You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Wu Xiao Kang - A Dose of LIES
- Thread starter synapseman
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Where is bicameralism in the photos?
Where is schizophrenia in the photos?
Did this artwork draw any awareness to schizophrenia like it claimed to set out to do? Or just an individual?
Did this artwork accomplish any bigger accomplishment like it claimed (to raise awareness for the less fortunate) than the self-gloryfying one?
I think as a conceptual art piece, those questions are not really on the agenda
and its intention was not to raise awareness of schizophrenia (unless you believe the silly justification they gave after the hoax was discovered...)
art doesn't need to have some sort of worthwhile intention.I don't think there's anything wrong with self-glorifying art (we are photographers, there is a whole tradition of self-portraiture)
If no one revealed that this story was a hoax, you would have gone to the exhibition and assumed that that was how a schizophrenic takes photos. The questioning only arose because the hoax was discovered.
if 3 different personalities took photographs and merged it into one character, Wu Xiao Kang, then in some naive way it's a presentation of schizophrenia. I don't believe it's an effective interpretation...but it's one interpretation
I think that there is a positive side to this whole drama
many people seem to have sympathised with this person simply from seeing a website with a little story and some photos online
Perhaps the very fact that we are so easily taken in should remind us that we need to be abit more skeptical before believing everything we see/read?
I find that we tend to be very easily convinced by sob stories (always a good tactic to misuse when you are a charity), perhaps this will make us think more.
I uphold the artist's right to create any sort of work
I just don't think that the drama surrounding it will be good for art's name in singapore
I protest what?:bsmilie:
What you were suggesting us as a precursor to protest.
Sigh, let me put this in a manner easy to understand. Slightly OT.
Protests in even western culture is often a last resort, and it's usually held by students or associated people with any idealistic notions. How often are any protests are succesful? Vietnam war, watergate scandal, czechosolvakia , is all I could think of. Even then, its probably petitions from the influential who got these done rather than those students marching on the streets.
I have been living in australia for 2 1/2 years. Sure...they protest
sure they have permits. I myself have been documenting activities as such that goes up to 22,000 strong. Have I even see a single protest change anything? No. Has it made any profound difference in the govt? No. Why? If you got a whole bunch of people yelling and chanting slogans, as photographically interesting as it may sound, it just makes the whole scenario looks uncouth and a debacle.
Which sounds better? A very precise worded letter made public and to the open press, or going around like a couple of exhibits with everybody rolling their eyeballs and go 'Here we go again...'. It just delays the inevitable.
Now, an online petition and email has been sent. The photographs got pulled. Now..what would a protest accomplish...?
Read the model of Communism and see what happened to Soviet Union."absolute chaos"????
you sure have a flair for the dramatic.
Sorry to say but even if u have faith in ur own integrity to uphold basic common sense and morals, I don't have faith in the remaining few zillion ppl on planet Earth to uphold the same basic sense like u do.
I believe u heard of the saying, "One kind of rice feeds a thousand different kinds of people."
What you were suggesting us as a precursor to protest.
Sigh, let me put this in a manner easy to understand. Slightly OT.
Protests in even western culture is often a last resort, and it's usually held by students or associated people with any idealistic notions. How often are any protests are succesful? Vietnam war, watergate scandal, czechosolvakia , is all I could think of. Even then, its probably petitions from the influential who got these done rather than those students marching on the streets.
I have been living in australia for 2 1/2 years. Sure...they protest
sure they have permits. I myself have been documenting activities as such that goes up to 22,000 strong. Have I even see a single protest change anything? No. Has it made any profound difference in the govt? No. Why? If you got a whole bunch of people yelling and chanting slogans, as photographically interesting as it may sound, it just makes the whole scenario looks uncouth and a debacle.
Which sounds better? A very precise worded letter made public and to the open press, or going around like a couple of exhibits with everybody rolling their eyeballs and go 'Here we go again...'. It just delays the inevitable.
Now, an online petition and email has been sent. The photographs got pulled. Now..what would a protest accomplish...?
a protest would be visually stunning and would bring an emotive point across, would put pressure on people nd would make great publicity
all protests work on getting media attention.
What would be more effective, a precisely worded letter that is subject to the editor's whims or fancies, if you're lucky you're on page 21 inside the newspaper in a small column
or a visually,aurally and emotionally captivating scene, of people chanting with angry faces
on the 9pm news?
a protest would be visually stunning and would bring an emotive point across, would put pressure on people nd would make great publicity
all protests work on getting media attention.
What would be more effective, a precisely worded letter that is subject to the editor's whims or fancies, if you're lucky you're on page 21 inside the newspaper in a small column
or a visually,aurally and emotionally captivating scene, of people chanting with angry faces
on the 9pm news?
