I include everybody in this room. It’s back to what would the resistance means, particularly in the certain, going back to the title, three times three times six, the civilian system that we live in, what would resistance mean today?
I feel myself, as Paul said, I’m also a activist. I’m also a media activist. We are the code activist. In this case, I’m always wondering about the masses. I get back to the masses.
The masses, all the mundanity or the masses on the street holding the rainbow flag particularly, for example or the recent rainbow on the Facebook status [laughs] report. These kind of, I think it’s almost like what would be this kind of gesture, the gesture of resistance.
In a certain way, I think we are coming back to more of a gesture of resistance. I’m not so sure about how to generate the power of resistance. I think before, when we are out on the street, we are counting the heads, and we’re counting the hats, how many people on the street.
We know all the time, by the time we got home and watch the TV, this was before the mobile phone time, that the television report, the media report, will cut the masses into half.
The police report also cut the mass into maybe one third. In a certain way, what would these masses be? Again, we’ve been through the street movement, and we also through the digital disturbance on the net. Either in terms...I really want to question Paul’s idea about very much to find the new grammar, the paradigm, and basically reposition ourselves. Isn’t it? How do we reposition ourselves?
Paul, you want to pick up? Maybe we talked briefly on this, because I think you did talk about some of these issues in terms the marriage and the norm.
It’s very difficult for me to break your conversation, particularly it’s a very emotional statement. I think this talk about the gender and about this gender at birth that related to the marriage system that we seem to be sudden concern has been such a big issues and is such a big grand issues and in terms of what we have gone through today in all the topics we talk about, it’s true. It’s such a heavy issue.
We also moved the time up, 4:30. I don’t know if the streaming had a particular time limit here, but I do, maybe as an artist moderator, which moderating artist, [laughs] I want to maybe bring to the two last question. Actually, this is some question I will not attempt to answer.
I think it seems as an artist and people are still feeling as an artist, I think we are facing the issue about being an artist and not what would be the connection with the general public or our art not being understood by the general public or someone posting that our conversation here today would never understood by the general public.
Nobody would look at our discussion video for more than one minute. With that remark, I close this panel.
Today, the getting together have two purpose. The first purpose actually, the two interpreters are for the Tuesday talk, interpreting simultaneously. They were quite worried about if they can understand all the language that you speak.
The three museums, as the director, Sharleen.
That’s not a physical director. Tzu-Hsiu and Waverly are coordinating the whole production for the Venice Biennale.
They want to join a bit to also understand how the talk will be about.
The second part would be that Paul would like to have more of an interview with you, which will combine with the talk we would have on Tuesday once we have a transcript of that. Maybe she can already also do some more in-depth interview tonight, and that would serve for the catalog publication.
What I’m proposing is that maybe we use one hour to talk about what we don’t talk about on Tuesday. Maybe we talk a bit whatever, and then they can try to see if they can grasp everything. I say, for this first hour, they can interrupt if they don’t understand what we are going to talk about. Maybe, if necessary, we can also do a rehearsal of the simultaneous translation.
Then you will maybe...
Yeah, but maybe we can do a bit of rehearsal just for them so they understand. Me and Audrey, who knows the language, we could say, "Oh, this certain word is totally out of the way."
Pretty much, we should do this maybe for an hour. After the first hour, they can all leave, and then you can do the interview in English.
That’s fine. That’s what I mean because we have two hours.
Yeah.
As far as Tuesday’s topic’s concerned, I want to be more the moderator.
Of course, I would introduce you and introduce Paul and where you all come from, but then I wouldn’t really totally join the conversation in a certain way. I would probably play the role more like a moderator. Of course, at any point I feel I can contribute, I will come in and all that. OK?
Exactly. The problem with this project right from the beginning will be because of the prison, because of Casanova. We got into this idea of really study the crimes that related to sex and gender and all that. At one point, we probably would call a sex show deviant, but we prefer not to use this word anymore as applies to deviants. It’s still about more like people are incarcerated because of some sort of sexual crimes.
Because this is the beginning point of this whole project, because of the location or Prigioni being a prison, and because, before we start doing the research, Casanova was incarcerated there. That bring up this whole topic.
The other thing I want to say, because I have done work with panopticon in terms of panopticon as the 17th-century prison structure, and then today’s all-around, all about everywhere in the city, everywhere the facial recognition camera, the whole prison in China hosting 20 million, these kind of situations.
I wanting to bring up the project not to limit it in the panopticon or in the prison of Prigioni, but extend it into the whole society. Also, that was mostly data panopticon. We have come out with terms like data panopticon or sexopticon, [laughs] these kind of words. Sexopticon, we’ll see if they can translate this one.
To cut in again, exactly. Yes, this particular talk started out from the work, the exhibition itself. It’s really bring up much more issue, and particularly not to only focus on the sex issue, but more all kind of regime, political, social, agency.
That, I think, had to be made clear right from the beginning. We are not really particularly talking about the artwork. Rather, during the press conference, we would introduce the art, the installation, and the film.
Yeah, but because she...
Just so you know that this conversation...
Yeah, being lazy.
Mm-hmm.
Exactly.
I would probably organize it better, but it’s basically why. Particularly in the course, I would say with you I actually knew you as a hacker, 2011. We also know each other since around 2000...
Actually, 2001.
It’s almost the same time. From that perspective, it’s very interesting to connect you two.
Exactly. I think during today’s conversation, we should probably narrow down a few topics.
That’s why today is so relaxing.
Hacktivism, you understand.
I think that’s why the hacktivism, more of the word hacker.
This will probably be difficult for me because my computer knowledge, my computer technique and everything, I learn in the West. I actually had no connection with the development here. Until now, I cannot type Chinese on the computer. It probably would take me...
It would probably take me a couple days. This is the thing. A lot of the vocabulary in English I would not know how to translate into Chinese. For example, it took me a while to understand what is data in Chinese.
[laughs]
It’s a boast that she never studied abroad.
Sorry, go ahead.
