你對ThaiTai理解了多少？

和所有故事的起點一般，在酒酣耳熱的迷幻中，懵懵然答應了一段也許清醒時絕對不會做的決定；一群藝術家，不管是因為遠在異地產生沒來由的勇氣，還是思鄉情懷作祟，決定在什麼條件都沒有的情況下，靠著堅信藝術的力量，展開一次文化交流之旅。台灣藝術家劉和讓、邱昭財與打開－當代藝術工作站的許家維在紐約駐村期間認識了泰國藝術家夫妻檔jiandyin，也許不見得是上面描述的情景，但他們著實實現了一段藝術家團體獨自完成的藝術交流。跨時兩年，從發想、籌備、執行到完成，推出《理解的尺度》兩階段展覽，由2012年11月的曼谷到2013年12月的台北。 

如何理解一檔展覽，可能開始於其展覽論述，策展人希望討論的議題，或是透過展出藝術家的作品，延伸出連結自己生命經驗的想像。然而《理解的尺度》一展打破了以往我們熟悉的閱讀模式，將這個「理解」的範圍拉得很廣、扭轉我們對地方、跨地交流的認知。透過展覽我們看到藝術家駐地的過程及產生出的碰撞與矛盾，連結起台灣與泰國－兩個在國家拼音及文化邊緣下的混淆軌跡。

 2012年11月，在曼谷當代藝術中心（Bangkok Art & Culture Centre, BACC）的第一階段展覽，我們看到台灣藝術家創作語彙的成熟及自信，如何透過自身熟悉的方式介入異地脈絡，卻又小心避開容易落入的外來文化移植。范曉嵐在進駐曼谷的期間，訪談了工作站所在的中國城裡從事性交易工作的女子，在特意打造的卡拉OK派對中，轉換了原本燈紅酒綠的世界，置身一個你我都曾經歷的平常派對；范曉嵐透過模糊的場景營造，凸顯了《Soi Nana》不是任何區域、語言、文化的專屬，而是全球共同皆可體現的一種底層聲音。周育正的《TEMCO》延續他一貫低溫的觀念中介角色，企劃邀請一間泰國當地油漆商進行為期一年的油漆贊助計劃，以jiandyin贈予的泰國傳統圖紋手提袋爲視覺形象，象徵整體計劃一開始的經濟、文化、勞工交流。許家維的《回莫村》以泰國清萊回莫村的自強孤兒院與其特殊區域歷史爲軸線，透過影像呈現一個編導式的敘事事件；而這段歷史的偶遇，在之後的一年，隨著許家維回到泰國繼續未完成的探照，軸線因此被延長，於理解上接續了下一階段的台泰展 。 

上述三種不同脈絡的創作是首階段台泰交流展的縮影，台灣藝術家爲這段關係的建立打下一個扎實的基礎。因此我們可以在2013年12月最後階段的展覽中，看到這些關係發展的影子；敘事的延長，脈絡化了這段緊密的關係。在URS21中山創意基地的空間裡，展覽分成三個區塊，以階段過程表現兩地藝術家的合作和駐地研究後的想像。在「ThaiTai是場偶遇嗎？」我們看到台灣藝術家葉偉立與泰國兄弟藝術家Suwicha & Kritsada Dussadeewanich的合作。2012年葉偉立帶著一張損壞的椅子去到泰國，請當地木工設計師著手進行修復，在沒有任何指示和設計需求下，泰國設計師透過自己的想像重新賦予這張椅子不同的生命。帶著當時的記錄文件回來，我們在展場看到一個物件所串起的勞動經驗，而這份異地營造的意外重生，延續了Dussadeewanich兄弟的想像。葉偉立於住家附近的海邊，撿拾了許多廢棄的木料，Dussadeewnich以此為靈感，將木料的原始理解轉化成中國字的「橋」，製作一個木造模型，隨後將其焚毀。木造的「橋」字模型與椅子相同，在遺棄／消失及重建之間，串聯起一段跨越文化、語言、空間的合作關係。 