You've got a point. It probably would work very well, if those ppl on the 9pm news are allowed to show much of it in the first place =/.
I think as a conceptual art piece, those questions are not really on the agenda
and its intention was not to raise awareness of schizophrenia (unless you believe the silly justification they gave after the hoax was discovered...)
art doesn't need to have some sort of worthwhile intention.I don't think there's anything wrong with self-glorifying art (we are photographers, there is a whole tradition of self-portraiture)
If no one revealed that this story was a hoax, you would have gone to the exhibition and assumed that that was how a schizophrenic takes photos. The questioning only arose because the hoax was discovered.
if 3 different personalities took photographs and merged it into one character, Wu Xiao Kang, then in some naive way it's a presentation of schizophrenia. I don't believe it's an effective interpretation...but it's one interpretation
I think that there is a positive side to this whole drama
many people seem to have sympathised with this person simply from seeing a website with a little story and some photos online
Perhaps the very fact that we are so easily taken in should remind us that we need to be abit more skeptical before believing everything we see/read?
I find that we tend to be very easily convinced by sob stories (always a good tactic to misuse when you are a charity), perhaps this will make us think more.
I uphold the artist's right to create any sort of work
I just don't think that the drama surrounding it will be good for art's name in singapore
i'll be more worried for art in singapore if there's no response to the issue
Read the model of Communism and see what happened to Soviet Union.
Sorry to say but even if u have faith in ur own integrity to uphold basic common sense and morals, I don't have faith in the remaining few zillion ppl on planet Earth to uphold the same basic sense like u do.
I believe u heard of the saying, "One kind of rice feeds a thousand different kinds of people."
Communism is ALL ABOUT social norms
it's about conforming to social norms! you want to talk about overstepping social norms then you should be looking at democracy
Artists of all sorts from the literary to the visual arts have a rich history of challenging social norms
Alot of it came from Europe
I don't see France exactly crumbling. If anything they have a rich cultural history that they are very proud of.
Soviet union didn't collapse due to crossing OB markers! I don't know how you connected those two things together.
You've got a point. It probably would work very well, if those ppl on the 9pm news are allowed to show much of it in the first place =/.
well trust me some foreign media would love to pick up on it
wouldn't it be funny if the only protest in singapore was over a bunch of photographs that aren't actually very interesting?
Hi Matt,
I agree (which you probably can tell), that if it were a conceptual art piece, then the questions didn't matter.
And you're quick to realise that I didn't believe their justification after they were discovered.
Which is why being obliged to give them the benefit of doubt, I said what I said.
If, indeed, it were conceptual, they couldn't claim the artist's integrity.
I also agree how artist should constantly push the boundaries.
Photographing nude pregnant women used to be a huge taboo in our society, for those of us who can remember that far back.
Now I get paid for doing it. Thanks to the very first artists who pushed that boundary.
There are many artists who pushed that boundary, which I still feel pretty uncomfortable with. Like that guy who grew corpse on his garden (yes, laid dead bodies in the garden to grow mold). Like the exhibition on dissected corpses. Like many experimental pieces which though forgotten, but may lead to greater discoveries. These artists don't bat an eyelid on societal pressure and their OB markers. Many of them don't even bother to explain, but those who did showed resolution and purposefulness.
I know my examples can be offensive to some. If they are, please just refer to the example on pregnant nudes on what I mean by artists pushing the boundaries.
Even if I were uncomfortable with them, I could see the value in it. I could see the artist integrity behind it. The resolute for pushing boundaries. The firm and sure intent and execution. And I respect these artists for their insights, visions and courage.
But I personally don't feel that this piece of work in discussion, at least to me, fall in that category.
Thanks for your interpretation of the possible interpretation of the artists - that having 3 photographers is one form of interpretation of schizophrenia. It's enlightening, and reminded me of how close minded I was to overlook that possibility. But again, this spark of creativity, I would rather, credit it to you, than to give the authors the benefit of doubt. I can debate on what you said for the sake of an intellectual exchange, but that's not the issue here. And I do wish that I had seen it as well. :thumbsup:
I agree (which you probably can tell), that if it were a conceptual art piece, then the questions didn't matter.
And you're quick to realise that I didn't believe their justification after they were discovered.
Which is why being obliged to give them the benefit of doubt, I said what I said.
If, indeed, it were conceptual, they couldn't claim the artist's integrity.
I also agree how artist should constantly push the boundaries.
Photographing nude pregnant women used to be a huge taboo in our society, for those of us who can remember that far back.
