艺言难尽 Speak No More｜一种关于合作模式的美学

项目协商：关于“后艺术”的讨论，拟像空间，北京，2022

项目协商：关于“后艺术”的讨论

Project Negotiation: A Discussion on "Post-Art"

艺术家 Artists:

李波 Li Bo

刘冠南 Liu Guannan

刘耀华 Liu Yaohua

石玩玩 Shi Wanwan

耶苏 Ye Su

策展人 Curator:

高远 Gao Yuan

展览时间 Exhibition Dates:

2022.01.16 - 2022.02.23

项目协商：关于“后艺术”的讨论，线上对谈

对谈内容 Dialogue

赵邦：首先感谢各位来参加这个讨论，咱们主要是围绕两个部分。

第一部分是这个展览本身，就是说大家各自对展览的主题和展览的概念，关于项目协商，关于这种“项目制”这样的创作方式，大家可以先讨论一下，包括对比如说这个展览的展陈展览的概念，还有策展人（高远）的工作，大家可以互相有什么问题可以抛出来，然后我们可以有回应，这样有一个交流。

第二个部分就是大家各自的作品，可以聊自己的作品，最好也能聊聊这个展览里面别人的作品，相互之间直接提问讨论。

因为大家都是参加这个展览的艺术家，所以说对于自己的项目和别人的项目，一定也会有一些想要表达的，想要去交流的，或者说有一些疑问，然后我们可以用这种方式来聊一下。要不远哥你先来聊一聊？

高远：各位好。我先说一下这个项目的缘起吧，咱们这个展览叫项目协商，最初实际上是艺术家李波最早跟我说的。他已经开始了一个项目，以一种项目的方式，把他的几位学生组织起来，进行一个“算账”的活动。让他们计算自己上学花费的费用，把它作为一项社会调查式的实验；后来刘冠南加入，聊着聊着，就感觉是不是可以做一个艺术家的群展，以“项目”的方式呈现出来，就是说每一位艺术家的作品都是一种项目的呈现。后来越聊越深入、具体，跟刘冠南聊了以后又找赵邦，感觉他们空间的这个调性做这个展览比较适合。刘冠南也推荐石玩玩一起做这个项目。这几位艺术家的项目都非常合适，都很有意思，都是以这种“项目”的方式，不是以实体作品的形式来创作的。我就想如果组织一个群展的话，咱们组织五、六位艺术家做一个群展，都是以“项目”的方式来参与。当然初衷可能跟最终呈现出来的样子不太一样，展览都是这样的，聊着这展览可能就变了啊，总有一些新的想法，包括艺术家的一些新的想法，它都会产生变化。所以在执行的过程当中也有很多有意思的事发生，后来就加入了刘耀华，还有耶苏，他们的项目非常契合，都是以发起“项目”，组织参与者的方式来进行的创作。

但是咱们这里指的“项目”实际上它有广义和狭义之分，广义的项目其实什么展览都可以认为是“项目”，就像我们展览的海报一样，展览海报它就是一个“项目合同”，实际上所有的展览落实到这白纸黑字上，都可以叫“项目”是吧？这就是广义的项目。但是咱们这个展览中理解的项目，实际上是就是艺术家执行策划的一个项目，那么这个项目跟广义上的那种项目实际上是有差别的，我感觉它是艺术家发起的并承担了一个组织者的作用，就是艺术家他不仅仅是作品的创作者，他同时也是一个组织者，相当于艺术家策展（artist as curator）一样，实际上是发起了一个项目，而且这个项目里边都有各位参与者生活实践的痕迹，或者说这些作品是主要由参与者制作的，也可能是由艺术家和参与者合作完成的结果。

咱们这个展览的主旨是由艺术家发起，但是每个项目都是有参与人的，这样的一个一个项目的集成，咱们一共五位艺术家就成为了五个项目。这其中包含许多协商，包括了艺术家与艺术家之间的协商，同时也有艺术家与策展人的协商，同时也有艺术家与空间的协商，或者与机构之间的协商。所以协商可以有多重的含义，在我的理解当中，主要是空间的协商，这五个项目在同一个空间里展示，必然涉及到与空间关系问题。同时也有赖于我们的赵邦设计的非常精彩的海报。后来我又琢磨这海报特别符合咱们展览的调性，你在签合同的时候心里肯定想了一大堆权利与义务是吧？这些权利义务正好就是我们各种协商的一个结果，我们协商过程当中都会想到的一些问题，实际上这就是一种协商。我先大概说一下这个项目的初衷和项目的主旨。我抛个砖大家发表一下高见，各位艺术家也都是久经沙场、经验丰富，所以我有很多想法也都是跟大家讨论的结果，大家有什么想法和建议咱们都可以聊，咱们畅所欲言。

赵邦：远哥我们今天下午聊到你一开始构思这个展览的概念，现在这个展览已经马上结束了，它被实施了之后，你现在回过头来看这个展览，你会是一种什么样的感觉，对你跟你最初的想法有什么出入吗？

高远：咱们这个展览也是逐渐商量逐渐协商的结果，就是一步一步来的，一开始想法肯定跟现在不一样。那么具体怎么不一样？一开始我跟李波商量的是这个展览中艺术家作为项目的发起人，他不参与作品的制作，他跟这个作品就没关系，所有作品都是项目的参与者制作的，参与者作为艺术家而出现。艺术家只是一个组织者，所有的作品的物质形态，包括它的一些图像或者什么，都是由参与项目的参与人来执行完成的，这艺术家他放弃了他的主动权，或者说他把这个权利都下放给各位的参与者，等于作品都是由他们来创作。但是后来这可能有一些变化，咱们随着协商逐步进行和艺术家创作的丰富性我展览的理念可能发生了一些变化，尤其是耶苏的加入，我发现他的作品有很多都是他听了项目参与者讲述的故事以后，根据这些参与者的故事他来手绘完成的。展示的项目包括图像包括它物质形态，也有艺术家参与的痕迹，所以这就是第一个不同是吧。跟一开始的初衷是有变化的，但是我感觉耶苏的项目非常有参与性，同时展示的效果也非常丰富。所以我们还是作出了一定的调整，跟最初的想法或者说那种完全由项目参与者来执行作品的方式是不一样的。

赵邦：各位艺术家，大家有没有对这个展览的部分想要谈的，比如说关于展览的概念，这种构思，这样的这种组织方式，跟你们各自的这种创作和工作方式，或者说大家有没有对它有疑问甚至不认同的方面？

李波：我发个言。最开始跟高远聊天的时候，我说有这么一个算账的事儿，我觉得挺有意思，看有合适的机会可以呈现一下吗？只能算是一种朋友之间的交流。我是一个老师，学校在大学城，现在全国很多城市都有这种大学城。大学城是一个新城，功能不像老城那么丰富。我之前和学生一起做过一些集体项目，我们发现大学城像一个“魔幻的桃花源”，在大学城里面，消费成了特别重要的话题和核心的东西，一切都是为了消费，这个也是我们今天共同面对的日常生活里面的常态。另外，我曾经带过一个毕业生的毕业创作，她有保留小票的习惯，毕业创作就认真计算了一下她上学四年的账，这个作品我觉得很有现实意义，也有教育意义，但毕业以后这个学生不再从事艺术了。算账对于她而言，作为毕业创作展览完了就结束了。对于我来说这个事没有完，我觉得每一个来到大学城的年青人，其实一直在持续着消费，不断地花钱，一茬又一茬地这么来。我觉得在这个事里头，我感兴趣的地方在于它是一个社会性的事情，如果有一个可以讨论的机会，可能对个体而言，它会有一种反观自我的可能性；对于群体可能也会形成一个新的认识角度。就是在这样一个以消费为核心理念构建起来的空间里面，呈现的消费状态，是你主动进来，甚至要通过努力争取的方式进来。在这个地方也不是所有的人都会有预期的收获，有的可能也会很失望。我觉得算账这个事儿本身，会让我们去反思日常生存状态里面的一种经验，重新去认识这样一个消费过程。所以，我觉得算账这个事可以持续做，于是组织更多的人来做。另外我本人是2002年上本科，也是教育产业化不久，那会儿读美院什么的刚开始要花1万多块钱的高昂的学费，也有个体经验和群体之间的关系问题。

从最初我的算账项目的想法到成为一个项目式的展览，我并没有意识到它有什么独特性，这个是高远提出来的，他说可不可以找一些创作方法有这种项目式共性的艺术家来做一个群展。后来高远联系我，说是11月份在拟像来做，后来因为疫情推迟了。刚刚高远说的关于协商的问题，我觉得整个过程确实一直都在协商，到今天我觉得我都没协商到特别好，有很多方面还没有做到理想状态，而且在过程当中我还打过退堂鼓，不想展了或什么的，我觉得这个过程挺有意思的。这个项目不是我去做作品，我作为发起者，其他人去展开自己的创作工作，这个工作本身是一个发起行动的过程。这个行动过程可以生成新的主体性，就是这些算账的人，要反过来去看自己的生存经验。我认为这是一个开放式的项目。作为一个开放式的项目，能够产生新的东西，有区别于最初想法的东西派生出来！我对这个比较感兴趣。这个展览里面，我很有收获，看到了不同的艺术家用自己的方式去进行完全不一样的项目，对我也很有启发。就像刘耀华，听他讲他的项目通过网络，通过各种渠道……

在这个过程中，参与的年轻艺术家，我要跟他们去交流。他们开始的时候也可能会认为是老师让我去做，但随着工作的开展，他们逐渐地也会有一些变化。我也想听一听参与项目的年轻人，聊一聊他们自己的感受，也希望听其他艺术家怎么看，也可以批评我，给我提点意见。谢谢。

赵邦：那咱们要不就接着李波老师的这个讨论，可以直接往下进行，比如说对你对这个展览中别的艺术家的项目和作品有什么想法，或者说是对自己的项目有什么想要大家可以聊一下，一起来讨论一下的，大家可以随意一点。

刘耀华：既然李波让我们拿他开刀了，我就先说几句。我从刚开始看到李波的作品，就对它背后能够撕开多大的口子很感兴趣，也很好奇。布展的时候我也跟李波聊了很多，对作品多了一些了解，其实我感觉就目前的成果来说，只是开了一个头。作品名字叫“算账”，我刚才在想啊，李波刚开始特别像一个父亲对儿子说，你算算你大学四年花了家里多少钱？然后这个儿子就真去算了。算完之后，李波又扮演了老师的角色，说那你们就做个作品吧，然后这些学生们就为此做了一个作品。

李波刚才讲到他们那边大学城的“消费”和“管制”，其实对于整个社会来讲，不同的空间，不同的部位，不同的阶层都存在既相同又有差异性的问题。这个作品的基因就是社会向的，它包含了对社会中人的群体取样，又涉及到当下的消费主义带来的现实问题，我能想象这件作品可以触及到的层次非常多，也非常丰富。但具体到展览中呈现出来的内容，艺术家到底想要通过作品抵达什么，或者打开什么，它要瞄准的那个区域可以不是一个点，可以是宽泛的，但绝不可以是模糊的，可以是没有靶心的，但绝不可以是没有靶的。

下午还跟赵邦就这个问题聊了几句，他谈到说如果是左派艺术家，就会让学生们调查自己的家庭经济来源，还有这样那样等等等等，我其实不太关心左和右的问题，但从艺术自身的逻辑上，我俩的感受比较类似，就是觉得能看到方向，但还不是那么清晰，还没有看到土层下面的那些盘根错节的问题。所以我说我感觉这只是开了个头，我对李波这件作品接下来的发展还是很有期待的，因为我感觉到了后面那个东西，但是还没有完全看到，所以说还需要作品自身把这个东西拽出来。

还有一点，就是在这个展览里边是否有必要让学生作为创作主体创作一个叫做“作品”的物质化的东西，作为李波作品的一部分，在我看来，如果不呈现药丸啊项链啊之类的东西，整个作品也是不受影响的。在这个链条中，学生们通过做作品，证实了李波与他们的师生关系，因为老师布置了作业，他们就在老师的课题下，完成了一个创作行为。我并不是想讨论这些学生作品的好坏，而是说，是否有必要，因为这里面出现了创作和创作的嵌套关系，所以这方面我倒是想听听李波自己的想法。

李波：我来回应一下吧。我觉得你刚才说的很对，其实就是有两个事情，一个是“算账”，一个是艺术创作。

为什么要呈现作品？这并非是给他们布置作业，他们都已经毕业了，我只是去发动他们，希望他们能对这个已经或者正在持续发生在自己身上的事感兴趣，他们有的在继续读研究生。他们是学习艺术实践专业的，我希望他们用自己的方式去认识这个数据，我发动他们去做算账和创作这两件事。前者是先细致认真的去统计自己的消费明细，二是在统计基础之上，尝试着进行艺术创作活动。他们每个人做的东西其实都是对算账的反应，而这个反应本身也是他们受教育之后的结果，那么这个事情它就构成了一个消费和消费之后的收获的一个正相关，看似分离的两个部分其实是一个逻辑。我邀请周边的青年人来算账，但如果我又去找了法学的、建筑的来做这些事情，可能是另外一个情况了。我希望他们对自己消费状况有一个“产出”，这个产出就是他们自己的创作。有一个学生（古晓欢）把她消费的25万多用一个房子去衡量，这牵涉到她对自己消费行为的理解。她觉得投资买房子这个事情，是家庭以及社会特别重要的经济行为，她学习的经费付出是靠家庭的这种经济行为支撑，同时回过头来去想上学收获是什么，觉得可能上学也没有什么太明确的收获，像是做了一些稀奇古怪的梦，所以她把自己几年的37个梦境做成动画，体现对这个事情的进一步认识。在这里头，我觉得她的认识形成了闭环，完成了从消费到产出的过程。在算账基础上的创作行为，相当于消费之后的一种结果呈现。不是我去要求他们去做一个作业，他们不自觉地也就会想到要去做一件作品。当然，在跟他们聊这个想法的时候，我都是给他们说可以先算账，算完了以后再看。那么算完以后要有展览了，各自就开始有一个想法。其实整个算账的项目，这次并没有展示出来。有一个问题，刚才刘耀华说的特别对，就是这次展的7件作品，对于不明白整个算账这件事情的朋友可能很难懂，感觉好像都是做了一个小的作品，做了一个小物件，为什么要做这些？这就需要更丰富的展览呈现。但刚才耀华谈到的调查父母那块我可能不会这样去推动，但我们得到的数据是可以分析的，比如说在游戏上面花了多少钱？在买衣服上面花了多少钱？在这个话费上花了多少钱？吃饭花了多少钱？和朋友聚餐花多少钱……对日常生活，有一个观照。