葉偉立與泰國兄弟藝術家的合作可以說是整個展覽脈絡的雛型，藝術家帶著各自的想像來到陌生城市，透過不同相交、方法，建構起自身對此次合作的理解尺度。Sakarin Krue-on 的《失譯的紀錄》共有五項元素，這些看似不相干的組成，背後其實連接的是藝術家來台灣前最原始的想像。Sakarin曾在泰國北部吃過一種透過發酵製成的豆腐，這是只在泰北才會看到的食物，當時國民政府撤退到泰緬邊界，生活飲食的文化隨著定居而傳承了下來，這是Sakarin對台灣最起始的微薄印象。帶著這樣的記憶來台，Sakarin拋開藝術家和老師的身份（按：Sakarin爲泰國藝術大學美術學院副院長），在不尋求翻譯的協助下，讓語言成為理解的隔閡，透過刻意拉開的距離，學習豆腐製作、牡丹繪製，讓自己與想像的脈絡建立起私密的關係，在理解的尺度上進行一場純粹的洗滌並連接其自身與在台留學的泰國學生經驗上的交集。

 這是展覽第三部分「ThaiTai如何被想像？」所提出的問題，Sakarin以他帶來的理解，自我咀嚼式地做出回應。因此，相較於Preeyachanok Ketsuwan《從這山到那山》錐心式的挖掘，似乎也反應出泰國藝術家在面對自身位置投射於異地文化時，介入的旋轉軸心及繞旋力道的不同。Ketsuwan來自泰國的少數民族，在父權爲大的家庭環境下，她透過藝術為自己尋找身份的認同及出口。此次來台，她認識了來自台東部落的Kaleskes，相同的生活背景讓兩人很快透過藝術找到了理解的平台。展場上展示著兩地女紅的織布，圖騰的針黹繡著彼此無言的聯繫。而這種情感上的不可見，在開幕當天Ketsuwan與 Kaleskes的合作中讓人見識到藝術無言的力量是如何令人動容。Kaleskes的歌聲讓當天冰冷的空氣溫暖了下來，Ketsuwan邀請合作對象剪下自己的頭髮作為紀念的行為，則完整了那些語言表達不了的激動。 

《理解的尺度》是一檔會被真實觸動的展覽，它不見得有高深的論述或令人反思的議題，但每件作品都感受得到一種溫度和背後你能理解的犧牲。徐建宇在2012年的展覽論述中提道；「一種文化不應該僅僅被視為某種經濟上戰略意義的符號，或是用以填補現代性的普世理論的空缺。作為當代藝術的實踐者與觀察者，我們應該試著重新面對以社群交往而不是以地方性符號爲基礎的文化圖像...我們總習於理解與歸納，而不是身處其中。」如果我們從另一個角度來看《理解的尺度》，它背後象徵和集合的力量似乎比展覽本身的完整性更為強烈，這似乎可以回應徐建宇所謂的「身處其中」。然而從這「其中」細看當藝術家團體並非以一個共同的創作理念出發時，藝術家的身份位置是會退居到展覽之後還是之前？當團體大於個人時，這個不小數目的組成所提出的宣言是否還會是共同意識？身處其中，是為了就地實驗那些話外音的不找邊際，打開當代努力實驗一個藝術家團體的極限，從成員組織到執行策略，他們試圖顛覆所有藝術生態功能分配的想像，回到起點，讓藝術家來發聲。然而這過程的辛苦、矛盾與誤解，似乎就只待自己才能理解了。 

打開－當代藝術工作站確實打開了一條險路，從結束城中區的空間，進駐曼谷一年，帶出兩階段頗具規模的展覽，雖然最後還是回到台北落腳，拿下政府補助的空間，但旅程結束了嗎？漂泊，浪漫的是那個意念，無根無所的游擊生活，可能只是我們這些沒有深入其中的旁觀者用來敲邊鼓的喧鬧。當然，我們仍期待著下一次出走的機會，不僅是打開當代，而是更多開啓對話、合作的流浪之歌。想起林其蔚在曼谷時曾跟我說的：「重點不是我們在哪裡？而是該往哪裡走？」

