The Lure back to Chaos: On reactive platform at Taipei MOCA
重返渾沌之餌--評台北當代館reactive platform展
郭昭蘭
如何不被系統綁架？如何以創造性破壞的情境，以繞到而行的策略，解放套牢於於文化中的特定溝通模式？透過對既有系統的重新排列組合，錯置，延遲，逆轉， 干擾，給思想一個回到渾沌，一個前系統狀態的可能，這是 re-active platform 讓我們得以再往前推近一步之處吧。
「開/關」
「共鳴體」
「感應器的姿態」之一
「感應器的姿態」之二，
「意外」
「走道」
來自德國的藝術團體re-active platform在台北當代美術館的地下街展出了五件作品，其中運用了大量的感應器：溫度測儀，影像監視器，電訊迴路，導航系統，用來測量太陽輻射的蓋革計數器，倒車雷達所使用的距離超音波感測器（ultra sonic sensor），以及電腦運算裝置等等。我們究竟可以如何理解這些在展場中看似熟悉卻又不見其回應的電器裝置？在這個人來人往的中山地下街中，這五個裝置作品如何讓我們的腳步暫停下來，又如何讓人繼續往前推進？
對於習慣於感應器作為展場中裝置啓動的觀眾來說，re-active platform 的裝置似乎顯得冷漠而且疏離。就算「On/Off」的距離感測器與觀眾的身體行成你來我往的「互動—開關」關係，多數時候這件作品在自身的迴路中運轉，觀眾的現身比較像是「干擾」整體裝置的一個變數。「走道」同樣使用了感應器，但是啓動的作品的結構，分立於地下街與遠端的地上美術館門口的裝置。藝術家在此拆解了介面的預設邏輯，將預設為視覺化影像的訊號轉譯成聲覺的訊號，其目的不在於串聯視覺與聽覺之感官，創造身體現象學意義之下的統合感官之理想。總的來說，re-active platform作品以迴路的形式出現，重點不在於向觀眾的身體發出明敏的回應，這些裝置似乎並不打算對現場觀眾說：「嘿，你好！我知道你來了，我在跟你說話！」
與其說 re-active platform 的作品要透過裝置跟觀眾「說話」，還不如說他們正在透過「無法說」，「無法溝通」，「傳遞不全」來表達其創作意識。「感應器總是讓某種特定事物成為可見」，感應器在re-active platform看來好比一個知覺系統，它彰顯某種特定事物，並使之可見，但同時忽略了對感應器來說無效的事物。感應器因此進入一種隱喻，與知覺相關的隱喻之中。從另一個角度來說，re-active platform的策略有種近似解構語言學的思維感應裝置有如某種再現系統，近似於語言之於渾沌世界。藝術家透過不斷的挪用，進行訊息的轉譯，拆解訊息與知覺的慣性現象，藉此探討訊息世界造成的疏離與異化。
回到這些電子組件來看，事實上這些感應器並非是徹底被去勢的去功能技術物，畢竟它們預設的工具邏輯依然完好的運行著，但是當這些感知元件向著觀眾發出訊號的時候，這些訊號經過誤用而得以將那些被感應器邏輯所排斥掉的不可見性彰顯出來，並同時進入由藝術家所設計的迴路系統之中。（如果要問這是不是一個等待被拆解的另一套系統的話，由於作品呈現全然的開放性，藝術家可說是以「無目的性」「無意義」這樣的答案事先處理了我們的提問。）
藝術家在挪用工具的同時，鬆脫掉工具預設的功能脈絡。re-active platform的解構最後以美學空間的規劃與調度完美演出，這個因此得以被撼動的物理局面，可說是以美術館的白色圍牆作為他最後的前線。儘管這次的展出平台安置在人潮往來頻繁的中山站地下街區。但是這三個展間與過道行成的展覽空間，幾乎是被處理成中性透明的美術館白牆空間。對於地鐵的穿梭，城市的位址，藝術家與美術館似乎事先劃定了白牆的疆界，無意對城市的風景進行更多的攪局。藝術家創造的這個新系統要不是以現象學式的空間回應他自身的提問，要不就是以象徵的方式向更龐大的人類系統做出他的暗示。所以可以說，他是以一種抽象的概念指涉他所處理的問題。因此，象徵性的提點，成為這次 re-active platform 的聚焦，最終觸及更多的是哲學式的質問。
莊子應帝王篇有一則「渾沌與七竅」的寓言，敘述的是三個國王: 「混沌」、「儵」、「忽」的故事。南海之王「儵」與北海之王「忽」由於經常相會於中央的帝王「渾沌」處，為了報答「渾沌」的招待，「儵」與「忽」見眾人皆有眼、耳、口、鼻，可用來看、聽、吃、聞，而「渾沌」卻沒有，於是兩人就為他鑿了七竅(雙眼、雙耳、兩鼻孔、口)。每天鑿一竅，七天後，七竅出，而「渾沌」卻死了。
莊子的這一則寓言，表明對人類五官所得訊息，抱持懷疑的態度。這背後肯定是莊子對終極無為世界的追求，最終可望抵達渾沌之境。儘管莊子的渾沌之境與 re-active platform 所處理的媒介化的社會，在意識上有著一段從 自然主義到訊息社會的距離，但兩者對於媒介工具的懷疑論卻意外有種跨越時代的互通與互補的作用。如果我們可以這樣聯想，那麼 re-active platform 便是誘引我們朝向渾沌的那個誘餌了。
如何不被系統綁架？如何以創造性破壞的情境，以繞到而行的策略，解放套牢於於現象中的特定溝通模式。透過對既有系統的重新排列組合，錯置，延遲，逆轉， 干擾，給思想一個回到渾沌，一個前系統狀態的可能，這是 re-active platform 讓我們得以再往前推進一步之處吧。
The Lure back to Chaos
by Jau-lan Guo
