Art for a New Audience

HK Magazine
By Grace Tsoi | Mar 08, 2012

Shanghai Street, one of the longest streets in the city, runs through the aging district of Yau Ma Tei. Dotted with old tenement buildings and traditional shops, at first glance the street seems an unlikely home for contemporary art. But a group of local artists think otherwise. In an attempt to breathe some new life into an old district, they founded Woofer Ten, an alternative art space.

“The artist-audience relationship is no longer dictated by display and reception,” says Lee Chun-fung, the curator of Woofer Ten. “Of course, museums are important, but what’s more important is the emotional exchange between artists and the audience.” The population of Yau Ma Tei is largely working class. For many, art might seem like a distant thing. So the artists of Woofer Ten try to make the space inviting for the community. Many kaifongs (local residents)—including Pakistani children, retired men and old grannies—have become frequent visitors, who come to mingle and enjoy the art. “The essence of Woofer Ten is to create a platform for artists to engage with the community. It is a friendly place, and kaifongs can also contribute their opinions. It is an enriching interaction between artists and kaifongs,” Lee says.

Woofer Ten is not afraid of taking a political stance—the controversial de-facto referendum of 2010, Chinese authorities' treatment of Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo and the upcoming chief executive election have all been themes of the window displays, posters and artwork in the little enclave. Political activism is a notable trait among Hong Kong artists, and the ones affiliated with Woofer Ten are no exception. Somewhat ironically, the space is in fact funded by the government. “We vowed to make funding Woofer Ten the most regrettable decision ever made by the Arts Development Council,” Lee says jokingly.

Running Woofer Ten is no easy task—especially when some local artists refuse to shy away from spreading pointed messages in the face of the city’s political conservatism. However, they think that all their efforts are worthwhile, and they feel obliged to speak out. “Artists are actually also public intellectuals, and public intellectuals have the responsibility to voice their opinion," says Lee. “In a place such as Hong Kong, there’s no way for artists to avoid politics. This is something that we need to think about, and artists should not just hide themselves inside the studios.”