刘耀华：你说这些学生是自发地要用艺术创作的方式来作为他们算账的一个结果，那你怎么评价他们呈现的这个结果？

李波：我觉得他们7位都做得很棒。算账这个事情我做不到绝对的开放，但我尽量的去开放，这个事情由我发起，他们参与进来，他们有这种能动性，但是他们可能有的时候会比较模糊，然后我就要去跟他们进行讨论、协商。有的我不用跟他讨论，他很清楚，“我就要这么干”，我觉得挺好。我可能会给一些鼓励或者什么的，但是他们有时候又没有明确的想法。这个时候可能我就会影响到他，我开始的时候是想把这种影响去掉的，后来我想可能也不用去掉，是为什么？因为其实这个事儿既然是我发动的，我就应该参与进去，但最后是要他们满意，觉得能够体现自己的认识就行了。比如说做药丸那个同学，他是做写实雕塑的，他说我怎么做？我擅长做写实雕塑。我建议他抛开写实的角度去做，算上这个账以后，怎么看待这个数据？然后我们交流，他就谈到了他母亲生病，他在和他母亲交流的过程当中，总是把自己的学习成绩分享给他妈妈，妈妈因此而病情获得某种缓解，他觉得好像能够在某种程度上去治愈妈妈。但其实从另外一个角度看，这何尝又不是对他自己的一种疗愈，同时他自己强调药丸有批判消费行为的一种态度。我觉得也不错。

高远：咱们这个展览的整个预算就两万五，所以是在非常低的预算情况下完成的低成本项目。比如说像石玩玩的项目就是一个非常低成本的实践，包括打印输出都是艺术家自己完成的。所以咱们请石玩玩谈谈他的作品具体的实施过程。

石玩玩：特别遗憾，本来是说想去北京的，跟大伙多见个面，互相交流一下。但是后来因为很多其他原因，所以后来没有去。在座的每一个个人都在过现场，对作品大家都有更多地发言权，只有我不在，所以我只能通过微信来看到这些作品，可能了解得不是特别全面。我有两点想想说，第一点是针对这个展览的，先是冠南跟我说的这个事儿，后来高远把他的策展意图发给了我，发了一段文字，特别认真的一段文字，我看了一下之后，我觉得我几乎全部赞同他里面的观点，而且我认为我的很多作品都是符合展览要求的。项目制这这种工作方式是我一直非常赞同的，我也一直在进行这样的工作。我想问的是，现在就作为策展人来讲，或者作为咱们空间来讲，我们以项目的方式来做一个群展，里面的内容是讲给谁看的，也就是我们分享和讨论的对象是谁？我们想听到什么样的反馈？

高远：咱们长话短说，实际上所谓“项目”想呈现的是什么？呈现的是那些理论家说的“后艺术”？实际上就呈现了一个生命的过程、一种生活的体验，是吧？每一个艺术家在这个项目的过程当中，你呈现了一个什么样的生命体验，用学术一点的话说，就是“生命政治”。或者像格洛伊斯说的，这个项目是想要“创造生活和记录生活”，其实就是记录的每一个项目参与者的生活实践，是这样的一个目的或者初衷。它呈现的是一种过程，而不是一个结果。

赵邦：我最初听到这个概念的时候，我的第一反应是首先我觉得这在当代艺术里面是非常多的艺术家在使用的一种创作方式，实际上已经不是一个很先进、很少见的一种方式了。其实这种项目制合作非常常见，比如咱们这次是把项目制作为艺术语言本身，但是其他的，比如说我做一个作品，然后我雇佣别的雕塑家，或者我雇佣别的人，甚至是工人，甚至是那种最普通的人来帮我一起完成这个作品，它其实在某种意义上，虽然他没有打着一种项目或者是合作的名号，但它实际上在当代艺术甚至不只是当代艺术，在当代的经济活动中，在这样的一个系统链条的运作里面，大家共同来完成一个事情。比如说电影或者是很多的这样的工作，实际上都是由这种方式来完成的。至于咱们的展览的这些艺术家的作品，就像刚才玩玩问的那个问题，我的一个感受是什么？我觉得咱们的展览包括每一位的艺术家的工作方式有一点特别之处，那就是至少在这个作品没有进行展出的时候，就已经开始对一些人进行影响了。实际上在你发出合作邀请的那一刻，你被你邀请合作的那个人，他已经开始思考艺术这件事情了，无论他此前是否在一个艺术的话语里面，或者是是否是在一个创作怀表达语境里，比如刘耀华的项目，当你对他发出邀请，当参与者受到邀请的那一刻，他就已经开始思考垃圾是什么，艺术又是什么？就是说我怎么来处理这个艺术家对我的邀请，实际上所有的我觉得你们的这些项目制的作品在真正进行公开展示之前，就已经在发生一些作用了。这里面有的作品是更多地倾向于对于社会公共空间的介入，有一些是更私人化的一些，比如说“算账”，这个是更关系到参与者的更私人层面的东西。

石玩玩：传统的学院里出身的艺术家，或者我们的中国艺术家，在学校里受到的是一种造型艺术的训练——我们去做一个做一个有感觉的“东西”，一个有视觉感受的“东西”。这样的东西很显然更符合现在的整个展示体系或者画廊体系的要求，可以比较容易被被交易，容易被收藏。我们可以看到很多博览会上都是这种作品了，但是很显然，我们这个展览的作品不是这样的，它们不符合现在的主流市场的流通需求，那么既然知道如此，但为什么还要这么工作，肯定每个人去有自己的一本账，每个人有自己的一个想法和意图。所以说就这个展览本身的作品来讲的话，我想当然大家可以谈，对于我来说，我认为，我们集中地把这种作品拿出来在空间里展示，其实代表了一种我们共同的基本立场。就对于这种工作方法的基本立场，是面对我们今天艺术家工作处境的一种声明或者一种表态，我想这对于我来讲是非常大的一个吸引力。

关于作品，当时我给了高远三件作品，高远挑的。这个作品最早的展出是去年的曼谷双年展，但这个曼谷双年展不是官方的那个曼谷双年展（曼谷艺术双年展），是台湾的艺术家朋友推荐的，他比较了解我们的工作方法，觉得我应该会比较喜欢这样的展览。这个双年展是一个由艺术家自主发起的，它针对的是曼谷官方的双年展，是无组织和去中心化的。没有策展人，任何人报名就可以参加。我确实很赞赏艺术家这样的立场和态度，就用这件作品参加了展览，但在国内没有展示过。高远跟我说了这事之后，我觉得这件还挺合适的，挺完整，不需要花多少钱，布展也简单，也想拿出来跟北京的朋友们分享，就定了这件作品。

赵邦：我有一个问题想问玩玩，其实这是很私人的一个问题。你在明信片上每一张明信片上有一个字，然后这一个字最终形成了一个文本，形成了一句话，其实我发现你挺喜欢用一句话、一个字组成一句有意味的一个句子。我之前看你有的作品，实际上你对文字的选择，我很感兴趣，你很多的那种对文字的选择实际上是带有多重意义的，比如说有关于政治性的隐喻的意味，有的是关于一种生活的浪漫的感觉，它是一种多重的意味的综合。我想问的是你这次在你每一张明信片寄过去，最终形成这一句话的文本，你是怎么样确定下来并且选择它，你选择这些文本的意图和动机是什么？

石玩玩：“每个人一生中最重要的作品，是我们所度过的时光”，这句话是《杜尚访谈录》里的一句话，其实也代表着杜尚的艺术观。我对这句话是有感受的，比较赞同这个观点。在之前，我对这句话没有这么深刻的认识，我认为是艺术家应该做“好作品”。然后经历了很多事儿之后，我自己对于自己的工作有了更多反思，做了这么多年艺术，对于我来讲艺术到底意味着什么？例如项目制作品，不见得能带来热度、流量，你还要去做，你为什么还要去做？还有一个原因就是去年夏天对我的家庭来讲是一个重要时刻，我博士毕业，我爱人硕士毕业，我小孩初中毕业，本来也想有一个这样时间去旅行，但是后来因为疫情的原因，没法实现。我想疫情是一个重大的事情，它超越了医学本身，它跟社会政治，全球化和逆全球化都有关系，让我们在停顿中，更好的理解我们的生活与这个世界的关系，无论世界怎样，我们都要珍惜我们所处的时光，所以当做这个作品的时候，我非常自然的就想到了这句话，没有花太多时间做的选择。

赵邦：大家还有没有对玩玩的项目和这个作品有没有什么想聊的，或者想问问他，想讨论的？如果没有的话，我们就进行到下一个艺术家，让刘冠南来聊一聊。

刘冠南：我说两句，首先是就高远，最初他跟我提这个展览的时候，我听到整个展览的意图，其实我是对他的意图特别地支持，然后我们我和高远还有赵邦，我们三个聊了很多，关于主体性，主体间性，与社会现实的相互交往、相互互动等等，我们都聊了很多，所以在这块我们也不再赘述了。然后我说一下我个人对这件事情，或者说对我们这个项目和展览的、非常个人的体会。首先是我感觉到实际上是在我们整个的社会生活中，我们今天所面对的我们每个人所面对的本土的社会现实的境遇下，实际上人与人之间是没有群体性、也没有社会组织性的，我们把所有的权利都交了上去，然后权力本身它提供了一个严密的社会组织。人与人之间反倒是这种分子化的、是一种孤立的状态，他们之间不允许有各种形式的组织，不允许有私人的基金会，也不允许有私人的一些集会。比如说以前有个叫什么内涵段子，它发展到一定的程度的时候，他就会被权力进行取缔的这么一个操作、一个运作。所以在这种前提下，就我个人觉得实际上就是说我们的每个人所从事的工作和艺术，你能够达到什么样的美学，或者说在美学上有什么样的突破，和你的工作方法有什么样突破，这个未必是最重要的。重要的是我们如何把所通过艺术把所有人组织起来，形成一种松散的一种自我组织，然后这样的话既能拉拉近人与人之间的距离，也可以让艺术的价值逻辑进行一个更好的传播。毕竟我们今天所在座的各位所理解的艺术的价值逻辑的，实际上是一个非常现代性的艺术的价值。但是我们在整个社会的范畴内，因为权力话语的关系和历史性的一些因素，我们所是面对的社会现实，他们所理解的艺术完全一种高度的前现代性的东西。然后我们全人类所做出的一些现在关于现代化和现代性的一些努力和一些价值的提升，它并没有得到一个集中的呈现，所以导致我们生活中会遇到各各式各样的一些矛盾和一些困惑。在这个基础上，我认为艺术既能够拉进和人与人之间的关系，同时又能够把社会的现代性价值进行一个推进。你比如说就像李波所做的“算账”，它其实是对我们整个的本土的儒家的这种家庭伦理关系的一个介入，像石玩玩跟耶苏所做的和跨越文化背景之间的人进行社会性的交往。无论怎么说，其实我们都是对于社会关系的介入，一定程度上可能会改变社会关系，所以在我看来，我们对于美学的认识是对于社会关系的一个转变。总结起来就是说，不同于以往的西方艺术界中的一些参与性艺术的概念，我们实际上在做这些事情的时候，还是跟他们之间有一种差异，然后这种差异也体现在一些细细节中，就包括我们这次展览的5位艺术家，实际上我们每个人的作品之间也都有这种差异。然后我对展览其实有个人的感受和总体的批评，我不针对哪一个人，实际上我认为我们每个人有一种对于社会关系重新参与的一种自觉，并且能够希望把这种对于社会关系的转变演化、或者说改写，成为一种美学，我们对这件事情是有一种自觉性，这一点在我看来是特别好的一件事情。

但是我认为不足之处在于，我们似乎还没有找到一种行之有效的工作方法，能够真正深入到社会关系的内部，包括刚才耀华对李波老师说的，你能不能能否更进一步的深入到他的家庭伦理关系之中。针对于我自己的作品，其实我也有感觉，包括避免谈论权力话语和政治性的这个议题，在这种前提下，我们是否能够有这种相应的办法能够更进一步的深入到这种社会关系中，因为今天的美学肯定不仅仅是视觉性的，它也是通过各种的这种社会关系之间的这种张力，能够让你体会到这种美学的力量，所以我们如何能够通过自身的工作，能够进一步的深入到社会，改变社会关系，这个可能是我们将来需要面对的一个事情。我的发言到此为止，谢谢大家。

赵邦：冠南你能不能聊一下你这个项目的迭代，包括过程中的权衡与打磨？

刘冠南：我简单说一下，我那个项目实际上最初的想法是就是说，我们实际上是话语的一个接受者，我们每天都在接受不同的权力话语，但实际上这不代表说是我们每个人作为个体没有自身的认识和想法。那么在这个基础上，我就希望他者能够通过邀请参与者，让他们自己讲述自身的想法，然后这样的话我们每个人从一个话语的接受者变成一个话语的创造者，这样的话你的社会关系其实就已经转变了，对吧？我是希望通过这种形式来让每个人，至少是参与到这个项目的人，可以去思考什么是真正的社会关系，什么是真正的社会关系的美学。但是在实施的过程中就发现了有很多问题，大多数人其实他很担忧，关于现在的话语环境，我们现在都能够一目了然，而且今年2022年是一个很关键的时间点，你的话语能够散播，能够到什么程度，大家可能都心知肚明。所以在这个前提下，在我们那期推送里边有一个朋友，他苦口婆心地告诉我，你不能干这个事儿，你干这个事会有很大的危险，那一天我们俩聊了很多。然后在这个基础上我有一个观点，就是说，以往的涉及到权力话语的艺术家，他除了社会关系以外，其实他的某些做法它恰恰体现了权力的强力：比如说他说出一个大逆不道的话，或者对权力不能容忍的话，然后权力就会自上而下的把这个人进行一个处理，处理可能是某种暴力形式，也可能是某种监禁，甚至是简简单单地给你一种封杀，不让你再抛头露面，对吧？那么你无论怎么做，你最终显示的都是一个权力者的强力。一个想要突破社会关系，想要改变社会关系的一个艺术项目或者艺术行动，或者是你作为一个艺术家，实际上你面临一个非常失败的境地，就是说你的活动，你的叙事恰恰体现了权力的强力。换句话说，我认为什么样的才是应该我们采取的办法。今天的艺术和政治、和权力话语其实已经没法脱离开关系，对吧？如果你跟今天的权力话语完全不发生关系，就像比格尔所总结的那三条道路一样，那就是唯美主义的路线，最终变成格林伯格的《前卫与庸俗》那样：他不希望和社会现实发生任何关系，最终它还是不可避免的被权力所利用，这个是一个非常残酷的现实。那么你跟权力走得太近，像新古典主义，或者说到后来的苏联的革命现实主义一样，你还是被权力所利用。所以比格尔认为应该是有限的参与。这个点我是很赞同的。你对于社会现实的有限参与，既能够保持你艺术的独立性，同时又不把生活实践排除在外，因为你和社会现实有一个亲密的互动。所以在这个基础上，我比较反对之前的就我们上一辈的本土艺术家的某些实践，他们要么就是说对权力这种非常直接的一种攻击，然后迫使权力展现出他的力量和强力，要么就是浮皮潦草的跟社会现实的一种参与，其实是把参与者当成一种赤裸裸的消费品。你跟参与者之间进行一个互动，你互动完了之后，实际上你跟参与者在其后的生活中，完全没有任何的交集，就是相忘于江湖，老死不相往来，这两种方式其实都是我比较反对的，所以在这个基础上还是拿比如说耀华的作品，他尽管是就是说选了那么多的别人不要的东西，它是一种无用之用，但是在展示的过程中，在展览开幕的当天还是来了一部分这些物品的原主人，并且我们能够发现耀华跟这些原主人他们之间的交往和互动都是一种很良好的关系。换句话说我们没有像之前的艺术家一样，去消费参与者。重申：这次展览的缺点在于，我们如何能够深入到社会现实的、具体的、密切的操作中，我说完了。

