料一定要能够充分燃烧,这样才能尽快进入地府——虽然几乎任何材料都是可燃的。曾几何时,人们在提供祭品的时候更加慷慨。但现在人们有着当代的理解,往往选择更普通的方式祭奠过世的爱人或祖先。 现在人人都可进行祭奠活动,所以祭奠也变得不在神圣,趋于理性。但是毕竟,相比于Georges Bataille提出的,用文字寄托哀思,或Jacques Attali倡导的,寄悲情于当代音乐,烧纸钱、烧祭物,显然还是更加直接的祭奠方式。然而这些用品必须做到能物尽其用同时价格低廉。所以,与现代社会的其他产品一样,祭奠用品也是大规模的现成制品。一套九件的祭奠品仅售15元。如果钱不是问题的话,还可以定做娃娃屋大小的别墅,或者等离子电视。在北京的小店里你可以在列着上百条物件的清单上订货,然后河北的制造者就会发货过来。不过,一般来说,卖的最好的还是成捆的通胀率极高的冥币,价格十分公道。

但是让我不解的是,如果祭奠用品的意义在于让死者在地府活得体面,那为什么还用最便宜的材料给他们做各种物件的复制品呢?是因为在这“纯粹的交换”中,最普通的商品,也是最合适的替代品吗?如果可以用仿冒品的话(比如,生前死后都可使用的双SIM卡手机;印着玉皇大帝的冥币),那么为什么还要买那些卖家的赝品,而不去自己制作一些适合自己情况和价值观的用品呢?这样不是能更好的阐释我们去已故亲人的关系吗?

带着这些想法,我自己制作了一些纸件并拿到对门的寿衣店,想知道能不能卖出去。我们的邻居并不吝惜对设计本身的评价,却坦承觉得这卖不出去。我向他们说明,他们可以自己定价,卖出去的钱完全归他们所有,他们也不断地问是否真的不需要给我任何钱。我唯一的要求就是请他们告诉我人们的反应。在我们的坚持下,他们同意拿几个看看。我本以为,手工制作可能对人们更有吸引力。然而店主却说,有人倒是买了一件,不管是以什么价格出售的,此人却打算留着我做的纸件而不是用于焚烧。这对我来说有些有趣,也有些让人失望。这并不是我的预期目标,也不是我最初保密的目的。不管怎么说,我还是觉得有机会的:接下来的几周,我路过对门,发现我的彩色小车摆在他们的玻璃柜台里。过了一段时间小车不见了,我却知道原因不是卖出去了。他们就是无法再忍受我的掺合,不想摆在柜台里了。而我们也觉得很尴尬,不敢旧事重提。

对亡者的纪念全世界都有,而我所知的祭奠方式相较这种简单很多。对很多人来说,谈到死亡,往往会谈宗教;而不信教的人,在说到死亡的时候,也会谈谈宗教,因为,没人谁真的知道死亡是怎样的一种体验,只能通过宗教来解释。我还记得参加过的几次亲戚的葬礼,感觉与其他重要场合没有什么特别大的区别,只是气氛凝重些。有的人相信天堂,我并不相信。在这点上,我与很多人包括亲属朋友是不同的。(我母亲是犹太人,她的文化身份可能更明显,而我其他亲戚的观点更集中于现世,引用我一个叔叔Alex在邮件中的原话,他说“等到陨石撞了地球,一切灰飞烟灭,一切都是浮云”)。如果说我们这个例子里,还依稀可见传统的影子的话,那么最多也只是说,这些传统时不时的扰乱了迥然不同的生活。

从某种程度上说,对死者的纪念,是人们用一种宗教,或者文化的方式,对抗着对于当代社会(流于物质)的失望,这种设计,可以说是存在于我们的内心深处根深蒂固的本能,或至少是,一种行之有效的对抗方式。牧师的动作,犹太拉比的语言或者在街边烧纸钱妇女的做法在一定意义上都是他们所在的环境的设计。而对于烧纸钱的妇女来说,这种设计其实是以象征的方式,重新构建了中国传统家庭相互依靠的体系,而让这些理念不因生命的终止而结束。但其实,即使焚烧的物件可能会变,这种习俗仍是在试图同精神世界建立一种连接,虽然表现形式是物质的,但实质并不全是。