How not to get taken by systemic structures? How to liberate given circumstances by creative interference resp. strategies of detour in order to circumvent settled lines of policy, to overcome cultural fixation and a particular mode of communication? It is the implication of a reversion to circumstances before systematisation by realignment, displacement, eversion, and interference within a given system to achieve a reversal of thought to chaos. This is what re-active platform lets us realize in a way which is not return of development to earlier states, but in the given direction – not regressive, but facing forward.
“On/Off"
"resonators"
"gestures with sensors i"
"gestures with sensors ii"
"coincidence setup"
" navigation corridors"
The installation of re-active platform in MOCA Studio Underground consists of five modules which apply a large number of sensors: temperature measuring devices, video monitoring systems, telecommunication circuits, navigation systems, and Geiger counters for measuring solar activity, furthermore ultrasonic sensors and computing devices, etc.. All technical elements of the exhibition seem familiar at first sight, yet it is their interconnection that remains hidden. So how do the five modules yet achieve in a crowded public space such as MOCA Studio Undergrund to interrupt our way to our original destination and thereby yet bring us forward?
For an audience that is experienced with installations using sensors for interaction, the appearance of re-active platform’s work seems rather cool and distant. Even though the [on/off] module for instance reacts on the audience’s physical presence, this audience is not more than rather a variable of disturbance influencing the module’s original program. Also the [Navigation Corridor] module uses sensors, but the artwork’s reaction to the audience takes effect only in the spatially unconnected entrance area of MOCA, where a similar setup is installed, whose reactions then take effect in MOCA Studio underground. This is one way, the artists deconstruct our ususal expectation on interactive artwork; a second one for instance is the translation of a visual sensors expected viusal reaction into an audio effect.This stategy however does neither aim at conceptually integrating the visual and audible senses nor intend to refer to any kind of idealization of physical phenomenology and the perceputal apparatus. re-active platform’s works appear in the form of electronic circuits whereby the focus is not set on any subtle response to the audience's presence: the installed devices do not intend to address to and communicatie with the audience e.g. in the form: „Hey, hello, I know you’re there and I want to communicate with you“.