赵邦：我想问一下冠南，你收集出来的这大概是5个素材，相当于是5个作品。这5个样本，这5次这种在公共空间中的谈话，有没有哪个会你个人会觉得比较精彩，比较有意思？

刘冠南：我个人觉得比较精彩的实际上有两个哥们。首先他们聊的就是关于新疆的话题，因为有一个哥们他是突然到了新疆那边去生活和工作，然后他聊了很多关于新疆的话题，其实我比较感兴趣。另一方面，你对整个项目要有一种包容性，有些参与者可能他聊的话题，虽然在你看来可能不会触动权力话语，但是它确实是他们生活中面临的一些非常实际的问题，这样的话其实我觉得也挺好，这就是我们在跟社会现实进行交往中必须要面对的事情，你不可能所有的事情都会按照你艺术家的初衷和想法去走，我觉得是不可能的。然后另外一方面就是说整个的行动，它恰恰有一种有象征意义，象征性的两个人，在公共的话语空间，然后去聊一些公共话题，最后你们的谈话也会被公开。这个象征性主要体现在两个层面。其实我们现在通过腾讯会议所聊的一切话题，在权力面前是赤裸裸的，对吧？另一方面就是说，如果我们所聊的话题的内容变成一个艺术展览的形式，它进行传播，它的这种象征意义也不言而喻。所以通过种种层面，我觉得针对我个人来说，还是要像我刚才说的那样，如何能够切入到社会操作的毛细血管，这是一个最重要的环节，因为恰恰是在你抵抗的那一刹那，恰恰是你在在你改变社会关系的一刹那，美学才会诞生。

石玩玩：我想问一下冠南，你是在公开场合邀请大家一块谈论一个话题，这个话题是一个公共话题，我的问题是你希望这些话这个话题是被更多人听到，还是被尽量的少被人听到？

刘冠南：就像我刚才举的那个例子，我们现在的腾讯会议实际上在权力面前它是赤裸的，对吧？我没有说希望还是不希望，我觉得说你但凡是借用了这种平台展示，或者是这种互联网平台的一个传播，你就是一种赤裸状态，这就是权力之眼，可能暂时还没看到你或者你的威胁还不够大，所以他暂时不去看你，但不代表你是一种私密的状态。换句话说就，我这个项目所策划的行动，也是对这样的一种社会现实的一种隐喻。你只要是经由了这些平台去发声，你就是在权力之眼的监控范围内，但是他可能暂时没有看到你在这种前提下，你到底是希望被人看到还是不希望被人看到，其实都是不是最重要的。最重要的是你要主动，在这个过程中你要带有一种勇敢，去触碰到边界和底线，我所在意的是，所有参与者也好，包括我自身也好，有没有这种勇敢，包括我们的拟像空间也好，虽然就像我刚才说的，一定要在安全范围内，因为不安全就要展现出权力的强力，但我们所认为的安全范围真的就安全吗？这个是不一定的。那么换句话说，拟像空间也有一种勇敢，策展人高远也有一种勇敢。如果说我们其中的一个项目得到了权力之眼的这种密切的关怀，那么在座的各位肯定也会受到拖累，对不对？这都是很自然的事情。在座各位我们捆绑在一块去做一件事，做一个展览，其实一定程度上说也是一种勇敢，我所在乎的其实不是说大家这个东西要不要让别人听见，可是这事你敢不敢，你弄不弄，只要你敢了，你下回你还能再敢，对吧？因为这个“敢”是一点一点发展起来的，对吧？

石玩玩：也就是你是想通过这种象征性来展示咱们的小心翼翼是吧？

刘冠南：不是小心翼翼，我觉得是一种循序渐进。

赵邦：下面让刘耀华来聊一聊他的项目。

刘耀华：这次展出的作品是我在艺术上做的第一件作品，哈哈，处女作，那时候我已经30岁了。回想起来，确实刚开始做的时候野心满满，我想，要是就干“收垃圾”这么一个事儿，够我干一辈子了。我在项目推送的短文里也写到了，我当时就想啊，若干年后我要建一座全球性的垃圾博物馆，这个博物馆面向世界上的任何人开放，任何人都可以选一件自己认为是“垃圾”的东西作为这个博物馆的藏品之一。但这个“垃圾”它不一定是没用的东西，甚至也不一定是物，比如说如果一个人在某个阶段觉得自己是垃圾，那我们这个博物馆可以把他养起来，然后他就是我们的展品，每天在那里对公众开放。因为这里边有一个参与者在主观意志上的认定，他需要在一个概念之下去找一个具体的对象与之对应，并且是以艺术的名义，而艺术跟垃圾一样，两者在概念层面是平等的。所以我就想如何用一种方式把这两个概念并置起来，而且通过这种并置，让它们在人的意识层面产生作用。当时每天都在想这些事情，感觉复杂极了，有意思极了。你想啊，艺术看起来是一个人人都能认识的词，其实这个词在不同人的意识对应是不一样的，我当时对这个就很感兴趣，就像冯友兰讲的文化积淀说一样，艺术在每个人头脑中的积淀也是千差万别的。

谈到协商，其实我好像也是通过协商，好像表面看起来很温和，但这个项目里本质上我还是强势的，也没什么需要协商的内容。我告诉别人说，我是艺术家，你能不能送给我一件垃圾啊，我会把这件垃圾当作艺术进行展览，然后我还要求他在这个垃圾上像艺术家那样签上名字和日期（就像杜尚在小便池上签名一样），当然也会跟他聊为什么会选这件而不是那件，我其实通过一个游戏机制把问题丢给了对方。会有人拿出来一堆他不要的东西来跟我说，说我有这么多垃圾，你选一件，我说我不选，只能你选。当然也有不愿意参与的，我也不说服他，谁感兴趣他就参与进来。就是这么一个过程。

通过这件作品我跟无数的人进行了类似的交流，我是真得发现了我最早在构思这件作品时所思考的那个东西……我确实感受到了，但那个东西是难以通过作品表达出来的。每一个人在面对我提出的这么一个请求时，他们脑子里是怎么想的，以及他门给予的回馈跟那个“此时此地”的自我有着密切而复杂的关系。我当时说要“垃圾”，这里边他们每个人肯定会有很多疑问，他们必须同时面对垃圾和艺术这两个概念的等同，他们给予的回馈内容还有语境其实是蛮复杂的，我其实不太能够准确地表达出来。

我那个时候就总是在想人到底是怎么认识概念的，我们每一个人的主观意识形态是怎么形成的。我还自己给自己编了一个小故事，就类似于思想实验那种。我就假想啊，有一个中国人从去了一趟欧洲，他回来的时候找来四个不同的朋友，拿出来一枚生锈的铁钉跟这四个朋友说，这是他从欧洲大教堂里偷来的圣物，是当时耶稣受难时被钉在十字架上的其中一枚。这四个人里，一个人是农民（根本不知道耶稣是谁），一个人是知识分子，一个人是虔诚的基督徒，还有一个人是考古学家，你说这四个人在面对这枚铁钉时他们脑子里会投射出什么。哎，我胡乱说了一堆，我是回想十年前啊，那时候就是这样，每天想各种各样的问题。后来过了几年，看鲍德里亚的东西，他说：“当任何垃圾都能被视作艺术的时候，那么任何的艺术品都会被当作垃圾来对待”，我觉得这话跟我的作品还有着某种对应关系。

我把收来的这些垃圾保管起来，整整10年也没打开过，曾经有几年我有点怀疑，但这次展览完了之后，我又有一些新的感觉，说不太清楚。十年前那么多人带着各种各样的疑问、心情、态度在艺术的幌子下面给了我各种各样的东西，这里面当然有一些很有意思甚至带有个人表达的东西，但有的也真是垃圾，甚至就是一根吃剩的鸡骨头，一堆烟头烟灰和酒瓶，还有破烂的内裤，用过的尿不湿等等，但对我来说，这些东西都是平等的，我就是把它们认认真真保存了10年，然后当做艺术做一次展览，然后再丢掉。回味起来，好像也没什么意义，又好像有一些莫名其妙的东西在里面。

总之呢，“垃圾博物馆”的设想现在看来的确是痴人说梦。但这件作品在概念层面还是完成了的。

（另外补充一点，刚才听到玩玩说他最早的时候是从造型训练开始，然后后来越来越意识和体悟到杜尚的观念，我正好是反过来，所以我听玩玩讲那个的时候觉得还挺有意思的，一个人的艺术观念和态度真得跟个人经历有很大的关系，我没有上过什么美院，没有受过专业的造型训练，但小时候也喜欢画画，很奇怪的是我似乎从小就感觉艺术是一个很广大的东西，绝不只是画画。后来上了大学，从一个同学的书架上偶然拿下《杜尚访谈录》，一下就不行了。所以说我最早的艺术启蒙还就是杜尚，在还完全不知道什么现代艺术和当代艺术，也不知道任何艺术史和奇奇怪怪的作品的时候，在还没有艺术家身份自觉的时候，读到了杜尚，这导致多年以后我甚至自动抑制这种身份自觉，因为如果真像杜尚说的，一辈子不做艺术又怎么样啊，但我越到后面就越反过来，觉得艺术家就是要靠作品说话的。

冠南刚才说那个东西对我也非常有煽动力，我自认为不是一个政治敏感度高的人，但我在认识上非常同意“人必然是社会性和政治性的动物”这样的观点。艺术呢，我认为艺术自有上帝，而且不是一个上帝，艺术是很难被定义的。我曾经自己写过一句话，就是任何试图给艺术进行定义的人都是暴君。我非常赞同冠南说的，所以我也非常期待冠南在他的艺术理念上能走得更远，能做得更纯粹更有力量。但我自己来说，其实不重视工作方法，我讨厌方法论的东西，因为我认为一个艺术家不应该被某种策略，某种目的性的东西指引，限定他通向艺术的那条道路，一个艺术家也不一定只能走一条路，或者说从没有通向艺术的道路，艺术就像个幽灵，游荡在人们日常所无法察觉的地方，所以艺术家也应该是一个游荡者的状态。）

李波：如果展览没做，你还要继续把它们保留下去吗？

刘耀华：当然。因为在最早的时候，我就想好只有这些垃圾被展览，这件作品才算完成，或者说，只有展览完我把它们丢掉了，它才算完成。我一直在讲一个词，就是艺术的名义，如今的艺术早就已经脱离了技艺，艺术不再必要“由技进道”的时候，它其实就是一个先行的观念，我们到底能在艺术的名义之下做些什么，所以艺术的名义也变成了艺术本体的一部分。

耶苏：我就接着刘老师的话。这些项目我感觉大家做得都比较干净，我给我的感觉虽然整体的项目都做出去，而且这些项目类的作品跟那种比较个人的作品有个区别。项目类的作品，你只有做出来，然后不断地滚动几次，你才知道能够走得有多深多远，所以我觉得挺好的，大家都有这么一个开始也借这个机会把一些东西实现了。我自己反正挺愉快的，也借此认识了一些新的朋友，把原来没有做完的项目继续收集了很多故事，因为我那个项目本身就是采集故事，然后画出来做成明信片送给他们，蛮简单的。开幕那天我记得我们说过，布完展我会反思，我说我这个作品到底有没有什么意思，有没有什么意义？后来组织了一些朋友过来分享故事的时候，中间碰到一些问题，比方说要找翻译。有些人会拒绝，然后有些人答应了就不来了。我觉得这些对我来说，就是一个项目他跟人产生关系的时候会有各种问题，因为这些差错，因为这些不可确定的东西，我觉得项目慢慢自己成长起来。

高远：我先对耶苏发问吧。因为当时耶苏提供了两个备选的项目，一个是他的讲故事，还有一个就是他的壁画系列。当时甚至还商量跟草场地的某一个社会化的空间或者小卖店有一个结合，但是因为这个项目实施的时候有一定难度，所以咱们就放弃了。选择了征集故事的项目来展出。如果你当时实施的是壁画的项目，你会如何设定？你感觉实施壁画的项目更有意思，还是说手绘的征集故事的项目更有意思？

耶苏：聊壁画的项目的时候，有个协商过程。表面上可能是更符合咱们的主题，但是实施上确实是有难度的。咱们这次很多展览对很多项目它都是在两个点之间扭转的，一方面走向更加社会化的，有一种你跟别人站在一起的感觉，比方说冠南和李波的作品，我觉得这两件作品里面都有一个“我们”这个概念，“我们”是一个复数。我们的社会也好，我们的未来也好，应该形成怎么样的一种思考，或者说艺术在这种社会中形成什么样的一种合理的连接，或者是深入性。我觉得可能其他几位艺术家，我从作品我只是从这次参展的作群来说，可能用另外一种迂回的方式在进行对于社会的一种反馈。就说他们可能并不一定是有“我们”的概念，或者是需要通过连接去做这个事情，所以我们在商量方案的时候，我相对来说还是觉得一个东西已经成型，它自我长出来的时候，我会选这样的方案。像壁画那个方案，我后来还真做了一个方案，当然可能不是针对草场地的，但是针对我家附近的一条街造成的一个壁画，就是说我对那个东西有切身感受的时候，我觉得我投入进去会更有那种共鸣。