我是站在一个不了解内情的人的角度上发表的观点,很难深入从人类学、社会学或宗教理论上进行分析。也就是在此,理论和信仰似乎分裂成了自相矛盾的境地。如果我们对待鬼魂的方式如此功利,我们如何能够真正进入灵魂的世界呢?带着这样的问题,我不禁自忖,是否现在已为时太晚?围绕真正的信仰问题,各种阐释与误解将我们对待灵魂的方式定调为艺术,但何为真相,何为误解,我们的路程在发现与怀疑的相反方向上,渐行渐远。毕竟,扪心自问,我们能说,扫墓者在祭奠先人时,所希望获得的,也是我们所期待的这种近距离的心灵体验吗?这些纪念本身是否已经稀释成了一种约定俗成的仪式?那么,个人与习俗的真正关系又是什么呢,我作为外来者是否就本不应该介入呢?

我们周边其实有很多家寿衣店。我决定去接触临近医院的一家更为“正规”的寿衣店。和我家附近的几家寿衣店差不多,这家店也是24小时开放的。毕竟,当生命走到尽头的时候,说不好什么时候,寿衣就派上用场了。一个晚上,我和陈陈一起去了这家寿衣店,他们比我想象的更愿意谈这个话题,我本以为他们会对此缄默无言。与我交谈的女士不认为寿衣店有任何不同,她也不认为所谓的私人处购买骨灰盒不可进入公墓的说法是真的。她给出的理由是,我邻居不像他们是本地人,入行时间短,所以在与当地顾客交谈时更为敏感。这位女士还对我拿去的纸件做出了批评意见。一个星期后我拿着改进过的纸件又去找她,这次纸件上有了手绘的细节。她问我,其他的像冰箱、洗衣机、衣柜床的物件在什么地方。正是她的态度导致了我的变节,让我觉得,之前的谨慎低调都是不必要的。祭奠,本是很个人的行为;但若仅仅因为质疑这一活动的纯粹性,便以此为题,公开讨论,是会让人感觉,多少有些尴尬。(你真相信灵魂吗?)说实话,对于这一精神世界的论断,我们无可稽考;而未来人们将以何种方式祭奠先人,我们也不得而知。我们把一种行为冠以“设计”之名的那一刻,其实就已经表明,这已不再是种信仰。因为,我们看到的,不再是真相,而是某个具体的物件,被赋予了具体的用途,被视作为满足人类需求而设计的一整套战略解决方案。这不禁让我想起了Vilem Flusser的名言:“设计者都是攻于心计,巧设陷阱的算计者。但如果通过讨论,我们可以获得另外一个视角,学会在思考的时候,不只局限于融合、利用、或强行引入某种文化元素,那么,也许在这时,我们可以说,自己真正实现了外国习俗与自身艺术的水乳交融。艺术作品不是人类征服精神世界的工具;不是对逝者简单粗暴的讽刺;相反,艺术作品可以是纯粹的;但真正的艺术来不得半点匆忙。

Several months ago a friend working for the “Un-Named Design” section of the 2011 Gwangju Design Biennale (titled “Design is not Design is Design”) put me in touch with some of her colleagues researching paraphernalia associated with death rituals, presumably as examples of un-named design. My friend was aware of the paper objects I have been making in dialogue with the neighborhood Shouyi, so the researchers asked where they could find these shops. I sent them some images of my objects and research, as I hadn’t even taken images of the insides of the Shouyi stores. But I deliberately refrained from telling them where our neighbors’ store is (it’s directly across from us in the alleyway).


