尋找香港的大地藝術 In Search of Land Art in Hong Kong
The Legacy of Land Art Land Art is an art genre that emerged in the 1960s – a time when the world was confronting issues such as environmental injustice, industrial landscape degradation, and resource / energy crisis. Artists, mostly in the European / American context, responded to these environmental issues by allowing their artworks to interact more directly with the landscape. They took the land as their “canvas” to create what is referred to as “Land Art” – art in the landscape. At the time, Land Art was considered a breakthrough, challenging the traditional notion of art as paintings and sculptures in museums and galleries. Instead, Land Art emphasises on-site experience, and advocates the importance of the site-specificity of art work in its environmental context. Land Art also often incorporates natural cycles specific to the site, and uses local materials authentic to the surrounding environment. The unique processes of how Land Art is created in the landscape marks the intersection of nature and culture. Earth art, environmental art, and ecological art emerged from a similar trajectory, aiming to embrace art creations with ecological attributes of nature.
大地藝術的源流 大地藝術出現於二十世紀六十年代 —— 世界當時正面對環境不公、工業地境變壞、資源及能源危 機等種種問題。當時，歐美的藝術家希望透過藝術創作來回應環境問題。他們走進大地，將土地 變作他們的「畫布」，讓環境與藝術融合和互動，創造出稱作「大地藝術」之作品。 這是一個重大的突破 —— 藝術不再局限於博物館或畫廊之內的畫作和雕塑。大地藝術強調身處環 境當中的切身體驗，亦提倡藝術作品應擁有對其環境的場地獨特性。大地藝術作品經常會採用場 地環境的自然韻律，亦會利用當地材料，使作品忠於其周圍的環境特質。大地藝術的獨特創作過 程，使其成為文化與大自然融和的宣言。 其他相關的流派，如土地藝術、環境藝術、生態藝術等，都來自同一個源流，旨於讓藝術創作擁抱大自 然中的生態特質。
Curatorial Statement
策展人語
Land Art first started in the United States and Europe in 1960-80s, during a period when the Western world began to question environmental issues. In Asia, we saw the emergence of Land Art starting from 1990s, perhaps also as a reaction to the environmental degradation following the Western society’s footsteps.
大地藝術始於歐美，出現於西方社會開始對環境議題提出質疑的六十至八十年代。從九十年代至 今，我們亦開始見到大地藝術在亞洲地區出現。這些作品，可能亦建基於在現代化過程中，我們 面對環境遭受破壞的一種回應。
From projects such as the Spiral Jetty (1970) by Robert Smithson, Wheatfield – a Confrontation (1982) by Agnes Denes, to the initiative of the Echigo Tsumari Art Triennale (since 1996) in Japan, Land Art projects intend to provoke a new way of understanding our landscape, and generate insights of how we can better conserve our environment in the future. Land Art first started in the United States and Europe in 1960-80s, during a period when the Western world began to question environmental issues. In Asia, we saw the emergence of Land Art starting from 1990s, perhaps also as a reaction to the environmental degradation following the Western society’s footsteps. Being an international city in Asia, Hong Kong has her unique approach in channelling environmental questions through creative work. Many local artists have taken environmental settings in Hong Kong to become their “studios” in creating artworks that integrate with the native landscape, while addressing local environmental issues. This exhibition aims to look at land-related art projects generated in Hong Kong in the past 10 years, to examine how local environmental issues are discussed through the artists represented here. The lineage of how these local art projects relate to the fundamental qualities and essences of early Land Art will also be explored, both through art forms and artistic approaches that artists from these two generations applied. The vision of early Land Art is to use site-specific approaches to reflect on land issues and generate ideas. Do we take such physical interaction with the land to define what Land Art is? Do Hong Kong contemporary art projects dealing with land issues share the same vision? Do they reveal the essence of the land, through site-specific approach and physical interaction with the environment ? Are they considered Land Art? And to push the investigation further, do we have Land Art in Hong Kong? Reviewing the course of Land Art development - from pure artistic explorations to play with natural