Category: Uncategorized

  • 《日記》的日記

    (2021-11-14) 親愛的彭老師,你好嗎?如果你還在世上,大概已經快一百歲了。這年我老是想起,五六歲的某年小學旅行,一大群同學在動植物公園遊玩,走過木橋的一剎那有一只黑蟻爬了上我的右手,我站了在橋上不知所措,看著小小的亮黑色點從指尖緩緩走到掌心,你走過來,把手靠在我手的左邊,一起盯著牠每只小足向著前方走上去,你把牠送回橋上,對我說:「我們都是過客,來了打擾牠們的地方去學習不同的動植物,離去前記得要答謝牠們。」我默默地看著阿蟻回到群體之中,躲進樹葉裏去。

    (2021-08-04.) 來來回回想寫了又再次停下來,我討厭結束(closure),生怕定論 (settlement),卻又容易把事情忘記。《日記》猶如一個蜘蛛網,它的出現源於一種面對近乎災難與崩壞的無力感,見證以往所認所知與各種理所當然逐一被推倒的沮喪和乏力。某天我被一位小孩子指著我和朋友說:「(2022-04-13)就是你們破壞了我的家。」我想,要是有一天,每個在這個地方的小孩子以另一種語言溝通,或者認為我是一個阻隔進程的中年人,我大概也得接受,他們鐵定會被我生活到一個更接近未來的世界。(2021-08-04))對於這個作品,我沒有計劃,或者期待它的出現。它沒有開始結束,沒有進程,也沒有前後左右。我想最大的推動力源於原定委約作品下定的死線(deadline)以及前所未有過的一段停頓(pause)所在,(2022-04-13)原定的作品其實也做了三分一,不過也幸好做了,才知道我完全沒有想要把那些部分完成,當時我只想好好活著,把這些記憶連起,在作品的那個空間裏對那個畫圖畫的小朋友,那位樹下的男子,或者每個我沒法得知他們名字或面孔的個體說一聲,我記住了你們。

    (2019-5-29.)「會好想念他們(微敘事的同學)。」是這幾天一直流連在腦袋的想法。大概創作的旅程裏又會記住多幾個人,即使沒有實在地想要去認識他們。放映會就這樣結束,最終我也是沒勇氣提出想要問的問題,一是不想「概括」他們,二是想我在學時的一塌糊塗,相比起來他們都有趣多了,我的能力範圍也止於好好弄一張比較得體的印刷品,希望他們會想要保留住,在未來的某一天看到今天的自己,正如我在數個月前看到2015年的我於微敍事課寫下的文字一樣。

    “What I have been, is.
    Do not try to think what I have thought behind the screen,
    nor should anyone try to guess on another.
    I do not think about you when I make my videos,
    nor should you think of me when you see my works.
    My works are a part of me, but I am not my works.
    Videography is a headache. Video fragments walk in their own pace,
    in their own way, and all I could is to run after them…”
    (Winnie Yan, 2015)

    (2019-5-30.) 2015 的迷惘,大概是不知道為什麼所有東西都需得做,每星期總得有一兩份作業要交,模模糊糊就完了一個又一個學期,然後又甚樣了?還得上班,有一陣子的腦袋總算著一頓飯代表又得上多少分鐘的工作。身邊的人都嚷著下學期的畢業作品要做甚麼,突如其來的變得重要。我想看書,有個可以放縱的空間,結果2016 年畢業了,作品還未做完,花了好多時間想要埋住內疚,但現在回想起來我還頗用力的想了好多事情。不想提起 2015 年的微敍事課,大概是因為埋藏了好多不想記起的情緒。不想拍攝,不想剪片,更不要提討論了,幸好教授有 introvert-friendly option,我就一直寫,還好她一直回覆我那些過於亢長的電郵。

    (2019-6-1.) 有人問:為什麼要書寫,不專心好好做創作,我好像愈來愈看得見,存在於書寫的自己,與存在於其他媒介的自己,一直而兩種不同的行走路線嘗試碰撞,嘗試解釋自己沒法以三言兩語可以安置的迷惘和焦慮。

    (2019-6-9.) 好多iPhone,Samsung,可能是小米, 好多Go Pro,Video cam,單反,自拍,合照。開路,開路。好多年輕人,好多人。拍照,上傳,更新,再更新。即時的錄像變得好重要,前進,前進。平日二十分鐘的路程,今天卡了三四個小時。存在的權利,說話的權利,我在向前,也從手提電話中得知我的朋友,朋友的朋友,在同一條大街的前後向前,吶喊。我的電話同時生產和接受資訊,我們連繫,甚至跨越這地得知世界的另一端,人-人的聯繫。想起 Stan VanDerBeek和黑澤明各自曾經提出關於影像-世界-時間-球體的想像和論述,想起早前某處的影像存庫中每個人想要拍下的影像,各自的世界會在什麼的情況發生而融合,最近聽了一個公開講座提到建築空間作為架構的傳送門(portal)⋯ 斷斷續續在微敍事的課堂裏聽到同伴在問,我也在問,微敍事是什麼,但答案好像每當要吐出前就已失效了。黎博士說微敍事是個行動代號。

    卡在好多平日不會停留的空間,然後很用力去聽。

    (2020-5-28.) 所有文字,所有影像,最後都是一堆密碼,我卻是擁有機件故障的解密人,處處帶著瑕疵的機器。

    (2022-04-13)我在花不起太多力說話了。

  • Button/Butterflies

    “I am about to change my phone,” This thought twirls in my mind every time I press the button. The surface of recent models is button-less, manifesting its minimalistic look. Is it better? As a tactile person, I am constantly panicking about that.

    Back then I once worked part-time in Videotage when I was an undergraduate. If memory serves, my tasks are straightforward: gather a pile of catalogues, type in and cross-check information of the listed video works with the digital system, and propose relevant keywords that aid user search. Knowing where I study and my interest in animation, my then supervisor Phoebe Wong readily asked for my thoughts on Linda Lai’s Door Games Window Frames: Near Drama (2012) and Ellen Pau’s Fanfare For The Common People (2010), she then continued to ask if I would consider working as an animator for Apply Daily, or whether I would ever experiment the concept of animation with the use of PowerPoint slides. Despite how those questions might appear somewhat out of the blue, this piece of memory remains to be one of the most vivid, if not thought-provoking moments I had there.

    In a broad sense, this conversation points towards a re-investigation on image-making: how it is made (process/effect), what the tools are (machine/equipment), its possibilities (function/imagination), and how these continuously defined, defining elements await to evolve (construct/stakeholder). Indeed, wherever I go through any video work descriptions, the first thing that piques my curiosity is always its original format. Browsing through the VAMC archive, it’s not unusual to see a dynamic within the spectrum: Super 8 (1965), U-matic (1971), Betamax (1975)- VHS (1976), Video8 (1984)- Hi8 (1998), GIF (1989), DVCAM (1996) to name a few. As a millennial who wistfully missed out on countless analogue and early digital machines, regardless of how these formats might look all Greek at a glance, they are still a critical primary anchor to prose questions and assumptions and submerge unreservedly into the work itself.

    To the contemporary, the choice of format, or medium, often demonstrates an aesthetic pursuit or gently echoes with its context in another way. Yet, to the previous generations, it tends to be a more practical reason, be it the availability of resources, or the technical limitation of certain technology, for instance, not all DSLR cameras were suitable for making frame-by-frame animation at the beginning. Local independent animator Wagner Tang (鄧滿球), who created delicate hand-drawn animation works Heads (1982), Rain Maker and Niao 《鳥》 in the 80s, once mentioned he stopped creating due to the unavailability in Super 8 films and developing service in Hong Kong (RTHK 8 Beats, Episode 5, 2002). In parallel, early computer animation also requires additional hardware to facilitate the process of computer rendering, generating a frame, ‘dropping’ it to videotape, and moving the tape on one frame for the next frame. Beyond how these hurdles reflect a kind of hardship in coping with the material uncertainties and instabilities, or the readiness to do it all over again, it also illustrates a kind of blindness and virtuosity, where artists are constantly confronted with a series of guessing, trusting, or let go, where one must combat and address these constraints with grit.

    On the bright side, these uncertainties could be counterintuitive at times, examples such as Jim Shum’s (沈聖德) work Pin Yi《品一》which explores an alternative viewing experience through overlying three simultaneous Super 8 projections into one (Film Biweekly Issue 49), or Jamsen Law’s continuous explorations with digital applications, such as the digital stroke drawn agilely with Microsoft’s MS Paint (Seen on Star To Star (2003)), or Matching 4 With 12 – Digesting A Patience (2002) which engages an intense act of mark-making on screen, as if pixels and glitches are being continuously crunched for visual digestion. These creative trajectories propose an observative reading towards the nuance of images made with different machines, above the sculptural or material attention, what intrigues me is how these knobs and buttons alter the literacy towards the bigger picture.

    These constellations of how one work sheds light on another will never cease. Image making is perhaps lyrical, mathematical, or increasingly speculative, though lately I have been mesmerized by its instrumental nature, its analogue or digital mediations, and how these refresh my conception of sequential thinking. In my practice, I always deliberately choose to try out different approaches. To me, from button to knob, to swipe and many more, is a journey beyond a dry game of resolution, it is to wonder if one day there would be a possibility ahead of a binary thinking of on/off, of control and let go, of the authorship and liberation in automation. What if one day we can communicate with the machines in the form of a net rather than a button? What will that trigger?

