Wu Xiao Kang - A Dose of LIES

[madmacs]

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

right on! :thumbsup:

 

[shinken]

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.

What I did, in a confusing fashion I admit, was to propose another situation, which I may have accepted as an work of art.

It would have been a piece of impressive artistic expression IF (and I don't think it is the case)

Right from the start, 3 individuals came together and brainstormed the possibility of exhibiting a fantasy character's work. A person who doesn't exist.

So their experiment would be on seeing whether they can create a fantasy individual. So what they did would be built around it. Hence the biography. Hence the online petition. Hence the 'hoax'. And the entire 'performance' is on how to get the people to believe in this existence through merely what they read on the net. And photography is just a small piece of this art. Even then, I would merely be impressed, and I don't think it should be promoted. Or I have no stand on whether such forms of expressions should be promoted. Afterall, I'm a conservative at heart. A hoax is a hoax.

But because of various reasons which I couldn't explain in a simpler fashion, I believe it is not the case. I believe the hoax is incidental, and wasn't part of the plan. It only happened because of the simple desire to get more people interested in their art. The hoax is not the art itself. It would have been. Thus, I believe the intent was to generate publicity for shabby photography.

Erm, I tried my best. Am I still so confusing?

 

[madmacs]

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...?

there are many types and many ways to protest - not just the slogan bearing/chanting, marching way. you could lodge a written protest with the organizers and artists as some have already done. and if the exhibition does proceed with the offending photos, you could go then and lodge a verbal protest with folks there. protests do not need to be noisy or violent.

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

What I did, in a confusing fashion I admit, was to propose another situation, which I may have accepted as an work of art.

It would have been a piece of impressive artistic expression IF (and I don't think it is the case)

Right from the start, 3 individuals came together and brainstormed the possibility of exhibiting a fantasy character's work. A person who doesn't exist.

So their experiment would be on seeing whether they can create a fantasy individual. So what they did would be built around it. Hence the biography. Hence the online petition. Hence the 'hoax'. And the entire 'performance' is on how to get the people to believe in this existence through merely what they read on the net. And photography is just a small piece of this art. Even then, I would merely be impressed, and I don't think it should be promoted. Or I have no stand on whether such forms of expressions should be promoted. Afterall, I'm a conservative at heart. A hoax is a hoax.

But because of various reasons which I couldn't explain in a simpler fashion, I believe it is not the case. I believe the hoax is incidental, and wasn't part of the plan. It only happened because of the simple desire to get more people interested in their art. The hoax is not the art itself. It would have been. Thus, I believe the intent was to generate publicity for shabby photography.

Erm, I tried my best. Am I still so confusing?

in a way, i find no justification for them to do such things, neither, i think you just gave them idea for a slip...

 

[madmacs]

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?

just wondering..how is the rest of the world responding to this hoax? or are we just the only ones? :think:

 

[madmacs]

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.

this wasnt the case for most before it was uncovered as a hoax right? i read about ppl feeling for wxk and the schizophrenia patients. and the fact that some organization actually wanted to exhibit the works appears to support that.

the main issue is the artists did not initially state that the character was fictional, and ppl look about that as an attempt to cheat the public.

 

[nonchann]

you know...i have been following this Xiao Kang thing for quite some...since last year I guess. What convinced me at that point of time was not the website itself but the content published on one of the creator's blog. It really did not seem like a hoax to me at that time.

Here's a post on the petition by Angelique. She made it seem so real and that it integrates with her life and routine. Maybe it's none of my business to be trolling around her blog, but her life story and the whole Xiao Kang issue really intrigued me then.

http://www.curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=5

Death?
http://curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=30

The start of it all.
http://curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=31

For more stories on Xiao Kang, you can just scroll back and forth. Now, i am just wondering if her other stories are real too. It's just so tempting to believe in them.
Honestly, I did feel cheated by this whole incident.Partly because I respected her cause and actions. It seemed so noble at that time. But I must say, it's very well thought out and well executed.If no one probed into it intensively, no one would have uncovered the truth.

 

[skopio]

just wondering..how is the rest of the world responding to this hoax? or are we just the only ones? :think:

most people would go "oh, it is not real huh? chey!"

don't think they care.