TIME, PLACE, MEMORY: A LOOK AT HSU CHIA-WEI’S MULTI-NARRATIVE LANGUAGE

Remembrance restores possibility to the past, making what happened incomplete and completing what never was. Giorgio Agamben 

Hsu Chia-Wei’s films are often characterized by “ low temperature,” or a calm treatment of composition and objects. The viewer quietly listens to their narrations, which unfold with a slow and patient attitude. This kind of contended maturity is unusual for an artist only 30 years of age. Hsu is among a young generation of Taiwanese artists who have been described as inhabiting a political space without political potential — their expressions could only be channeled through the fetishization of objects and the past. According to this point of view, beginning in the late 1990s, the cultural scene in Taiwan moved toward a state of isolated monologue, which in contemporary art has translated into a sate of fatigue, leading to “Art of Frustration.” Hsu Chia-Wei considers the above-mentioned view too narrow. The absence of artworks’ engagement with political history does not mean that artists are unable to translate their desires into action. On the contrary, young artists have been effectively transforming the way memory and history is represented today. 

WHEN HISTORY CANNOT BE RE-PRESENTED 

THE STORY OF Hoping Island (2008) can be seen as Hsu Chia-Wei’s response to the Art of Frustration. The film is shot at a boat factory on Keelung’s Hoping Island. the island formerly served as Japan’s southern base for military shipbuilding. After the war, the ship factory also played a significant role in Taiwan’s economic development. By surviving two political eras, the factory contains multiple histories, depending on the narrator’s national identification. In The Story of Hoping Island, Hsu Chia-Wei employed several different elements — the real ship factory, dialogue with his grandmother, electronic music, and floral patterns — to create a highly complex narrative reading. With this deliberately designed approach, Hsu hopes that the audience can wander through the real ( the historical factory site), memory (the dialogue with his grandmother), and an overall dream-like presentation. Narrative films have long explored the meaning of narration, the ways of narrating, and its cultural function. The Story of Hoping Island uses a chaotic, multi-layered way of storytelling to blur the distinction between dream and daily life, a separation that the medium of film innately creates. 

Confronted with a history that cannot actually be re-presented, Hsu Chia-Wei creates and alternative narrative method to address the distance between the past and present, thus creating a new reality of his own. He considers this process an action, and furthermore, an action that defeats issues of re-presenting. To re-represent requires a departure from reality. Hsu uses the narrative function of film itself, as well as the off-screen presence of real people, places, and things, to draw out the contours of the fictional narrative of the film and to reveal the structure of the narrative itself. In Hsu’s latest work Marshal Tie Jia (2012-2013), the concept of the off-screen is again considered to create a structure that seems real and illusory at the same time. 

In Marshal Tie Jia, a dialogue between man and god initiates the artists’ quest for cultural memory, setting up the relationship between the narrative and production of myth and film. In 2010, Hsu encountered a small island called Turtle Island, not far from Beigan Village in the Matsu Islands. the contour and size fo this island gives it a fart-tale like aura. Hsu immediately chose Turtle Island as the filming location for his writing and research project about island memory. Prior to the shoot, the artist was told that he must gain the permission of the island owner Frog God, locally known as Marshal Tie Jia (‘ Ironclad Marshal”). The elaborate rituals and quantity of research led the artist to understand the very different historical fates of Mastu and Taiwan, though both now belong to the same authority. Matsu is located across the Taiwan Strait from Fujian. When Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuominmntang army moved to Taiwan, Turtle Island became an important strategic point between China and Taiwan. Over time, its military significance faded, the fortifications were abandoned, and Marshal Tie Jia regained authority of Turtle Island. It is said that the Frog King’s Temple idd not originate on Turtle Island. It was initially founded on China’s Wuyi Mountain, but moved to the Matsu Islands after its home temple was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution. 

Hsu Chia-Wei's Marshal Tie Jia debuted at the 2012 Taipei Biennial. For its presentation, Hsu re-created the original Frog God Temple, projected on a green screen erected onto the actual island. The frame slowly zooms out to reveal the borders of the green screen and the island’s contours. This deliberate panning transforms the filming process into an act or performance. In front of the green screen, an old man sings Marshal Tie Jia’s favorite song. During exhibition, this film was pretend adjacent to a full-scale replica of the Frog God Temple and a letter correspondence between the artist and the Marshal. 