赵邦：对我有一个问题想问耶苏，在看你的项目之前咱俩也聊过，就是你的地图是一个世界地图的翻转，海陆的翻转。我的问题关于你构思的结构化，我想问的是，你的海路翻转的这样的一个像乌托邦式新的世界地图和你收集来的故事，以及你画这些故事，他们这三者之间，我感觉是一种跳跃的关系。我想知道是在你的构思里

面，它这三者是怎么被你粘合在一起的，它们是怎么成为一个整体的？他们互相之间的关系是什么？

耶苏：里面有一些不同的线索，但它们不一定搭得上。比方说地图的概念，它是一个很单纯的东西，它如果只是一个地图的话，就非常地单薄。我觉得我说的单薄并不是说它不成立，因为在现在这样一个图像的时代，图像有更多的层次，或它有更多的可能性去承载各种东西，不管是直接图像还是一个画面，当然绘画可能是一个独立系统。所以地图本身我只能把它当作一个背景，谈话本身比方说我请大家来讲故事，比方说这次如果咱们通过腾讯会议，每个人分享一个故事，我也觉得大家应该都会有收获，我也不一定非要给大家画出来。比方说咱们7个人有7个故事分享完了，不一定要画出来，我是在摸索一种可以把它综合起来的方式。关于故事，我觉得一旦讲出来以后，它就带有一些个人的色彩了，它不能完全是作为一个真的东西，它可以有点文学性的东西，我觉得文学跟想象是相关的，所以把它放到一个乌托邦式的一个地图上面去，以这样的方式把它展示结合起来，我不能确定这种是一种非常合适的方式。包括展陈的时候，那些小画本来也准备找一个地方单独列出几排，没准备放在地图上，后来是觉得增加一个图层可能会好一些，都是很临时的一种安排。可能更好的是一种把它做成一个三D引擎，开放在网络上的3D引擎，让大家可以上传故事，过一段时间他就会收到一张电子明信片源，可能这样会好一点。

赵邦：元宇宙是吗？

耶苏：对，稍微单纯一点。

刘耀华：我再补充一下。玩玩刚才解释了之后，他要用杜尚那句文本我就能够理解了，我俩的路径不太一样，所以我刚开始会觉得那句话有点鸡汤。但另外我还是不太能理解作品里面的语言和语法关系，你是因为去不了泰国，但是你寄一张泰国的明信片给泰国民宿的老板，然后让他拍照给在国内的自己。按常规的理解是，你应该让酒店的老板给你寄一张他们当地的明信片，这样的话也是一种心理补偿，或者另外怎么样也好。而你是逆过来的，这里边的关系，我就不太能理解，而且你也说，如果是哪一张明信片没有送到，可能这句话就变得不完整。我们就想像如果有一张或者几张没有送到，当这句话呈现不完整的时候，对于作品呈现的结果会有什么样的不同。其实我很早就了解你的作品，很多作品我都很喜欢，包括你那个人肉旋转门，我在“一件作品”上也发过一期，但这次的作品对我来说就有点不太理解。

石玩玩：这个可能是我没有说清楚，不是寄给泰国老板，我是支付了房间的房钱的，那张床是我的，屋子也是我的。只是请他代收一下，然后给拍个照片给我就行了。所以实际上它的出发点或者是语法结构是，寄到一个我去不了的地方，是寄给我自己的，如果没有疫情我就去了，我就会在那待那么多天。

刘耀华：那明信片最后的归宿是什么？拍完之后老板自行处理了吗？

石玩玩：对，我给他了，就放那吧。所以展览里的是明信片的复印版。

李波：好像哪个艺术家做过一个作品，就是给自己寄东西的。他的肉身在这，他给自己不在的那个地方寄东西。

石玩玩：李老师说的那件作品，我也不是不了解，我想回答耀华的第二个问题。我也不知道这个是算好的结果还是不好的结果，这个作品寄丢了是完全有可能的，因为当时我寄的那时候疫情刚发生。邮局告诉我，能不能寄到都是问题，多长时间也不知道，会不会丢，顺序会不会打乱我也不知道。所以这种情况是大概率会出现的，但是我觉得中国邮政还行，他们都帮我寄到了，而且收费非常便宜。

刘耀华：如果出现了问题怎么办？

石玩玩：出现就出现了吧，如果出现问题，顺序打乱错了，少了几张，就这事只能这么着，也挺好的。其实我觉得就像我所说的，在这个里面我把这事做完了就OK了，是什么结果我没法控制，但是不管是不是能控制，他就那意思，反正那意思大家也都能感觉到，我也能感觉到，遗憾也是不可控的。

赵邦：顺着刚才玩玩的回答耀华的问题，我其实想问你们这几个艺术家，项目制的这种作品是比如像玩玩说的，有可能他寄去的明信片，由于疫情等等各种原因，老板不能如数地收到，最后帮他收集成这一整句话。就是说你们在发起这种项目制的作品，包括由别的人来跟你们一起完成，这里面其实是有大量的不可控性的，你们在发起以及制作的过程中，是否会想尽可能地不去控制那个过程和结果，比如说刘耀华说你给我一件垃圾由你自己来选，包括耶苏让别人给他一个故事，其实都是艺术家由他者来完成的，就说我想问的是你们自己有没有对他最终的样貌有一些期待，比如说玩玩你是更期这一整句话、刚好每一封都如实的寄到，然后最终呈现了这一完整的一句话，还是说中间有可能有一些波折，它有一些缺损，一些缺失。但最终还是形成了那一句话，甚至是更有值得玩味的一句，有一种诗意的或者是一种残缺的故障感。并且在这种残缺故障感背后，它肯定会让人们更多地联想到疫情，导致大家人与人之间的连接产生问题。我想问的是你们对于各自的项目在发起了之后，由他人来完成的过程中，是否对最终的结果有一个预期，或者说有一个期待，更希望它成为什么样子，还是说完全无所谓，是什么就是什么。我想听听你们是怎么看的。

石玩玩：我先说吧，我肯定是希望实施过程别出幺蛾子，能到最好。当然要是万一不靠谱，丢了怎么办？这结果我觉得我也能接受。这是第一。第二，坦率地讲，失控本身也不是问题，我觉得做了这么多年，即便是最后丢了又如何呢？对吧？比如说像李波的作品，究竟有没有刨根问底，我觉得无所谓，就是说他把算账呈现出来了，这事我有感受了，我就觉得OK了。这个是我们能感受到它的魅力，我就包括耀华的作品也是这样。所以其实失控和不失控之间是有张力的，正是因为张力的出现，才使得这样的作品显得有意思。

李波：我其实也是有预期的，但就像耀华说的，这是个起点，我也这么认为。这次在中途的时候我都已经开始要退出了，我想不展了，我觉得这次时机不成熟。但后来我觉得对不起几位参与的伙伴，这次展出很重要，对于他们的付出要有呈现，踩出去这一步很重要，踩出去的这一步，也会推动后续工作的进行，起码可以思考以后怎么呈现更加满意。我觉得现在还没有达到真正的预期，我对这些数字是有预期的，现在这个体量还不够，到了一定体量的时候，会更有意思，这个力量不是我能完成的，我要想办法去推动它完成，因为不是所有人都愿意来算的。很多人不愿算，算这有什么价值？有什么意义？参与算账的，也并非每一个人都完全知道它真正的价值和意义，但是他对这个事情本身有感觉很重要。这个过程会产生很多变量，这个变量可以带来更多的想象，包括这个数据最终成为相对大的大数据的时候，会带来更多的想象力。所以，对于项目后续的很多工作我还是充满期待。

石玩玩：这个作品永无止境，每次展完之后都有下一次的可能性，其实这也挺好玩的。

刘耀华：对，它一环扣一环，会不断勾连出新的语境和新的问题出来，我觉得这次展览很好，宣布这个起点是很重要的，对后面的发展可能是一种积极的催化。

赵邦：玩玩作品中选择了杜尚那句话，杜尚特别著名的大玻璃的作品，就是在一次展出的运输过程中碎了，上面有很多产生了很多纹路，然后运输它的策展人就慌了，说这个完蛋了，这个作品坏了。但是杜尚就说特别棒，比我最初非常完整、非常干净的作品本身要好很多，说这里面有很多的偶然性被加入了。其实我想问的就是，当杜尚这个故事变为一个传说，延展开之后，很多艺术家甚至期待在隐隐地期待一些意外，出现一些问题，其实很多艺术家，尤其是以某种项目制的类似工作中，由于有别的主体的加入，就期望这个里面产生一些弦外之音，或者是让这个项目某些部分，失去它的控制，改变它本来的面貌。比如说耀华的那个作品，但是没有人那么做，比如说他如果来找我，他要一个垃圾的话，比如说我对他放一个屁，我说这个是我给你的垃圾，我就等着看你怎么呈现，因为你承诺了，你说一个人给了你一个垃圾你就会保存并展出它。

刘耀华：我要回复你这个问题。事实上我在做之前就已经把自己代入到参与者的角色，想过很多离奇的应对了。我期待的是，每个人能在这里边玩起来，跳脱出日常的那种经验束缚，甚至来故意为难我。但结果并不如我想象的那样。如果你来了说要给我一个屁，我太开心了，那我就跟着你，你什么时候说要放了要放了，我就拿个罐子，扣在你屁眼上，我要接着啊，我接完之后就把它密封起来。太好玩了。我事先是有很多种预想的，当然也给自己树立一个最基本的原则，那就是不管任何人给我任何东西，我都要想办法把它保存起来，你来了说你自己是垃圾，可以啊，我可以养你，当时我脑子里已经打开了一个巨大的世界，但是实际上的结果是比较保守的。

李波：要有人觉得自己是垃圾，你还真是有点棘手。

刘耀华：我不觉得棘手，反而我渴望去面对那样的问题。……因为刚才李波谈到创作方法上的相似性，我再补充一点，我是后来才知道的，就在前几天，我从一个艺术家的推送里知道耿建翌在2012年9月份的个展上，展示了一件叫做“没用了”的作品，资料里说他这件作品是2004年做的。他当时是以展览为契机，好像是快到展览开幕的时候他才临时给朋友们打电话说，把你们家里没用的东西都拿到展厅里边来吧，然后他很多朋友就把很多不用了的东西拿到展厅里边，就这么展的。当我知道耿建翌这件作品的时候，我是认为跟他在方法层面有很大相似性的，我也在思考我俩的相同和不同在哪里。其实如果耿建翌老师还在世的话，我是想跟他讨论一下的。我觉得他那个还是把日常的“物”作为对象，他不是针对概念，而我是针对抽象的概念和人在主观认知层面的对应，他直接让朋友们把家里没用的东西拿出来，这跟我给人一个“垃圾”的概念是不一样的。我其实习惯于离远了审视自己和自己的作品，之前一直不知道耿建翌老师有这件作品，但我收完垃圾一段时间之后，看到了宋冬老师的“物尽其用”，因为宋冬老师的作品是跟他的妈妈有关，首先是从家庭出发的，他展示的全部是生活物品，带有不同年代的痕迹，所以它背后要引向的是在中国巨大的经济飞跃中所引起的人和物之间情感和关系的转变，和人对当下消费主义的反思等等。看起来都是一堆东西铺在那里，但我跟宋冬老师的完全不一样，倒是跟耿建翌老师在方法上相似。

高远：你这个比较高明了。

刘耀华：你别逗我。我不是想比较谁高明，我是想认真对待这个问题。我们经常说抄袭啊，撞车啊等等，说真的，艺术可能绝对是独创么，总有些人会想到一起去的。艺术除了想，还要做，想和做同样重要，有时候想的比较相似，但做起来涉及到无数次的选择，这里面就涉及到语言和语法，就会有无数的分化，这也是反映一个艺术家非常重要的部分。所以我也不在乎说谁像谁，反而这些个案的比较研究还挺有意思的，当然那种恶意抄袭谋名得利的不包括在内。

赵邦：其实关于作品相似的问题，或者说跟别的艺术家比较接近，这就产生了另一个问题，如果不能和别的艺术家在思考方式或者是工作方式，甚至是对某种材料的选择雷同，比如说大家爱用“抄袭”或者“撞车”这样的词，如果要完全规避这样的事情的话，那是不是在今天做一个当代艺术家想要开展工作之前，是不是就需要先看尽这个世界上其他所有的艺术家的所有作品，你才能开始工作，答案当然是否定的。

高远：其实这种撞车的作品或者说有点雷同的作品，这样汇总起来做一个群展也不是不行。

刘耀华：太多的艺术家怕自己做的跟别人一样，又有太多艺术家怕自己做的跟别人不一样。我觉得艺术最重要是跟自己实实在在的关系，弄不得假，如果一个艺术家天天想着要做出跟所有人都不一样的东西，那负担太大了。

石玩玩：我也想过这个问题，就是说我作品有一些也会跟别人的方法会有一些接近或者雷同，但是肯定这个不是特别重要，也没有谁抄谁的。现代主义时期的作品，比如说像考尔德他做活动雕塑，或者说毕加索发明的一种立体画派的方法，那么他们最大的价值是在于贡献出一种形式。这个形式是我发明，这个材料是我发现的，所以这个是很重要的，几乎是他们创作的核心。所以在这种方式上是不能雷同的，别人用过那种画法我再画一遍毫无意义了，因为它本身的价值就是形式贡献。但当代艺术重要的价值不再形式贡献，其实当代艺术最重要的价值是在于每个艺术提供了新的观看世界的角度。也就是说，每个人的观察角度、观看角度比创造一个形式审美要重要的多。所以这样来讲的话，我们每个人都有自身的出发点，比如耀华他显然他跟耿建翌老师的经历时代都是不同的，他针对的发问也是不同的，所以这个作品最后的指向也是不同的，是吧？跟宋冬就更不一样了。所以当代艺术这里面来讲，除非故意的恶意抄袭，一般来讲这种个别作品、局部作品的撞车，这个我觉得不是一个特别重要的话题。

李波：我不是要重点说相似性，“撞车”这种事情，没有必要太看重。艺术创作从自己的角度出发，按照自己的方式，一定会跟别人有接近的地方。大家都是人，人是有共性的。不过即便如此也有差异，因为你所面对的问题和他所面对的问题不一样。哪怕最终呈现出来形式类似，也不能混为一谈。