  〈活化〉《深圳商報》(2012-09-17)C06 萬象


說到那個時代,當下的老牌書店PAGE ONE為了壓倒近開業的誠品書店,正祭出張愛玲遺物展的法寶。

Tradition trampled in “fine arts” frenzy

By Doug Meigs May 23, 2012

Fung Kwok’s paintings are relics of a rapidly changing society.
The elderly man hunched over his worktable every day, at a cramped, unlicensed stall on 443 Shanghai Street. Using calligraphy pens and erasers he produced charcoal portraits, based on photographs.
Fung’s works often adorned household altars honoring his clients’ deceased relatives. He also sold artistic sketches. There was a portrait of Mao Zedong, and a nude woman, lifted from a vintage pornographic film.
Demand for Fung’s charcoal paintings had fallen over the last few decades. Inexpensive photocopying became commonplace, and in turn, his skills less needed. Yet the man retained clientele. A pink receipt book documents a steady stream of transactions between 2009 and 2010, proof he had recently produced about one painting every three days. A 16x20 inch portrait of a one person would cost about HK$400-500.
Fung is the picture of dignity, himself. He wears gold-rimmed glasses with his silver hair parted nearly on the side. About this time last year, he was painting at his stall. The city’s arts sector percolated at the time with further anecdotal evidence that Hong Kong was relinquishing its “cultural desert” status to become “the arts hub of Asia”.
Interest in the Fine Arts again consumed Hong Kong when ArtHK returned to Wan Chai last weekend for the fifth straight year. This year, Fung was absent from his usual workplace in Yau Ma Tei. His stall had been almost completely demolished a few months earlier. All that remains now is a small wooden cart.
He had spent nearly 40 years reproducing photographs in the vicinity. The stall in Yau Ma Tei was his second. He had been forced to vacate the first when Langham Place Shopping Mall was built in the 1990s. Stalls like Fung’s once were common around Hong Kong. Only a few remain.
Fung had a stroke over the winter. While he lay in hospital, a notice was posted on his stall, warning that workers needed access to paint the adjacent building. There was nothing Fung could do.
His son retrieved any salvageable materials, and he shared the bits of memorabilia with Wooferten, a local community arts group at 404 Shanghai Street. 
Since then, Fung has been recuperating at home with his son in the New Territories.
Wooferten has been showcasing Fung’s story and paintings inside its gallery-cum-office.
The exhibit is part of a “Yau Ma Tei Self-Rescue Project” meant to inspire neighbors to support local businesses and to oppose gentrification of the area. The exhibit closed last weekend, but Fung’s portraits will stay on display until the end of June.
Fung declined China Daily’s requests for an interview through Roland Ip, one of the exhibit’s curators at Wooferten. The painter cannot read or hold a calligraphy pen since he suffered the stroke. Ip relayed Fung’s historical background from conversations with Fung’s son. The reticent painter is 80.
However you define his charcoal paintings — artwork or craftsmanship — Fung’s work is far more likely to appear inside local homes than any of the highbrow ornamentation sold at art fairs or displayed in the windows of Soho’s galleries.
More than 60,000 people attended ArtHK, which opened last Wednesday with a VIP preview. It concluded on Sunday. Hong Kong’s general public alongside globetrotting millionaire art collectors perused booths set up by 266 galleries from 38 countries.
ArtHK is considered Asia’s most important art fair. Work on display included masterpieces by Western iconoclasts, celebrity painters from the Chinese mainland, other Asian artists and a small contingent of local artists.
The homegrown event was sold to MCH Group last July. The Switzerland-based buyer runs Art Basel, the world’s top art fair. Art Basel also owns a subsidiary event in Florida (Art Basel Miami Beach).
Next year, ArtHK’s name will change to “Art Basel in Hong Kong.” The new owners promised to retain the event’s mix of Asian and international works while retaining Magnus Renfrew as the fair’s director. At an opening press conference, Renfrew said Art Basel’s leadership would help Hong Kong’s art scene to reach a broader international market.
Ip suspects Hong Kong’s supposedly new “regional arts hub” status is merely a reflection of the city’s thriving commercial art market, which has grown rapidly thanks to its duty-free port and convenient sales outlet for in-demand mainland artists. Christie’s and Sotheby’s are entrenched in Hong Kong. The city, officially has become the world’s third largest art auction market by sales, behind New York and London.
“I don’t think the city was ever a cultural desert. We have many great movies and street culture, but those are not ‘high art,’” he said, speaking with China Daily while walking past the remaining fragments of Fung’s stall on a brief loop around the nearby Yau Ma Tei neighborhood.
“Government officials don’t think of small things as culture,” he complained. “They only look at the big picture. Even if a building is ‘not historic enough’ it still has a cultural context worth preserving. These stalls (he gestured to the green metal hawker stalls lining Canton Road) are also related to local culture, even if they’re just selling mechanical second hand objects. Before the present age, this street was full of stalls.”
Ip expects most of the stalls to disappear in the next five years. He said the government’s Food Environment and Hygiene Department has stepped up pressure on hawkers after the disastrous fire on Fa Yuen Street that killed nine people in November.
Returning to the Wooferten offices, Ip pointed to hand-painted “advertisements,” made by artists in memorial to small businesses forced to close because of increasing rents.