DECONSTRUCTING AND REASSEMBLING NARRATIVE 

AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, Hsu Chia-Wei has consistently employed the use of multiple narratives in his work. Through a multi-layered installation setup, he seeks to reveal the production process of film itself, while at the same time actively engaging the work with the exhibition space. What the viewer sees presented is not only a group of related sculptures, texts, and images, but a designed atmosphere as a new form of representation. Hsu describes this process as continuously deconstructing and reassembling narrative at the border of reality and fiction, allowing both sides to blur into each other. 

This approach is seen in Hsu Chia-Wei’s latest work Huai Mo Village (2012-2013). The work tells the story of an orphanage in Huai Mo Village, Chiang Rai, Thailand. In 1949, when the kuomintang retreated to Taiwan, it stationed a unit of soldiers at Chiang Rai’s Mae Salong, located in the Golden Triangle at the border of Thailand and Myanmar. They were positioned in preparation to fight the Mainland. Due to international circumstances and the disagreement between China’s Communist Party and Kuomintang, the unit was finally forced to separate from the Republic of China, essentially becoming a group of men without national identity. As the Golden Triangle evolved into a refugee area, the abandoned soldiers won their residential rights by aiding the Thailand government in its was against Myanmar. They also illegally grew poppy flowers and transported drugs for living. 

In an exhibition in Bangkok, the artist chose to present two films shot during the project’s research stages. The first tim consists of three scenes that the artist had accidentally filmed with his cellphone during his first visit to Huai Mo Village. the second film is a planned scene of a priest telling the story of his life before a group of children. A strong beam of light is directed on the priest’s face, while the lens slowly zooms out to reveal the professional arrangement of filming lights, cameras, tripod, and tracks, awakening the viewer from the priest’s story of the past and into the reality of the film set. 

History is an accumulation of individuals and events. Historical contexts are created through a mixture of time, identification, imagination, and memory. Hsu Chia-Wei considers his creative process an act of challenging the construction of history as a context for space and time. The arousal of the viewer’s own fundamental memories completes this combination; an awareness of the present, past and what is currently becoming the past is provoked. The future will soon become the present and subsequently the past. 

Godard once said the one can do anything apart from the history of what one does. History cannot be reproduced lit can only be reviewed. Although Hsu Chia-Wei does not maintain that his work transforms historical events into images, the way different generations understand reality produces historical gaps. As it is impossible to fill in nonexistent memory, through the action of filming, Hsu seeks to inspire dialogue and produce new events; to challenge the process of image production; and to repeatedly excavate stories and extend their potential.

The debut of Marshal Tie Jia at the 2012 Taipei Biennial was a prelude to the second exhibition of the same work at the Venice Biennale in 2013. In between the two presentations, Hsu visited the birthplace of Marshal Tie Jia on Wuyi Mountain, Jiangxi, to further his investigate the myth’s origins. Similarly, Huai Mo Village was also pretend in two stages. After the projects debut in Bangkok, Hsu revisited Huai Mo Village and studied the arts and crafts of the local young people, using a quilting technique he learned to re-create an old photo of the Kuomintang intelligence officers taken in the village in 1973. In the image, an old soldier stands in front of a house, of which Hsu creates a full-scale replica. When Hua Mo Village was exhibited in Shanghai this September, the presentation consisted of the reproduced building, the quilted photo, and the film of the priest. 