赵邦：就像刚才玩玩说的，现代主义时期，大家往往是对样式，对花纹，布的表面的构成的一个贡献，形式的贡献。我觉得当代艺术家，到了今天，尤其是大家，其实这些用你们用方案的这种用项目制的方式来做艺术，其实更多的是一个比较纯粹概念化或者是更观念艺术的方式来工作的这样的，艺术家，我觉得更难以用一种风格来去界定。而我觉得更多的时候，对于一个观念艺术家来说，它的风格其实是来源于就像刚才你们说的，其实你每一次做创作是对现实的一次试探和一次出手，而你所有的不是你一件作品的一个样式，他怎么在展厅里面摆弄，他用了什么材料来形成风格，而是你不厌其烦地一次又一次和真实的现实去互动，你怎么挑动它，你怎么去行动。

李波：在项目中，要去发动他人，要去和人打交道是很难的。独立创作一件作品，只需要解决一个人的思想就行了。当你面对的是一个真正一个和你想法不一样的人，就需要你去和他真正产生一种交流，工作难度和工作强度都一定会大于独立创作的方式。这种方式让我去重新思考“关系”，协商就是处理关系。在这次展览当中，大家的方向虽然不太一样，大家的面貌也各不相同，可能方法上它也不是一种新的东西，但是我觉得它可以带出更突出的问题和更多的面向。在这个展览当中，我觉得虽然有好多不尽人意的地方，或者是有一些缺憾的地方，但它反而成了一个新的一个起点，这是收获很大的一个过程。

高远：刚才李波那段话实际上相当于对咱们展览项目一个总结了。

赵邦：被告方的总结陈词。

高远：其实刚才李波说的正好是我想说的，就是展览5位艺术家的面貌都是不同的，这实际上就是最好的一个结果。如果有两位艺术家呈现的形式或者观念差不多的就没什么意思，我就希望每位项目发起人的面貌是完全不同的，特别多样化。而且项目参与者的身份也是多样化的，玩玩的作品参与者只有1个人，刘耀华的是300个人，这个数量差异是非常大的。而且耶苏作品的参与者人数是不定的，随着征集活动增加还在不断的生成，这是一个很好的结果。可以说，这是当代艺术尤其是观念艺术创作的一种常态，由艺术家发起或者策划一个项目，在特定的时间段内邀请人参与。我并不是想把这种工作方式当成一种艺术形式，它只是艺术家选择的一种创作方式，来回避某种交换系统或者既有的艺术机制。

---

  Scroll down for English 

Zhao Bang: First of all, thank you for coming to this discussion, we are mainly focused on two parts.

The first part is the exhibition itself, that is to say, we can discuss each other about the theme and concept of the exhibition, about the project consultation, about this "project system" of creation, including the concept of the exhibition, for example, the exhibition of the exhibition, and the work of the curator (Gao Yuan), we can have a discussion with each other. We can discuss the concept of the exhibition and the work of the curator (Gao Yuan), so that we can have a mutual exchange of questions and responses.

The second part is to talk about your own works and preferably also about other people's works in this exhibition, and to ask and discuss with each other directly.

Since we are all artists participating in this exhibition, we must have something we want to express and communicate about our own projects and others' projects, or have some questions, and then we can talk about it in this way. Do you want to talk about it first, Yuan?

Gao Yuan: Hello, everyone. Let me tell you a little bit about the origin of this project. This exhibition is called Project Negotiation, and it was actually the artist Li Bo who first told me about it. He had already started a project to organize some of his students in a way to do an "accounting" activity. Later, Liu Guannan joined him, and as we talked, we thought we could do a group exhibition of artists and present it as a "project", that is, each artist's work is a kind of project presentation. Later, the more we talked, the more in-depth and specific we became, and after talking with Liu Guannan, we approached Zhao Bang, feeling that the tone of their space was more suitable for this exhibition. Liu Guannan also recommended Shi to do this project together. The projects of these artists are all very suitable and interesting, and they are all created in the form of "projects", not physical works. I think if we organize a group exhibition, let's organize five or six artists to do a group exhibition, all in the form of "projects". Of course, the original intention may not be the same as the final presentation, the exhibition is always like this, and the exhibition may change after talking about it, there are always some new ideas, including some new ideas of the artists, and it will change. Therefore, there are many interesting things happened in the process of implementation, and later on, we joined Liu Yaohua and Yesu, their projects are very compatible, they both initiated the "project" and organized the participants to create.

But the "project" we are referring to here actually has a broad and narrow sense, the broad sense of the project in fact, any exhibition can be considered a "project", just like our exhibition posters, exhibition posters it is a " Project contract", in fact, all exhibitions can be called "project" when implemented in black and white, right? This is the broad sense of project. But the project that we understand in this exhibition is actually a project that the artist executes and plans, so this project is actually different from the broad sense of that kind of project, I feel that it is initiated by the artist and assumes the role of an organizer, that is, the artist is not only the creator of the work, he is also an organizer, equivalent to the artist and curator (artist as The artist is not only the creator of the work, but also an organizer, equivalent to the artist as curator, actually initiating a project, and this project has traces of the participants' life practices, or the works are mainly produced by the participants, or maybe the result of cooperation between the artist and the participants.

The main idea of this exhibition is initiated by the artists, but each project has a participant, so that one by one project is integrated, and we have five artists in total to become five projects. This includes a lot of negotiation, including the negotiation between the artist and the artist, and also the negotiation between the artist and the curator, and also the negotiation between the artist and the space, or the negotiation between the artist and the institution. So negotiation can have multiple meanings, but in my understanding, it is mainly the negotiation of space, as these five projects are presented in the same space, which necessarily involves the relationship with space. It also relies on the wonderful poster designed by our own Zhao Bang. Later I thought that this poster is especially suitable for the tone of our exhibition, you must have a lot of rights and obligations in mind when you sign the contract, right? These rights and obligations are exactly the result of our various negotiations, we will think of some issues during the negotiation process, in fact, this is a kind of negotiation. I'll start by talking about the original intention of the project and the main idea of the project. I'll throw a brick for you to express your opinions. All of you artists are experienced in the field, so I have many ideas that are the result of discussions with you.

Zhao Bang: Yuan, we talked this afternoon about the concept of this exhibition when you first conceived it, and now that this exhibition has ended immediately, after it has been implemented, what kind of feeling would you have when you look back at this exhibition now, and is there any difference to you and your initial idea?

Gao Yuan: Our exhibition is also the result of gradual discussion and consultation, that is, step by step, at the beginning of the idea is certainly different from the present. So how exactly is it different? At the beginning, I discussed with Li Bo that the artist, as the initiator of the project, is not involved in the production of the works, and he has nothing to do with the works, all the works are made by the participants of the project, and the participants appear as artists. The artist is only an organizer, and all the material forms of the works, including its images or whatever, are executed by the participants of the project, which means that the artist has given up his initiative, or he has delegated this right to the participants, which means that the works are created by them. But later on, there may be some changes, as we gradually negotiate and the richness of the artists' creations, the concept of my exhibition may have changed, especially with the addition of Ye Su, I found that many of his works are hand-drawn by him after listening to the stories told by the project participants. The project on display includes images and material forms, but also traces of the artist's participation, so that's the first difference, right? It's a change from the original intention, but I feel thatYe Su's project is very participatory and at the same time the display is very rich. So we have made some adjustments from the original idea or the way the work was executed by the participants.

Zhao Bang: Artists, do you have anything to say about the exhibition, such as the concept of the exhibition, the concept, the way it is organized, the way you create and work, or do you have any questions or even disagreements about it?

Li Bo: I'll make a statement. When I first chatted with Gao Yuan, I said there was such a thing as accounting, and I thought it was quite interesting to see if there was a suitable opportunity to present it. It can only be considered an exchange between friends. I am a teacher and my school is in a university town, which is now found in many cities across the country. A university town is a new city, not as functional as an old city. I have done some group projects with my students before, and we found that a university town is like a "magical peach blossom garden". She had the habit of keeping small bills and carefully calculated the accounts of her four years of schooling for her graduation. For her, the accounting is over after the graduation exhibition. I think that every young person who comes to the university town has been spending money continuously, one after another. I think what interests me in this matter is that it is a social matter, and if there is an opportunity to discuss it, it may be a possibility for individuals to look at themselves, and for the group to form a new perspective of understanding. It is in such a space built up with the core concept of consumption that the state of consumption is presented, and it is you who come in actively, or even have to come in by way of striving for it. Not all people in this place will have the expected harvest, some may also be very disappointed. I think the accounting thing itself will make us reflect on the experience of our daily life and re-understand such a consumption process. Therefore, I think this can be done continuously, so I organized more people to do it. At that time, I had 2002 to spend 1more than ten thousand dollars in tuition fees to study in art schools, and there was also the problem of the relationship between individual experience and the group.

From the initial idea of my accounting project to becoming a project- based exhibition, I did not realize that it had any uniqueness. This was suggested by Gao Yuan, who said that he could find some artists whose creative methods had such project-based commonality to make a group exhibition. Later on, Gao Yuan contacted me and said that he would do it in the coming 11month, but it was later postponed due to the epidemic. I think the whole process has been under negotiation, and I don't think I've been able to negotiate particularly well so far, and I haven't achieved the ideal state in many aspects. This project is not about me making the work, but about me being the initiator and other people starting their own creative work, which is a process of initiating action. This process of action can generate new subjectivities, that is, these people who are doing the accounting, to look at their own experience of existence in turn. I see this as an open-ended project. As an open-ended project, something new can be generated, something different from the initial idea derived! I am more interested in this. Inside this exhibition, I was very rewarded to see different artists working on completely different projects in their own way, which was also very inspiring to me. Just like Liu Yaohua, listening to him talk about his projects through the internet, through various channels .......

In this process, the young artists involved, I have to go and communicate with them. At the beginning, they may think that the teacher asked me to do it, but as the work is carried out, they will gradually change a bit. I would also like to listen to the young people involved in the project and talk about their own feelings, and I would also like to hear what other artists think about it, so that they can criticize me and give me some advice. Thank you.

Zhao Bang: Then we should not follow this discussion of Mr. Li Bo, we can go directly to the next, for example, what ideas you have about other artists' projects and works in this exhibition, or what you want to talk about your own projects, come together to discuss, we can feel free to do so.

Liu Yaohua: Since Li Bo has asked us to take him to task, I'll say a few words first. Since I first saw Li Bo's work, I was interested and curious about how big a hole could be torn behind it. I talked a lot with Li Bo during the exhibition and got to know more about the work, but in fact I feel that it is just a beginning in terms of the results so far. The title of the work is "Accounting", and I was just thinking about it. It's especially like a father saying to his son, "Calculate how much money you spent on your family during your four years in college. Then the son really did the math. After the calculation, Li Bo played the role of a teacher again, saying that you should make a work, and then the students made a work for this purpose.

Li Bo just talked about the "consumption" and "control" in their university town. In fact, for the whole society, different spaces, different parts and different classes all have the same and different problems. This work is genetically socially oriented, and it contains a sampling of people in society, and it also deals with the current reality brought about by consumerism. The area that the artist wants to aim at can be more than a point, it can be broad, but never vague, it can be without a bull's eye, but never without a target.

I don't really care much about left and right, but from the logic presented by the art itself, our feelings are more similar, that is, we feel we can see the direction, but it's not so clear yet, we haven't seen the ones under the soil yet The problem of disjointed roots. I feel that this is just the beginning, and I still have expectations for the next development of Li Bo's work, because I feel the thing behind it, but I don't see it completely yet, so I still need the work itself to pull it out.

Another point is whether it is necessary to let the students create a materialized thing called "work" as part of Li Bo's work in this exhibition, and in my opinion, the whole work is not affected if they do not present pills, necklaces, or other things. In this chain, the students confirmed the teacher-student relationship between Li Bo and them by making the works, because the teacher assigned the homework and they completed a creative act under the teacher's subject. I am not trying to discuss the goodness or badness of these students' works, but rather, whether it is necessary, because there is clearly a nested relationship between creation and creation, so I would like to hear Li Bo's own thoughts in this regard.

Li Bo: Let me respond to it. I think what you just said is very right, there are actually two things, one is "accounting" and the other is artistic creation.

Why present the work? It's not assigning them homework, they've all graduated, I'm just going to mobilize them, and hopefully, they'll be interested in this thing that has happened or is continuing to happen to them, and some of them are going on to graduate school. They were studying art practice majors, and I wanted them to recognize this data in their own way, and I launched them to do both the math and the creative work. The former is to first meticulously and carefully go through the breakdown of their spending, and the second is to try to do art-making activities on top of the statistics. What each of them did was actually a response to the accounting, and this response itself was also the result of their education, so it constituted a positive correlation between consumption and the harvest after consumption. I invite the young people around me to do the math, but if I went to a law school or an architecture school to do these things, it might be a different situation. I want them to have an "output" of their own consumption situation, and this output is their own creation. One student (Gu Xiaohuan) measured her consumption of 250,000 yuan in terms of a house, which involved her understanding of her own consumption behavior. She felt that investing in a house was a particularly important economic act for her family and society, and that her study expenses were supported by this economic act of her family. Here, I think her awareness has formed a closed loop, completing the process from consumption to output. The act of creation on the basis of accounting is equivalent to the presentation of a result after consumption. It's not that I ask them to do an assignment and they unconsciously think of making a work. Of course, when I talk to them about this idea, I always tell them that they can do the calculation first and then look at it afterwards. Then after the calculation, there will be an exhibition, and each of them will start to have an idea. In fact, the whole project of accounting was not shown this time. There is one problem, Liu Yaohua is right, that is, the seven works in this exhibition may be difficult to understand for those who do not understand the whole accounting thing, they feel as if they have made a small work, made a small object, why should they make these? This requires a richer presentation of the exhibition. But I may not be able to promote the survey of parents that Yaohua talked about just now, but the data we got can be analyzed, for example, how much money was spent on games? How much money did you spend on clothes? How much did you spend on the phone bill? How much did you spend on eating? How much do you spend on dinner with friends ...... to have a view of your daily life.

Liu Yaohua: You said that these students were spontaneously going to create art as a result of their reckoning, or as a memorial, right, so how do you evaluate this result they presented?

