2017
「 This is an preserved fresh flower wreath. The size is about 20 x 20cm, with light
green Viburnum macrocephalum as the base of the rose wreath. Moving on to the
wreath main material. The base is formed by light green Viburnum macrocephalum
and Roses that are, light yellow roses (large), light yellow roses (small), orange pink
rose (small), light orange rose (small), white rose (middle). Connected to the branches
of the mall-rounded pink purple s fruit string, similar to the pearl plum fruit, but pink.
24 Light yellow flowers and about five or six petals. The middle round flower is
Gypsophila paniculata in deep yellow. White daisy (small). Brown pine nuts, Dark
purple a small fruit, a bit like mulberry, but not that long, is rounded. I cannot see the
rest of it (laugh). Floral configuration from the middle of the middle of the circle,
imagine a circle to roses as the main, clockwise description, if I didn’t specifically
say, the unit will be 1. 」After that, she used clock direction to describe the whole
wreath. (Jia - Zhen, Li, 2017)
What can I picture?
After a lot of experimental works based on organs, intestine and lungs. Some
days later, when I was sitting in the studio, surrounded by my works and those
organ’s photocopy images, and I suddenly realized that those intestines weren’t my
first - hand information. I leaned by books that my intestine may be up to certain
length or those for and insight of organs. I’d never actually see those intestine during
the time I was using a blindness approach to illustrate pieces that wants to refer other
blindness. Although it feels quite ironic to me, but it shares the similarity of the
process of seeing. From light to object, object to eyes, eyes to mind, every stage will
transfer and interpret the message to the follow, and each deliver contain
interpretation, ambiguous, and the final picture will be as a conclusion of synthesizing
various of fragments. Base on this finding, I come up a collaboration with random
people to refer the whole situation that I am at, by asking the participant to record a
description of an object for 5 minutes without giving me the object or the photo.
Formed on their description, I have the chance to analyzed and reformed information
just like what brain does.
To emphasized the ambiguous, I decided to look up the dictionary for some word that
frequently used within the narrative.
Large - big in size, more than average size, quantity, degree.
Middle - neither high nor low in importance, amount or size. in central position.
Small - limited size, not big, as compared with what is typical or average.
Analyzing the word within the record, the method of how they observe an
object, the lost information between the viewer and the reproducer, the different
interpretation of an item, every aspect is unsettled and intriguing. The interpretation
seems not just happen with light, but also image, words that we able and chosen to
pick, tone and intonation of specking, manners and patters of mind. I listen those
records again and again, reading the note that I wrote down, and wonder, what will
this be? Is there any possibility to be alike to original? Is it important to be alike to the
original? Will I be satisfied when the time I see the original?