If art is an imagination of the relationships between the people, politics, and social power, then in the process of art making the artist must face his own political position in relation to the narrated object. Hsu chia-Wei’s film are often take people as their subjects, the interaction between the characters inspiring new events as the films proceed. Through multiple narratives, Hsu tries to lay out an organized system of material which includes the context and origin of the event and the stories told by the subjects themselves. The presentation of Marshal Tie Jia involves film, a novel based on a series of dialogues, a map of Jiangxi and the Matsu Islands, and letter of correspondence between the artist and the Frog God. Through this arraignment, Hsu attempts an equal relationship between the multiple narratives. At the same time, these separated layers disrupt the flow of narration, as the different forms and mediums communicate different perspectives. Such diversity augments the works’ dynamics, yet it also runs the danger of over-complexity. Does the artist’s attempt to blur or accentuate content by employing multiple tracks of narration aid the completeness of the work? these questions are worth keeping in mind in our future observation of Hsu’s artistic production. 

Only just having gotten started at 3- years old, Hsu Chia-Wei’s practice is unusually vigilant the genuine. It is a response to the present reality, and to the gaps in history. In the future, the story of Huai Mo Village will continue to be written, and the myth of Marshal Tie Jia further brought to light. As Herta Muller once said. ‘ as long as you’re moving, you haven’t arrived. As long as you haven’t arrived, you don’t have to work. Riding… gives you time to recover.” With time, Hsu- Chia Wei’s actions will begin to reveal their effects. His desire is not to avoid working, but simply to keep moving on, and to know what he has done.

[this article is published in LEAP24 http://leapleapleap.com/issues/leap-24/ ]

^[1] Lin Hong-John, “Speaking of Art of Frustration in Taiwan,” Abstract: Look At This Symptom, ARTCO, March 2007, p. 125

Ed. Note: This young generation of artists has not participated any major political events, nor did they experience Taiwan’s martial law period. The artworks they produce lack a political dimension, mostly lingering in a self-absorbed state of monologue. According to Lin, their feishization of obhects and the past constitutes the imagined political space of these artists.

^[2] See “ Esther Lu in Conversation with Hsu Chia-Wei,” The 55^th Venice Biennale ‘ This is Not a Taiwan Pavilion’ catalogue

^[3] Ibid

^[4] Herta Muller, The Hunger Angel, 2009

時間、地域、記憶 ──看許家維的多重敘事語言

「雖然真相已經不在，記憶卻重現了過往的可能性」－Giorgio Agamben 

觀看許家維的作品常會感覺一種緩慢不急躁的態度，透過低溫的影像和物件似乎要觀眾靜靜地傾聽他欲敘述的故事；這種內斂的老成很難想像今年的他才剛滿30歲。台灣年輕一代的藝術家，曾被認為作品中存在的政治性空間，呈現出藝術家在政治缺席下，藉由一種戀物、戀屍癖來達成其想望方式。[1]也就是說，當時的批評認為90年代末開始台灣文化現象那種追求自我卻又喃喃自語的狀態，在藝術創作中轉化成了一種困頓於現狀的狀態，而發展出所謂的「頓挫藝術」（Art of Frustration）。[2]許家維身為此世代的年輕藝術家一員，認為此論點過於狹隘的一分為二，年輕一輩在政治歷史的缺席並不代表「所欲無可為之」，反而是對再現歷史和記憶的方式轉變。


 當歷史無法再現

《和平島故事》（2008）可以說是許家維對「頓挫藝術」的一個回應。作品拍攝地點位於基隆和平島的造船廠，這裡在日據時代是日本政府國境內最南端的軍事造船基地，主要支持日本政府的南進政策；而後台灣光復，造船廠在台灣經濟起飛上也扮演十分重要的位置；同一地點在兩段不同政治時空背景下，卻因國族的認同而有了不同的歷史故事。許家維採用幾項不同元素：真實造船廠場景、祖母的對白、電子音樂、雕花圖樣，各自與其系統下運作，利用多重敘事手法，和觀眾建立一個複雜的閱讀關係。這樣刻意營造的敘事方法在於希望觀眾遊走於真實（造船廠場景）、記憶（祖母的對白）和夢境中。敘述性的錄像長期以來所處理探討的是關於敘述故事的意義，故事被敘述的方式，以及敘述所提供的文化功能。因此，許家維透過一種更混亂、多層次的故事形式模糊了影像所建立的夢境和日常生活的關係。