 

[madmacs]

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.

actually i wonder what the reaction would be if they had not admitted that it was hoax, and had stood their ground and continued with their petition

 

[madmacs]

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.

art is very subjective and open to interpretation

 

[eikin]

if the intention of the art done was to generate a kind of consciousness in people, totally removed from reality but yet finds its place in reality, it would have been a very clever exercise, minus the ''artistic need'' to hide behind some nobler cause like promoting awareness of mental illness.

going by the development of events, that is not so. their focus was more on the ''masterful'' quality of the pictures, their focus was on promoting themselves as the heroes who inherited some ''art'' from their dead friend and through much effort bring it into the light of the public so that the public can see the pictures and hand out praises. their focus was not to promote the awareness of mental illness, as demonstrated by their confession of the hoax. BUT everyone believed that they were working for a noble cause, a respectable cause, helping their dead friend to share with the world his schizophrenic visions, bringing awareness of mental illness to the world. do they need to do such things to demonstrate their conceptual art?

that's the problem with conceptual art, many artists take it superficially and use it as their license to do whatever they please, as long as the idea gets through. in this instance, the idea does get delivered, but accompanying the delivery was the ''need'' to lie about a noble cause. societies may be degrading every minute, noble causes finding no exchange value in the increasingly alienating world. but the attack on whatever remaining belief in goodness of humanity that some people still hold was not only unnecessary, but also disgusting and inhuman. do they want to see whatever remaining human to human trust disappear, so that they will find joy in their artistic accomplishment?

 

[hASHbrown_kopitiam]

Here's a post on the petition by Angelique. She made it seem so real and that it integrates with her life and routine. Maybe it's none of my business to be trolling around her blog, but her life story and the whole Xiao Kang issue really intrigued me then.

http://www.curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=5

Death?
http://curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=30

The start of it all.
http://curious-eyess.livejournal.com/?skip=31

For more stories on Xiao Kang, you can just scroll back and forth. Now, i am just wondering if her other stories are real too. It's just so tempting to believe in them.
Honestly, I did feel cheated by this whole incident.Partly because I respected her cause and actions. It seemed so noble at that time. But I must say, it's very well thought out and well executed.If no one probed into it intensively, no one would have uncovered the truth.

Now it made me feel tat angelique might not be real too.... dual, triple personality? :think:

 

[eikin]

for those who thought this conceptual art was very clever, what about this one that happened not so long ago?

http://bp3.blogger.com/_9oEppe36Iu8.../z2ktnKq4qKY/s1600-h/581617565_2b603e11bb.jpg

slaughtering a pig in the name of conceptual art? if the artist gave the reason that the slaughterhouses are doing that so why can't he, i would have given him some credit despite the cruelty, since most of us are guilty of supporting the killing in slaughterhouses. but in the name of conceptual art to demonstrate death? conceptual art focuses on the idea and not the execution, so why can't he just kill himself instead to demonstrate death? not sure what was shown to invoke the idea of birth, i hope he didn't drag a couple of women in labour to the exhibition and force them to give birth by themselves.

back to the case of these 3 artists. why are so many people angry about what happened? because people value trust. all we ask for is some basic respect for humanly trust from these 3. if you're the kind who take issues of trust lightly, since trust isn't going to earn you much gratification, go ahead and argue for their cause, fight for their art. but since no one can be trusted, there shall be no need for argument.

 

[shinken]

for those who thought this conceptual art was very clever, what about this one that happened not so long ago?

http://bp3.blogger.com/_9oEppe36Iu8.../z2ktnKq4qKY/s1600-h/581617565_2b603e11bb.jpg

slaughtering a pig in the name of conceptual art? if the artist gave the reason that the slaughterhouses are doing that so why can't he, i would have given him some credit despite the cruelty, since most of us are guilty of supporting the killing in slaughterhouses. but in the name of conceptual art to demonstrate death? conceptual art focuses on the idea and not the execution, so why can't he just kill himself instead to demonstrate death?

To start off, I think my response and subsequent discussions to this response, if any, would be off-topic. Enriching, but OT, and best left to another thread.

I believe some, if not many, would associate me as one of "those who thought this conceptual art was very clever" And hence my need to respond. Of course, just to reiterate, I don't accept the piece of work in discussion as conceptual art.

I assume you were referring to the hypothetical situation we were talking about - that it would be art, if the exercise were to be actually creating an existance from non-existence. Because from what I read, you didn't accept this piece as conceptual art either.

Even if I were to accept what I was hypothesising as art, doesn't meant I agree with it.

