2015年曾荷，茫然不知地走大的阿姆斯特丹市立博物（Stedelijk Museum)，打撞地在其中一走Tino Sehgal作品《如此奏》（This Variation）的房，在漆黑的世界逐瞳孔，身於黑色的角落，著看著表演者的歌舞步，也看到入口光源多少好奇，最初是摸黑，及最後仍能放抱，有些人如我一安坐一旁，有些更走出一起跳舞，表演者融合起，利用一起交流的感，滋了那只有丁光的世界，就不知不就了一多小，是很美好的光。
事隔六年，我再次在大的方中看到作品，此一彼一，地域及政局不同，及世界，即便是同一追求人互，探索人面黑暗，用最的方式了解交流意的作品，予我另一番完全不同的滋味。
究竟香港下的，Sehgal及其作品多大？看演出之後，我中一直徘徊提。原因是，其Sehgal的作品是打破表演展，舞蹈的，更的法可能是表演者的距越近，但仍保留如般的距，而依空、言、作，持二者的。正如是次在大策展的「信任&迷惑」活中，Sehgal的作品《些》（These Associations）及《如此奏》一，二者都是把空作社交式呈，前者原敦泰特代美（Tate Modern）邀作品，今次本地表演者在操，路人／自己的故事；後者如上所，表演者在漆黑的房唱歌及起舞，等待光的入口悄悄，又慢慢。
不同於一般社活，Sehgal不表演者混淆，即使二者如何密，演出仍是表演者主，跟。然而是，我欣的天可能是平日下午，在表演者早到晚不的演出途中，不是博物那完全不起眼的黑房，或是外面操，人流都少得可，有只有我一，或多一位。在多，而香港大多既含蓄又不近表演者的情下，那些重交往，甚至是依靠交流才能成作品的演出，究竟要怎才能完整？更何，在刻疫情政治，尤其是表演者及，在香港政府整年努力以疫情之名下多重隔防之下，表演者如同菌者或疑似病源般看待，迫令表演者做限制加的防疫措施，定性完全不同性的生物品，只要他近距接就有可能犯法或交叉感染下，探索人人的距的作品，是注定要「失」。
然所「失」只是行政的角度看，人流太少，交流密度不足；但作品而言，然也是一很好的地反映及另，正好香港及如何看待非及非舞蹈的互作品。而且，以角看的，在我刻所看到的是，香港表演者及，均具智慧及良好心，去投入中的交流。《些》中表演者走到路人面前，一一地向他好的人小故事，而聆，有回，就成了。可以，在香港如此抑的情下，表演者及密地分享，享受空，非常得，也了下境之外的。
有趣的是，因很多我也是一人，在《如此奏》中的黑房（其他客只在外探望而），常被表演者注意；在《些》的情尤甚，不多於半小在操流，表演者因得有可予他互，而我「虎耽耽」，至最後我了四不同表演者的故事，方才去。中有小老的，而令表演者去回到幼稚向密的老投，而不是父母的故事，以及有社交媒的分手故事最暖又悲。
至於，表演的性及性，以及依互方可完整的作品，究竟其性如何，是、展、舞蹈，或是社活？在我察，Sehgal只不是在挑中的界，而是不在乎。在英或荷，都很在表演表演者交流，因日常生活陌生人表自己的想法是普通不；但在香港，成是一「舞蹈」，也可能令真看待起，更何是界常要「代舞」的必要性，以及香港已成自由也具，家要思前想後自我批判，市民烤都可能被票控，野也得求生，我又怎可能安心出行，在漆黑之，在陌生人分享的故事中，想去下「」字眼的保及包（更何不能保），然地感受近距密所的安自由？
Tino Sehgal: Close Contact Yet Out of Reach
Original text: Felix
Translator: Chermaine Lee
In 2015, I attended the Holland Festival in the Netherlands. I was confused as I entered the enormous Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam, and found myself in a room showcasing Tino Sehgal’s artwork This Variation. In a world of darkness, I hid in a dark corner, let my eyes gradually adjust to the environment, listened to the songs and watched the dance.
I saw some visitors show their curiosity at the entrance - they hesitated a little before entering the dark room, but eventually relaxed. Some sat to one side like me, while others went up and danced with the performers. The interactions brightened up the dimly-lit world. An hour passed by swiftly - it was a good time.
Fast forward six years, to when I saw the same artwork again at the JC Contemporary in Tai Kwun. The differences between now and then, here and there, politics, timing and changes left me with an altered impression, even though the work still featured human interactions and explored people’s reactions in the dark.