Inside the building, across from Fung’s charcoal paintings, a video installation played a continuous loop of storefronts dissolving into chain stores. “It’s like an apocalypse for local shops,” he said.
Gentrification is endemic throughout Hong Kong. Rent increases have forced many local residents to relocate to distant, less expensive districts. Ip said art galleries and cultural hotspots exacerbate the problem. He used the term “Soholization” for the social disruption resulting from galleries and upscale shops concentrating in Soho.
“We don’t want art to be the only character of a community — to neglect the other characters,” said Ip. “But if local culture has been falling off in Yau Ma Tei continuously, people in the local community should really be careful about us artists.”
Many of the world’s top contemporary art galleries have already established shops in Hong Kong. Last week in Central, Gallerie Perrotin from Paris and Pearl Lam Galleries from Shanghai opened. The French gallery opened 17 floors above where London’s White Cube gallery launched to great fanfare in March. Pearl Lam, originally from Hong Kong, opened her space on the sixth floor of the Pedder Building, just below where New York’s Gagosian Gallery made its high-profile Asia debut in January of 2011.
Nowadays, Central’s concentration of galleries is seeping into neighboring Sheung Wan. Hip cafes and fashion boutiques have joined the procession, occupying former storefronts of car mechanics, printing and hardware stores.
Asia Art Archive (AAA) is situated in the midst of Sheung Wan’s “Soholization”, on the 11th floor of the Hollywood Centre. Down on the street, local antique shops mix with restaurants, repair shops, and coffin-makers, all near a Taoist temple.
AAA researcher Janet Chan spent most of her life in Western District. She grew up in the neighborhood. She admits it has changed dramatically in the past few years. Despite nearby rents tripling in 2011, after the stylish Lomography Gallery Store moved next door to the Para/Site Art Space (downhill from the archive), she remains optimistic that local conservation-minded people will preserve Sheung Wan’s eclectic atmosphere.
Chan first heard the phrase “cultural desert” applied to Hong Kong while attending secondary school in the 90s. She believes the term stems from public expectations that a global financial hub should host a likewise cosmopolitan cultural landscape.
Today, Hong Kong is investing an astronomical sum in the arts — HK$2.8 billion (that’s HK$242 million more than Singapore according to ArtAsiaPacific’s 2012 Almanac). Hong Kong’s contemporary art galleries and arts spaces now number 97, also nearly double Singapore’s tally).
“Because of my job, I’ve had an opportunity to talk with people in the art communities of nearby countries and cities,” she said. “When they talk about Hong Kong, they usually only know about the art fair and whoever joined the Biennial. I think Hong Kong as an art hub and Hong Kong art are so different.”
Chan took a black pen and drew an outline of Hong Kong on a blank sheet of paper. She proceeded to illustrate the city’s evolving arts ecology. When she finished, the paper was covered with a thick tangle of annotated markings from New Territories to Ap Lei Chau.
In the 1950s, there were occasional artist associations’ exhibits in hotels. The Museum of Art opened in 1962 (and relocated to TST in 90s). The Hong Kong Arts Centre in Wan Chai ushered in government-funded independent art spaces in the late 70s. Arts-focused institutions of higher education became more plentiful in subsequent decades. More local graduates turned to art.
By the 90s, alternative art spaces began reclaiming Hong Kong’s derelict industrial areas, while international galleries began concentrating in Soho. Curator-run spaces dominated the art scene during the new millennium, said Chan.
In the current decade, the government’s ultimate arts project began formalizing its foundation. Design plans were finalized for the West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD) in 2011 and the WKCD Authority hosted its first event, a Cantonese opera, in a makeshift bamboo theatre, in January of 2012.
Coinciding with ArtHK, WKCD’s contemporary art museum named “M+” soft-launched last week with a pop-up exhibit on the downtrodden streets of Yau Ma Tei. Seven Hong Kong-based artists have installation works at six different sites. The exhibit will continue until June 10.
Works include a park sculpture made of giant neon Coca Cola and Sprite signs discarded in Macao; a vacant  “tong lau” (tenement building built in late 19th century to the 1960s in Hong Kong) retrofitted as a multimedia ghost story; silly “self-improvement” workshops hosted by local shopkeepers; and museum-style video installations tucked into makeshift gallery spaces.
“For M+, it’s very important that the museum is not the same as the building. It’s actually in reality a relationship between the art, the artists, and the public,” said Lars Nittve, M+ executive director, noting that the museum would be ultimately anchored in the communities of western Kowloon. He described Yau Ma Tei as the embodiment of “Hong Kong’s heart and soul”.
The physical M+ is not scheduled to open until the end of 2017. Nittve is in the process of acquiring artworks for the 58,000 square feet space. He estimated that Hong Kong artists would take up 20 percent of the collection, with the remaining space dedicated to artists from China, Asia and the West.
Many neighborhood residents seemed baffled by the impromptu gallery spaces. On opening day, Mobile M+ tour guides took guests through labyrinthine streets to view the exhibit, while Yau Ma Tei residents and shopkeepers swarmed about in their daily routines.
As the M+ entourage walked past, one local man voiced his confusion: “What’s with all these gwai-pos (foreign women)?” he asked in Cantonese. “Is somebody shooting a movie?”