To go with the OT, I don't agree with the killing. But that's a moral judgement. Not an artistic one. And neither do I agree with you saying that conceptual art focuses on the idea and not the execution. It is often the execution that illustrates the idea. Many a times this execution lies on a controversial fine line.

If there is no dilemma, no conflict, no contradiction, the idea is not worth focussing on in the first place.

But that's not saying I agree with it. And even if the hoax were a piece of art, one that threads thinly on multiple moral issues head on without clear directions, is supremely courageous, to the point of being foolhardy. In my humble opinion.

 

[eikin]

To start off, I think my response and subsequent discussions would be off-topic. Enriching, but OT, and best left to another thread.

I believe some, if not many, would associate me as one of "those who thought this conceptual art was very clever, what about this one that happened not so long ago?" And hence my need to respond. Of course, just to reiterate, I don't accept the piece of work in discussion as conceptual art.

I assume you were referring to the hypothetical situation we were talking about - that it would be art, if the exercise were to be actually creating an existance from non-existence. Because from what I read, you didn't accept this piece as conceptual art either.

Even if I were to accept what I was hypothesising as art, doesn't meant I agree with it.

To go with the OT, I don't agree with the killing. But that's a moral judgement. Not an artistic one. And neither do I agree with you saying that conceptual art focuses on the idea and not the execution. It is often the execution that illustrates the idea. Many a times this execution lies on a controversial fine line.

If there is no dilemma, no conflict, no contradiction, the idea is not worth focussing on in the first place.

But that's not saying I agree with it. And even if the hoax was a piece of art, one that threads thinly on moral issues is supremely courageous, to the point of being foolhardy. In my humble opinion.

thanks for the response, what you said is very true :thumbsup:

therein lies the responsibility in the execution. the artist can be brave and do what he/she wants, but he/she will also have to bravely face the accompanying consequences of their acts. if the artist knows that he/she is challenging social norm and is ready to accept whatever reaction that comes, he/she at least still hold on to the artistic integrity that makes him/her an artist.

i have not seen the 3 artists coming out to address the public anger they caused, the only response we heard so far was that the lie was necessary.

 

[madmacs]

Now it made me feel tat angelique might not be real too.... dual, triple personality? :think:

that thought did cross my mind :bsmilie:

 

[madmacs]

thanks for the response, what you said is very true :thumbsup:

therein lies the responsibility in the execution. the artist can be brave and do what he/she wants, but he/she will also have to bravely face the accompanying consequences of their acts. if the artist knows that he/she is challenging social norm and is ready to accept whatever reaction that comes, he/she at least still hold on to the artistic integrity that makes him/her an artist.

i have not seen the 3 artists coming out to address the public anger they caused, the only response we heard so far was that the lie was necessary.

maybe the time is not yet right. maybe they want more reaction...more anger....

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

art is very subjective and open to interpretation

well, i can also say now that art is very objective and closed to misinterpretation... since i am subjective to give my interpretation...

but then again... its just strange...

how can one lie and say its art when a lie is a lie, an art is an art... no link...

its becoming more strange now, i think i won't believe in any promo, art work... since all promos are lies, and all lies are art...

If this is what the society feels, then today i am very sad... as these are what the society feels that the lie here is the art which deems appropriate, 10 years down the road, everyone will feel that art is to deceive the innocent mind, corrupt the youth of the truth in name of art... to deceive is art... to create a false illusion is art...


so what is art... its just an empty shell with nothing to represent it. a lie which becomes truth and with idea gives concept and concept gives courage to deceive the many tender hearts. so what is art... its nothing but a big fat lie...

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

maybe the time is not yet right. maybe they want more reaction...more anger....

they need a welcoming committee?

any fruit & egg vendors willing to sponsor their expired merchandise for the cause?

 

[TrailsofLife]

thanks for the response, what you said is very true :thumbsup:

therein lies the responsibility in the execution. the artist can be brave and do what he/she wants, but he/she will also have to bravely face the accompanying consequences of their acts. if the artist knows that he/she is challenging social norm and is ready to accept whatever reaction that comes, he/she at least still hold on to the artistic integrity that makes him/her an artist.

i have not seen the 3 artists coming out to address the public anger they caused, the only response we heard so far was that the lie was necessary.

Got a call from adeline. She says thats it. exhibition will not go ahead. No finale. Abit disappointed, I must say.