Now I get paid for doing it. Thanks to the very first artists who pushed that boundary.
There are many artists who pushed that boundary, which I still feel pretty uncomfortable with. Like that guy who grew corpse on his garden (yes, laid dead bodies in the garden to grow mold). Like the exhibition on dissected corpses. Like many experimental pieces which though forgotten, but may lead to greater discoveries. These artists don't bat an eyelid on societal pressure and their OB markers. Many of them don't even bother to explain, but those who did showed resolution and purposefulness.
I know my examples can be offensive to some. If they are, please just refer to the example on pregnant nudes on what I mean by artists pushing the boundaries.
Even if I were uncomfortable with them, I could see the value in it. I could see the artist integrity behind it. The resolute for pushing boundaries. The firm and sure intent and execution. And I respect these artists for their insights, visions and courage.
But I personally don't feel that this piece of work in discussion, at least to me, fall in that category.
Thanks for your interpretation of the possible interpretation of the artists - that having 3 photographers is one form of interpretation of schizophrenia. It's enlightening, and reminded me of how close minded I was to overlook that possibility. But again, this spark of creativity, I would rather, credit it to you, than to give the authors the benefit of doubt. I can debate on what you said for the sake of an intellectual exchange, but that's not the issue here. And I do wish that I had seen it as well. :thumbsup:
I think as a conceptual art piece, those questions are not really on the agenda
and its intention was not to raise awareness of schizophrenia (unless you believe the silly justification they gave after the hoax was discovered...)
art doesn't need to have some sort of worthwhile intention.I don't think there's anything wrong with self-glorifying art (we are photographers, there is a whole tradition of self-portraiture)
If no one revealed that this story was a hoax, you would have gone to the exhibition and assumed that that was how a schizophrenic takes photos. The questioning only arose because the hoax was discovered.
hobbit6003
Senior Member
Hmms. Since there seems to be at least one aspect of closure on this matter, I guess part of the blood calling will kinda die down.
Spent the last hour or so reading through all the posts here, and I think Shinken balances the whole issue best in his post, and expresses my sentiments exactly.
If the whole point of this project/art piece/whatever you want to call it was to create reactions, generate controversy, and raise their own profile, they did a good job.
But the point about schizophrenia was totally missed. The photography didn't do a good job with respect to the subject matter. They didn't seem like they did their homework, or if they did, they showed no prove of it.
And the way they changed their stories to cover their backside is downright shameful.
Regardless, I wonder where this episode will lead to next? Another entertaining show to watch? :bsmilie:
Yes, my bone of contention is about how these bunch of so called artists, have totally misrepresented schizophrenia, the exact community that they were purportedly trying to highlight and raise awareness.
By doing what they did, they have actually achieved the opposite: it makes people misunderstand them even more!
In my opinion, I'd think that if they've done their research properly and pull off this hoax with accurate pictorial depiction of a schizophrenic, it would have actually been an intelligent piece of work.
Thus, I thought that something must be done about this and that prompted me to write to the reporter.
I must also thank Kay Chin, who actually helped facilitate the communication. I sincerely think that it was really a gross oversight by him, and it is indeed brave and noble of him to come forward and face the brunt here in CS.
I hope that this episode will just die down, whe the wrong has been righted.
Even if I were uncomfortable with them, I could see the value in it. I could see the artist integrity behind it. The resolute for pushing boundaries. The firm and sure intent and execution. And I respect these artists for their insights, visions and courage.
But I personally don't feel that this piece of work in discussion, at least to me, fall in that category.
Thanks for your interpretation of the possible interpretation of the artists - that having 3 photographers is one form of interpretation of schizophrenia. It's enlightening, and reminded me of how close minded I was to overlook that possibility. But again, this spark of creativity, I would rather, credit it to you, than to give the authors the benefit of doubt. I can debate on what you said for the sake of an intellectual exchange, but that's not the issue here. And I do wish that I had seen it as well. :thumbsup:
yeah I don't believe in it either
but I think that we should give the artists an opportunity to discuss their process and intentions HONESTLY (not to the media for soundbites) before we lynch them.
the strong reaction provoked in Clubsnap points to the fact that some sacred cow was slaughtered here...some big boundary was crossed.
I think when people discuss this in terms of art they come in with the mentality that art should be confined to certain playing fields...but let's analyze the whole process and consider the effectiveness of each point
-The setting up of a website with a believable character
Done pretty well apart from eagle eyed folks who noticed the digital manipulation
-The petitioning for the roll of film
Abit dramatic, but managed to garner some response
-Exhibiting the work under the character's name
Nearly got there!Nearly!
