看看看看​

Watch, Look, See&Read

2016

Fujifilm Instax 拍立得相紙、檔案書 

Fujifilm Instax Polaroid Paper, Archives 

看看看看​

Watch, Look, See&Read

2016

Fujifilm Instax 拍立得相紙、檔案書 

Fujifilm Instax Polaroid Paper, Archives 

攝影,並不是「攝」「影」,並不是將影像收納,而反而先是將眼睛帶到事物跟前。本作的動機,惟在於反省影像與人、甚至藝術與人應有面貌,以寓居台南十年來積累對日常鄉土之情感為契機,對自己好好地審視,並嘗試對本時代的影像問題做一回應。

影像的兩面,一是純自身的、另一是對象性的,這是與所有藝術共同的。若回顧攝影術發明前之歷史,我們會驚訝地發覺,此偶然的技術對存在整體產生多重大的變化,一方面使影像自身那面轉化至世界性,一方面更使藝術性於存在中完全隱蔽,換言之,人史無前例地在生活中被世界滲透而似再無人的生活。現今,一般認為影像的力量在其表象性或虛擬性,從事實層面來說固然如此,但若從人的角度言,影像真實的力量實非「看」的擴增,而是將事物帶至眼前、或是將自身帶到事物前之一種「臨」「近」之親而已,非能單純旁觀的。我的意思是,並非對攝影及之後圖像技術所標示的種種負面現象無視,而更在指出:攝影作為創作的技術來說是人性的,不是非得立於觀念性或表現性上。故,能不能純然正面地肯定影像、進而肯定當代人存在真實?我想我們時代的影像問題全繫於此。

本作組成有拍立得照片、檔案書,及一張代表著拍攝方式的照片,而本作別於一般的拍攝方式是其中最為要緊的:共約莫二三天,從早到晚,我帶著相機漫遊在台南市中,若遇到了監視器,廟街旁、天橋上、高塔頂、圍牆邊⋯⋯便架起梯子,以相機抵住監視器的鏡頭,向著它原本朝向處——人們的生活——按下快門。事後,拍立得立即吐出的照片即成為展示的第一部分,而被我“遮擋“過的監視器則被另當作主題彙集成一檔案書而為第二部分,第三部分則是以獨立的方式被展示。

之所以命名為《看看看看》——非同語反覆、強迫症地強調「看」,我們可從作品英文名得到佐證——是為了凸顯看之豐富、注意力之自由,這精神體現在作品上即為種種互相遊戲的看,既非嬉鬧亦非純思辨地超然,其展示的也只是作為人的攝影並關注於人的生活,亦是我對影像誠懇的關注與回應而已。我的拍攝之平凡性相對於監視器拍攝之整體性,並不因其片面而顯其卑微,而是恰恰因此而重獲人看之活力與想像力,其中,日常及日常的影像亦再非無意義之紀錄,反而被視為影像之為影像之基礎,此亦看的根本意義。

Photography is not about “photography” or “shadowing”, it is not about storing images, but first bringing the eyes to the things. The motive of this work is to reflect on the image and people, and even art and people. Taking the opportunity of living in Tainan for ten years to accumulate feelings about the daily countryside, I have a good look at myself and try to respond to the image problems of this era. .

The two sides of the image, one is purely self and the other is objectivity, is common to all art. If we look back on the history before the invention of photography, we will be surprised to find how much this accidental technology has changed the whole of existence. , In other words, people are infiltrated by the world like no one else in their lives without precedent in history. Today, it is generally believed that the power of images lies in their representational or virtuality, and this is true from a factual level, but from a human perspective, the real power of images is not the augmentation of “seeing”, but the bringing of things to the It is just a kind of “near” or “near” relative who brings oneself to the front of things in front of the eyes, and cannot be simply watched. What I mean is that I am not ignoring the various negative phenomena marked by photography and subsequent image technology, but I am pointing out that photography, as a creative technology, is human, not necessarily based on concept or expression. Therefore, can it be possible to positively affirm images, and then affirm the existence of reality in contemporary people? I think the problem of images in our time is all related to this.

This work consists of a Polaroid photo, an archive book, and a photo that represents the way of shooting. The most important thing is that this work is different from the usual way of shooting: a total of about two or three days. Roaming in Tainan City with the camera, if you come across a monitor, beside Temple Street, on the overpass, on the top of the tower, beside the fence…then set up a ladder, put the camera against the lens of the monitor, and head towards where it was originally facing— People’s lives – press the shutter. Afterwards, the photos immediately spit out by the Polaroid became the first part of the exhibition, and the monitors that I “blocked” were regarded as the subject and collected into an archive book as the second part, and the third part was an independent part. way is shown.

The reason why it is named “Look and Look”—it emphasizes “look” without repetition and obsessive-compulsive disorder, which we can get evidence from the English title of the work—is to highlight the richness of looking and the freedom of attention, which is a spiritual body. At present, the works are all kinds of playing with each other. They are neither playful nor purely speculative and detached. What they show is only photography as a human being and focusing on human life. It is also my sincere concern and response to the image. Compared with the integrity of monitor photography, the ordinaryness of my photography is not humble because of its one-sidedness, but it is precisely because of this that it regains the vitality and imagination of people. Among them, the everyday and everyday images are no longer absent. The record of meaning, on the contrary, is regarded as the basis of the image as the image, which is also the fundamental meaning of seeing.