  • 專有名詞 — 以《局部失明》作結的自白

    所有所有

    創作《局部失明》的動力源於自身想要終結那個自暴自棄顧慮太多不停放負無限輪迴的自己,2018 年下半年經常以十倍的力量笑,再用百倍的力量哭,然後睡覺,一早醒來再接再厲。想過把自己的頭髮一條一條拔下來,不斷不斷睡覺睡到腦袋神智混濁不清,查詢是否要食藥控制突如其來的情緒,沒想過自殺。幸得L 一直冷靜聆聽和分析,見了幾回治療師,學習面對及承認情緒,恆常以呼吸平伏自己,現在穩定多了,起碼這年再沒有人覺得「你要快樂」,憂愁彷彿成了當下的內定值 (default setting),我城也生病了,又再一次復發。

    這裏我會嘗試盡量記錄所有創作過程的步驟及細節,除了想以創作者的身份釐清一些前因後果及重整途中一些難以啟口的關卡外,也期望藉筋疲力竭的書寫把作品盡量透明化,盡可能實現一種「把這些能說出來的都完了,我們可以開始面對作品。」的狀態。這並非作品的解釋,充其量是一篇緒言,又或是一節伸展運動。

    「好掛住佢,你由得我啦。」

    ​2018 年,二十四歲。我在兩週內先後得知一位親人與一位朋友的離去,在情緒逐漸紓緩之際,又再次經歷好友摯親離去的儀式,還有種種關係擦邊快要決裂的瞬間。接二連三地的失去與不安令我陷入了一種極度失語的狀態:我不能夠理解自己的近況,像一種機能性故障。這並非一種自省過後的發現,而是從朋友交談中得知無論我如何竭力解釋,仍無法把那些支離破碎的句子與自身的情感畫上等號。那些吐出來的話語把我越拉越遠,朋友把對我的擔憂安置好了,而我的情緒卻仍在不斷分裂變形,漸漸形成一種侵蝕性的自我厭惡:各種過期的解釋、互相投射的誤會、還有過份用力的改正。斷斷續續的三言兩語突顯了我言語表達的殘缺不堪,為我已有的焦慮再蓋上一層壓力,比較親密的朋友都默默地陪伴著,偶然說點毫不關連的事情,為我淡化了好些拉扯。

    說實在,我沒有想要跟任何人剖白那些關係的起承轉合,一方面是沒法拿捏那些刺痛的重量,另一方面大概亦是沒有承受不斷複述的勇氣。我需要一個出口,好讓我透過複述一種情緒起伏釋放那些擾人的躁動。我一直在前後矛盾中纏繞,想要好好表達各種不帶關連的情緒。面對旁人回應「我明 (白你的感受)。」那種看似設身處地的關切,起初是一種拒人於外的排斥感,直到後期我嘗試提問:他們是否也發生過些甚麼,才會流露這種「過來人」的語氣。也許是我們都會不斷經歷著各種失去,究竟失去之痛在於哪,喚起傷痛的又在哪⋯⋯ C 跟我說她沒有感到太大的悲傷,只是每每經過一些地點就會喚起那些「專有名詞」,原先充斥著互相陪伴的週末一下子被掏空了,現在硬塞其他總覺不太對勁。我曾一度懷疑這永不以「康復」作正視狀況的方法,撇除為自己帶來的情緒壓力外,可能是一種最佳的記憶方法,那種輕易刺痛流淚嚎叫的快感,直到後期我再沒法放肆,時間把我逐漸推開,「距離」突然成了我極度在意的一環:我與失去的人或事物的距離(記憶-視覺)、我與朋友之間的距離(語言表達)、我與身體的距離(情緒)、還有創作當中我與觀者之間的距離(作者)。我認為直接把失去的各種清晰放大呈現並不是我最想牢記或者公開的事,我所需要的出口是把困擾著我的各種盲點以視覺呈現。我想透過建立一個共同的時空洞,把我作為一個敘述者的身份淡化,在我把我的情感以各種隱喻存放於《局部失明》之中,它不斷重覆並提醒我的同時,其他觀者猶如不同視力的人,一同以第一身的身份經歷《局部失明》。

    測試-無縫的邊界-無人的日常

    《局部失明》整部作品長19 分鐘45 秒,主要分為測試及形容病患兩部分。在未有任何實際考量之先本想做一部大約25 分鐘的作品,理由無他,是想藉以長度嘗試歇斯底里把所有痛楚拉出,也同時借以說服自己這作品存在的重要,最終《局部失明》花了一整年才劃上句號,把2019 年的徊看與 2018年重疊交錯。

    關於當中的剪接,我暫時想把這個想法列為:「無縫剪接」(Seamless Cut)。由始至終我對於剪接錄像還是有一種沒法解釋的抗拒,這並非我不喜歡造/看錄像,而是很多情況下我會被剪接所清晰劃分的時差牽走,令我沒法好好理解。我好奇為何看書沒有這個疑惑,是因為「字」作為單元的微小,還是書可以讓我隨時向前向後?每逢觀看長鏡頭的拍攝我都會想起這些問題,長鏡頭的確紓緩了一種透不過氣的焦慮,把框內的影像時間與我觀看的時間矇糊化,但我不認為長鏡頭解決了剪接,又或是長鏡頭本身與剪接這個行為無關,長鏡頭只是影響了剪接。動畫,或者繪畫都可以很輕易地解決「清晰劃分」這個狀態,很多實驗動畫的例子都可以以無剪接的姿態把整個世界帶出來。我不想安於用長鏡頭解決,所以我嘗試塑造以「理所當然」的剪接行為作為一個「灰色地帶」進行實驗,也是《局部失明》的想法。當中的剪接存在是基於影片作為一個眼睛測試的過程,而不是因為擁有什麼「後着」,測試在作品之中只是一個比喻,或是以一種建立結構的形式存在。

    對《局部失明》的起初構思並沒有形容病患的第二部分,直到自己一直卡住在測試中非黑即白的狀態。我在想究竟科學上的文字會否容許感性或具想像性的表達,簡單如刷牙示範,用藥指引,物理治療練習等等。與星座運程相比,形容肌肉拉扯固然比較「實在」,但同時我又如何以視覺語言,在不直接呈現肌肉的動作同時,表達那種拉扯感呢?其後我看了好多關於不同眼疾的病患者所形容的狀態,例如他們的感光能力、最初懷疑失去視力的情況、一般視力健全人士對病患的誤解,當中以法國精神醫學醫師德‧克雷宏波所著《德‧克雷宏波的眼睛》一書,克雷宏波由白內障醫師變成白內障病患者後,為自己所經歷的視覺變化、手術的過程、及痊癒狀況三個階段的記錄最為清晰,我亦以此段文字作為形容病患的基調,作為對視力衰退的不安的表達方式。當中的影像素材,主要都是在有《局部失明》的構思前的日常記錄,有的是合照,有的是旅行影像,或是日常最普通不過的琑碎記錄,天空、道路、風景,我刻意迴避人面,片中很多影像都放大了好多好多,這是我其中一種存放隱喻的方法。

    加密解密:以找尋同病相憐的人逃避現實

    創作中途一度癱瘓,不斷逃跑往書裏去。我跟A 兩人常以「淡淡的哀傷」形容自己的想法,失落的時候總會想翻一翻羅蘭·巴特 Roland Barthes 的《哀悼日記》Mourning Diary,以巴特於1977/1988年同月同日的傷痛陪伴,還有李智良的《房間》,如此精煉的文字猶如短暫無害的麻醉藥。我一直挪用不同時空的情感覆蓋自身的傷痕。我想起伊俄與阿爾戈斯的眼睛與孔雀,想起快樂王子的藍寶石眼睛與燕子。我引用了這些作品的句子,抽取了他們在失去眼睛的同時所失去的「身份關係」、「存在」、「記憶」等的連繫,把自己的影像藏進去。

    以下是羅蘭·巴特 的《哀悼日記》 裡的幾篇:

    October 29, 1977:

    How strange: her voice, which I knew so well, and which is said to be the very texture of memory (‘the dear inflection…’), I no longer hear. Like a localized deafness…

    October 29, 1977:

    A stupefying, though not distressing notion – that she has not been ‘everything’ for me. If she had, I wouldn’t have written my work. Since I’ve been taking care of her, the last size months in fact, she was ‘everything’ for me, and I’ve completely forgotten that I had ever written. I was no longer anything but desperately hers. Before, she had made herself transparent so that I could write.

    November 10, 1977:

    Struck by the abstract nature of absence; yet it’s so painful, lacerating. Which allows me to understand abstraction somewhat better: it is absence and pain, the pain of absence — perhaps therefore love?

    August 1, 1978:

    [Perhaps already noted]

    Always (painfullu) surprised to be able – finally – to live with my suffering, which means that it is literally endurable. But – no doubt – this is because I can, more or less (in other words, with the feeling of not managing to do so) utter it, put it into words. My culture, my taste for writing gives me this apotropaic or integrative power: I integrate,* by language.

    My suffering is inexpressible but all the same utterable, speakable. The very fact that language affords me the work ‘intolerable’ immediately achieves a certain tolerance.

    *enter into a whole – federate – socialize, communize, gregoriate.

    以下是奧斯卡·王爾德 Oscar Wilde 的《快樂王子》Happy Prince 其中的幾句:

    One night there flew over the city a little Swallow.

    “When I was alive and had a human heart,” answered the statue, “I did not know what tears were, for I lived in the Palace of Sans-Souci, where sorrow is not allowed to enter. (…) So I lived, and so I died. And now that I am dead they have set me up here so high that I can see all the ugliness and all the misery of my city, and though my heart is made of lead yet I cannot choose but weep.”

    “Swallow, Swallow, little Swallow,” said the Prince, “will you not stay with me for one night, and be my messenger?

    “And here is actually a dead bird at his feet!”