The manipulation of the web media to stir emotions and reactions in people was done pretty well methinks
Their artwork is not finished yet, the incorporation of the news media into this piece is still ongoing.
Yep. I witheld my response because I was just as impressed by the points you made. But when I read the published justification...
If the published justification were some form bowing to public pressure, and nowhere authentic because of the need to conform to expectations (or even more exciting still, part of the performance), then probably the benefit of doubt you are giving (and which I gave at first) is deserved. Then I would be very very heartened at the creativity of the emerging generation in the art scene.
Nevertheless, I still find it hard to wipe out the disappointment (and bad taste) left behind by the said justification. Although after your sharing, my mind is reopened. I really hope that if that were to happen, the benefit of doubt you gave is deserved. Instead of a group of failed authors who's trying to find the next best excuse for their flounder.
If the published justification were some form bowing to public pressure, and nowhere authentic because of the need to conform to expectations (or even more exciting still, part of the performance), then probably the benefit of doubt you are giving (and which I gave at first) is deserved. Then I would be very very heartened at the creativity of the emerging generation in the art scene.
Nevertheless, I still find it hard to wipe out the disappointment (and bad taste) left behind by the said justification. Although after your sharing, my mind is reopened. I really hope that if that were to happen, the benefit of doubt you gave is deserved. Instead of a group of failed authors who's trying to find the next best excuse for their flounder.
I think when people discuss this in terms of art they come in with the mentality that art should be confined to certain playing fields...but let's analyze the whole process and consider the effectiveness of each point
-The setting up of a website with a believable character
Done pretty well apart from eagle eyed folks who noticed the digital manipulation
-The petitioning for the roll of film
Abit dramatic, but managed to garner some response
-Exhibiting the work under the character's name
Nearly got there!Nearly!
The manipulation of the web media to stir emotions and reactions in people was done pretty well methinks
Their artwork is not finished yet, the incorporation of the news media into this piece is still ongoing.
yeah I don't believe in it either
but I think that we should give the artists an opportunity to discuss their process and intentions HONESTLY (not to the media for soundbites) before we lynch them.
the strong reaction provoked in Clubsnap points to the fact that some sacred cow was slaughtered here...some big boundary was crossed.
I think when people discuss this in terms of art they come in with the mentality that art should be confined to certain playing fields...but let's analyze the whole process and consider the effectiveness of each point
-The setting up of a website with a believable character
Done pretty well apart from eagle eyed folks who noticed the digital manipulation
-The petitioning for the roll of film
Abit dramatic, but managed to garner some response
-Exhibiting the work under the character's name
Nearly got there!Nearly!
The manipulation of the web media to stir emotions and reactions in people was done pretty well methinks
Their artwork is not finished yet, the incorporation of the news media into this piece is still ongoing.
you think highly of these artists.
you left out the part where they were supposed to intentionally expose the hoax for the sake of their art.
and i believe the cancellation of the exhibition was part of the artistic agenda.
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
so shinken & mattlock...
both of you are saying that, this is a superb piece of work by the artist and its not actually about schizophrenia and only about the 3 artist trying to display their art?
both of you are saying that, this is a superb piece of work by the artist and its not actually about schizophrenia and only about the 3 artist trying to display their art?
so shinken & mattlock...
both of you are saying that, this is a superb piece of work by the artist and its not actually about schizophrenia and only about the 3 artist trying to display their art?
No. At this point in time, I think the work is created by 3 people, who had hoped to generate interest in their shabby work by using an interesting theme, and proceeded on building on that theme to dupe people into being interested in their shabby photography, and were forced to admit the hoax.
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
No. At this point in time, I think the work is created by 3 people, who had hoped to generate interest in their shabby work by using an interesting theme, and proceeded on building on that theme to dupe people into being interested in their shabby photography, and were forced to admit the hoax.
but then again, you are illustrating that the work generates something called art, in a positive notion... and should be promoted... or am i getting the wrong idea.
Hmms. Since there seems to be at least one aspect of closure on this matter, I guess part of the blood calling will kinda die down.
Spent the last hour or so reading through all the posts here, and I think Shinken balances the whole issue best in his post, and expresses my sentiments exactly.
If the whole point of this project/art piece/whatever you want to call it was to create reactions, generate controversy, and raise their own profile, they did a good job.
But the point about schizophrenia was totally missed. The photography didn't do a good job with respect to the subject matter. They didn't seem like they did their homework, or if they did, they showed no prove of it.
And the way they changed their stories to cover their backside is downright shameful.
Regardless, I wonder where this episode will lead to next? Another entertaining show to watch? :bsmilie:
perhaps :bsmilie:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 158
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 139
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 127
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 128
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 133