materials in the landscape when the genre of Land Art emerged in the 60s, to how the Japanese took it as a way to embrace the rural community and to revitalise village living since the late-90s – it t is definitely a question worth projecting, to explore how the genre of Land Art has developed in the past decade in Hong Kong, as a way to express our voice to our changing environment, and to respond to our unique rural-urban development context of 21st Century Hong Kong. The goal of this curation is not only to showcase some of the local works of Land Art, but also to link our local endeavours to the global platform and discourse of Land Art. - Vincci Mak
從 Robert Smithson 的《Spiral Jetty》（1970）、 Agnes Denes 的《Wheatfield – a Confrontation》 （1982）等經典作品，到自一九九六年起日本三年一届的「越後妻有大地藝術祭」，這 些作品全都旨在激發我們重新認識土地，從而對如何保育環境產生新的見解。 大地藝術始於歐美，出現於西方社會開始對環境議題提出質疑的六十至八十年代。從九十年代至 今，我們亦開始見到大地藝術在亞洲地區出現。這些作品，可能亦建基於在現代化過程中，我們 面對環境遭受破壞的一種回應。 在這種通過藝術創作來回應環境問題的趨勢下，不少本地藝術家亦利用香港的獨特地理環境為自 己的「工作室」，創作出不單只融入自然地境的藝術作品，同時亦針對地區的環境議題，作出回 應。 是次展覽旨在回顧在過去十年在香港孕育、與大地相關的藝術創作，並探討藝術家如何透過作品 討論環境議題。同時，展覽亦會探索這些作品的創作源流，將它們與早期的大地藝術作品作討 論，藉此了解兩代大地藝術創作方法及形態上的異同。 早期的大地藝術，讓我們承傳了透過藝術來反思及辯論土地問題的視野，和它們對環境的獨特性 及與土地互動的創作特質。我們是否要用這些特質來定義大地藝術？香港當代藝術創作中，探討 土地議題的作品，又是否跟這些早期的大地藝術作品擁有共同的視野？這些作品又是否源用場地 獨特和土地互動的創作手法，以揭露大地的真諦？它們能否被歸納為大地藝術？再進一步詰問， 香港有否大地藝術？ 從六十年代起，始於對大自然以及天然韻律作創作的純藝術探索，到九十年代後期，日本人用大 地藝術來振興郊區的農村生活； 大地藝術在過去十年如何發展過來、如何在不斷轉變的環境中表 達我們的態度、如何回應二十一世紀香港的特殊城鄉發展 —— 這絶對是一個值得深入探討的課 題。 策劃今次展覽的目的，不僅是展出本地的大地藝術作品，同時亦希望將本地創作連繫至全球的大 地藝術論述平台。 - 麥詠詩
Premise – The Contemporary Landscapes of Hong Kong
前提 —— 現今的香港地境
Compared to the European and American contexts, the development of Hong Kong started a bit later. Our industrial boom didn’t start until 1960s, new town development was just an emerging idea by then. Citizens’ awareness to the environment was relatively simple – village living relied on interaction with the landscape as a resource for food and supplies, while urban living took the relatively unspoiled countryside as the destination of a good getaway trip.
香港的工業發展始於二十世紀六十年代。相對於歐美，我們的發展比較晚。那時候，新市鎮發展 還在一個十分初步的階段。市民對環境的理解相對簡單 —— 鄉村依靠土地資源提供生活所需，而 城市人則視鄉郊為遊山玩水之地。
It was not until the 1980s that Hong Kong’s urbanisation accelerated. The opening of China’s market provided abundant fresh produce for Hong Kong, we no longer had to rely on our own food production from of the New Territories’ villages, leading to the decline of village living. Industrial production was also moved from Hong Kong to China, for its cheaper labour and proximity to resources, leading to the emergence of abandoned factories / post-industrial landscapes and contaminated environment in Hong Kong. Our city also went through massive land reclamation. For example, in 1990s, land reclamation took place to pave way for the Chek Lap Kok Airport and its associated transport links, resulting in environmental degradation in some areas. As a city with high living standard, we rely on an expanded geography to sustain our demand for resources, i.e. our demand for natural resource has gone beyond the capacity of our own territory that we have extended our grab of resources into other regions. We also fall victim to the global mass consumerist culture. While shopping is a key “leisure” activity for Hong Kong people, we never had a consensus on where the trash should go at the end of the life-cycle of the products we purchase. Hong Kong’s current waste issue is a pressing problem, with all our current landfills reaching their capacities rapidly. Current landfill extension proposal, to cede areas from the country park, is seen as an environmental injustice. Lastly, the continuous increase in population of Hong Kong in the past 10 years has triggered citizens to see the environment from a different perspective. Rather than seeing nature as an unlimited resource for exploitation, we are now looking for ways to live more sustainably. It is under this premise that a group of local artists manifest ideas and discussions about the landscape of Hong Kong through their art creations.