    “As he is no longer beautiful he is no longer useful,”

    「完啦好嘛?」

    開始作品的第一個畫面大概是 2018年 8月 22日,而檔案的最後一個更新是2019 年 11月 26日,期間拖延好了一陣時間,又提不起勁,但想著再拖延至2020 年大概便會無了期消失。作品公開的瞬間,我也好想得到了被接受的感覺,這不是因為作品本身的素質,更大的原因是儘管它看似極度抽象,我的確把實在的片段放進去,我對而言是一種在適當距離下把情緒赤裸地公開的可行途徑。

    書寫的我就在此作結。 (2020.02.02)

    極度矯情草稿:「記住記住記住記住鎖住」

    《局部失明》最初的訂名為《失明碎片》,只因當時打碎一個玻璃樽的畫面在我的腦海裏不斷重複,亦有可能是當時還未有可以整理碎片的冷靜和能耐。創作之前,我建立了一個文字檔案,把想法和相關的圖像放進去,草稿筆記總共有十八頁,我把沒有在影片出現,但偶然還會想看一下的草稿放在這裡。

    「八秒後天空還會是藍色的。

    原來八分鐘路程與八千幾公里的距離其實沒差很多。
    抬頭看的是八秒鐘前的藍色嗎?
    每一個最終的道別好像也只能在兩處藍色的地方之間發生。
    若然八分鐘過後我便雙目失明。」

    「我聽人講:瞓覺之前唔好睇唔好用電話,唔好睇電視。有一日我發現,如果好專心咁望住一張相,我就會可能係夢境夢見你。」

    「今年係第七年喇,原來我哋已經冇見咁耐。」

    「These are just questions.」

    「當我們行進時,周圍景物才逐漸展現;遠在天邊,我們一無所見,即使近在眼前,也僅是連續不斷、變幻不定的表象。⋯⋯納塔納埃,你要仿效那些手擎火炬為自己照路的人。⋯⋯
    你一路只管觀賞,哪裡也不要停留。關鍵是你的目光,而不是你目睹的事物。」
    安德烈·紀德 《人間食糧》Andre Gide: Les nourritures terrestres (The Fruits of the Earth)

    「或許我們還會再見吧,在那遙遠的時間之輪相接的地方。我只是存在於你少年時代回憶中的青春幻影。」
    松本零士 《銀河鐵道999》Matsumoto Leiji: Galaxy Express 999

    ‘Her absence is like the sky, spread over everything.’
    C.S. Lewis, A Grief Observed

    ‘I am going to look at the stars. They are so far away, and their light takes so long to reach us…… All we ever see of stars are their old photographs.’
    Alan Moore, Watchmen

    ‘You cannot swim for new horizons until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.’
    William Faulkner, Old men

    記憶歌單:「我會一直記住你。」

    自己其中一個比較奇怪的習慣大概是可以一整天不停重複一首歌,自然而然很容易將一首歌連繫到一個特定時段的我,以下是創作《局部失明》中曾經循環播放的歌曲。

    Anna Chim – 單戀一萬年
    AMK – 浪漫是您的本性
    Arvo Pärt – Spiegel im Spiegel
    Bach – Goldberg Variations
    Gorillaz – On Melancholy Hill
    Grieg – Cello Sonata in A-minor
    Hyukoh – When October Goes
    joji – thom
    玉置浩二 – 行かないで
    鄧麗君 – 我只在乎你
    張國榮 – 明星
    Maurice Ravel – Pavane pour une infante défunte
    Mac Miller – Self Care
    Thundercat – Dui
    Sufjan Stevens – Visions of Gideon
    Schubert – Arpeggione Sonata
    王冠聰 – 來仔細欣賞
    Unknown Mortal Orchestra – Hunnybee

    Proper Nouns
    Confession on ending things with “Localized Blindness”

    All and All
    The motivation to compose “Localized Blindness” stemmed from the desire to put an end to the whirling cycle of self destruction, the overthinking and the seemingly never-ending accumulation of negativity. In late 2018, I laughed as hard as I could then cried even harder afterwards. I would then call it a day, go to bed and let everything repeat itself again the next morning. I thought about pulling my own hair out one string after another, kept on sleeping till my head ached as if a million clouds had been made. I consulted a therapist on whether I should seek medical treatment to control these emotional upheavals, never have I thought about suicide though. As one of the many silver linings, L had been listening and analyzing my thoughts calmly. Meeting a serene therapist regularly would be the other. I have learnt to face and acknowledge different mental states. I have learnt to calm myself by deep and regulated breathing. Now I am much more stable, for at least no one expects anyone to “be happy” anymore, as if sorrow has become the default setting of the city at the moment. My city is ill, it relapsed.

    Here I attempt to record all steps and details of the production process as far as possible. As a creator, in addition to clarifying some of the causes and consequences, and the challenges confronted throughout the making, I also seek to make the work as transparent as possible through writing, as if such an exhausting act could bring forth a state of fulfillment, a sense where after all these have been said, we could begin to “confront” the work. This is, afterall, not an explanation, perhaps it is an introduction to a certain extent, or rather plainly, a set of stretches.

    “I Miss (Him/Her) Badly, Just Leave Me Alone.”
    I was 24 in 2018. I was struck by the consecutive passing of a relative and a friend within two weeks. As the intense grief was gradually relieved, I was informed to attend a funeral ceremony of my close friend’s family member. In some other moments I felt as if all relationships were about to break. I fell into a state of extreme speechlessness: I cannot comprehend my situation in the midst of such boundless loss and restlessness, like a malfunction. It is not a diagnosis based on self-reflection, but rather an intuition derived from the inability to make clear my thoughts and feelings with a very few fragmented sentences I was able to pull out during the countless conversations with friends. I could not equate my feelings with words no matter how hard I’d tried. Those uttered words pulled me further away, while my friends appeared to have grasped my condition, my emotions remained morphing, mutating and dividing unceasingly into new shapes and patterns, gradually forming an erosive form of self-loathing: all the expired explanations, the misunderstandings from projecting thoughts into one another, and the overcompensating acts… The lack of words denoted my inadequacy in verbal expression, casting yet another layer of pressure on top of my existing anxiety. Some of my very close friends were kind enough to stay by my side, toning down a lot of tugging moments by sharing with me their anecdotes here and there day after day.

    Frankly, I didn’t seek to confess any twists or turns of the aforementioned relationships I had with the people who are gone. On one hand, I could not handle the weight of those stingings, on the other I simply do not have the courage to repeat. There was an urge for an outlet, however, where all the distressing turmoils could be released. I had been entangled by contradictions and yet I still yearned to express the scattered emotions. “I understand (your feelings)”, they said, a line which one might often say to express their condolences, such an act of concern was at first alienating, until later I began to guess if something had also happened to them, if they had gone through something that echoes mine, or perhaps we all experience a kind of loss at some point. What exactly are we mourning? What triggers sorrow? C told me that she was not immensely sad, yet whenever she passed by some particular places, she would recall those “proper nouns”. Weekends that were usually packed with companionships are now emptied out, and yet to fill them with other arrangements would seem inappropriate. I once suspected such mentality of never letting go might be the best way to preserve a piece of memory, if the emotional burdens could be taken out of the context. The pleasure of crying and bowling so easily is tempting, until later when I cannot be presumptuous anymore, time gradually pushed me away, “distance” suddenly became something that I couldn’t be more aware of: the distance between me and the missing person or thing (memory-vision), the distance between me and my friends (expression), the distance between me and the body (emotion), and the distance between me and the viewer in the film (author). To magnify these various losses directly and clearly is not something I would like to do nor something I seek to remember and make public. What I look for is to visualize the blindspots that plague me. I want to tone down my identity as a narrator by constructing a shared space-time capsule, while I stored my emotions in “Localized Blindness” with my own metaphors, other viewers can still experience the work as a first person, or as an individual who has a different visual acuity.

    Test – Seamless Borders – Daily with “No-bodies”
    “Localized Blindness” takes 19 minutes and 45 seconds. It consists of two parts: testing and describing the symptoms. I originally intended to make it last for 25 minutes. There is no specific reason, a part of me wanted to push myself to try and to hysterically pull out all the pain, and at the same time, to convince myself that the presence of this work is necessary. Eventually, it took a whole year to draw an end. The wanderings in 2019 seem to spread across some akin moments from 2018.

    I would like to consider this approach I applied to editing this film as “Seamless Cut”. From the very beginning since I have learnt video making, I have noticed an unexplainable resistance from within myself towards the act of editing. It is not because I am not fond of making or watching films, though oftentimes I will be carried away by the time difference clearly divided, and it bothers me to absorb the work more thoroughly. I wonder why I do not have such doubt while reading a book, for instance. Is it because of the minute interval of “words” as a unit, or if books allow viewers to move back and forth at any time? I think of this every time I watch a long shot. Long shot does relieve some breathless anxiety. It blurs the difference between the motion time and the real time, it however does not solve my concerns towards editing. A long shot itself has nothing to do with editing, it only affects the decisions in editing. Animation or drawing can easily solve such a state of “clear division”. Indeed, many examples of experimental animation can facilitate a complete worldbuilding without any editing at all. I do not want to settle for a long shot, therefore I try to construct a matter-of-fact editing model as a “grey area” for experimentation, which is also the backbone of ​​”Localized Blindness”. The presence of such editing approach in the film is to simulate the process of an eye test, it is not made to facilitate what is “after”, the test is presented as a structure, or solely a metaphor.

    It was not until I was stuck in the black-or-white nature of a test that “Localized Blindness” shifted from a one-part structure to having an additional section on describing visual defects. I wonder whether scientific texts contain perceptual or imaginative expressions between lines, for instance, in tooth brushing demonstrations, medication guidelines or physical therapies. Compared with horoscope predictions, although describing muscle pulling seems to be more down-to-earth, is it possible to utilize a visual language to express that pulling without directly showing muscle movements? I referenced a number of audio-visual materials that feature patients with different visual impairments. They explained their personal experiences and conditions in detail, such as their sensitivity to light, their initial suspicions on vision loss, and the common misunderstandings from people with normal eyesight. Among them, I pondered upon French psychiatrist Gaëtan Gatien de Clérambault’s writings which document his change from being a cataract surgeon to a patient. Titled “Les yeux de Clérambault”, the book consists of three main sections which include his observations towards his declining visual acuity, the operation procedures, and the recovery process. In my work, I extracted some words from the text as an undertone to sculpt an anxiety towards the vision loss. Most of the image materials presented in “Localized Blindness” were quotidian fragments taken ages before having the idea to compose them into a film, some of them are group photos, some are travel images if not the most common visual records of the daily surrounding: the sky, the roads, and the landscapes. I deliberately avoided human faces. Many images in this film have been greatly enlarged. This is one way for me to store metaphors.

    Encryption and Decryption: To Escape the Reality by Reaching People with the Same Illness
    Feeling paralyzed in the middle of the process, I kept escaping into the books. A and I often describe our thoughts as “somewhat with a slight touch of sorrow”. I often go to the Mourning Diary from Roland Barthes when I am down, looking for a companion who wrote a line or two on the same date in 1977/1978. At times I also read Lee Chi-Leung’s A Room Without Myself, where words are so refinely put together as if the words have become a set of temporary harmless anesthetics prescriptions. I appropriated these time-space fabrics from the others to cover my own. I think of the eyes and that of the peacock from Hera and Argos, the sapphire eyes and the swallow in the Happy Prince. I quoted sentences from these works, extracting the connections between the persona and the loss of “identity and relationship”, “existence”, or “memory” at the moment when the eyes were lost or given up. There, I hid my images in them.