面對無法再現的歷史時，許家維選擇創造不同的敘事方法來轉化這遙遠的距離，成為屬於自己的現實。他將這樣的過程視為一種行動，而行動中首先要打破的是「再現」的問題，因為再現脫離了現實，所以透過影像本身的敘事功能，藉由人物、地點和物件各自原本的身份與脈絡作為畫外場，勾勒出虛構敘事的輪廓，呈現敘事的結構本身。[3]於此，我們在《鐵甲元帥》（2012-2013）中看到畫外場的影像是如何展開敘事，創造一個似真又假的結構。 

《鐵甲元帥》始於一場與神界進行的交流對話，而後開啓尋找文化記憶的旅程，並帶出神話與影像的敘事和生產結構。2010年許家維意外在馬祖北竿鄉發現了相距不遠的一座離島－龜島，其輪廓、尺寸宛如神話小說般的不真實，許家維很快地決定選擇龜島作為島嶼記憶書寫研究計劃的拍攝地。在申請拍攝前，許家維被告知必須獲得龜島主人－青蛙神，當地人稱鐵甲元帥的許可。拍攝過程中經歷的複雜儀式及觸及的龐大資料讓許家維理解同屬一個政權的馬祖和台灣竟有著截然不同的歷史際遇。馬祖位於福建外海作為台灣海峽的前哨站，蔣介石遷台後，國民黨軍隊的進駐使得龜島成為重要的戰略據點。然而隨著時代變遷，戰略意義不再，原先建造的軍事碉堡遭廢棄，當時被迫搬遷的廟宇也再度拿回了所有權，龜島回到鐵甲元帥的管轄。據說，鐵甲元帥的廟宇原先並不在龜島上，最早的據點是在中國武夷山，文化大革命期間遭到焚毀，因而遷徙到馬祖北竿的芹壁村。

此件作品首次於2012年台北雙年展展出，許家維將島嶼轉化成舞台，利用電影後製的「綠幕」將虛擬的小廟重新放回島上，影像中我們隨著鏡頭緩慢的拉遠逐漸看見設置島上的綠幕，這樣刻意的手法讓過程成了一項表演／行動；影片中的老人吟唱著現已失傳的曲目，據說是鐵甲元帥閒暇之餘最愛聽的曲目。展場間，投影的一旁是等比例大小製作的小廟模型，對照著影片中的真實廟宇；另一旁牆上則掛著許家維寫的一封信，陳述他當時請示鐵甲元帥的意願以及之後元帥回應的文件。

拆解與重組敘事 

如同先前所提，多重敘事手法一直是許家維在呈現作品時採用的方式，從多層的裝置佈置中，他試圖揭露影像本身的製造過程，並在真實空間中積極運作。因此，我們看到不論是雕塑或文件等不同形式的物件交疊對應，影像在此不再是一連串聯結關係中的要素，而是一種情境調度下的結果。這種調度形成一種再現模式，並依據新的型態，重新調整其位置。許家維認為他不斷在嘗試拆解又同時重組敘事，模糊「再現」帶來的現實與虛構的界限，使彼此相互介入。

同樣的佈局我們也可以在《回莫村》（2012－2013）中看到。《回莫村》講述的是關於泰國清萊（Ching Rai）回莫村自強孤兒院的區域歷史。1949年國民黨政府於國共內戰後退守至台灣，同時撤留了一支正規部隊於泰緬邊境的金三角和清萊美斯樂（Mae Salong）佈守，以備將來反攻大陸。然而隨著國際情勢的轉變及國共分裂，這支「孤軍」被迫與中華民國政府劃清界限，他們失去了身份，三不管地帶則成了難民區；孤立無援的他們靠著幫助泰國政府打泰緬戰以獲得居留權，並私種罌粟花（鴉片）及運送毒品來換取微薄的生存空間。 

於泰國曼谷的展覽中，許家維展示了研究發展的兩階段作品，一為初次走訪回莫村時透過手機意外拍到的三段影像；另一則透過電影手法在孤兒院現場拍攝編導式的情境事件。影片中我們看到牧師坐在孩童前講述自己的故事，強烈的光源聚焦在牧師的臉上，隨著鏡頭拉遠，孤兒院的現場成了佈置專業的電影拍攝場景，腳架、燈光、軌道、攝影機的出現，頓時將觀眾從一段歷史故事的記憶拉至了真實世界的場景。 