In the summer one of our turtles stopped moving. We buried its body under the shrub by the gates. 夏天的时候,我们养的四只乌龟中有一只死了,我们将它埋在门口的灌木丛里。

This sounds silly now, but in my defense, I swear it wasn’t because I wanted to be the only cultural poacher in the neighborhood. I was simply trying to remain as true as possible to the subject I am following, which from the outset of my acquaintance seemed shrouded in secrecy. When we were preparing the first Beiertiao Leaks a year ago, Xiao and I went over to ask if the Shandong-bred mother-son business team living and working there would place an advertisement free-of-charge in our small newspaper. They refused on the grounds that it was bad luck to publicize as a profession dealing in “superstition.” They didn’t want publicity and wouldn’t allow any pictures or direct mentions of their store printed. Being a sector based on spirituality and superstition, it is kept a close eye on by authorities, and we were told that the government has a monopoly on the funerary industry. Apparently, if one were to buy an urn from our neighbors, it couldn’t be buried in an official cemetery, as they aren’t officially sanctioned. We suspected part of the issue was the instability of their own personal situation. They cagily but politely answered our inquiries, though, so we prepared a short article introducing the phenomenon only to the English-speaking readership.

The title of this brief piece had the Chinese characters “寿衣“ in it though, so the day after distributing the scrappy new copies of the first edition of Beiertiao Leaks we received reprimands from some of the neighbors for even broaching the subject. It seemed from their reactions that, aside from this little shop’s ambiguous relation to the state, as an area of human activity addressing the mysteries of what happens after you die, one shouldn’t speak openly about these rituals.


We had never given it a name, so in order to wish it well, we decided on one: 龟龟 (Gui Gui). 我们的乌龟生前没有名字,但为了祝福它,我们决定叫它龟龟。

Watching a presentation in November by Brendan McGetrick, one of the curators of “Un-Named Design,” we saw an inspiring methodology in organizing a wide range of ideas and artifacts. Toward this, there was a thoughtful attempt to broaden the definition of design to examples of rustic and simple but effective uses of everyday items, scientific innovations and even protocols of action and social situations: “a political protest manual, DNA barcodes, execution procedures, a transcontinental monetary system.” So what made these diverse examples design? McGetrick wrote: “The goal of this theme is to reframe design as a set of strategic solutions to human needs, rather than an ego-driven pursuit of subjective beauty.”

Shouyi goods draw from the design world in the most flagrant sense that McGetrick was reacting against, as they itemize the essential commodities of our lives, and more often consist of the most luxurious fetishes that our cultures share, like money, cars, fancy clothes, mobile phones, and mansions. Their production process rarely results in direct copies, of course. Neither are they really intended to function like shanzhai products, which are in a sense copies better than the original, though they often include subtle and sometimes humorous twists and references to their repurposing. A simple question of materiality determines the boxy appearance of Shouyi goods: they are made of paper and intended to be burnt. The indifference of fire determines a certain indifference of production where other definitions of design come in. The material must adequately combust, thereby expeditiously crossing from the world of the living to that of the dead—but almost anything burns. Having understood this in a peculiarly modern sense, as compared with the more elaborate offerings and sacrifices of bygone times, many people normally opt for rather indifferent forms of tribute to their deceased loved ones or ancestors. The modern sense of sacrifice is that with its democratization has come its effective desacralization and rationalization. However, the ritual of burning Shouyi goods is obviously intended more directly as sacrifice than its substitution with literature (Georges Bataille) or its resonance in all modern music forms (Jacques Attali). It fulfills its function but it must be cheap. Therefore, like all aspects of the modern world, it is conventionally mass-produced and readymade. An average full household set of the nine necessary amenities costs only 15 yuan. If money is no object, one can order the larger dollhouse-size villas or 3/4-scale plasma screens, from a catalogue of hundreds of choices, as the small shops in Beijing usually have them delivered from Hebei manufacturers on request. But logically, as money is an object, the most popular sales are bundles of extremely inflated denominations of “Hell Money,” a very good value-for-your-dollar deal.