    Are You Done Yet?”
    The very first scene in this work was created on August 22, 2018, whereas the last update of the file was time stamped on November 26, 2019. There was a slight procrastination throughout the making. Even though there was no deadline, deep down I knew it would go by the board if I did not have it rounded up before 2020. Once the work was shown, I finally felt as if some part of me was being accepted. This was not because of the quality of the work, but rather the fact that although it appears to be extremely abstract, I did keep the actual fragments inside. To me, it is one feasible way to expose the naked emotions at a right distance.

    The self that writes will pause here for now.

  • 柔軟的齒輪

    往 臺中國際動畫影展 2018 札記 Notes on TIAF 2018 (Taichung International Animation Festival)

    「眼睛就是身上的燈。你的眼睛若瞭亮,全身就光明;你的眼睛若昏花,全身就黑暗。」
    馬太福音 6:22-23

    《馬太福音》這段有關眼睛的重要性的經文,在《路加福音》 11:34 也出現過。自從資訊愈變無邊無際,眼睛,相比起任何器官,是我們於瞬間與外間產生或強化連繫的重要賴以;牽動情緒的瞬間,獲取資訊的瞬間,下決定的瞬間。眼睛的接收可以增加,同時確立我的認知,那麼,我的界限止於感官的邊界嗎?

    斯坦·布拉哈格 (Stan Brakhage) 在 《Metaphors on Vision》中要求我們試試想像眼睛擺脫了人為的透視法則可能經驗的驚訝與震盪。他提出:

    “Imagine an eye unruled by man-made laws of perspective, an eye unprejudiced by compositional logic, an eye which does not respond to the name of everything but which must know each object encountered in life through an adventure of perception.”

    布拉哈格強調了我們如何看、如何感知世界,長久以來建基於人為的法則,並不絕對或唯一。那麼,我們失去了些甚麼?我們還可以怎樣看?怎樣透過「看」去認知我們的世界?

    上述所指的是一種嘗試超越視覺限制的思考,但在向後往抽象思考裏盤旋之前,我想先向前嘗試理解及觀察這視覺感官的存在。我並非追求以科學角度去釐清或解答這好奇,在此,我想以動畫影展中的幾個放映作品作為例子,記錄我因著「眼睛」而來的幾層聯想及疑問,以延伸對動畫媒介的一些可能的閱讀。

    一/眼睛作為觀察工具-科技所賦予的新視覺範圍
    機械作為眼睛的延伸並不創新,埃德沃德·邁布里奇(Eadweard Muybridge) 在十九世紀時已透過攝影裝置記錄一連串動物運動的影像(animals in motion)。個半世紀的過去,更尖銳精密的機械的出現,機械與機械之間的裝配 (assemblage) 多樣化,尤其當下這些機械連接上網絡通訊,足以讓我們透過眼前的流動裝置接觸到世界某一端的樣貌。現在愈受重視的監控(surveillance) 與審查(censorship) 問題,其中一個狀況是社交網路與雲端種種上傳數據於網絡的行為日漸普及,或早已變成日常的必須,另一個解釋可能與現今成像(image-making) 過程跨越地域界限有關。舉例,我擁有一張馬的相片,可以是真實處境,可以是模擬捏造又或偷取,而依照現今的科技,亦可是透過網絡拍攝生存在地球另一端的一隻馬。

    Google 地球 (Google Earth) 標榜可以令用家「直接在瀏覽器中探索天涯海角。」法國導演尼古拉德浮 (Nicolas Deveaux) 與製作團隊 Cube Creative 製作的一系列超照片寫實 (hyper- photorealism) 動畫中,近作 1 mètre/heure (2018) 是一套關於一群蝸牛在位於萬呎高空的機翼上隨著音樂起舞的短片。乍眼一看是一套輕鬆小品,實際上背後涵蓋了多層繁瑣且精密的影像創作工序;例如蝸牛身體及軀殼的肌理皆採用由偏光鏡 (polarized lenses) 對真實的蝸牛進行多方位拍攝的素材整理配合後期製作組合而成,蝸牛起舞的動畫來自參考一群真人舞者模擬一只只蝸牛起舞。導演提及由於航空公司及機場實在難以提供足夠的時間與場地支援讓製作團隊將實景完全數碼化,除了於短時間内實地取景為建模 (modeling) 與渲染 (shading) 提供資料外,團隊亦聯絡到飛機愛好者的幫助,以及Google 地球遠端攝取停機坪的航拍照片 (aerial photo) 提升模擬場景的可信性與準確性,最後的動畫作品亦有穿插團隊拍攝的實景影像 (live-action video)。

    雖說以機械提供的高解析度在應用於摸擬人類會連繫至恐怖谷理論 (uncanny valley) 的討論,但從上述例子可見,科技對於協助追求更進一步的現實主義 (realism) 方向的創作上不單是實際的技術協助,對時間地域限制的模糊化所增加的觀察範圍以及靈活性 (flesibility) 亦提供創作者一種挪用真實世界的影像化成虛擬世界的藍圖的可能。

    二/眼球:速度-閃鑠-殘影
    眼睛(eye) 的拉丁原文為 oculus,在建築學上意指拱頂 (dome) 上的圓形開口,讓日光和空氣可以透過這結構進入建築空間。眼睛是視覺的全部嗎?又或,我們只可以透過眼睛感受光嗎?除了眼睛,科學家亦在人體的中樞神經系統以及皮膚發現感光細胞的存在。動畫 (animation) 的動詞 (animate) 則源於拉丁語 anima,可解作靈魂 (“soul”) 或者呼吸 (“breath”),有趣的是希臘語neume除了解作氣息 (“breath”)或者旋律 (“sign”)外,neume 本身亦可指向紐姆記譜法,一個於五線譜發明前西方和東方音樂以「紐姆」作基本元素的音樂系統。若然「紐姆」或音符是音樂系統裏的基本元素,那麼動畫系統裏的基本元素是幀 (frame) 嗎?

    英國導演保羅布希 (Paul Bush) 指出「節拍」 (beat) 是劇本中最小的測量單位,電影的話就是「鏡頭」(shot) ,動畫就是「幀」(frame) 。他一系列的短片作品都圍繞著幀與幀之間的距離作實驗,在這次「臺中國際動畫影展」(2018)的專題放映中可以觀察到他創作的其中四個方向:一,透過人物動作、鏡頭與鏡頭的次序建立敘事,例子包括 His Comedy (1994),The Albatross (1998),Secret Love (2002):他首先利用16米釐黑白菲林進行真人實拍,沖曬後逐格雕刻 (engraving) ,透過不同的底片處理方式 (processing) 增添化學劑的顏色後再進行另一層雕刻,最後以光學印片 (optical printing) 剪輯而成,這與轉描機技術 (rotoscoping) 相似。二,透過動作縫合不同人物建立敘事,例子包括 Pas de Deux de Deux (2001),Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (2001) :這系列的作品透過先計劃一套動作,例如一段預先編排好的舞蹈,或者一組演戲舉動,再根據逐格安排好的動作和電腦軟件的配合指示不同演員重演,最後以一秒二十四格的播放速率播放整套照片序列。三, 透過靜態物件之間形態上的異同建立敘事,例子包括 Furniture Poetry (1999),When Darwin Sleeps (2004),Lay Bare (2012):這組作品先將搜集回來的物件依照不同規則(形狀、顏色、尺寸)分類,再以照片序列方式逐一拍攝,將物件形態上本身的視覺異同編排產生變化,塑造成一連串有延續性的動態。Lay Bare (2012) 就是混合了這與上述 (二) 的方向邀請不同年齡、性別、形態的人拍攝他們的身體和動態製作出的錄像作品。四, 透過改變幀率 (frame rate) 壓縮時間膨脹動態建立敘事,例子包括 Shinjuku Samurai (2004),Central Swiss (2006):這系列作品同樣是以實拍方式邀請不同人物參與,有別於上述三種方法的是,創作者需要事先編排一套動態,保羅布希要求被拍者保持不動,後期再以改變幀率突出被拍者凝固不動的狀態與其拍攝環境週圍的速度變動製造偏差,膨脹了本身被拍者微小的動態與習焉不覺的環境。

    上述幾個實驗方向不單勾劃了觀察行為本身所存在於時間或空間的局限性,我認為保羅布希的作品,尤其那些利用靜態物件建立敘事的動畫,雖不像算法動畫 (algorithmic animation) 般以動畫作為工具以觀察精密運算中難以概述或察覺的模式 (pattern) 或特性 (property),但這種似乎更賦予了一種另類更個人觀察、保存及喚起資料庫的方式。

    三/眼睛作為索引,鏡頭作為視覺、視點
    孔雀羽毛在希臘神話裏繼承了阿耳戈斯 (Argos) 的百顆眼睛。快樂王子的眼睛是獨一無二的藍寶石。西方比喻眼睛為靈魂之窗,東方有孟子道「觀其眸子,人焉廋哉」,還有目光如炬、雙目無神等詞語以一個人的眼睛表述或比喻他的性情或精神狀態。

    法籍越南裔導演杜來順 (Denis Do) 首套長篇動畫作品《戰火扶南》(Funan) 以一個家庭作軸心講述柬埔寨人民於1975 到1979 年赤柬 (Khmer Rouge) 執政期間的故事。夫婦阿珠 (Chou) 與阿光 (Khoun) 於遷徙期間意外與幼子蘇凡 (Sovanh) 及奶奶失散,自此分別於弱水之隔的兩個營地生活。每個角色都得經歷恐懼,阿光的弟弟因與軍人理論而險被槍斃,阿珠一直擔憂著幼子,阿光不斷嘗試逃離營地去尋找失散親人的下落。相比起建立一個非黑即白的世界,導演更想刻劃出現實種種進退兩難的困境,為了保護家人而加入紅色高棉的弟弟,為了多留兒子一些配給而搬弄是非的婦人⋯ 畫面的各種眼神特寫交代了角色的心理狀態,阿珠被軍人剪去長髮的屈辱,婦人為了討好軍人的擠眉弄眼,小男孩被軍訓奪去好奇的左顧右盼,變得循規蹈矩、目無表情,阿光於草叢裡與從軍的弟弟眉來眼去,為的是最終找回失散已久的蘇凡,即使團聚的一刻迎來是他陌生冷漠的凝視。暴政的洗禮,各人面對著極權都是如此無能為力。導演在影後談提及到,相比起普遍追求形態動作的遊刃有餘,他更希望透過畫面構圖本身的張力把人物的關係脈絡提出。