你有軍隊 我有人民




先賣口乖,雖已是年初八,祝大家虎年無苦頭,一於公投,並送來長駐「上海街活化廳」的印巴籍小朋友寫的揮春,內容是音譯的「恭喜發財」。香港人的成分漸起變化,印巴朋友早是芳鄰,互相尊重文化禮儀,很是美事,何,收到賦吉祥寓意的東西,看不明,也是心領。但某些老人家在新春期間,對符號的閱讀特別認真,只可報喜,如民建聯對年宵賣的「禮義廉」汗衫的logo 便超認真地看待,向海關投訴,扣查貨品,那不就是以最實際的行為演繹成語的留白真義?「面書」的「我相信可以召集十萬個厭惡民建聯的人!」群組,在接近達標時,一夜消失,虛擬的符號社區被煙滅了,又應如何閱讀?有誰害怕嗎?打壓言論?還是媒體自我審查?

2. 籤文。年年劉地主都煞有介事到車公廟為香港求籤,籤意的終極解釋很是政治。今年,八十後也為香港求籤,卻惹來兇猛批評,什麼「不能代表香港」、「自行解籤好自大」,如此反應,好奇怪,我們何時默許官紳獨家代辦求福事宜?連解釋權也拱手讓給指定的權威?人人都可以為香港求籤罷,如朋友當天也為藝發局求籤,是94下籤,籤文如下﹕「雞公閉口雞母啼/紫袍換脫素袍歸/名利倒顛心意急/空遊南北過東西」任君解讀,自行脈胳化……

3. 回家。政治公關秀離不開符號,今年特首用上「麥嘜」和「回家」,如意算盤是一個寓意支持創意工業,一個擁抱家庭價值。只是看官在家有無限look的可能,群情最是洶湧認定謝氏賣豬求榮,再被收編;自己也想問,為何支持創意工業卻出手區區十萬買個再版,「look」回家本就有的,現在外加滾上的特首夫婦(為何上不換衫?)想給我們說明香港創意要成為工業,就要懂得食老本,平靚正快?而「回家真好」 由特首說出,比寒風還要刺骨,回家有多好,難道土瓜灣塌樓的街坊、菜園村村民、觀塘順齡道街坊、各區受重建影響的居民,以及年初二早上凍死在油麻地後巷的百歲老人家不知道嗎?如果回家也成為奢望時,香港這個「亞洲國際大都會」發生了什麼?

4. 城市。五月上海舉行的世界博覽會,主題為「城市,讓生活更美好」,金句實在簡潔,問號馬上急生,想知道﹕「誰的城市,如何讓怎樣的生活比起什麼更美好?」當然,問題還可以無限延長。各有答案。全球化下,時間空間壓縮,人口、資源、資本、意念打破物理框架急速流動,城市代替國家成為文化身分的單位,也是地區現代化發展的策略之本,簡單說,城市就是一個地區的品牌。城市這兩個字,愈變愈虛,甚至沒有再現的主體,試代入「雪櫃」、「高清電視」或「跑車」都似乎可以的。