Li Bo: I think they all did a great job. I can't be absolutely open about the accounting, but I try to be as open as possible. I initiate this thing, they participate in it, they have this kind of motivation, but they may sometimes be more ambiguous, and then I have to discuss and negotiate with them. Some I don't have to discuss with him, he is very clear, "I'm going to do this", I think it's good. I may give some encouragement or something, but they sometimes do not have a clear idea. This time I may influence him, I started to remove this influence, but later I thought it may not be necessary to remove, why? Because in fact, since I started this thing, I should participate in it, but in the end, I want them to be satisfied and feel that they can reflect their own understanding on the line. For example, the student who made the pills was a realistic sculptor, and he said, "How can I do it? I am good at making realistic sculptures. I suggested him to put aside the perspective of realism to do it, and after calculating this account, how do you think about this data? Then we talked and he talked about his mother's illness. In the process of communicating with his mother, he always shared his academic achievements with her, and she got some kind of relief because of it, and he felt as if he could somehow cure her. But in fact, from another perspective, this is not a kind of healing for himself, and at the same time he emphasizes that the pill has an attitude of criticizing consumer behavior. I think that's not bad.

Gao Yuan: The whole budget of this exhibition is only 25,000 RMB, so it is a low-cost project completed under a very low budget. For example, the project of Shi Wanwan is a very low-cost practice, including the printing and output are done by the artist himself. So let's ask Shi Wanwan to talk about the specific implementation process of his work.

Shi Wanwan: special regret, originally said that I wanted to go to Beijing, and the group to meet more, to communicate with each other. But then, for many other reasons, I didn't go. Everyone here has been on the scene, and we all have more say in the works, only I was not there, so I could only see the works through WeChat, so I may not have a particularly comprehensive understanding. The first point is about this exhibition, first Guan Nan told me about it, then Gao Yuan sent me his curatorial intention and sent me a text, a particularly serious text, and after I read it, I think I agree with almost all of his views, and I think many of my works are in line with the exhibition requirements. The project- based system is a way of working that I have always agreed with, and I have been working on it. What I want to ask is, as a curator, or as a space, if we do a group exhibition in the form of a project, who is the content for, that is, who are the people we share and discuss? What kind of feedback do we want to hear?

Gao Yuan: Let's make a long story short, what does the so-called "project" actually want to present? Is it the "post-art" that the theorists say? In fact, it presents a process of life, an experience of life, right? In the process of this project, what kind of life experience does each artist present, in academic terms, "life politics". Or as Galois said, this project is trying to "create life and record life", in fact, it is a record of the life practice of each project participant, which is the purpose or the original intention. It presents a process, not a result.

Zhao Bang: When I first heard about this concept, my first reaction was that first of all I thought that this is a way of creation that very many artists are using in contemporary art, which is actually not a very advanced and rare way anymore. In fact, this kind of project-based collaboration is very common, for example, we are making the project as an artistic language itself, but other things, for example, I make a work, and then I hire other sculptors, or I hire other people, or even workers, or even the most ordinary people to help me finish this work, it is actually in a sense, although it does not bear the name of a project or a collaboration, but it In fact, in contemporary art, not only in contemporary art, but also in contemporary economic activities, in the operation of such a systemic chain, we all work together to accomplish a thing. For example, films or many other such works are actually done in this way. As for the works of the artists in our exhibition, just like the question asked by Wanwan earlier, what is one of my feelings? I think there is something special about our exhibition and the way each artist works, that is, at least before the work is exhibited, it has already begun to influence some people. In fact, the moment you extend an invitation to collaborate, the person you invite to collaborate with already starts to think about art, whether he was in an artistic discourse or not, or whether he was in a context of creative expression, such as Liu Yaohua's project. What is art? That is, how do I deal with this artist's invitation to me? In fact, I think all of your project-based works are already in play before they are actually shown in public. Some of these works tend to intervene more in the public space, while others are more personal, such as "Accounting", which is more related to the participants' more personal aspects.

Shi Wanwan: Traditionally, artists from the academy, or our Chinese artists, are trained in school as a kind of plastic art - we go to make a "thing" that has a feeling, a "thing" that has a visual feeling. "something" with visual feeling. Such a thing is obviously more in line with the requirements of the whole exhibition system or gallery system now, and can be more easily traded and collected. We can see many fairs are such works now, but obviously, the works in our exhibition are not like this, they do not meet the current mainstream market's circulation requirements, so if we know so, but why do we still work so much, surely everyone goes to have their own book, everyone has their own one idea and intention. So in terms of the works in the exhibition itself, I think we can certainly talk about it, but for me, I think that the fact that we focus on this kind of works and show them in the space actually represents a kind of basic position that we share. I think it is a statement or a stand in the face of the situation of artists' work today, which is a very big attraction for me.

About the work, at that time I gave Gao Yuan three pieces of work, which Gao Yuan picked. This work was first exhibited in last year's Bangkok Biennale, but this Bangkok Biennale is not the official one (Bangkok Art Biennale), it was recommended by an artist friend in Taiwan who knows our working method better and thought I should like this kind of exhibition more. This biennial is an artist-initiated one, which is against the official Bangkok Biennale and is unorganized and decentralized. There is no curator, and anyone who signs up can participate. I really appreciated the artist's position and attitude, so I participated in the exhibition with this work, but it was not shown in China. After Gao Yuan told me about it, I thought it was quite suitable and complete, and it didn't cost much money, and the exhibition was simple, and I also wanted to share it with my friends in Beijing, so I ordered this work.

Zhao Bang: I have a question I want to ask Wanwan, which is actually a very personal question. You have one word on each postcard, and then this one word eventually forms a text, forms a sentence, in fact I found that you quite like to use a sentence, a word to form a sentence with meaning. I've read some of your works before, and I'm very interested in your choice of words. Many of your choices of words actually carry multiple meanings, such as political metaphors and romantic feelings about life. What I want to ask you is how you determined and chose the text of each postcard you sent, and what was your intention and motivation for choosing these texts?

Shi Wanwan: "The most important work in everyone's life is the time we spend", this is a quote from "Interview with Duchamp", which actually represents Duchamp's view of art. I have feelings about this quote and agree with this viewpoint more. Before that, I did not have such a deep understanding of this quote, I thought that artists should make "good works". Then, after experiencing many things, I have reflected more on my own work. After years of making art, what does art really mean to me? For example, the project-based works may not bring popularity or traffic, but why do you still do it? Another reason is that last summer was an important time for my family. I graduated with my PhD, my lover graduated with her master's degree, and my child graduated from junior high school, and I wanted to have a time to travel, but I couldn't because of the epidemic. I think the epidemic is a major event that goes beyond medicine itself, it has something to do with socio-politics, globalization and counter-globalization, and makes us pause to better understand the relationship between our lives and the world, no matter what the world is like, we should cherish the time we have.

Zhao Bang: Is there anything else that people would like to talk about or ask him about the Shi Wanwan's project and this work that they would like to discuss? If not, we'll move on to the next artist and have Liu Guannan come in to talk about it.

Liu Guannan: I'd like to say a few words. First of all, when Gao Yuan initially mentioned this exhibition to me, I heard the whole intention of the exhibition, and in fact I was particularly supportive of his intention, and then I talked a lot with Gao Yuan and Zhao Bang, the three of us, about subjectivity, intersubjectivity, mutual interaction with social reality, and so on, and we all talked a lot, so we won't repeat it here. Then I will talk about my personal experience about this matter, or about our project and exhibition. First of all, I feel that in our social life, in the local social reality that we are facing today, there is actually no community and no social organization among people. Instead, there is this molecularized, isolated state between people, and they are not allowed to have various forms of organizations, private foundations, or private gatherings. For example, there used to be something called Neihan Duanzi, and when it reached a certain level, he would be banned by the power of such an operation, an operation. So on this premise, I personally feel that it is not necessarily the most important thing to say what kind of aesthetics you can achieve in your work and art, or what kind of breakthrough in aesthetics, and what kind of breakthrough in your working methods. What is important is how we can organize everyone through art, forming a kind of loose self- organization, which can then not only bring people closer to each other, but also allow the value logic of art to be better spread. After all, the value logic of art as understood by all of us here today is actually a very modern value of art. But in the context of society as a whole, because of the power discourse and historical factors, we are faced with a social reality that understands art to be a highly pre-modern thing. Then some of the efforts and values of modernization and modernity made by all of us have not been presented in a centralized manner, which leads to various contradictions and confusions in our lives. On this basis, I believe that art can not only improve the relationship between people, but also promote the value of modernity in society. For example, like Li Bo's"Accounting", it is actually an intervention in our local Confucian family ethics, and like what Shi Wanwan and Ye Su did, it is a social interaction with people across cultural backgrounds. In any case, we are actually intervening in social relations, and to a certain extent, we may change them. To sum up, it means that, unlike the concept of participatory art in the Western art world in the past, there is a difference between us and them when we do these things, and this difference is also reflected in some details, including the 5 artists in this exhibition, in fact, there are also such differences between each of our works. In fact, I think we all have a consciousness of re-engaging with social relations, and we hope to evolve or rewrite this transformation of social relations into a kind of aesthetics, and this is a good thing in my opinion.

But I think the shortcoming lies in the fact that we have not yet found a proven method of working that can really go deeper into social relations, including what Yaohua said to Mr. Li Bo earlier: Can you go further into his family ethics? For my own works, I also have the feeling that, including avoiding talking about power discourse and politics, under this premise, can we have this kind of corresponding method to further penetrate into this kind of social relationship, because today's aesthetics is certainly not only visual, it is also through the tension between various kinds of social relationships, so that you can experience this kind of aesthetic power. Therefore, how we can further penetrate into society and change social relations through our own work may be one of the things we need to face in the future. This is the end of my speech, thank you.

Zhao Bang: Guan Nan can you talk about the iteration of your project, including the trade-offs and polish in the process?

Liu Guannan: I'll briefly explain that the original idea of my project is that we are actually a recipient of discourse, we are receiving different discourses of power every day, but it doesn't mean that each of us as individuals doesn't have our own understanding and ideas. So on this basis, I hope that the Other can invite participants to tell their own ideas, and then each of us can change from being a recipient of discourse to a creator of discourse, so that your social relationship has actually changed, right? I hope that through this form, everyone, at least those who participate in this project, can think about what is the real social relationship, what is the real aesthetics of social relationship. But in the process of implementation, we found that there are a lot of problems, most people are actually very worried about the current discourse environment, we are now able to see at a glance, and this 2022 year is a very critical point in time, your words can be spread, to what extent, we may all know it by heart. So on this premise, in that issue of our tweet there is a friend, he told me bitterly, you can not do this thing, you do this thing will be very dangerous, that day we two talked a lot. On the basis of this, I have a point of view, that is, in the past, artists involved in the discourse of power, in addition to their social relations, in fact, some of their practices precisely reflect the power of power: for example, if they say something treacherous or intolerable to the power, then the power will deal with this person from the top down, and the treatment maybe some kind of violence, or it may be some kind of imprisonment. It could be some kind of violence, it could be some kind of imprisonment, or it could simply be a kind of a ban on you, to keep you from showing your face, right? Then no matter what you do, you end up showing the power of a person in power. An art project or an art action that wants to break through social relations, wants to change social relations, or you as an artist, you actually face a very unsuccessful situation, that is, your activity, your narrative precisely reflects the power of power. In other words, what I think is the approach that we should take. Today's art and politics, and the discourse of power, are actually inextricably linked, right? If you don't have any relationship with the discourse of power today, just like the three paths that Beagle summarized, that is the route of aestheticism, which eventually becomes like Greenberg's Avant-Garde and Vulgarity: he doesn't want to have any relationship with social reality, but in the end it is inevitably used by power, which is a very cruel reality. Then you get too close to power, as in neoclassicism, or later in Soviet revolutionary realism, you are still used by power. So Beagle thinks it should be limited participation. This is a point I agree with. Your limited participation in social reality is able to maintain your artistic independence, while at the same time not excluding the practice of life, because you have an intimate interaction with social reality. So on this basis, I am opposed to some of the previous practices of local artists of the previous generation, who either attacked power directly and forced it to show its power and strength, or engaged with social reality in a frivolous way, actually treating the participants as a kind of naked consumer goods. After you interact with the participants, you actually have no interactions with them in their subsequent lives, just forget about each other and die. But in the process of display, on the opening day of the exhibition, some of the original owners of these objects came, and we could find that the interaction between Yew Wah and these original owners was a very good relationship. In other words, we did not consume the participants as previous artists did. To reiterate: the downside of this exhibition is how we were able to delve into the social reality, the concrete, the close operation, I'm done.

Zhao Bang: I would like to ask Guan Nan, this is probably 5 materials that you collected out, which is equivalent to 5 works. 5 samples, this 5 times this kind of conversation in public space, is there any which will you personally will find more exciting and interesting?

Liu Guannan: I personally feel that there are actually two buddies who are more exciting. First of all, they talked about the topic of Xinjiang, because there was a buddy who suddenly went to Xinjiang to live and work there, and then he talked a lot about the topic of Xinjiang, which actually interested me more. On the other hand, you have to have a kind of inclusiveness to the whole project, some participants may talk about topics that may not touch the power discourse in your opinion, but it is really some very practical problems they are facing in their lives, so I think it is actually quite good, this is what we have to face in dealing with social reality, you can't do everything according to your artist's I think it is impossible. On the other hand, the whole action has a kind of symbolic meaning, symbolic two people, in a public discourse space, and then talk about some public topics, and finally your conversation will be made public. This symbolism is mainly reflected in two levels. In fact, everything we talk about now through the Tencent conference is naked in front of the power, right? On the other hand, it means that if the content of the topic we are talking about is turned into the form of an art exhibition and it is disseminated, it's this symbolic meaning is also self-evident. So through all these levels, I think for me personally, it is still important to cut into the capillaries of social operation, as I said earlier, because it is precisely at the moment you resist, precisely at the moment you change social relations, that aesthetics is born.

Shi Wanwan: I want to ask Guan Nan, you are in a public occasion to invite people to talk about a topic, this topic is a public topic, my question is you want these words this topic is heard by more people, or be as little as possible to be heard by people?

Liu Guannan: Just like the example I just gave, our current Tencent meeting is actually naked in front of the power, right? I didn't say whether I hope or not, I think that whenever you borrow this kind of platform to show, or this kind of Internet platform of a dissemination, you are a kind of naked state, this is the eye of power, may not see you for the time being or your threat is not big enough, so he temporarily not to see you, but it does not mean that you are a private state. In other words, the action I am planning for this project is also a metaphor for such a social reality. As long as you speak out through these platforms, you are under the surveillance of the eye of power, but he may not see you for a while. The most important thing is that you have to take the initiative, in this process you have to carry a brave, to touch the boundaries and bottom line, what I care is that all participants, including myself, have this bravery, including our anthropomorphic space, although, as I just said, must be within the safe range, because not safe to show the power of the strong, but we think the safe range is really safe Is it really safe? This is not necessarily the case. In other words, there is also a kind of bravery in the anthropomorphic space, and there is also a kind of bravery in the curator Gao Yuan. If one of our projects gets this kind of close care from the Eye of Power, then everyone here will definitely be dragged down, right? It's all very natural. All of us here are bundled together to do something, to do an exhibition, in fact, to a certain extent, it is also a kind of bravery, what I care about is not that we should not let others hear this thing, but this thing you dare to do, you get it or not, as long as you dare, you can dare again next time, right? Because this "dare" is developed little by little, right?