    另一邊箱,中國導演劉健的《大世界》則利用一個視點轉換的模式講述貪婪。誰是主角呢?或許是那個裝了一百萬的運動袋。為帶整容失敗的未婚妻燕子到韓國「撥亂反正」,工地司機小張持刀要脅老趙,強搶了劉叔的巨款。接踵而至的是相關又毫不相干的人;麵檔的波霸老闆娘與業餘科學家黃眼利用「透視眼鏡」看見這一袋匪夷所思的賊贓;燕子的親戚洝洝姐與她的男友,看似要幫忙看看小張的安危,實情想把錢吞併去美好的香格里拉⋯。 還有一堆在南京城中的小角色, 如路過的工地工人,在「誠信網吧」門前煩惱將來的「偽富二代」,為兒子求籤的媽媽等。那些監視式的鏡頭好像比主敘事線灑上多一層的荒誕與諷刺,例如殺手瘦皮在車上對於電台播放特朗普 (Donald Trump) 的勝利演說 (victory speech) 中一句 “and I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard-fought campaign..” 所發出的竊笑,媽媽報告外婆兒子有著「清華北大哈佛劍橋牛津的命」,又或是大叔黃眼所發明的「超級VR 紅外線全能無敵透視眼鏡」猶如淘寶網上那些過份重覆冗長的商品描述一樣。結局只是一個「去向」,鏡頭看似不斷在這黑色幽默的世界觀偷窺資本主義下的各種物慾,那些角色的起承轉合無論如何也只會如片頭所引用的托爾斯泰 (Tolstoy) 的話一樣:「春天依然是春天。」

    四/欺騙眼睛-眼睛以外
    《大世界》的大叔黃眼深信「沒有高科技是贏不了」的。看畢紀錄片《電影冒險家卡雷爾茲曼》,我好奇捷克導演雷爾茲曼 (Karel Zeman) 對科技的看法,他曾提到:

    “Man has created a grandiose world of technology, of which dread and fear are often the result… Fortunately, events in the world and our way of life are not determined by technology alone.”

    眼睛是緩慢的。十九世紀初出現的留影盤 (thaumatrope) 簡單闡明了視覺暫留 (persistence of vision) 這現象。之後的費納奇鏡 (phenakistiscope) 和走馬盤 (zoetrope) 這些光學玩具 (optical toys) 同樣指向此現象,以圖像與繼承圖像之間的視覺資訊增減構成視錯覺 (optical illusion),透過動態讓觀者在原本靜止的平面循環中得到另一面的視覺解讀 (visual interpretation)。

    雷爾茲曼在銀幕上「?了一刀」。對比於上述的光學玩具以時間殘影「欺騙」眼睛,他作出不同時空交錯的實驗,例如以一條負片分開上下兩部分拍攝,以超現實繪畫的佈景版、帶活動骨架的恐龍偶、林林總總的道具混合真人拍攝,把畫面的四邊作為視野的邊界,把空間分割處理,透過眼睛透視的空間錯配將科幻的想法與真實世界重疊。以一個被追殺的騎士跳過懸崖為例,雷爾茲曼把畫面略分為左右(距離)、前後(深度)。首先量度騎士從右邊側身進鏡一直向前,中途跳過懸崖,直至貼近螢幕左邊邊界轉彎跑往鏡頭直至出鏡離場。其後是佈景,以細膩筆觸繪畫兩邊的懸崖山景,再堆砌一顆顆石頭於適當的位置模糊人造景觀的痕跡。追殺騎士的人不幸墮崖,這並非透過道具或假人拍攝,而是以剪紙動畫 (silhouette animation) 模擬遠方的一場意外。

    早在電腦科技廣泛應用於動畫之前,雷爾茲曼已嘗試在每一個作品作出進一步的挑戰,無論是室內外的場景空間,或是科幻世界裏的種種奇異生物和機器,又或是更嚴謹的後期製作,即使背負著一整個工作團隊將來的壓力,他仍堅持作為創作者的實驗精神,挑戰以現有的技術和材料帶出他獨有的視覺。於創作晚年,雖然多次被邀策劃更大規模的特殊效果製作,他卻懷疑自己與創作的距離,從而回到剪紙動畫當中,以這種方式重新詮釋一個個童話故事,同時重塑那種孩童時期原始的創作觸感。

    英國理論天文學家馬丁·里斯(Martin Rees) 就 AlphaGo 對決李世乭引用了俄羅斯西洋棋棋手卡斯帕洛夫 (Kasparov) 的一句話去描述: ‘a good human plus a machine is the best combination’. 雷爾茲曼種種跨物料的嘗試和操作不單顯示了敏銳的觀察和精密的預備,更重要的是創作者本身不懼素材限制,反之以此為挑戰把自己的想像視野呈現,相信各種科技的嘗試乃推進自身創作的思考的觸發點,科技與自身創作可以相輔相承,但並非不可缺少的元素,創作本身才是。

    結語
    各人有不同的角度,不同的思考,不足為奇。每當他者提起這樣的想法,我便會不期然地生怕這會否是拒絕進一步溝通的表態。上述幾個作品中,我了解到的是可能在表達「看法」之前,形容所「觀察」到的這個過程的本身已是分析的開始,剖析了的是很多日積月累的經驗與細微的考量,後期的「看法」反之容易偏向價值觀與個人對於技法與敘事等各種元素的序列安排的引申想法,再者是創作者本身的個人創作理念的延伸論述,相比起要對「訊息」(message) 尋根究底,好像揭開「觀察」– 也就是形容、描述 — 本身更能讓思考擴大。

    在此感謝旅程幾位同行友人(蕭方、Calynx、阿詩) ,是她們每每在回飯店的路途上不厭其煩的分享,讓我得出以上的體會。

    (2018.11.09)

    延伸閱讀:
    Who needs democracy when you have data? by Christina Larson:
    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611815/who-needs-democracy-when-you-have-data/
    尼古拉德浮(Nicolas Deveaux)與創作團隊 Cube Creative 對 1 mètre/heure 的技術講解:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNYo3X-owJk
    Seeing without Eyes Cells throughout the body can detect light, too:
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/seeing-without-eyes1/
    保羅布希(Paul Bush)的個人網站: http://www.paulbushfilms.com/
    保羅布希的 Vimeo channel:https://vimeo.com/user5238437
    《戰火扶南》(Funan)的樣片:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8UCKhBUdWk
    有關《戰火扶南》的訪問:https://www.mirrormedia.mg/story/20180927int001/
    有關《大世界》的訪問:http://www.thepaper.cn/baidu.jsp?contid=1947465
    Donald Trump’s full victory speech:
    https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-full-transcript-video-speech-victory-acceptance-2016-11
    Film Adventurer Karel Zeman trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiAVFwEdPV8
    Visionary Filmmaker Karel Zeman:
    https://www.radio.cz/en/section/special/the-work-of-visionary-filmmaker-karel-zeman-and-his-daughter-ludmila-acclaimed-childrens-book-author-illustrator
    Netflix AlphaGo: https://www.netflix.com/title/80190844

    這次去了的場次紀錄:
    2018/10/13 16:00 焦點導演:影像頑童 保羅布希(一)
    2018/10/13 18:20 TIAF觀察站:拉丁魔幻
    2018/10/14 12:00 短text
    2018/10/16 16:00 焦點新銳:新女力爆發
    2018/10/16 18:40 短片競賽2:愛的練習題
    2018/10/16 20:40 戰火扶南

  • through eyes, we wander / through hands, perhaps speak and sing 若然透過眼睛游離,以手說話唱歌

    Brief travel/study notes after visiting Experimental Film & Video Festival in Seoul (EXiS 2018) with some dear friends (Kinchoi, Jess, and Andy)

    “6pm at Space CELL. 5pm at the bus stop. A quick meal before that. Must not get too full otherwise we might nod off.” J said. “6-11pm.”, written on the schedule, as if it’s not already underneath our palms, “Stan Brakhage, The Art of Vision”. Recalling the days, if my bloodshot eyes during freshman years were ever caused by watching films, one or two strands would have belonged to the countless encounters with either Brakhage’s Mothlight or Ito’s Spacy, both oft screened without a word before or afterwards.

    Crying baby. Swinging awe. Elongating female body. Nipples. Flakes. Fluids. Flickers. Brakhage’s The Art of Vision never ceases to push and pull the wobbling presence, scratch and stretch recklessly the imaginary in the 250-minutes timeline across five sections. Besides a couple of dozes in the prelude (awfully sorry), everything that follows strikes like lightning, despite how much the fragments reappear, superimpose and interweave, deconstruct and reconstruct the work’s ever evolving paradigm. The film is as lucid as a pulse, yet also by virtue of such demanding (on-screen and off-screen) presence it makes any descriptive attempts ambiguous or null. Is it possible to make notes, literally or pictorially, about experimental films? I wonder.

    These days I have been chancing through a broad range of works and chewing them over and over with friends. Beyond embracing the materiality of celluloid film, viewing analogue film always invokes in me an almost reflexive inquisitiveness for the image-making process or the material source, somehow. Film reveals multiple pathways and distances between filmmakers/cameras and their subject matters over time; it shows bodily movements; it leaves traces of the maker’s hands in the acts of producing, editing or film processing, most of which could now be replaced with clicks and singular buttons in digital filmmaking. The state of anticipation, whether in working and reviewing (as a filmmaker), or in screening (as audience), also changes significantly. I am not sure if such changes hint at the vanishing of our intrinsic curiosity. It is, however, rather obvious that in celluloid or digital film, the demand on practical knowledge of the interior workings of the black-boxed processes and aesthetic command are compatible – software packages or mechanics of the camera with its chemical processes alike. There are, though, obvious differences. Unlike the anxiety of facing unfamiliar algorithms or the unforeseeable crashes in the computing process, the analogue film’s tactility and transparency ­­and its accompanying devices seem to give a more dependable safety net. Rather than being left high and dry, “even the worst case scenario is still manageable by simply opening the machine, fixing it bit by bit then trying again,” A said, as if the mistakes are also some tempting invitations to further alter, augment, and challenge the existing mechanics.