5. 美好。香港也為上海世博準備,現正在香港藝術館舉行至四月廿五日「視界新色 」,就是七月及十一月到上海舉辦藝術展覽的前哨。雖然十三件參展作品大都是舊作,但閱讀藝術家如何再現對美好生活的想像,扣連當下情景,也是有趣。如黃國才的《顯赫家族》不失抵死本色,呈現了沒落貴族最後的浮跨——依法拉利跑車設計而成的流動摺疊睡,為因破產流落街頭的中產人士保持生活素質。另,李民偉作品《開展所能》,用的三色尼龍早在「活在西九」展覽盡顯基層力量,現在離開了深水舊樓天台,抽離地方脈絡,沒有街坊、小孩的喧囂,放在冰冷高雅的藝術館內,意義不一樣。但儘管氣味淡薄,也有基層的味道,豐富了展覽的成分。




臨近六四廿一周年,上海街活化廳舉辦展覽《六十四件事》,主題是「重訪」(Re-visit),找來兩代藝術家,通過藝術呈現「歷史與人更實在的連繫」。展覽包括了「我所知有關六四的二三事」以及「心中有鬼問我真理和公義的問題」,「前者探討六四與年輕一代的生活關係的連繫,後者讓當年的藝術家回應自己八九民運 期間的創作。」或許,因為筆者曾經在2000年於Para/Site藝術空間策劃過「六四(集體)私人記憶」展覽,活化廳「總司令」劉建華特別來電郵,問我是否也有興趣「重訪」當年有關六四的種種。

打當記憶的硬碟,當年展覽的新聞稿是這樣寫的:「 提到『六四』,大家會想起/記起什麼?六四集會?百萬人遊行?『毋忘六四』?『放下歷史包袱』?除了這些耳熟能詳的『公共記憶』,還有什麼?有朋友每年六四都無法參加六四集會,因為她當天太忙了,要跟朋友一起慶祝自己的生日,年年如是。亦有朋友因為當年六四在配偶臨盆之際,選擇了上街遊行,而終究與配偶各走各路。當然,因為六四集會或百萬人遊行而結識成愛侶的,更不在少數。對於很多人來說,這些經驗真實不過,但為什麼在有關六四的公開談論中不見有關這類『私人記憶』的分享?」現在回想起來,當年展覽強調的,是六四記憶的雜多性與私人性,只有差異,沒有同一,所謂六四的記憶,也只是雜多的六四私人記憶所構成的一個集體。固然,當年提出「六四私人記憶」,一方面是為了抗衝當時主流的六四「公共記憶」,另一方面也大概是為了找尋「歷史與人更實在的連繫」,為六四在個體的生命軌跡中定位,貼身的重訪六四,讓六四的記憶得以更深刻的承傳下去。

然而,現在看來,當年的構想或許也太過強調個人了,並沒有好好的思考,當這些介乎「公共」與「私人」的貼身體驗幅射到整個社會,個體的公共意識到底有着怎樣的變化?而這些看似細微的個人變化又到底跟後八九的香港社會有着怎麼的關係?意大利哲學家葛蘭西(Antonio Gramsci)認為,「統識」(Hegemony)的建立,不在於反對意見的消失,而在於「異見者的潰不成軍」(Disorganization of Dissent)。或許,重訪六四的意義,也在於為當下民主運動發展的困境,尋找歷史的根源和出路。