歷史是一段段不同個體、事件的累積，脈絡建立的過程結合了時間、認同、想像和記憶，許家維認為創作的實踐過程便在挑戰這樣時空脈絡的建構，並重畫這些脈絡的所在位置。[4]這樣的時空配置，因為觀眾的底層記憶，完整了空間及時間經驗的組合；當下的時間感和過去或正成為過去的記憶被挑起，未來的當下即將成為現在，並在之後成為過去。

高達曾說：「一個人什麼事都能做到，除了他過去的歷史」。的確，歷史無法複製，但卻能一再的回看。儘管許家維認為他的作品創作並不在將歷史事件轉化成影像，然而不同世代跨度理解的現實畢竟是歷史過程的缺席；因此既然無法填補那些不存在的記憶，嘗試藉由拍攝的行動來激起對話或產生事件，改變影像的生產過程，反覆的挖掘作品故事及延續能動性，則成了許家維再現歷史和記憶的方式。2012年的台北雙年展可以說是《鐵甲元帥》的序曲，而為了隔年的威尼斯雙年展，許家維回到一千四百多年前鐵甲元帥位於江西武夷山的出生地，繼續追溯神話的起源。《回莫村》的故事也是如此，許家維利用今年9月上海展覽的機會，回到孤兒院與當地的青少年學習他們謀生的手工藝法，利用拼布接成了一張1973年國民黨情治單位駐時紮所拍攝的老照片。照片裡的一名老兵站立在屋子前，許家維於上海的展場等比例用竹編搭建了同樣大小的老屋，與布拼接的圖像並列，對應著牧師講述的影片。 

如果說藝術作品是在想像一種與大眾、政治和社會權力的關係，那麼在敘述這種關係時，藝術家免不了必須面對自身與書寫對象間的權力位置。許家維的拍攝多以人物為主體，利用彼此間的交會引發出議題事件，他嘗試以多重敘事排列出一種系統組織，包括事件脈絡的起源、對象自己羅織的故事參照等，因此在《鐵甲元帥》整體作品裝置中，除了影像外我們還看到對話集結而成的小說、江西與馬祖對置的地圖、請示過程的書信。許家維試圖鋪陳和引介一個平等的書寫關係，然而在這樣營造的對應下，切割的層次元素不免分散了敘事的流暢，以不同媒材形式呈現的多重角度，儘管迴避了單一風格，但是否流於繁雜？多條軌跡的並置，許家維希望模糊的，又或凸顯的是否替作品的完整度加了分；這些相信都是我們往後在觀察許家維作品中可以仔細深思和討論的部分。 

當然，30歲的許家維才剛起步，在不長的創作年齡中卻秉持著一貫謹慎且忠實地的態度，透過作品來實踐他作為此一世代藝術家在面對現實和歷史缺席下的立場。未來《回莫村》的故事還會繼續書寫，《鐵甲元帥》的神話仍要持續發掘，德國小說家荷塔慕勒（Herta Muller）說：「只要你還在行駛，你就還沒抵達；只要你還沒抵達，你就不必勞動；行駛是豁免的時光。」[5]藝術家持續的行動，乃在開啓言說的力道，欲求豁免的未必是勞動，也許是能仍然投入其中，並知其所為。

 [本篇文章刊登於LEAP 24 http://leapleapleap.com/issues/leap-24/]



[1] 林宏璋論頓挫藝術在台灣：《導論：瞧！這個癥狀》，見典藏今藝術雜誌2007年3月號p.125
[2] 同上出處
[3] 見《呂岱如與許家維對話》第55屆威尼斯雙年展－這不是一座台灣館展覽專輯。
[4] 同上出處
[5] 見《呼吸鞦韆》（Atemschaukel）——荷塔慕勒（Herta Muller）

展覽推薦－小日子：《理解的尺度》台泰當代藝術交流展