    Analogue films’ hands-on mode restores to us a kind of boldness and vitality in image-making. This is particularly distinct when we had the great pleasure to look at a series of animated works from avant-garde filmmaker Robert Breer during the festival. I first learnt about his legacy of direct cinema from his eccentric documentary short Homage to Jean Tinguely’s Homage to New-York, where his sometimes shaky camera movements and repeated sequences seems to suggest an active way of seeing. Little did I know that aside from his collaborations with the E.A.T. (Experiments in Art and Technology), he has created such a dynamic body of animated experimentations. I was stunned, barely capable of pulling myself together. In the screenings, it was as if I just had a quick glance of someone’s life, which otherwise could be described as some animated visual “letters” or “diaries” that record the humorous thoughts and wildest experimentations at an earlier stage of his artistic practice. Staying on, I started to immerse into his intimate documents as well, a rich blend of personal videos and self-portraits. Every now and then, certain image fragments appear like time capsules that withhold a mumble, perhaps also a metaphor, or a touch of melancholy reminding us of the transience of life, invoking particularly Breer’s having another little daughter in his advanced years. Breer’s animations do not solely ignite life as figures or forms, but they also point towards a prominent presence of a living mind confronting everyday situations as unique temporal and spatial entities, through the act of shooting and drawing.

    A strong sense of liberation and honesty in Breer’s works is utterly courageous. There are often doubts among friends as we discuss if experimentation ever ages, and if we should not repeat our predecessors’ experimentation, or, particularly with the handy digital tools available nowadays, how we, as a generation so distant from the analogue mechanics could ever critically engage in film and deliver a thoughtful work without the smoked coating of nostalgia.

    It hasn’t been very long ago since I first held a Bolex and shot. I wasn’t quite comfortable with it then, but I still recalled, vaguely, the numbers and steps that got my fingers clumsy. The rolling and flickering sound felt familiar, just like a metronome, the rewinding of film, the slight swinging when holding camera are solid sensations. And the very act of shooting was so weighty, like when I was playing a musical instrument. Composer Claude Debussy once suggested that “music is the space between the notes, or the dividing of the tones,” which animator Norman McLaren echoed with a similar claim, “Animation is not the art of drawings that move but the art of movements that are drawn; what happens between each frame is much more important than what exists on each frame; animation is therefore the art of manipulating the invisible interstices that lie between the frames.” And Stan Brakhage makes the linkage for me, “Of all the arts, music is closest to film.”

    I must confess I am still completely clueless of what film (or frankly anything) is, but I am luckily still enjoying every moment of the ride in my study of film and animation.

    Written by YAN Wai-yin, Winnie

    Special Thanks to Richard Tuohy and Dianna Barrie for their warm encouragement and support to the Floating Projects Collective, and to Lee Hang-jun for curating such a mind-boggling festival.


    若然透過眼睛游離,以手說話唱歌

    與親愛的友人(建才+Jess+Andy)前往韓國首爾實驗短片節EXiS的旅遊/學習札記
    「下午6時要到達Space CELL。 下午5時要到達巴士站。 在那之前來點速吃的餐。 千萬別吃全餐,否則可能會打瞌睡。」J 如是說。「6-11pm…」把它寫在時間表上,「…斯坦·布拉哈格(Stan Brakhage),The Art of Vision」,把它寫在手板之上。 想當年,若然我在大學時期的那滿佈血絲的雙眼是由觀看影片所引起,那麼當中的一兩絲大概會是基於無數次與布拉哈格的《蛾火》(Mothlight)或伊藤高志(Takashi Ito)的 Spacy 之相遇莫屬,儘管看片的前後,大都沒有引子或註腳。

    哭泣的嬰兒。 擺蕩的驚嘆。 拉長了的女性身體。乳頭。雪花。液體。閃爍。 布拉哈格的 The Art of Vision 從未憩息於搖晃的推推拉拉,在橫跨250分鐘分五節的時間線中,肆無忌憚的把影象刮劃、拉扯。除了在前奏中打了幾個瞌睡(非常抱歉)外,隨後的一切都如閃電落下,任憑碎片重新出現、疊加與交織,瓦解和重塑使作品不斷演化。這部電影像脈搏般一樣清晰,但也憑藉如此嚴謹的(銀幕上和銀幕外)存在,使得任何敘述性的試圖變得模糊或無力。 為實驗電影寫下文字或圖像式的筆記可能嗎? 我如此思考。

    這些日子,我遍覽了各式各樣的作品,並與朋友一遍又一遍的討論著。 除了菲林電影(celluloid film)本身的物質性外,觀看類比影片 (analog film)(或前數碼影片) 總會在某種程度上,近乎條件反射般喚起我對圖像製作過程或物料來源的求知慾。隨著時間的推移,影片揭示了影片製作人/攝影機、以及他們的選材之間在多種路線上遊走的距離; 它顯示了製作影片時身體與機器的動態 (bodily movements); 在製作、編輯或影片處理過程中,負片留下製作人雙手的痕跡,其中大部分現在或許已被數碼影片製作中的「點擊(click)」和某個按鍵所取代。無論是在(作為影片製作人)製作或複習期間,又或(作為觀眾)在放映期間,那種期盼的狀態都帶著明顯的變化。我不確定這些變化,是否暗示著我們內在的好奇心已水逝雲卷。然而,不管是在菲林或數碼影片中,對黑盒內部運作和美學指導上那些技術性知識上的需求,是顯而易見地相容 – 軟件的組合與相機的機械結構,有著相似的化學過程,但兩者也有著明顯的差異,不同於面對陌生演算方法或使用電腦時無法預見的死機情況的焦慮,負片的觸感和透明度,以及其附帶設備,似乎有著更加可靠的安全網。對比面對著電腦發呆和孤立無援,「即便最差的情況,仍然能透過簡單地打開機器、一步步修復,一步步摸索。」A這樣說,錯誤彷彿變成誘人的邀請,讓人進一步嘗試修整,優化和挑戰現有的機制。

    類比影片的手動模式,讓我們在圖像處理中恢復了一種大膽和活力。這點在我們觀賞前衛錄像家羅伯特·布瑞爾 (Robert Breer)的一系列動畫作品中尤其明顯。初接觸布瑞爾是基於直接電影(direct cinema與他其中一個簡短古怪的紀錄片Jean Tinguely’s“Homage to New-York),那時而活潑的鏡頭動作與重覆的連續鏡頭,仿佛提出了一種積極的觀察模式。我不知道原來他除了與E.A.T. (Experiments in Art and Technology)的合作外,還創造了不少充滿生氣的動畫實驗,看得人目瞪口呆,好不容易才回過氣。我就像貪婪地瀏覽了某人的生命、或可以被描述為一些記錄著他藝術實踐早期階段的幽默思想和最瘋狂的實驗、一些動畫視覺的「信件」或「日記」。那些豐富的個人視頻、那些自畫像… 我逐漸沉浸在他的私密文件之中。某些形象碎片看起來就像時間膠囊,隱藏著一句註腳,也許是一種隱喻,或是一種滲透憂鬱的提醒,提醒著生命的短暫性,這在他面對著新生小女兒的晚年時期尤其明顯。他的動畫並不僅僅將生命視為姿態或形狀,它們亦指向一個活生生的頭腦如何面對日常情境,並通過拍攝和繪畫行為把這些獨特的時空再現。

    強烈的解放感與無比的真誠,充斥於布雷爾的作品之中。當與友人討論時,一些疑問總是揮之不去:「實驗」會否有一刻再變得不合時宜?我們是否不應再度重複前人的實驗?又或是,生於數碼時代的我們,該如何具批判性地學習與運用負片,展示深思熟慮的創作,而不被塗抹上一層煙熏了的懷舊情懷?

    回想起來,第一次拿著Bolex 攝錄機,也不過只是約一年前左右。那時,我對它並沒多在意,但還是能模糊地憶起那些負片的數字格,與讓我感覺手指拙劣的拍攝步驟。上鏈和齒輪轉動的聲音倒是很熟悉,就像一部拍子機、負片的倒帶、攝錄機在手中微微晃動,種種手動的過程都有種實實在在的感覺。Bolex 非常沉重,拍攝就像提著樂器演奏。作曲家克勞德·德彪西曾經提出:『音樂是音符之間的空間,或音調的劃分』,動畫師諾曼·麥克拉倫(Norman McLaren)亦回應了類似的說法,「動畫不是會動的圖畫,而是以繪畫方式表達出來的動作;每幀之間發生的事情比每幀上的事情重要;因此,動畫是操縱框架之間隱形空隙的藝術。」而Stan Brakhage為我提供了它們之間的聯繫:「在所有藝術中,音樂最接近電影。」

    我必須承認我仍然對影像(或坦白說是對任何東西)感到陌生,但很幸運地我依然享受著在電影和動畫研究中的每一刻。

    (英文原文:忻慧妍 | 中文翻譯:駱敏聰)

  • 黑色的音符,黑色的顏料,透明的邊界:《港樂太古樂賞-波蘭動畫70年》札記

    氣喘吁吁跑上了香港大學的大會堂,幸好人龍還不算太長,趕上在前排滿座前進去。這由香港國際電影節與香港管弦樂團聯辦的節目「港樂太古樂賞」:《波蘭動畫70年》,以三首波蘭作曲家(高歷斯基(Henryk Górecki)、班努夫尼克(Andrzej Panufnik)、彭德雷茨基(Krzysztof Penderecki))的音樂與波蘭動畫家威爾欽斯基(Mariusz Wilczyński)的現場動畫表演慶祝當地的藝術文化。節目於小型音樂廳演出,演奏台的設置與一般音樂會無異,唯獨台上多了一個大型銀幕,台右又多了一個工作檯與一屏黑色畫架。短短一小時左右的節目先以純樂團演奏開始,其後兩個音樂作品則配現場動畫表演,音樂廳主要的照明都關掉了,只餘下每個譜架上掛著的小型閱書燈,畫架的幾盞燈和台上的大銀幕。