Shi Wanwan: That is, you want to show our caution through this symbolism, right?

Liu Guannan: It's not cautious, I think it's a kind of gradual progress. 

Zhao Bang: Let Liu Yaohua talk about his project.

Liu Yaohua: The work in this exhibition is my first work, haha, my debut work, and I was already 30 years old at that time. Looking back, I was really ambitious when I first started, and I thought that if I just did "garbage collection" for the rest of my life, it would be enough for me to do it for the rest of my life. I also wrote in that short article that I thought, "I want to build a global museum of garbage in a few years (wasn't there a museum of innocence in Pamuk's "Red"? Of course, that is a novel, but also more private and personal.) The museum is open to anyone in the world, and anyone can choose one thing they think is "junk" as one of the museum's collections. But this "junk" is not necessarily useless, or even objects, for example, if a person at some stage feels that he or she is junk, then the museum can keep him or her, and then he or she will be our exhibit, and will be exhibited to the public there every day. Because here there is a subjective determination of the participant's will, he needs to find a specific object to correspond to it under a concept, and in the name of art, and art is the same as garbage, both are equal on the conceptual level. So I thought about how to juxtapose these two concepts in a way that would make them work on the level of human consciousness. I was thinking about these things every day, and it felt very complicated and interesting. You think about it, art seems to be a word that everyone can recognize, but in fact this word corresponds to different people's consciousness in different ways.

When it comes to negotiation, in fact, although I seem to negotiate, as if I appear to be very gentle on the surface, I am essentially quite strong in this project, and there is nothing to negotiate. I tell people, "I am an artist, can you give me a piece of trash? I will exhibit this piece of trash as art, and then I ask them to sign and date this piece of trash like an artist (like Duchamp signed on a urinal), and of course I will talk to them about why they chose this piece instead of that one. Some people would bring out a pair of real junk to talk to me, saying I have so much junk, you choose one piece, I said I don't choose, you can only choose. Of course, there are those who do not want to participate, I do not convince him, who is interested in him to participate. This is such a process.

Through this work I have had similar exchanges with numerous people, and I really found that the thing I was thinking about when I first conceived this work ...... I really felt it, but it is difficult to express it through the work. When each person is faced with such a request from me, what they think in their head and what they give back is closely and complexly related to the self in the "here and now". When I said I wanted"trash", each of them must have had many questions, and they had to face the equation of the two concepts of trash and art at the same time.

At that time, I was always thinking about how people know the world and how our subjective ideology is formed. I also made up a little story for myself, similar to a thought experiment. I imagined that a Chinese man came back from a trip to Europe with four different friends and told them that he had stolen a large rusty nail from a European cathedral, one of which was nailed to the cross during the crucifixion of Jesus. These four people, one is a farmer (no idea who Jesus is), one is an intellectual, one is a Christian (devout or not), and one is an archaeologist, you say these four people in the face of this nail what they will project in their minds, these four people in addition to different professions, and the question of faith, complicated. I'm talking about a bunch of nonsense, I'm thinking back to ten years ago, that's when it was like this, thinking about all kinds of problems every day. The first time I saw it, I was too hard, too hard. A few years later, when I saw Baudrillard's stuff, he said, "When any garbage can be regarded as art, then any artwork will be treated as garbage", which I think has some kind of correspondence with my work.

After this work was done, I kept the garbage I received and never opened it for 10 years, and for a few years I had some doubts, but after this exhibition, I have some new feelings, I can't say it clearly. Ten years ago, so many people gave me all kinds of things under the guise of art with all kinds of questions, moods and attitudes, and there are certainly some very interesting and even personal expressions in them, but some of them are really trash, even a leftover chicken bone, a pile of cigarette butts and wine bottles, and torn underwear, used diapers, etc. But to me, all these things are equal. But to me, these things are also equal, I just keep them seriously for 10 years, and then do an exhibition as art, and then throw them away. After 10 years, looking back, it seems to have no meaning, but also seems to have some inexplicable things in it.

In any case, the idea of a "trash museum" now seems to be a fool's errand. But the work is still completed at the conceptual level.

(Another point I would like to add is that I just heard Wanwan say that he started from modelling at the earliest, and then he became more and more aware of Duchamp's concept. I didn't go to any art school, nor did I have any professional training in modeling, but I liked to draw when I was a child, and strangely enough, I seemed to feel that art was a very broad thing, never just drawing, since I was a child, precisely from junior high school. Later, when I went to college, I happened to take down "Interviews with Duchamp" from a classmate's bookshelf, and it didn't work at once. At that time, I didn't know anything about the concept of modern and contemporary art, nor did I know anything about art history or strange works. I read Duchamp at a time when I was not yet self- conscious about my identity as an artist, which led me to suppress this self-consciousness even after many years, because if it is really like what Duchamp said, so what if I don't do art for the rest of my life, just live a good life, but the later I got, the more I turned the other way around, thinking that artists have to rely on their works. I think I am not yet a socially and politically sensitive person, but I agree with the view that people are necessarily social and political animals. I think art has its own God, and it is not a God, this thing is very difficult to be defined. I once wrote myself that anyone who tries to define art is a tyrant. I very much agree with what Guannan said, and I very much expect Guannan to go farther in his art concept, to do it more purely and more powerfully. But for myself, I actually don't pay much attention to working methods. I hate methodological things because I think one shouldn't be limited by a certain strategy, a certain purpose, a guiding thing to the path that leads to art. (I think making art is a dynamic and wandering state for me.)

Li Bo: If the exhibition is not done, do you want to keep them on?

Liu Yaohua: Of course. Because at the earliest time, I thought that this work would be completed only when these trash were exhibited, or only when I threw them away again after the exhibition. I have been talking about a word, that is, the name of art. Today, when art is no longer about technique, when art no longer needs to "go from technique to path", it is actually a prior idea of what we can do in the name of art, so the name of art has become a more central part of art ontology.

Ye Su: I'll follow up on what Mr. Liu said. These projects I feel that everyone did a relatively clean job, I give me the feeling that although the overall project are done out, and these project works and the kind of more personal works have a difference. For project works, you only know how far and deep you can go when you do it and roll it over a few times, so I think it's good that we all have such a start and take this opportunity to realize something. I had a good time myself, and I also used this opportunity to meet some new friends and collect a lot of stories from my unfinished project, because my project itself is to collect stories and then draw them out and make postcards for them. On the opening day, I remember we said that after the exhibition, I would reflect on it and say, "Is there any meaning or significance to my work? Later, when we organized some friends to come over and share their stories, we encountered some problems in the middle, such as the need to find an interpreter. Some people would refuse, and then some people agreed to come. I think that for me, it is a project that has all kinds of problems when it relates to people, because of these mistakes, because of these uncertainties, I think the project slowly grows up by itself.

Gao Yuan: Let me ask a question to Ye Su first. At that time, Ye Su offered two alternative projects, one was his storytelling, and the other was his mural series. At that time, we even discussed a combination with one of the social spaces or kiosks in Caochangdi, but because of the difficulty in implementing this project, we abandoned it. Instead, we chose to exhibit a storytelling project. If you had implemented a mural project, how would you have set it up? Do you think it would have been more interesting to implement a mural project or a hand-painted storytelling project?

Ye Su: When talking about the mural project, there was a negotiation process. On the surface, it may be more in line with our theme, but the implementation is really difficult. Many of our projects in this exhibition are reversed between two points, on the one hand, towards a more social one, a feeling that you are standing with others, for example, the works of Guan Nan and Li Bo, I think there is a concept of "we" in these two works,"we We" is a plural. Whether it is our society or our future, what kind of thinking should be formed, or what kind of reasonable connection or depth art can form in this kind of society. I think that several other artists, I think from the works of the group of exhibitors, maybe giving feedback to the society in a different way in a roundabout way. They may not necessarily have the concept of "we" or need to do this through connection, so when we discussed the proposal, I relatively think that when something is already formed and it grows out of itself, I will choose such a proposal. Like the mural, I really made a plan later, of course, it may not be for Caochangdi, but for a street near my house, that is to say, when I have a personal feeling for that thing, I think I will have more resonance when I put myself into it.

Zhao Bang: Yeah I have a question for Ye Su, and we talked about this before we looked at your project, and that is your map is a flip of the world map, a flip of the sea and land. My question is about the structure of your idea; I want to ask about the relationship between your new utopian map of the world with the sea and the stories you collected and the stories you drew, I feel like there is a jump between the three of them. I want to know how the three of them are glued together in your conception, how they become a whole? What is their relationship to each other?

Ye Su: There are some different threads in there, but they don't necessarily go together. The concept of a map, for example, is a very simple thing, and it would be very thin if it were just a map. I think what I mean by thin is not that it is not valid, because in this era of images, images have more layers or more possibilities to carry various things, whether it is a direct image or a picture, and of course painting may be an independent system. So the map itself I can only take it as a background, the conversation itself let's say I invite people to tell stories, let's say if we share a story through the Tencent conference, I also think we should all gain, and I don't necessarily have to draw it for everyone. Let's say we have a 7 personal story to share, not necessarily to draw it out, I am trying to find a way to put it together. I think once the story is told, it has some personal color, it cannot be a real thing, it can be a bit literary, I think literature is related to imagination, so put it on a utopian map, and combine it in this way, I am not sure this is a very suitable way. When the exhibition was on display, the small paintings were originally intended to be listed in a separate place, not on the map, but later it was thought that it might be better to add a layer, which was a very temporary arrangement. It might be better to make it a kind of 3D engine, a 3D engine open on the network, so that people can upload their stories and after a while he will receive an electronic postcard source, which might be better.

Zhao Bang: Is the meta-universe? 

Ye Su: Yes, slightly more innocent.

Liu Yaohua: I'll add a little more. After playing with the explanation just now, I was able to understand that he wanted to use the text of Duchamp's phrase, maybe our journey is not quite the same, so I would feel that the phrase was a bit chicken soup at first. But I also feel that I don't quite understand the language and grammatical relationship inside the work. You can't go to Thailand, but you send a postcard from Thailand to the owner of a Thai B&B, and then ask him to take a picture of yourself in China. The conventional understanding is that you should ask the hotel owner to send you a local postcard, which would be a kind of psychological compensation, or whatever. And you are the reverse, the relationship here, I do not quite understand, and you also said that if it is which one postcard did not arrive, maybe this sentence becomes incomplete. Let's imagine if one or several postcards are not delivered, when the sentence is incomplete, what kind of difference will it make to the result of the work. In fact, I have known your works for a long time, and I like many of them, including your early human revolving door, which I have also posted in "One Work", but this work is a little bit difficult for me to understand.

Shi Wanwan: This may be I did not say clearly, not sent to the Thai boss, I paid for the room, the bed is mine, the house is also mine. I just asked him to receive it on my behalf, and then just take a picture of it for me. So actually its starting point or grammatical structure is that sending to a place where I can't go is sending to myself, if there was no epidemic, I would have gone and I would have stayed there for so many days.

Liu Yaohua: And what was the final destination of the postcard? Did the owner handle it on his own after the shoot?

Shi Wanwan: Yes, I gave it to him, so let's put it there. So what's in the exhibit is a photocopy of the postcard.

Li Bo: It seems that which artist has done a work that is sending something to himself. His physical body is here, and he sends something to the place where he is not.

I would like to answer Yaohua's second question. I don't know if this is a good result or a bad result. It is entirely possible that this work was lost in the mail because the epidemic had just occurred at the time I sent it. The post office told me that it was questionable whether it would arrive, how long it would take, whether it would be lost, and whether the order would be disrupted. So this situation is likely to occur, but I think China Post is okay, they have helped me to send it, and the fee is very cheap.

Liu Yaohua: What if there is a problem?

Shi Wanwan: appear on it, if there is a problem, the order is disrupted wrong, a few sheets are missing, so this can only be so, it is also good. In fact, I think as I said, in this I finished this thing is OK, what is the result I can not control, but whether or not I can control, he means that, anyway, the meaning of everyone can feel, I can also feel, regret is also not controllable.

Zhao Bang: In line with the answer to Yaohua's question, I would like to ask you artists about this kind of project-based works, for example, asYaohua said, it is possible that the postcards he sent could not be received by the boss as much as they should be due to the epidemic, and so on, and finally the postcards were collected for him as a whole sentence. For example, Liu Yaohua said that you should give me a piece of trash to be chosen by yourself, including Ye Su asking others to give him a story, which is actually done by the artist by others. I would like to ask whether you yourselves have some expectations of his final appearance, such as playing with the fact that you are more expected to send this whole sentence, just about every letter as it is, and then finally present this complete sentence, or is it possible that there are some twists and turns in the middle, and it has some deficiencies, some missing. But in the end it still forms that one sentence, even a more playful one, with a poetic or a sense of crippling failure. And behind that sense of crippling failure, it definitely makes people think more about the epidemic and causes problems for everyone to connect with each other. What I want to ask you is whether you have an expectation of the final outcome of your project after it has been initiated and completed by others, or whether you have an expectation of what you would like it to be, or whether you are completely indifferent to what it is. I would like to hear what you think about it.

Shi Wanwan: I'll say it first, I definitely hope that the implementation process do not go wrong, can be to the best. Of course, if in case of unreliable, lost how to do? This result I think I can also accept. This is the first. Second, frankly speaking, out of control itself is not a problem, I think doing so many years, even if the final loss of how? Right? For example, like Li Bo's work, I don't think it matters whether there is a root of the problem or not, that is to say, he has presented the accounting, I feel this, I think it is OK. This is what we can feel its charm, and I think this is also the case with Yaohua's works. In fact, there is a tension between the uncontrollable and the uncontrollable, and it is the tension that makes such works interesting.