How much impact does Hong Kong’s current situation have on Sehgal and his work? I kept asking myself this after watching the performance. Instead of saying that Sehgal breaks the barrier between performance and exhibition, as well as between play and dance, to me it’s more accurate to say that the artwork bridges the gap between performers and audience, yet still maintains a tiny distance between them, depending on space, language and movement to link them together.
In the trust & confusion exhibition in Tai Kwun, Sehgal’s These Associations and This Variation present space as a social ritual: the former was initially a commission from London’s Tate Modern Museum, and this time, local performers played games in the Prison Yard, telling the passers-by / audience their stories; in the latter - as mentioned above - performers sang and danced in a dark room, waiting for visitors to sneak in from the entrance where it was light, then slowly drift away.
Something that sets Sehgal’s shows apart from the usual community activity is that they do not confuse the role of the performers with that of the audience: regardless of how close the two are, the performers take the lead and the audience follows. However, when I had the pleasure of watching the performance it was a weekday afternoon. The performers worked non-stop in either the inconspicuous dark room or the square outdoors, but the problem was the pathetically small number of spectators - at times I was there on my own, or with only one or two other people.
Without many spectators, and in Hong Kong where the audience is used to being reserved and keeping a distance from the performers, how can an artwork like this, which focuses on interactions, be realized to the full? Not to mention that now we are under the pandemic policies, where the government has set strict boundaries on the pretext of controlling the virus, treating performers as potential carriers of infection and imposing multiple anti-virus measures on them. This inevitably separates the performers from the audience. If interactions in close proximity may risk violating the law or spreading infection, this kind of artwork that explores the distance between human beings is destined to “fail”.
Of course this can be seen as a ‘failure’ from the perspective of administration, as the number of spectators, and therefore of interactions, was too low. Nonetheless, it is useful for the work as it reflects the region’s reaction shows how the Hong Kong audience responds to interactive artworks which are not strictly theatre or dance. Furthermore, from an individual perspective, I could see that Hong Kong performers and spectators both had the wisdom and the right mindset to engage in the interactions. During These Associations, performers walked up to the people watching and told them personal stories they had prepared in advance. The spectators listened in silence, and sometimes responded, turning the performance into a conversation. In today’s depressing environment in Hong Kong, this was an extremely rare opportunity for performers and spectators to converse one-on-one and enjoy the space, a moment to feel free from the pressure of the current situation.
Interestingly, since I was mostly on my own, I received lots of attention from the performers in the dark room of This Variation (other visitors poked their heads in from outside, then left). In These Associations, I stayed for only half an hour, but ended up listening to the stories of four different performers because I was the rare spectator to be present. One of the stories was about a performer complaining to his / her close kindergarten teacher, rather than his / her parents, after receiving corporal punishment in primary school; another, about severing social media ties, was the most bittersweet.
How should we categorize such spontaneous and playful artworks that rely heavily on interactions with the audience? Are they plays, exhibitions, dance or community activities? I think Sehgal did not just seek to challenge the boundaries between them, he simply did not care. In Britain or the Netherlands, the audience is used to conversing with the performers in a show, because it is commonplace for them to express their views to strangers. Yet, in Hong Kong, if we categorize a show as “dance”, the audience will assume this is something to be taken seriously, especially when the term “contemporary dance” is used. In the city, speaking freely has become a risk, so artists often have to engage in self-censorship. Citizens risk paying fines for having a barbeque and wild boars find it hard to survive. In a dark room with strangers, how do we remove the packaging and the protective bubble of art (which does not actually protect it), and simply enjoy the peace and freedom of experiencing close contact and interactions in such a performance?
《如此奏》及《些》
This Variation and These Associations
大 Tai Kwun
家：Tino Sehgal
Artist: Tino Sehgal
展期2021年10月23日—2021年12月5日大方三及操
Exhibition: 23 October 2021 – 5 December 2021, 3/F, JC Contemporary and Prison Yard, Tai Kwun.
文章已刊於《舞蹈手札》2022年1月
https://www.dancejournalhk.com/single-post/%E4%B8%AD-eng-tino-sehgal-%E9%82%A3%E7%A8%AE%E9%81%99%E4%B8%8D%E5%8F%AF%E5%8F%8A%E7%9A%84%E6%9C%80%E8%BF%91%E8%B7%9D%E9%9B%A2%E4%BA%A4%E5%BE%80?fbclid=IwAR1-3DSI6hqxk6o-RjHPQRwFYjvcZIEPOFr03-jsUTV-ZZ1I9zDKE4aSajk
你的支持作者作很重要。
Like就可以支持作者
https://button.like.co/felixism
或到felixism.com 直接按支持。
文章定位：