Rather than intending to communicate with the audience through devices, re-active platform express their creative consciousness through the demonstration of impracticality of speaking out, uncommunicatability resp. non-realizability of complete transmission within a communication. „Since particular sensors always translate something unperceivable to become perceivable“, the sensors in the works of re-active platform seem like a perceptual system, perceiving and highlighting particular information, making it experianceable, but at the same time neglecting what is unperceivable.
The way re-active platform use their sensors somehow resembles the concept of deconstruction of linguistic structures, whereby the sensoric system works similar to language in relation to chaotic contexts. By repeated transformation, the artists appropriate the [sensors’] information and dismantle the 慣性 [torpidness] of perception and thereby investigate the alienation caused by the information society [sugg.: medialized world].
Returning to these electronic components, it is obvious that these sensors have not completely lost their function. After all, their original instrumental logic is still at work. However, whenever these devices send a signal to the audience, these signals – caused by the misuse of those sensors – are able to manifest such [usually] invisibility [or inexperienceable] logic. At the same time, the sensors enter the loop systems designed by the artists. (If one would ask whether this is another system waiting to be dismantled, then the artists would be prepared to answer that their whole arrangement is not intending to reach a particular goal or produce distinct meaning.)
By applying these tools, the artists deconstruct the functioning context presupposed by these instruments. This deconstruction realized by re-active platform is achieved through the perfect and neat formalistic use of the exhibition space that possibly goes as far as deconstructing the museal ‘white cube’.
Although the exhibition is placed in the crowded underground street area of Zhongshan Station, these three exhibition rooms and the aligned corridor are transformed into an almost transparently neutral, white-cube-ish space. Concerning the busyness of the subway line and the bustling surrounding city, the artists seem to have drawn a borderline of the museum’s white cube and no intention to further deal with this urban space. This new system created by the artists does either, in a phenomenological way, answer its own questions, or hints, in a symbolic way, to another much larger human system. Therefore, they are using an abstract way to deal with this problem. And their focused symbolic reference ultimately points towards further philosophical questions.
“The Ruler of the Southern Ocean was Shu, the Ruler of the Northern Ocean was Hu, and the Ruler of the Centre was Chaos. Shu and Hu were continually meeting in the land of Chaos, who treated them very well. They consulted together how they might repay his kindness, and said, 'Men all have seven orifices for the purpose of seeing, hearing, eating, and breathing, while this (poor) Ruler alone has not one. Let us try and make them for him.' Accordingly they dug one orifice in him every day; and at the end of seven days Chaos died.”(from: Zhuangzi, Inner Chapters, Book VII, Chapter 7)
Zhuangzi’s parable is referring to the perceptual apparatus and recommends to keep scepticism towards sensual perception. The concept behind this parable and the one behind re-ative platform’s work are slightly differing since re-active platform deals with the world in a medialized state. And even there are also similarities, Zhuangzi finally cannot really be applied to the world in such medialized state. The difference that occurs between Zhuangzi’s story and re-active platform’s concept is similar to the difference between naturalism and the concept of information society. Yet, both of them have common ideas related to scepticism towards the usage or application of media tools. And these common ideas are trancultural and transtemporal as well as complementary. If we can associate the two in this way, then re-active platform appears as the lure that leads back to chaos.
How not to get taken by systemic structures? How to liberate given circumstances by creative interference resp. strategies of detour in order to circumvent settled lines of policy, to overcome cultural fixation and a particular mode of communication? It is the implication of a reversion to circumstances before systematisation by realignment, displacement, eversion, and interference within a given system to achieve a reversal of thought to chaos. This is what re-active platform lets us realize in a progressive way.