但六四的意義,僅限於天安門清場前的全國民主運動,以及六四當晚及往後的血腥鎮壓和大搜捕嗎?記得07年到上海參與一個集合了中港台三地文化研究學者與研究生的會議,會後搞手之一陳光興教授屬意各地派出一人,撰文寫出對於會議上所碰上的地域與文化差異之觀察與反思,文章將刊於《文化研究》學刊上。雖然該小輯最後因為各人的學業與工作而不了了之,但卻促使了我對三地文化研究與批判理論的發展,作出了深入的思考。我發現,若果把時間往前推,中港台三地的文化研究與批判理論,都是在八十年代萌芽的。在八十年代,三地同時都擁有過一段思想開放的狂飆時期。雖然,中港台三地的年青人與知識份子通過對外文思想著作的直接閱讀(在香港的,是《號外》、《文化新潮》等刊物,在台灣,是《島嶼邊緣》、《破報》,在中國,則是「走向未來」、「文化·世界與中國」等系列叢書),滿足知識的饑渴,開啟批判思維,關懷家國社會,但更多的人,恐怕是通過三地的中文出版,磨鍊思考。恰好,公民意識產生的前提,正是批判思維的培育。可以這麼說,我們這一代香港人,是在八十年代中國的文化熱與思想啟蒙運動、台灣民間反對與思想運動與香港的文化運動中,而非在課本中,接受公民教育,或為集體公民意識的醒覺,作好準備的。所以,對於我們這一代人來說,六四所代表的,其實是整個八十年代中港台三地的思想啟蒙與文化運動。在這一場幅員廣闊的文化運動中,當年對於中國的民主、科學與現代化的種種思考與實踐,於今仍然適切,且逼切。所以,六四不單是一個有待平反與撫平的歷史傷口,它更是有待自遺忘中(再次)解放出力量來的歷史碎片。正如德國大哲雅明(Walter Benjamin)所言,救歷史並不是為了懷舊,而是為了解放與救贖。或許,重訪六四的意義,正正在此。

由六四、七一、天星皇后、反高鐵到516,我看到了一道清晰的系譜,以及歷史的詭計。 重訪六四,又豈只是重訪六四呢! 

「活化廳」2010/11 媒體報導列表

「小西九雙年展」 :
l   〈小西九雙年展小西九攝影旅行團〉,《東方新地雜誌/Go home(27/12/2009) ,頁168
l   〈遊舊區學攝影小西九攝影旅行團〉,《東方日報》(2010-12-28) P168 活動 
l   〈小西九雙年展〉,《瞄muse#47 (dec 2010), 40[Muse gallery]
l   〈小西九活化大西九〉,《Metropop#235,頁30-31

l   校方不接納「額外」活動〉,《星島日報》(2011-02-13) A10 港聞
l   〈藝團邀學生做拍拖實驗 可申報「其他學習經歷」鐘數〉,《星島日報》(2011-02-13) A10 港聞 專題報道 
l   文化給力:拍拖換學分另類愛情援交,《蘋果日報》(2011-02-17) E05 Voice Over 

l   〈雞毛掃花母親節集體回憶〉,《星島日報》(2011-05-08) A15 每日雜誌
l   〈隔牆有耳:社運月餅爭普選〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-09-12) A21李八方專欄專論

「拜山先講? 再問六四和我城」:
l   6422 未敢忘記〉, (記者:李秀嫻、周倩炘、梁智儀、謝傲霜),《經濟日報》(2011-05-25) C06,C07 城定格
l   〈今午遊行聲援艾未未〉,《太陽日報》(2011-05-29) A01 港聞 
l   〈民主女神像再豎時代廣場〉,《東方日報》(2011-05-29) A27 港聞 
l   被命名的飛翔法國人〉, (記者:林茵) ,《明報》(2011-05-29) P01 星期日生活
l   〈白色坦克控訴白色恐怖〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-05-29) A05 要聞 
l   〈民主女神再現時代廣場 警方按兵不動轉而打壓掛旗貼海報〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-05-29) A05 要聞
l   〈本土文化界多管齊下悼六四〉, (記者:卡夫卡),《信報》(2011-05-30) P37 今日焦點 圈來圈去
l   〈青年辦單車集會 重現天安門情景〉,《明報》(2011-05-31) A06 港聞 
l   〈踏單車悼六四 料百人參與〉,《經濟日報》(2011-06-01) A26 港聞 
l   〈人民力量呼籲千人築成人鏈 包圍中聯辦聲討屠夫政權〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-06-03) A12 港聞 
l   〈兩代人合寫六四日記重組痛史〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-06-03) A14 港聞 
l   〈 港人六四小故事 父留剪報作嫁妝〉,《明報》(2011-06-03) A04 六四22周年 
l   〈今晚維園燃燭光料15萬人悼六四〉,《太陽日報》(2011-06-04) A02 港聞 
l   64前夕 學生維園露宿體驗感受〉,《東方日報》(2011-06-04) A31 港聞 
l   〈警察新招封殺六四〉〉,《壹週刊》(2011-06-09) A044-048 時事 壹號頭條 
l   鄧小樺:〈穿越黑夜黎明 80後毋忘六四〉,《經濟日報》(2011-06-03) A40 國是港事 這時勢、該看甚麼書
l   俞若玫:〈展覽空間成為抗爭的場域——看「拜山先講——再問六四和我城」〉,《信報》 (2011-06-15) P43 文化評論 藝評