    「這(彭德雷茨基的作品)需要看。」這是我在大提琴家石坂團十郎(Danjulo Ishizaka)演奏彭德雷茨基的《第一大提琴協奏曲》(Krzysztof Penderecki’s Cello Concerto no. 1)中段突然冒出的想法。這刻意把觀眾目光引導到銀幕上的安排讓我想起歌劇,又或是關於舊電影的記錄。為映畫現場聲音配樂早在早期電影(Early Cinema)時期出現,當時的影象由已經拍攝及剪輯的片段作菲林放映,與近期朋輩間相互提起的久石讓 (Joe Hisaishi ) 來港音樂會技巧上大致相若,但前者是因菲林科技的限制繼而以透過現場配樂讓觀眾更容易投入影像世界,後者「繪形繪聲」的功能早已在吉卜力動畫(Studio Ghibli)放映在大銀幕時發生,音樂會的現場配樂反而成為主角,透過樂團演奏一首首耳熟能詳的樂章配上濃縮的動畫節錄放映,勾起觀眾對吉卜力動畫的回憶,猶如於吉卜力世界飛翔一樣。現時影音藝術表演(audiovisual performance)的技術也支援和打開了表演多樣性的可能,例如以電腦媒介軟件(computer mediated softwares)為主的錄影帶騎師(VJ),又或配以舞蹈,或裝置藝術其他跨媒介而發生的各種。常見的場合中,聲畫的出現,不管是以聲配畫或以畫配聲,都脫離不了主客關係的等次,或流於功能化。火車的聲效是為了令火車的擦過變得更像真,閃爍的舞台令經由大喇叭傳遞的衝擊能同時衝向眼球。這並不是要說明好壞,我只是感到疑惑,為甚麼這場演奏會的視覺處理有此安排,又是否有必要。

    彭德雷茨基是先鋒派波蘭作曲家,1960年作品《廣島受難者輓歌》(Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima)最為人熟悉, 其作品經常出現密集音簇(dense cluster)、快速的半音(semitone)和增四度(tritone),旋律尖銳複雜。他的樂譜也有獨立的圖像記譜(graphical notation)方法,與演奏傳統古典音樂不同,有的符號不單標記著音高(pitch)、音長(duration)或節奏(rhythm),還標記著演奏方法(instruction)或者行為(action)。就這一系列的圖像記譜作品,他曾經在1962年作品《螢光》(Fluorescences)中提到:What most interests me about this piece is the sound, the liberated sound which resides outside the traditional manufacture of the instrument, indeed outside the instrument itself, and is free of the traditional associations of the patterned time. The individual instruments and their players too are for me quite simply a total source of sound. 這個晚上的這場演奏會,給我最深刻印象的,大概是協奏曲中段大提琴獨奏的撥奏(pizzicato)與拋弓(ricochet bowing)之間還帶有拍擊大提琴的面板。這要求的是高度靈活與技巧的「失控」,手在指板(fingerboard)上以各種詭異的形態把樂譜顫抖、驚惶、不安與浮躁的情緒揮灑在空氣之中。後來看書,當中提到這作品帶以各種樂器漸弱(decrescendo)稍作「休息」,整首長約二十五分鐘的協奏曲由獨立一整個樂章(movement)完成,與常見的三個樂章結構不同。由其在大提琴獨奏的裝飾奏(cadenza)之前,樂句只標記要拉奏出最高的音(topmost note),而音高是並未有標記的(“pitch not indicated”)。這充滿不穩定性的的樂曲,對獨奏家石坂團來說迎刃有餘;這透不過氣來的演奏,盡在反映獨奏者的造詣,但有必要把這演繹放在聚光燈下嗎?

    彭德雷茨基《廣島受難者輓歌》的縮寫和符號. 圖片來源:Contemporary Compositional Practice

    彭德雷茨基《廣島受難者輓歌》樂章的開端/圖片來源:Contemporary Compositional Practice

    古典鋼琴家格倫・赫伯特・顧爾德(Glenn Gould)曾在散文集《The Glenn Gould Reader》(音樂評論家Tim Page 輯)中寫道:Briefly, he was tired of what he called the “non-take-two-ness” of the concert experience – the inability of a performer to correct finger slips and other minor mistakes. He pointed out that most creative artists are able to inker and to perfect, but that the liver performer must re-create his work from scratch every time he steps onto a stage. 依顧爾德的說法,現場演奏並不利於表達自我對樂章最完美的詮釋,這點亦可解釋為何後期顧爾德會專注於錄音發展,並以多重剪接錄音達至所追求的至佳效果。至於動畫,尤其手繪動畫,主要以逐幀(frame-by-frame)繪畫,又或透過電腦軟件輔助,以現場表演而言,前者若要求細緻渲染(rendering)則變得費時,後者多為已事先準備的圖象序列(image sequence)或電腦程式製作即場視覺拼湊(collage)。於是,這次的演出,動畫以強調現場性、現場音樂配襯為側重點,究竟為了甚麼?這個晚上於台上發生的現場性又如何影響我們對表演的理解呢?

    另一邊廂,威爾欽斯基(Mariusz Wilczyński)左手握著手提攝影機,右手拿住油畫筆掘一團白色的糊往紙上塗,再把已畫好的剪紙貼上去。一個工廠,一所學校,用黑色記號筆畫一棵樹,還有它的影子,這就是一個城市,一個以黑白線條構成的世界。威爾欽斯基搖擺的鏡頭成了目光,目光投影到樂團上的大銀幕。台上漆黑一片,大家都專注於銀幕上的動畫。遠望威爾欽斯基拿著紙船在畫布上的移動,靜態的紙張因他手部的郁動而「活」起來,鏡頭下的邊框遮蔽了他的指頭,呈現船隻穿梭城市的大街小巷,小主角浮游四周的流動景觀。畫面時而是他實時的繪畫表現,時而穿插他事前以逐幀方法繪畫的短片。

    突然,他手拾一片刀片往紙上亂掃。我的眼成為了證人。

    我的耳朵聽見弦樂手用力把弓壓在弦線上拖行,銅管樂雄厚的低音,接著大提琴獨奏與小提琴部分的高低聲區(register)互相交錯。眼前畫在紙上的人偶被?得支離破碎,世界被摧毀,粉碎,威爾欽斯基用手把顛簸的裂縫再度撕開,下層的紙畫還有另一個人物,刀片繼續往紙上狠狠地滑行,他拿起粗闊的油掃,沾滿黑色顏料後在紙上壓著拖行。那厚重的黑色漿液緩緩蓋在人偶的面,蓋在城市,蓋在紙上僅餘的白,繼而又再往下撕到另一層紙,彷彿陷進無底深潭一樣。

    忐忑的左顧右盼,表演充滿著「危機」,如顧爾德上述有關 ”non-take-two-ness” 的想法,無論經過多少練習與排演,台上的每一次表演都是返回到開始由零重新構建。在我看來,這次的演奏會並非拘泥於它是否因來回重複完善而完美,又或者說,這完美再並非是單純對展示準確性與精雕細琢的技巧的追求。台上面前的一切都無法以影音光碟傳達,它不會重複,表演者與觀者的共時、同一時空下所共同經歷的種種「未知數」;如彭德雷茨基樂章中那些曖昧的指示,某一個聲頻能觸發下一段旋律的機關,又如威爾欽斯基種種以行為介入圖像的舉動,觀眾在這裡經驗圖像和旋律的創造,再遠距離的一同目睹無傷害的「暴力」,就是那些畫作一下子被一張一張的丟棄,成為創作者腳邊的廢物紙堆。台上的那個世界就在大眾眼前完結而逝去,不由得誰的反抗。被動與拉扯要求在場的人察覺所有在這刻發生的事只會停留在我們之間,以後流傳的都只是片面,斬開了的零碎紀錄。

    回想去年在臺中看Jerzy Kucia 其中一個疑問是那些真人電影鏡頭(live-action film footage)如何擴展那作品的動畫創作可能。為甚麼要刻意選取這麼細緻的景象進行抽象的後期處理呢?更甚,為何我會為此感到懷疑?我很慚愧。這次威爾欽斯基的動畫配合彭德雷茨基的樂章,在種種激昂混沌的狀態下,我同樣的疑惑。若然動畫(animation)是源自拉丁文的anima,解作「空氣,呼吸,生命的重要元素,生命,靈魂」的話,攝影,真實鏡頭,手繪,電腦模型各種各樣的技法或許也只是工具(instrument),在這些文體取向(stylistic approach)的背後,是頑強而自我的生命的湧流,散放著他們豐實的聲音。

    Birkut, it’s good that you’re here. (…) You see, the camera works according to its own rules. It’s a soulless tool which records what it sees, nothing else. (…) I understand it, but… Well, but you just can’t do such things. It’s enough to tell me what needs to be done and I’ll do it. I am a human being. You can’t stuff food into a man as if he was a goose.
    — From Andrzej Wajda’s film Man of Marble (1977)

    繼1970年的政治動盪(Grudzień 1970),1971-1975期間波蘭正值改革時期,物價飆升,政權移交,又因向外借債過多及改革計劃決策不理想而導致人民多番抗議及罷工。種種社會動盪亦促成了藝術的興起,例如新一代波的電影運動-道德焦慮電影(Cinema of moral anxiety),關注波蘭大眾市民於共產主義日常所面對的狀況和衝突,透過鏡頭審問當時受到高壓統治下的社會與政治問題,以及人民的言論或創作自由。

    (2018.04.17)| 記 《港樂太古樂賞-波蘭動畫70年》於 2018年3月16日(星期五)在香港大學百周年校園李兆基會議中心大會堂的演出。

    延伸閱讀:
    Krzysztof Penderecki, His Life and Work: Encounters, Biography and Musical Commentary

    European National Identities. Elements. Transitions. Conflicts, Chapter: Poland: A Nation of the In-Between., Publisher: Transaction, Editors: In R. Vogt, W. Cristaudo, A. Leutzsch, pp.155-171. http://gis.hkbu.edu.hk/files/K%20Sliwinski_Poland%20a%20nation%20of%20the%20In%20Between.pdf

    Mariusz Wilczyński 的網頁:http://www.wilkwilk.pl/

    Mariusz Wilczyński – Performance dla TOK FM w Muzeum Historii Żydów Polskich w Warszawie
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEOFr6J_HnA

    久石讓 in 武道館 ~與宮崎駿動畫一起走過的25年~(DVD)

    太古樂賞-波蘭動畫70年的資料:http://www.hkphil.org/tch/concerts_and_ticket/concerts/concertdetail.jsp?id=655

    The Passion of Krzysztof Penderecki:https://www.residentadvisor.net/features/1234