Translated by Jade Wang and Andreas Walther in co-operation with the author
and consultation by Dr. Kai Marchal
重返渾沌之餌--評台北當代館reactive platform展
郭昭蘭
如何不被系統綁架？如何以創造性破壞的情境，以繞到而行的策略，解放套牢於於文化中的特定溝通模式？透過對既有系統的重新排列組合，錯置，延遲，逆轉， 干擾，給思想一個回到渾沌，一個前系統狀態的可能，這是 re-active platform 讓我們得以再往前推近一步之處吧。
「開/關」
「共鳴體」
「感應器的姿態」之一
「感應器的姿態」之二，
「意外」
「走道」
來自德國的藝術團體re-active platform在台北當代美術館的地下街展出了五件作品，其中運用了大量的感應器：溫度測儀，影像監視器，電訊迴路，導航系統，用來測量太陽輻射的蓋革計數器，倒車雷達所使用的距離超音波感測器（ultra sonic sensor），以及電腦運算裝置等等。我們究竟可以如何理解這些在展場中看似熟悉卻又不見其回應的電器裝置？在這個人來人往的中山地下街中，這五個裝置作品如何讓我們的腳步暫停下來，又如何讓人繼續往前推進？
對於習慣於感應器作為展場中裝置啓動的觀眾來說，re-active platform 的裝置似乎顯得冷漠而且疏離。就算「On/Off」的距離感測器與觀眾的身體行成你來我往的「互動—開關」關係，多數時候這件作品在自身的迴路中運轉，觀眾的現身比較像是「干擾」整體裝置的一個變數。「走道」同樣使用了感應器，但是啓動的作品的結構，分立於地下街與遠端的地上美術館門口的裝置。藝術家在此拆解了介面的預設邏輯，將預設為視覺化影像的訊號轉譯成聲覺的訊號，其目的不在於串聯視覺與聽覺之感官，創造身體現象學意義之下的統合感官之理想。總的來說，re-active platform作品以迴路的形式出現，重點不在於向觀眾的身體發出明敏的回應，這些裝置似乎並不打算對現場觀眾說：「嘿，你好！我知道你來了，我在跟你說話！」
與其說 re-active platform 的作品要透過裝置跟觀眾「說話」，還不如說他們正在透過「無法說」，「無法溝通」，「傳遞不全」來表達其創作意識。「感應器總是讓某種特定事物成為可見」，感應器在re-active platform看來好比一個知覺系統，它彰顯某種特定事物，並使之可見，但同時忽略了對感應器來說無效的事物。感應器因此進入一種隱喻，與知覺相關的隱喻之中。從另一個角度來說，re-active platform的策略有種近似解構語言學的思維感應裝置有如某種再現系統，近似於語言之於渾沌世界。藝術家透過不斷的挪用，進行訊息的轉譯，拆解訊息與知覺的慣性現象，藉此探討訊息世界造成的疏離與異化。
回到這些電子組件來看，事實上這些感應器並非是徹底被去勢的去功能技術物，畢竟它們預設的工具邏輯依然完好的運行著，但是當這些感知元件向著觀眾發出訊號的時候，這些訊號經過誤用而得以將那些被感應器邏輯所排斥掉的不可見性彰顯出來，並同時進入由藝術家所設計的迴路系統之中。（如果要問這是不是一個等待被拆解的另一套系統的話，由於作品呈現全然的開放性，藝術家可說是以「無目的性」「無意義」這樣的答案事先處理了我們的提問。）
藝術家在挪用工具的同時，鬆脫掉工具預設的功能脈絡。re-active platform的解構最後以美學空間的規劃與調度完美演出，這個因此得以被撼動的物理局面，可說是以美術館的白色圍牆作為他最後的前線。儘管這次的展出平台安置在人潮往來頻繁的中山站地下街區。但是這三個展間與過道行成的展覽空間，幾乎是被處理成中性透明的美術館白牆空間。對於地鐵的穿梭，城市的位址，藝術家與美術館似乎事先劃定了白牆的疆界，無意對城市的風景進行更多的攪局。藝術家創造的這個新系統要不是以現象學式的空間回應他自身的提問，要不就是以象徵的方式向更龐大的人類系統做出他的暗示。所以可以說，他是以一種抽象的概念指涉他所處理的問題。因此，象徵性的提點，成為這次 re-active platform 的聚焦，最終觸及更多的是哲學式的質問。
莊子應帝王篇有一則「渾沌與七竅」的寓言，敘述的是三個國王: 「混沌」、「儵」、「忽」的故事。南海之王「儵」與北海之王「忽」由於經常相會於中央的帝王「渾沌」處，為了報答「渾沌」的招待，「儵」與「忽」見眾人皆有眼、耳、口、鼻，可用來看、聽、吃、聞，而「渾沌」卻沒有，於是兩人就為他鑿了七竅(雙眼、雙耳、兩鼻孔、口)。每天鑿一竅，七天後，七竅出，而「渾沌」卻死了。
莊子的這一則寓言，表明對人類五官所得訊息，抱持懷疑的態度。這背後肯定是莊子對終極無為世界的追求，最終可望抵達渾沌之境。儘管莊子的渾沌之境與 re-active platform 所處理的媒介化的社會，在意識上有著一段從 自然主義到訊息社會的距離，但兩者對於媒介工具的懷疑論卻意外有種跨越時代的互通與互補的作用。如果我們可以這樣聯想，那麼 re-active platform 便是誘引我們朝向渾沌的那個誘餌了。
如何不被系統綁架？如何以創造性破壞的情境，以繞到而行的策略，解放套牢於於現象中的特定溝通模式。透過對既有系統的重新排列組合，錯置，延遲，逆轉， 干擾，給思想一個回到渾沌，一個前系統狀態的可能，這是 re-active platform 讓我們得以再往前推進一步之處吧。
The Lure back to Chaos
by Jau-lan Guo
