​以亞洲作為批判性問題

​

「失調的和諧」是一種經驗的思考與創造，因為一方面該計畫是由德國歌德學院發起，這是一個藝術生產與知識生產的協作計畫，建構新的文化平台是啟動這計畫非常核心的想法。另一方面該計畫試驗的是四個不同區域的機構、策展人、藝術家如何合作、討論並深化我們今天在亞洲面對的各種現象和問題。並在移轉展覽地點的同時，讓展覽參與者面對不同地方之間，在不同歷史與社會狀態下的不同視角與問題，以及我們所共享的又是甚麼。也因此，我們藉由藝術實踐與展覽生產重新面對「亞洲」問題，無論從政治、經濟和語言上來看，亞洲所發生的全球能動性與人類社會的新問題，都是屬於世界而非特定區域的問題。而藝術家在轉譯和回應他們各自的生活想像、歷史省思與社會處境時，所具有更新藝術想像與藝術溝通的能量，對我們而言，是面對今天多元文化與全球危機時的重要參照，更是能量與可能性的想像空間。

​

後殖民理論在過往三十年間的發展，確實面對了許多「被殖民」與「被支配」的經驗，並經由比較文學、政經分析、文化研究、歷史和社會學研究等不同進路，而分別以第三空間、混雜性、庶民研究、另類現代性等觀念，形構出這些經驗樣貌與各種分屬不同層次的差異性；但明顯地，無論是參照的文本、案例或是圖像，都在各種細緻的詮釋中導向將支配景象、災難景觀和對抗現場都自然化為「世界影像」的結果，所有個人的狀態和努力大都被消融在這再現我們世界的影像型錄中，從學術研討會到二十一世紀前十年的國際展覽皆然。

​

明顯地，我們必須離開對於「世界影像」的耽溺，不能僅止於田調、記錄和裝置展示。藝術家展呈的絕非止於文字、圖像或影像，而更為核心的應該是「方法」或說「創作方法」的發展與呈現。陳光興所提出的「以亞洲作為方法」，關切一種去除認同想像（無論是對歐美還是中國）的經驗觀察和新方法的探求，強調從共同脈絡下的不同經驗間尋找新的問題意識與方法。相對於此，陳界仁的「感．覺田調」則對「亞洲」的指認保持警覺，因為對他而言，國際結構的歷史現實可能比鄰接區域的對照來得更為親密。「亞洲」是一種從民族國家間的競爭與殖民關係、從世界分工的體系與網路中、佔奪式積累的全球資本化中、一直到今天文化資本全球競爭中生成的新問題。因此，他更關注這國際結構如何產生歷史性的作用，而「剝削」與「學習」正是在二戰之後，新的國際結構在支配連結區域時所施加的雙重鏈結。無論是陳光興或陳界仁，都不約而同的關注在經驗如何產生發展方法論的能動性，也就是說「亞洲」正是今天面對世界的主要命題，也是我們開展創造性批判的濫觴。

Asia as a critical issue

​

“Discordant Harmony” is a contemplation and creation of experience. It is a collaborative project between arts production and knowledge production initiated by the German Goethe Institute, with the establishment of a new cultural platform as a core concept. The project experiments with ways in which institutions, curators, and artists from four different regions collaborate on, delve into, and discuss the various phenomena and issues that confront Asia today. The relocation of exhibition sites presents different perspectives and issues under different historical and social conditions to participants, as well as highlight shared common ground. As such, we re-approach the “Asia” issue through artistic practice and exhibition production. From political, economic and linguistic perspectives, global initiatives and problems of human society that occur in Asia are in fact global issues rather than region-specific. A renewed artistic imagination and a powerful artistic message are present in the artists’ interpretations and responses that originate from their individual lives, historical reflections, and social situations. This provides an important reference for us as we confront contemporary issues of diversification and global crises, as well as an imaginative space of energy and possibility.

Over the last three decades, postcolonial theory has developed as a result of confronting colonialism and domination. This has also spawned different approaches to comparative literature, political and economic analysis, cultural studies, history and sociological research, which have formed concepts such as the third space, hybridity, subaltern studies and alternative modernities. But obviously, in any text, case study or image that we refer to, we find that their subjects have mainly, through all kinds of detailed interpretation, been rendered as naturalized images of domination, disaster and confrontation, and thus incorporated into a world-image where all individual situations and efforts are dissolved into a sweeping representation. This world-image permeated most academic symposia and international exhibitions in the last decade of the twentieth century.

It should be evident that we must leave this indulgence behind, since field study, and its recording and display mechanisms, are not enough. Artist exhibitions are by no means limited to texts, images or videos, but also present the core concerns of development and creative methods. Chen Kuan-Hsing has proposed “Asia as Method”, which does not read as some new Asian identity (that is, based on the words alone) but rather as a process for removing concerns about identity in either Europe or China. It suggests empirical observation and new methods of exploration, emphasizing ways of seeking a new problem awareness based on different experiences in a common context. By contrast, Chen Chieh-Jen's “sensual field study” of Asia indicates vigilance, because Chen thinks the reality of international constructs is closer to Taiwan than to its neighbouring regions. Asia as a new issue arises from the relationship between competition and colonialism among countries, including the world division of labour system, seized and accumulated global capital, and today's global competition for cultural capital.  Chen therefore is more concerned with how these international constructs produce functions of historicity and how new international compositions in the post-war years brought to bear a dual link of exploitation and learning while connecting and dominating regions. Both Chen Kuan-Hsing and Chen Chieh-Jen are concerned with how experience can produce and develop methodologies, which is to say “Asia” is a major proposition that confronts the world today, and it is a point of origin from which we begin our creative critique.