    關於臺中國際動畫影展的記錄:http://floatingprojectscollective.net/art-notes/white-time-taichung-animation-festival/

  • 白色的時間-往 臺中國際動畫影展 札記

    「專心做電影的時候,人生就這樣慢慢溜走了。」他說。反射的白光打在他的身上,不知看著二十三十年前自己所做的作品是什麼感覺呢。

    兩個月的假期過了一大半,本想專注留在家裏混,但腦裏還總是想著要去。看了幾次户口少得可憐的餘額,還是先得去,反正有廉航,台中生活消費也不高。就這樣把電腦、筆記本和幾件衣物塞進大背包裏前往機場出發去台中,大概花了一小時左右就到達,不用等行李,只算飛行時間的話跟從家往山上上班差不多。

    動畫節為期五天,以放映為主,也有數個講座和工作坊,放映涵蓋學生競賽短片、國際短片、長片、專題放映和兩場焦點導演放映。一張預售票賣八十台幣,比香港的一杯咖啡還要便宜,沒多想就買了八張,除了到埗後的首兩天去了幾個老地方,整個旅程基本上也在會場裏過,住的房間也只離會場十數分鐘的路程。

    2017/10/13 12:30《發現新視角:感官衝擊》/ 14:40《海邊的露易絲 + 蟹蟹你的愛》
    2017/10/14 18:00《焦點導演:光音詩人葉茲庫夏(一)》/ 21:00《今天開始我要放棄夢想》
    2017/10/15 12:10《發現新視角:水墨來潮》/ 14:20《國際短片競賽 3》
    2017/10/16 13:10《學生作品競賽 3》/ 19:10《焦點導演:光音詩人葉茲庫夏(二)》

    因為太晚決定的關係,未能買到開幕電影實在有一點可惜。每次看畢一場放映的即時反應還認為早該有理無理能買的戲票都買,能看的都看一遍。這八場放映雖然並非所有作品都引人矚目,但整體上每場放映節目的作品選片,主題放映尤其,都能顯示到整個影展對討論動畫這個媒介的積極開放性,引伸到很多自己待在家裏不會發生的思考。

    首當其衝是自己最期待的節目之一:《感官衝擊》,憶起在學時期與同學和教授一起到柏林看動畫影展時最深刻的放映節目也跟這個名字相若。動畫可以是全屬虛構,也可以是現實的延伸,可以是整潔完美的抽象幾何,也可以從日常生活中的碎片抽絲剝繭再重組節錄而成。一到會場,工作人員早在門口預備了一副副即棄的3D 眼鏡,運用幾何的光學錯覺動畫放在這場放映中彷彿像一個開光儀式。動畫中的幾何圖形雖花巧玲瓏,但坐在灰棗紅色的影院座椅上,我只確實地感覺到耳朵的疲倦和眼球的陣陣刺痛,算不上興奮,不過以感官衝擊的動畫而言,這類聲音視覺作品的確算是衝擊的起步點吧。此外,其他影片都叫人嘖嘖稱奇,《私頻無極限》(MeTube 2 : August Sings Carmina Burana)以CGI動畫、真人綠幕和後期制作拍攝而成,私頻,或原稱的MeTube,仿照家庭電影的低技術拍攝語言,利用搖擺遊離不定的鏡頭不斷轉換螢幕視點,偶然的低清畫面模糊真實拍攝與科幻想像的邊界,把一件本來屬於平凡無奇的個人視像紀錄變為共同經歷的荒誕奇幻旅程。安娜瓦沙夫(Anna Vasof)的作品向來引人入勝,《時間快步走》(When Time Moves Faster)整合她一系列的動畫實驗,透過拍攝實時操作精巧的裝置,再在錄像中重組時間,演變成一個個與裝置環境或實時的行為動態互相呼應的循環動畫。這樣把實時製作過程到最終的循環動畫集合在一起播放,雖然未能仔細地觀察個別裝置或瓦沙夫的實驗方向,但每次看到她的行為實驗都能直接指向對每一格(幀)的時間距離,以及實時耗費的體力(製造以及操作裝置)和實驗後循環動畫的時間差距(大多實驗的結果都不多於半分鐘),真的希望他日有機會以另一種觀看模式閱讀她的作品。雷磊和蘇文托馬斯(Thomas Sauvin) 的《照片手工上色》(Hand Colored no.2)是買這場放映場的原因,相比起前作《照片回收》(Recycled)中收集大量上海居民的舊照片再處理成為零碎的日常生活記錄,《照片手工上色》的照片需求數量大大減低,但所需要的時間並未顯得有所減少,由前作的動態處理中取決於一張照片與另一張照片之間的影象重疊,變為現作透過同一張照片但重覆的處理手法產生一張又一張新的影象,看來只是收集和篩選照片的時間變為手工上色的時間而已。雷磊在影後談中提及這新作想透過挪用這些不相關的個人照片,以上色的方法加上動態,連繫成為一組不確實的另類歷史。或許自己對手工上色這個技法毫不認識,這次的實驗對我而言並沒有太大衝擊,但與以往動畫處理歷史大多基於口述歷史或文本,以重塑為基調,雷磊這次以個體的歷史影像塑造出另一種關於個體,或群體記憶的影像解讀試驗無疑是與別不同。 最為驚喜,亦是自己是次影展最喜歡的作品是鄭多喜(Dahee JEONG)的《微塵光陰》(The Empty),精細優雅的筆觸配合三維軟件的角度輔助下使空間處理發揮得更淋漓盡致,旁白的男聲一直喃喃自語,想像存在於房間中的物件都擁有自己的故事。牆上的畫,書櫃裏一本本貼有作家大頭照的書,到桌上的蘋果,房間裡的床,存在過的事物都會留下痕跡嗎,所有殘留記憶的物件都被掏空的時候,我還擁有什麼可以哀掉呢。

    晚上的放映雖然跟中午的放映無關,但看畢也延伸了自己對技法、語境與感知的想法。法國與加拿大合作的長片作品《海邊的露易絲》講述老人露易絲因錯過了火車而獨自一人遊蕩在孤島的闖蕩以及憶起年輕的時候在島上發生的一點一滴。儘管片中沒有很多對白(不竟大部份時間都只有露易絲和小狗,雖然小狗在片中會說話),畫面以二維手繪與三維建模的視覺差別把背景及群眾與主角露易絲和小狗分開,除了突顯露易絲與他者離離合合的距離外,也深化了後期露易絲自己孤獨無援的無力感。相比一直所認知的以二維與三維配合減低製作時間和成本的取向,這暫時是看過最合乎情理的處理方法。

    對《水墨來潮》我並沒有太多想法,至於學生與國際競賽,說實話也只是第一次看這些因競賽組合而成的放映,整場放映猶如眼睛的狂想曲,五花八門的題材與不同技巧的展示實在叫人興奮。唯一令人失望的是學生羅荷的作品《用一天的時間回憶我》(2017)對久野遥子的作品《Airy Me》(2013)過份參考,雖然也是運用了長鏡頭和相似的色彩處理,但明顯久野遥子的作品擁有更多的解讀空間,例如每一幀每一條獨立線條的色彩變換,透過三維軟件確立更精確的建築空間,將像真的建築空間和爆炸有力的幻影前後交替與重疊,空間應用於視點同時亦勾劃著不同事件的時間點,還有片中不斷重複的符號,不知道日本有否與周公夢蝶相近的故事,每次看久野的作品都會因那獨特的速度節拍和各種視覺元素與叙事互相緊扣所著迷。可能是太過近似的關係,我看羅荷的作品感到完全摸不著頭腦。

    不過,在影展中最受到衝擊的必定是焦點導演的放映單元。他叫葉茲庫夏(Jerzy Kucia),是一位波蘭導演。放映分開兩場,第一場主要播放導演事前準備的作品節錄,把自己的實驗動畫歷程和每個作品中的挑戰和關注細節交代出來,再配以幾個完整作品放映作結,第二場則是完整放映回顧與映後談。由他對黑白正負空間的鋪排,到把劇情聲音(diegetic sound)演變成旋律,庫夏說他的作品抽取現實可見的影像配上自己的記憶組合而成,並沒有甚麼主旨或中心思想。畫面彷彿不斷重複,聲音結構卻漸變複雜。腦海的想像慢慢抽離眼前的影像,回過頭來卻不感到迷失。他提到觀眾不必拘泥於能否理解作品,但對此我有一點保留,畢竟他生處的社會環境,甚至創作氣氛在這數十年間都經歷不同的轉變,何況他所拍攝的影像(例如木頭車,大公雞等)都是城市人比較陌生且容易抽離的物件,難免會好奇這些事物在作品中出現如何可以推敲更深一層的解讀。

    「一首詩很可能不留任何痕跡地消失,但也有可能在人們的記憶中留下印象,並且引起重複的行為。它的述行性並不是單獨的、可以一次完成的行為,而是一種重複,這種重複使它所重複的認識有了生命。」(Jonathan Culler)*

    「每個人都擁有自己的電影語言,而在評價作品的時候亦必須要留意。」他說。旅程短短的數天都把自己完全陷入電影院和毫無一物的房間中,「專心做電影的時候,人生就這樣慢慢溜走了。」,究竟是什麼令我們願意把自己的生命濃縮成一小段影像呢。嘀嗒,嘀嗒。

    (2018.01.02)

    ---

    可供重溫的參考資料:

    Anna Vasof’s vimeo / https://vimeo.com/annavasof

    Lei Lei and Thomas Sauvin / Recycled / https://vimeo.com/154480199

    Thomas Sauvin and Lei Lei / Hand-Colored Photography (Interview) / https://vimeo.com/161896710

    Dahee JEONG / The Empty (Trailer) / https://vimeo.com/158120311

    Daniel Moshel / MeTube 2: August sings Carmina Burana / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o19cnfIOuU0

    Jean-François Laguionie / Louise by the Shore (Trailer) / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ni9k7b2aBVo

    羅荷 /用一天的時間回憶我 (訪問及影片)/

    http://animapp.tw/stores/shares/taiwanese/1951-reminisce-me-with-the-time-of-a-day.html

    久野遥子 /Airy Me / https://vimeo.com/70463623

    Jerzy Kucia 在網上能找到的幾個作品

    *Jonathan Culler,李平 譯 ,《文學理論》,香港:牛津大學出版社,2016,頁138。