How not to get taken by systemic structures? How to liberate given circumstances by creative interference resp. strategies of detour in order to circumvent settled lines of policy, to overcome cultural fixation and a particular mode of communication? It is the implication of a reversion to circumstances before systematisation by realignment, displacement, eversion, and interference within a given system to achieve a reversal of thought to chaos. This is what re-active platform lets us realize in a way which is not return of development to earlier states, but in the given direction – not regressive, but facing forward.
“On/Off"
"resonators"
"gestures with sensors i"
"gestures with sensors ii"
"coincidence setup"
" navigation corridors"
The installation of re-active platform in MOCA Studio Underground consists of five modules which apply a large number of sensors: temperature measuring devices, video monitoring systems, telecommunication circuits, navigation systems, and Geiger counters for measuring solar activity, furthermore ultrasonic sensors and computing devices, etc.. All technical elements of the exhibition seem familiar at first sight, yet it is their interconnection that remains hidden. So how do the five modules yet achieve in a crowded public space such as MOCA Studio Undergrund to interrupt our way to our original destination and thereby yet bring us forward?
For an audience that is experienced with installations using sensors for interaction, the appearance of re-active platform’s work seems rather cool and distant. Even though the [on/off] module for instance reacts on the audience’s physical presence, this audience is not more than rather a variable of disturbance influencing the module’s original program. Also the [Navigation Corridor] module uses sensors, but the artwork’s reaction to the audience takes effect only in the spatially unconnected entrance area of MOCA, where a similar setup is installed, whose reactions then take effect in MOCA Studio underground. This is one way, the artists deconstruct our ususal expectation on interactive artwork; a second one for instance is the translation of a visual sensors expected viusal reaction into an audio effect.This stategy however does neither aim at conceptually integrating the visual and audible senses nor intend to refer to any kind of idealization of physical phenomenology and the perceputal apparatus. re-active platform’s works appear in the form of electronic circuits whereby the focus is not set on any subtle response to the audience's presence: the installed devices do not intend to address to and communicatie with the audience e.g. in the form: „Hey, hello, I know you’re there and I want to communicate with you“.