What can a turtle do with a car, they questioned. 他们在琢磨,一直乌龟要辆车做什么呢.

But why, I wondered, should this be logical? If Shouyi is about venerating the dead and trying to make their afterlives more dignified, then why are we satisfied with the most cheaply-produced replicas? Is it that the most generic commodities are the most ready stand-in for “pure exchange”? And yet if there is the allowance of kitsch (for instance, pagers and mobile phones that boast of dual-band SIM cards functioning both on Earth and in Heaven, or Renminbi with the face of a god in place of Mao Zedong) then why do we have to buy these sham-brand-name goods from dealers instead of making our own or customizing them to suit our personalities, affections and values? Does it say something about our relationships with our relatives?

With this line of questioning in mind, I produced some very basic paper objects and brought them over to the shop to see if they would accept them to sell. Turning them over, our neighbors commented on the design but confessed they wouldn’t be able to sell them. They were free to set the price and to keep the money, I assured them, while the mother asked dubiously again and again whether they needed to pay me. My only request was to report to us how people perceived them. On our insistence, they said they were willing to take a couple of them, though, just to see what would happen. In my mind, I thought perhaps that at least the sign of the object being made by hand might make a difference to someone. The shop owners said that in the unlikely event someone bought one of them, no matter the price, they were more likely to put them on their shelves and hold onto them rather than set fire to them. This was interesting but still a frustrating compromise; it neatly avoided the problematic desire for real engagement that is the intention of my work, and which determined the relative secrecy and modest scale of my project. In any case, the possibility was there: passing the doors for the next couple of weeks, I was pleased to see my colorful car on the glass counter. After some time it disappeared, though I know it was never sold. They had simply tolerated my meddling enough and couldn’t justify the use of space. We were awkward enough to never again address the topic.


A boy was asked by his mother where Gui Gui is now, and he pointed up toward the dark sky. 一个小男孩问他妈妈,龟龟去了哪里,于是他的妈妈指向夜空.

Rituals surrounding death are a commonality among almost all peoples of the world, though the manner in which I grew up included fairly few practices comparable to Shouyi. For many, death is where religion is concentrated or re-emerges, as it is one of the only unaccounted-for parts of humans’ experience, otherwise always supposed to be understood. I remember funerals of my relatives seeming rather like any other momentous occasion, though blacker in mood. Some believe in heaven, but I don’t. In this, I may differ from other members even of my own family or those close to me (though on my mother’s side, which is Jewish and so the more distinct cultural identity, you could say there is a thoroughly secular tendency among sections of my relatives: in my uncle Alex’s words in an email, “An asteroid will hit the earth and it will all eventually end. It’s all bullshit.”). Traditions, if they can be said, fragilely, to exist in our case, do so only insofar as they punctuate our disparate lives.

In a way, this is the design of culture if not religion, hard-wired or useful enough to withstand all the dissolutions of the modern world. The gestures of a priest, the words of a rabbi or the rites of a woman burning paper money on the street are in some ways designs of community. In the latter case, perhaps it is the design that recreates in symbolic form a familial system of interdependency and debt that structures the lives of the living in China, and acknowledges its extending beyond. The custom of burning paper replicas might be seen to re-establish connections that can never be referred to exclusively as material, even as the designs of the objects themselves are periodically updated or added to.

As I am speaking from a rather uninformed perspective, it is hard to go much further into what might be anthropological, sociological or religious theories of action and belief, and it is also here where theories and beliefs splinter into seemingly contradictory positions. How can we really commune with ghosts if we sympathize with their presence in so utilitarian a manner? This question raised, am I already too late? A whole slew of understandings and misunderstandings of what is real belief underpins its approach as art, pulling in the contradictory directions of doubt and identification. After all, how can we say for sure that this intimacy desired is something actually shared with the people who burn the paper objects for their loved ones? Has the ritual itself not become something “diluted” into expected tradition? And therefore, what is the relation of individuals to their customs; as the outsider, isn’t it simply not my place to enter?