藝術家 駐場計劃2011:
l   〈隔牆有耳:韓佔屋藝術家教做泡菜〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-07-11) A20 專欄專論
l   〈荒屋.前世今生〉,《新假期》(2011-08-01) E076-079
l   〈注腳分量〉,《星島日報》(2011-08-06) E07 文化廊 藝粹Guide 
l   〈隔牆有耳:日本露宿女藝術家訪港〉,《蘋果日報》(2011-08-10) A21李八方專欄專論
l   港人對露宿者誤解多日女藝術家八年公園為家〉,《星島日報》(2011-08-14) A09 港聞 
l   日本露宿藝術家〉,(記者:林茵) ,《明報》( 2011-08-14) P05 星期日現場
l   〈來自韓國的佔屋行動〉(記者:Boo),《 am Post 08-2011,頁38-39
l   〈無家藝術展〉,(記者:游文) ,《香港商報》,(2011-08-28) B07 大會堂 好Art
l  潘麗:〈從臺北到香港/尋找城市更生中的裂縫〉,《城市畫報》 第 281 期,28-37
l Lateral-Thinking〉《Asia Art Pacific(Olivier Krischer) Issue 77 119

l Squatting for your rights in Hong Kong〉CNN travel,(By Doug Meigs 12 August, 2011)
l  周五搜記-露宿藝術家,無線新聞, 2011年9月9日

l   〈回首2010騎呢爆眼焦點〉,(記者:卡夫卡),《信報》(2010-12-31) P41 今日焦點 圈來圈去
l   〈隔牆有耳:藝術家掛banner玩田生 〉,《蘋果日報》(2010-10-11) A17李八方專欄專論
l   〈香港政府夠量度泵錢你反 搞Gag藝術家創意澎湃玩西九〉,(記者:卡夫卡),《信報》2010-12-18 P31 今日焦點 圈來圈去
l   楊天帥:〈記菜園村藝術節 —— 尋找社運與藝術的共生關係〉,,《信報》  (2011-02-07) P40 文化演藝 文化專題
l   潘國靈:〈人類改造〉,《星島日報》(2011-02-19) E07 文化廊〈當上海街 也成活化廳〉,《頭條日報》(2011-02-28) P37 共同空間 靈感國度
l   楊天帥:〈郊遊藝術家組合Picnic:創作合該釣勝於魚〉, 《信報》(2011-03-31) P47 今日焦點 焦點人物
l   〈普普匯聚〉,《星島日報》(2011-04-02) E07 文化廊 藝粹 Guide 
l   〈上樓!心機印尼菜 歌舞助興〉,《東方日報》(2011-07-03) E02 副刊 
l   執回來的藝術.劉建華 〉,《東方日報》(2011-04-08) E02 副刊 
l   民主對藝術的挑戰︰艾未未事件的還原思考〉, (記者:黃靜),《信報》(2011-04-18) P48 文化演藝 文化專題
l   〈消失中的藝術工作空間〉, (記者:顧海華),《經濟日報》(2011-05-10) C12 藝聞知
l   〈用12部短片,喚醒你的愛,他的愛,香港的愛〉, (記者:吳莎、張葉青),《南方都市報 (2011-05-15) C12 聲色周刊關注
l   〈兒時遊戲 不死之謎〉,(記者:李秀嫻、梁智儀、周倩炘、謝傲霜 ) ,《經濟日報》(2011-08-17) C06,C07 城定格
l   〈林嵐「傳宗接代,玩具盆景製作〉,《經濟日報》,(2011-08-18)
l   〈李俊峰赴日參與災後藝術計劃〉,(記者:卡夫卡) ,《信報》(2011-08-13) P31 今日焦點 圈來圈去