Rather than intending to communicate with the audience through devices, re-active platform express their creative consciousness through the demonstration of impracticality of speaking out, uncommunicatability resp. non-realizability of complete transmission within a communication. „Since particular sensors always translate something unperceivable to become perceivable“, the sensors in the works of re-active platform seem like a perceptual system, perceiving and highlighting particular information, making it experianceable, but at the same time neglecting what is unperceivable.
The way re-active platform use their sensors somehow resembles the concept of deconstruction of linguistic structures, whereby the sensoric system works similar to language in relation to chaotic contexts. By repeated transformation, the artists appropriate the [sensors’] information and dismantle the 慣性 [torpidness] of perception and thereby investigate the alienation caused by the information society [sugg.: medialized world].
Returning to these electronic components, it is obvious that these sensors have not completely lost their function. After all, their original instrumental logic is still at work. However, whenever these devices send a signal to the audience, these signals – caused by the misuse of those sensors – are able to manifest such [usually] invisibility [or inexperienceable] logic. At the same time, the sensors enter the loop systems designed by the artists. (If one would ask whether this is another system waiting to be dismantled, then the artists would be prepared to answer that their whole arrangement is not intending to reach a particular goal or produce distinct meaning.)
By applying these tools, the artists deconstruct the functioning context presupposed by these instruments. This deconstruction realized by re-active platform is achieved through the perfect and neat formalistic use of the exhibition space that possibly goes as far as deconstructing the museal ‘white cube’.
Although the exhibition is placed in the crowded underground street area of Zhongshan Station, these three exhibition rooms and the aligned corridor are transformed into an almost transparently neutral, white-cube-ish space. Concerning the busyness of the subway line and the bustling surrounding city, the artists seem to have drawn a borderline of the museum’s white cube and no intention to further deal with this urban space. This new system created by the artists does either, in a phenomenological way, answer its own questions, or hints, in a symbolic way, to another much larger human system. Therefore, they are using an abstract way to deal with this problem. And their focused symbolic reference ultimately points towards further philosophical questions.
“The Ruler of the Southern Ocean was Shu, the Ruler of the Northern Ocean was Hu, and the Ruler of the Centre was Chaos. Shu and Hu were continually meeting in the land of Chaos, who treated them very well. They consulted together how they might repay his kindness, and said, 'Men all have seven orifices for the purpose of seeing, hearing, eating, and breathing, while this (poor) Ruler alone has not one. Let us try and make them for him.' Accordingly they dug one orifice in him every day; and at the end of seven days Chaos died.”(from: Zhuangzi, Inner Chapters, Book VII, Chapter 7)
Zhuangzi’s parable is referring to the perceptual apparatus and recommends to keep scepticism towards sensual perception. The concept behind this parable and the one behind re-ative platform’s work are slightly differing since re-active platform deals with the world in a medialized state. And even there are also similarities, Zhuangzi finally cannot really be applied to the world in such medialized state. The difference that occurs between Zhuangzi’s story and re-active platform’s concept is similar to the difference between naturalism and the concept of information society. Yet, both of them have common ideas related to scepticism towards the usage or application of media tools. And these common ideas are trancultural and transtemporal as well as complementary. If we can associate the two in this way, then re-active platform appears as the lure that leads back to chaos.
How not to get taken by systemic structures? How to liberate given circumstances by creative interference resp. strategies of detour in order to circumvent settled lines of policy, to overcome cultural fixation and a particular mode of communication? It is the implication of a reversion to circumstances before systematisation by realignment, displacement, eversion, and interference within a given system to achieve a reversal of thought to chaos. This is what re-active platform lets us realize in a progressive way.
Translated by Jade Wang and Andreas Walther in co-operation with the author
and consultation by Dr. Kai Marchal
全站熱搜
留言列表
策展(Curatorial Project) (11)