It seems that many of you are interested in the issue of art’s commercialization. This is an important topic, and especially relevant to the Hong Kong art scene, since money often seem to be the #1 concern of many people here (or at least it’s tied for first place with Hong Kong’s other great passion, food). Many of your comments would be really useful for helping your audience understand the broader context of an exhibition such as “Chinabear and Chinaman”. I don’t know if I have already recommended this book to you, but there’s a great book on this issue in general, The Gift, by Lewis Hyde.
If this is your main interest, I’d like to suggest not just talking about the general issue (of the commercialization of art), but also about the “Chinabear and Chinaman” exhibition specifically. Some of you have already done this but I’d like to see more. What position does the exhibiton take in the art vs. commodity debate? Does it see these things as in opposition at all, or does it celebrate the commodification of art? If we embrace the commodification of art, does that mean that art is valuable just as long as it has market value and perhaps is also at least superficially pleasing? Or is the exhibition in any way ironic, or critical of the commercialization of art? In other words, try to link the bigger issues to detailed observations of the art work, so your readers have some idea of how you approached the work, and what significance you think it has.
Even though most of you seem to be interested in this exhibition, I’d also like to make a plea for the “Underneath the Tree” exhibiton. It’s certainly true that the commercialization of art is an important issue for Hong Kong’s culture. But another, maybe even bigger issue is Hong Kong’s relation to its past and its local traditions. We all know that everywhere you turn, some old building is being torn down to make way for a high-rise, and soon you’ll be able to walk from Tsim Sha Tsui to Central (or so it seems). It seems to me that part of the larger context of “Underneath the Tree” was this phenomenon. When I spoke with the artist, I was really struck by his remark that he found something strange about this tradition of tossing the oranges in the tree–why would it be strange to a local Hong Kong person? The photos themselves had the look of something old, something you might find in your parents’ or grandparents’ desk, rather than something recently photographed and printed. I don’t know if this was any part of the artist’s intention, but this thought of older traditions that seem to be slipping away gradually stayed with me and really shaped my experience of the works. I’d be interested to hear if any of you had similar thoughts–and especially interested to hear from those of you who haven’t posted anything in a while!
I’ve been quite busy these past few weeks and I’m leaving Hong Kong in less than two weeks. I’ll try my best, though, to say something useful about your words and ideas. Keep them coming!