Li Bo: I actually had expectations, but like Yaohua said, this is a starting point, and I think so too. At the midway point of the exhibition, I already started to withdraw, I wanted to stop the exhibition, I thought the time was not ripe. But then I felt sorry for the partners who participated in the exhibition, this exhibition is very important, for their efforts to be presented, stepping out this step is very important, stepping out this step will also promote the follow-up work, at least to think about how to present more satisfactory in the future. I think the real expectations have not yet been reached, I have expectations for these figures, now the volume is not enough, to a certain volume, it will be more interesting, this power is not what I can accomplish, I have to find ways to promote it to complete, because not everyone is willing to count. Many people do not want to calculate, what is the value of calculating this? What's the point? Not everyone who participates in the calculation is fully aware of its true value and meaning, but it is important that he has a sense of the matter itself. This process will generate a lot of variables, and this variable can bring more imagination, including when this data eventually becomes relatively large big data, it will bring more imagination. Therefore, I am still looking forward to the follow-up work of the project.

Shi Wanwan: This work is never ending, after each exhibition there is the possibility of the next one, which is actually quite fun.

Liu Yaohua: Yes, it is interlinked, and will constantly connect new contexts and new issues out. I think this exhibition is very good, and it is important to announce this starting point, which may be a positive catalyst for the later development.

Zhao Bang: Duchamp's phrase was selected by Wanwan in his work, Duchamp's particularly famous work of large glass was broken during the transportation process of an exhibition, and a lot of lines were created on it, and then the curator who transported it panicked and said this is finished, this work is broken. But then Duchamp said it was particularly good, much better than my initial very complete, very clean work itself, saying that there was a lot of serendipity added to it. In fact, what I want to ask is, when Duchamp's story becomes a legend, after it is extended, many artists even expect some accidents, some problems to arise, in fact, many artists, especially in similar work with some kind of project system, because of the addition of other subjects, expect some strings in this, or let some parts of this project, lose its control, change its The original face of the project. For example, if he comes to me and he wants a piece of trash, for example, if I fart to him and I say this is the trash I give you, I will wait to see how you present it, because you promise, you say a person gives you a piece of trash and you will keep and exhibit it.

Liu Yaohua: I'm going to respond to your question. In fact, before I did it, I had already put myself into the role of a participant and thought about a lot of bizarre responses. What I expected was that everyone would play up here and break out of the daily experience, even to deliberately make things difficult for me. But it didn't turn out the way I thought it would. If you come and say you're going to give me a fart, I'm too happy, then I'll follow you, and when you say you're going to release it to release it, I'll take a jar and snap it on your asshole, and I'll take it ah, and I'll seal it up after I catch it. It was so much fun. I had many kinds of preconceptions beforehand, of course, also set myself a most basic principle, that is, no matter what anyone gives me, I have to find a way to save it, you came to say that yourself are garbage, ah, I can raise you, at that time I have opened up a huge world in my head, but the actual results are more conservative.

Li Bo: It's kind of tricky for you to have someone feel like they're trash.

Liu Yaohua: I don't think it's tricky, rather I'm eager to face that kind of problem. ...... Because Li Bo just talked about the similarity in creative methods, I would like to add that I only learned about it later. According to the information, this work was made in 2004. At that time, he used the exhibition as an opportunity. It seems that he called his friends at the time of the opening of the exhibition and said, "Bring all your unused things at home to the exhibition hall, and then many of his friends brought a lot of unused things to the exhibition hall. When I found out about Geng Jianyi's work, I thought there was a great similarity with his approach, and I was thinking about how it was the same and how it was different. In fact, if Mr. Geng Jianyi were still alive, I would like to discuss it with him. I think his approach still takes everyday "things" as objects, and he is not focusing on concepts, while I am focusing on the correspondence between abstract concepts and people's subjective cognitive level, and he directly asks his friends to take out the useless things at home, which is different from my giving people a "garbage" concept. This is not the same as me giving people a concept of "junk". I am used to looking at myself and my works from a distance. Before this work by Geng Jianyi, after I collected the garbage, my work also reminded me of Mr. Song Dong's "Use everything to the fullest", because Mr. Song Dong's work is related to his mother, first of all from the family, and all the objects he shows are household items, with traces of different ages. He shows all the household items, with traces of different eras, so it leads to the transformation of emotions and relationships between people and things caused by the huge economic leap in China, and people's reflections on the current consumerism and so on. It seems to be a bunch of things laid out there, but I am completely different from Mr. Song Dong's, and I have some similarities with Mr. Geng Jianyi.

Gao Yuan: You're more brilliant at this.

Liu Yaohua: You don't tease me. I am not trying to compare who is superior, I am trying to take this issue seriously. We often talk about copying, crashing, etc. Seriously, art may be absolutely original, there are always people who will think together. In addition to thinking, art also has to do, thinking and doing are equally important, sometimes thinking is more similar, but doing involves countless choices, there is language and grammar, there will be countless differentiation, which is also a very important part of reflecting an artist. So I don't care who looks like who, but the comparative study of these cases is quite interesting, of course, the kind of malicious copying for fame and profit is not included.

Zhao Bang: In fact, regarding the similarity of the works, or the closeness to other artists, this raises another question, if you can't think or work in the same way as other artists, or even choose certain materials, for example, people love to use words like "plagiarism" or "crashing". "If you want to completely avoid such things, do you need to see all the works of all the other artists in the world before you can start working as a contemporary artist today?

Gao Yuan: In fact, it is not impossible to put together a group exhibition of such clashing works or works that are somewhat similar.

Liu Yaohua: Too many artists are afraid of doing the same as others, and then too many artists are afraid of doing something different from others. I think the most important thing in art is to have a real relationship with yourself, and you can't fake it. If an artist thinks about making something different from everyone else every day, it's too much of a burden, it's like a prison.

I have also thought about this question, that is, some of my works may be close to or similar to others' methods, but certainly this is not particularly important, and there is no one who copies anyone. The greatest value of the modernist works, such as Calder's moving sculptures or Picasso's invention of a three-dimensional painting method, is that they contributed a form. I invented this form, I discovered this material, so this is very important, almost the core of their creation. So in this way, it is not possible to be similar, and it is meaningless for me to paint again when others have used that method because its own value is the formal contribution. In fact, the most important value of contemporary art is that each art provides a new perspective on the world. In other words, each person's perspective of observation and viewing is much more important than creating a formal aesthetic. So in this way, each of us has our own starting point. For example, Yaohua's experience is obviously different from that of Geng Jianyi, and the questions he asks are also different, so the final direction of this work is also different, right? It's even different from Song Dong. Therefore, in contemporary art, unless there is intentional malicious plagiarism, generally speaking, I don't think this is a particularly important topic.

Li Bo: I don't want to focus on similarity, there is no need to pay too much attention to such things as "crashing". If you create art from your own perspective and in your own way, you will definitely be close to others. We are all human beings, and human beings have commonalities. But even so, there are differences, because the problems you face are different from the problems he faces. Even if they end up presenting a similar form, they should not be mixed up.

Zhao Bang: Just like what Wanwan said earlier, during the modernist period, everyone tended to make a contribution to the style, to the pattern, to the composition of the surface of the cloth, to the form. I think contemporary artists, today, especially everyone, in fact, these artists who use the project system to do art in a programmatic way, are actually more of a purely conceptual or more conceptual way to work; I think it is more difficult to define a style. And I think more often than not, for a conceptual artist, his style actually comes from the fact that, as you said earlier, every time you create is a test and a shot at reality, and all you need is not a style of your work, how he fiddles with it in the showroom, what materials he uses to form his style, but rather, you are tired of interacting with the real reality over and over again. How you provoke it, how you act on it.

Li Bo: It's hard to go and mobilize others and to deal with people in a project. To create a piece of work independently, you just need to address one person's thoughts. When you are dealing with someone who really thinks differently from you, you need to have a real communication with them, and the work is definitely more difficult and intense than the independent way. This way makes me rethink "relationship", negotiation is to deal with relationship. In this exhibition, although everyone's direction is not the same, and everyone's appearance is different, it may not be a new method, but I think it can bring out more prominent issues and more orientations. In this exhibition, I think that although there are many unsatisfactory points or some shortcomings, it has become a new starting point, which is a very rewarding process.

Gao Yuan: Just now, Li Bo's speech is actually equivalent to a summary of our exhibition project.

Zhao Bang: The defense's closing arguments.

Gao Yuan: In fact, what Li Bo said just now is exactly what I want to say, that is, the faces of the artists in the exhibition are all different, which is actually one of the best results. If there are two artists presenting similar forms or concepts, there is no point, I hope each project initiator's face is completely different, especially diverse. The number of participants in the project is also diverse. The number of participants in Wanwan's work is only one person, while Liu Yaohua's is a project for 300 people. Moreover, the number of participants in Ye Su's work is variable, and it is still being generated as the collection increases, which is a very good result. One could say that this is a norm in contemporary art, especially conceptual art-making, where an artist initiates or plans a project and invites people to participate in a specific period of time. I am not trying to consider this way of working as an art form; it is just a way of creation chosen by the artist to evade a certain exchange system or established art mechanism.

---

李波

李波，四川简阳人，重庆工作研究所成员，四川美术学院教师，硕士毕业于中央美术学院，生活、工作于北京和重庆。

李波的艺术活动着重研究“生活、艺术、行为”之间的关系，他从自己的生命经验出发，编织个体与集体话语关系的艺术行动，是他城市化进程中的心路历程和生存痕迹，也是个人价值与集体话语相互渗透的结果。

Li Bo was born in Jianyang city, Sichuan province，who now is  living and working in Beijing and Chongqing, the member of Chongqing Work Research Institute, working in  Sichuan fine arts Institute. He graduated from the Central  Fine Art Institute, Obained master degree.

Li Bo's artistic activities focus on the relationship between "life, art and behavior". Starting from his own life experience, he weaves the artistic action of the relationship between individual and collective discourse, which is not only his mental process and survival trace in the process of urbanization, but also the result of the mutual penetration of personal value and collective discourse.

刘冠南

刘冠南，2014年硕士毕业于中央美术美院雕塑系，现于中央美术学院博士生在读。

刘冠南感兴趣于历史性的图像叙事生产，及其与身体的作用关系。他的工作起始于对广泛传播的叙事类知识的考察，并在考察中发现了图像叙事是如何介入社会规训活动，最终作用于我们的身体。近年来，他的工作聚焦于日常中社会关系的重新发现。

Liu Guannan, graduated from the Sculpture Department of the Central Academy of Fine Arts in 2014. He is currently a doctoral student at the Central Academy of Fine Arts.

Liu Guannan is interested in the historical production of pictorial narratives and their relationship to the Liu Guannan is interested in the production of historical image narratives and their relationship to the role of the body. His work begins with an examination of the widely disseminated narrative knowledge, and in doing so, he has discovered how pictorial narratives and how it intervenes in social disciplinary activities and ultimately acts on our bodies. In recent years, his work has focused on the everyday. In recent years, his work has focused on the rediscovery of social relations in the everyday. In recent years, his work has focused on the rediscovery of social relations in the everyday.

刘耀华

刘耀华，出生于山西霍州，经过五年小学、五年初中、五年高中、五年大学的学习，2008年毕业于长安大学建筑系，获建筑学学士学位。先后从事过建筑师、艺术家助手、杂志编辑和艺术项目策划及统筹的工作。他的作品涵盖多种媒介，主要倾向于艺术在观念维度的延展和发掘。此外，他还于2018年创办“一件作品”公众号，并自主发起和策划了一些艺术项目。

Liu Yaohua graduated from the Department of Architecture of Chang'an University with a bachelor's degree in architecture in 2008, following five years of primary school, five years of junior high school, five years of high school, and five years of undergraduate studies. 

His works cover a wide range of media, with a focus on the extension and discovery of the conceptual dimension of contemporary art.In addition, he founded the ONEWORK WeChat platform in 2018, dedicated to the independent promotion and dissemination of contemporary art, and has initiated and planned a series of art projects on his own.

石玩玩

石玩玩是一个特定场域创作的艺术家，毕业于中央美术学院雕塑系，获得艺术硕士学位。毕业于中国美术学院跨媒体艺术学院，获得艺术学博士学位。现任教于苏州大学艺术学院，工作生活于苏州。

Shi Wanwan is a conceptual artist based on the creation of a specific context. Graduated from the Sculpture Department of the Central Academy of Fine Arts with a master degree, He graduated from the School of Intermedia Art of China Academy of Art and received his PhD.He is currently teaching at School of Art of Soochow University.

耶苏

耶苏 (张帆) ，出生于中国浙江绍兴，作为艺术家和写作者居住生活在北京。他长期致力于基于梦境的小说《油瓶记》的写作，并将其中的故事情节作为重要的创作灵感来源。作品展出于OCAT西安馆、中间美术馆、泰康空间、歌德学院、当代唐人艺术中心、上海双年展等；评论写作则散见于专业媒体和艺术书籍。

Ye Su (Zhang Fan) ,born in Shaoxing, Zhejiang Province, China. AS an artist and writer, Ye Su lives and works in Beijing. He has been working on a dream record novel “Oil Bottle”, and some of the story scenes of the novel become very important inspiration for his art creation. His work was exhibited in OCAT Xi'an Museum, In Side out Museum, Taikang space, Goethe college, Tang Contemporary Art, Shanghai Biennale, etc; Comment writings are published in professional media and art books.

---

高远

高远，艺术史学者、策展人。中央美术学院人文学院艺术史博士，清华大学美术学院艺术学理论博士后，任教于北京工业大学艺术设计学院传媒与艺术理论系。在重要学术刊物发表学术论文和艺术评论50余篇，译著2部。2010年起，在国内外独立艺术机构、美术馆等主持策划40余场学术展览。

高远的艺术史研究和策展工作主要致力于以跨媒介视角对欧洲艺术史、当代艺术展览展示的考察和关照。曾赴佛罗伦萨哈佛大学意大利文艺复兴研究中心（Villa l Tatti，2014）及巴黎德国艺术史研究中心（DFK Paris，2017）及佛罗伦萨艺术史研究所（KHl，2018）访问研究。

Gao Yuan is an art history scholar and curator. He has a PhD in art history from the School of Humanities, Central Academy of Fine Arts, and a postdoctoral research fellow in art theory from the Academy of Fine Arts, Tsinghua University. He has published more than 50 academic papers and art reviews in important academic journals and two translations, and has curated more than 40 academic exhibitions in independent art institutions and art museums at China and abroad since 2010.

Gao Yuan's art historical research and curatorial work is mainly devoted to the examination and care of European art history and contemporary art exhibition display from a trans-media perspective. He has visited the Center for Italian Renaissance Studies at Harvard University in Florence (Villa l Tatti, 2014) and the German Art History Research Center in Paris (DFK Paris, 2017) and the Florence Art History Institute (KHl, 2018) for research.

---

特别鸣谢

A Special Acknowledgement to

---