There are in fact many Shouyi shops in our neighborhood. I decided that it was time to approach one of the more “official” shops near the hospital. Like our neighbors they are open all hours, to match the contingency of schedule that moderates the ending of a life. One evening I went over with Chenchen and found that they were much more forthcoming in discussing the topic, rather than more closed as I had assumed. The woman there didn’t think there was actually a difference in the level of legitimacy of Shouyi shops, and she dismissed the idea that urns of so-called unofficial origin wouldn’t be acceptable in official graveyards. The explanation that she instead provided for the difference between the shops was that her family, made up of Beijing natives, did not come from away and had been in the business a long time, so they could be more sensitive in their counsel to local customers. The woman gave me criticisms of the objects I brought her. I returned a week later with a new version of a paper car, this time with hand-painted details, and she asked me where the other items were, the refrigerator, washing machine, wardrobe, bed, and so on. Her attitude was what finally lead me to this betrayal, to loosen my hold on the discretion I felt necessary for real engagement. Activity that operates on rather personal levels sits awkwardly when shifted to a discussion that could be called public, as I am doing now, namely for the reason that doubts arise about the genuineness of the engagement. (Are you a real believer?) This can’t be proven either way, in the end, and the future of this engagement cannot be predicted. Classifying a practice as design is a sign of the removal of belief, as one sees the ends an object is put to, its actualization “as a set of strategic solutions to human needs,” rather than as truth itself (a suspicion that recalls Vilém Flusser’s assertion: “A designer is a cunning plotter laying his traps.”) But if opening up the discussion allows us to see another perspective and to extend the idea beyond fitting in, exploiting or imposing, then that may be when this external custom is made into our own ritual. Rather than reining in spirits for instrumental ends or liquidating everything into the irony that glazes the oblivion lying behind our modern world, artwork can make moves toward becoming authentic—it cannot arrive there too hastily.

家作坊语音导览中文版摘录 excerpt from the Chinese version of the HomeShop Audio Tour
家作坊语音导览英文版摘录 excerpt from the English version of the HomeShop Audio Tour



项目:家作坊独家提供的语音导览系统是一个为了更好地与新老朋友交流而准备的艺术项目,从本质上讲,它既是一种通过声音与话语进行的空间探索,也 同时是让人们更加直观地了解我们这个“机构”的一种手段。本项目对公众开放,每个人均可带上耳机在交道口北二条8号及周边区域漫步,聆听萦绕在空 间内的过去、现在及未来的声音。

耳机使用结束后应当完好归还。出于礼貌,我们希望您能完整地听完导览介绍,当然这不是强制性的, 如果前来参观的人们能够通过这个语音导览系统获得更丰富的信息和更具教育意义的体验那么我们的目的也就达成了。但是作为一项适合家庭的活动,它并不能保证 满足喜欢刨根问底的参观者所提出的每一个问题;在这种情况下,参观者可向任一房间内的任一位工作人员寻求帮助。

基本免费!
享受这种体验吧!



PROGRAM: Available exclusively on-site at HomeShop, the HomeShop Audio Tour is a new and exciting audio adventure introducing fresh visitors and old friends alike to the story of our would-be institution. All members of the public are welcome to stroll around the grounds at Jiaodaokou Beiertiao No. 8 with a headset, listening to the voices of the past, present and future animating the space.

Conditions of use: After borrowing a headset, individuals are responsible for returning it in good working order. It is polite to listen to the whole tour, but not compulsory. Taking part in the HomeShop Audio Tour does provide an informative and educating experience, but as an activity suitable for families, it is not guaranteed to satisfy every question posed by the most keenly inquisitive visitor. In such case, visitors are requested to kindly refer to one of the human attendants occupying any of HomeShop’s several rooms.

Price: basically free
Accessibility: available in English and Chinese
Enjoy the experience!