14/2 港台節目:思潮作動.文明單位(主持:鄧小樺、胡世傑) 之愛情策展.愛情社區/關尚智、黃慧妍

3/6 The Pulse / RTHK
10/6 The Pulse / RTHK








〈活化廳@星期日生活〉[中秋號外],《明報》(2011-09-11) 星期日生活



〈藝術家表揚店鋪街坊威水史——上海街「奧斯卡」往事堪回味〉(記者:楊耀登),《星島日報》2009/10/18 A12 港聞。

〈藝術家真正活化上海街〉(記者:蔡元貴),《蘋果日報》2009/10/25 ()A9 港聞。

Prize! Prize! Prize!〉,《Muse(2009/11),頁110-111 [Muse gallery/瞄藝]

〈好Art 小小賞多多獎〉,《商報》(2009/11/1)

〈回憶,從現在開始建立——記上海街活化廳〉(記者:田江雁),《信報》2009/11/7+8,頁27 [城市生活]


〈活化上海街〉(記者:梁佩芬),《蘋果日報》2009/11/19 ()E12 副刊[香港一分鐘]

花牌師傅 黃乃忠:


〈出租藝術家$0任點——為借而外借 政府假時我來真〉(記者:月霧),《蘋果日報》2010/1/26 ()E14 副刊。


〈展覽悼念「8964」〉,《am730(2010/5/26),頁36 [遊樂]

21年前的香港六四痕跡(記者:雷子樂),《蘋果日報》2010/6/1 ()A2 要聞。

〈藝術抗壓迫 教師帶學生悼六四〉《明報》2010/6/1()A3

〈後華叔時代六四展〉(記者:梁佩芬),《蘋果日報》2010/6/3 ()E14 副刊 [Cult]

〈六四花果不飄零 青年為港 齊站出來〉(記者:林浩然),《香港經濟日報》2010/6/3 ()C5 專題。

小西:〈重訪六四,其實不只是重訪六四〉《明報》2010/6/5()D4 [副刊/世紀]

〈單車隊重演屠城時功能〉,《蘋果日報》2010/6/5 ()A7


〈創作造假 偽裝藝術〉,《am730(2010/7/26)



〈認真造假藝術展〉(記者:古凱茵),《RECRUIT2010/8/10,頁24 [culture]


〈藝術與生活 原來很接近〉,《RECRUIT2010/9/21,無頁碼(2)

〈風生水起 藝術咖啡廳〉,《新假期》2010/9/13(#575),頁94

〈年畫揮春裡的普選夢〉,《am730(2010/2/8),頁3 [遊樂]

〈有關社區文化:呈現或再現?陳智德與劉建華對話〉,《文化地圖》(2010/2) [專訪視人講視文]

塵翎:〈活化廳〉《明報》(2010/03/14)P09 [副刊時代.七齣好戲]

〈師父贊工作坊〉《太陽報》(2010/3/8)E07 [叻太日誌]


「倒後鏡 - TP Show Up」,「Teen Power」洪崎峻帶你認識「活化廳」策展人李俊峰及阿恩,香港電台(2009/10/22)

「舊區活化」,「文明單位」(主持:鄧小樺、胡世傑) ,香港電台 (2009/11/02)

Gimme 5(主持:梁德輝、黃天頤),香港電台 (2009/11/13)

[時代雜誌/timeline magazine]729 Part 3 - 社區藝術 (活化廳)   


「後浪」 (主持:梁御東、李俊峰)FM101(嘉賓:劉建華2010/3/12…)

Artwork On Loan” in “The Works,” RTHK TV Program (2010/01/06).
「快樂道里」(主持金剛與王喜)第一集 TVB8 (2010/2?)


俞若玫,〈活化粵語流行曲〉,《am730 (2010/1/15)M46 [視角]