八十年代，城市化加速。中國改革開放，出口食物至香港，香港無需再依靠新界作為主要的農作 物生產地，這導致香港鄉村生活衰落。工業亦大量北移以降低成本，香港逐漸出現廢棄的廠房、 後工業用地等受污染環境。 另外，我們的城市進行了多項大規模的填海工程。例如，在九十年代，赤鱲角機場及其相關工程 的興建，牽涉大量填海，這亦引致不同程度的環境破壞。 作為一個享有高生活質素的城市，我們其實依賴一個擴展化地理來維持我們的生活所需 —— 即我 們現在使用的資源已多於我們身處地域所能提供的，我們為保高質素生活而需要從身處地域以外 的地區引入資源。我們亦受環球消費主義文化的影響，對香港人來說，購物似乎已經是公認的「 消閒」活動，但我們對產品消耗後最終所剩下的垃圾該如何處置，卻從來沒有共識。香港的堆填 區快將爆滿，廢物處理現正是一個迫切需要解決的問題。由郊野公園改劃土地來擴建堆填區，被 很多人視為是環境不公義的發展方案。 香港在過去十年不斷的人口增長，亦讓市民從一個不同的角度來看待環境。香港人不再視大自然 為可以不斷提取的無限資源，轉而尋找更可持續的生活方式。 在此前提下，一群本地藝術家以大地為題進行創作，透過藝術作品來思考和討論香港的土地和環 境。
Participating Artists and their Works This exhibition is organised around five key environmental themes experienced in Hong Kong in the last 50 years (i.e. since 1960s). Five local projects relevant to our environmental issues are showcased, to explore the different creative means that contribute towards Hong Kong environmental debates. Wallace Chang’s Kai Tak River Green Art Fest “E-Co Habitat” (2012-) explores how a postindustrial landscape in Hong Kong could be revitalised. Sampson Wong @ emptyscape shares their 1st and 2nd Emptyscape Art Festivals (2013-) in Ping Che where they provoke the infringed village living in an urbanised Hong Kong context. The HK FARMers’ Almanac (2014 - 2015) by HK Farm discusses Hong Kong people’s ownership to land through urban farming and practices to grow your own food. Hok Shing Yee Ho – Story Telling Boat (2015) by Hanison Lau reveals the changing coastline of Sai Ying Pun. Lastly, Kingsley Ng’s Spring: homage to Liang Quan (2013) meditates on the expanded geography of resources we need to sustain our contemporary living. These representative projects will form the basis for the exploration, discussion, and analysis, of how Hong Kong’s Land Art plays a role in the discourse of local environmental history and development.
參展藝術家及作品 是次展覽圍繞香港在過去五十年（由六十年代起）所經歷的五個重要環境主題。通過展出五個有 關環境議題的本土藝術作品，展覽希望探索利用藝術創作來討論環境議題的不同方法。 鄭炳鴻的《啟德河綠色藝術節「生。活共構」》（2012-）探索一片後工業土地可以如何復興。黃 宇軒@空城計劃分享他們在坪輋的第一屆及第二屆空城藝術節 (2013-) 怎樣挑起香港城市人對鄉村 生活的想像。 HK Farm 的《香港農民曆》（2014-2015）透過城市及自我供給的耕作實踐，探討 香港人對土地歸屬感的概念。劉學成的《學成貳號 — 拖船仔講故仔》（2015）揭示西營盤海岸線 的變遷。最後，伍韶勁的《泉：向梁銓致敬》（2013）沉思維持我們現今生活所需的資源的擴展 化地理。 大地藝術在香港的環境歷史和發展的論述中擔當怎樣的角色？期望這些富代表性的作品將會成為 探索、討論、分析這課題的基礎。
Why are these five projects significant in the discussion of contemporary Land Art in Hong Kong, in lineage to the legacy of Land Art since 1960s? These five projects are put together for discussion in this exhibition, because they cover a series of major landscape development in contemporary Hong Kong: From the restoration of post-industrial landscapes, to a revived consideration of our city’s urban-rural relationship, to the promotion of urban farming as a means to explore public space, to the critique of how land reclamation at a coastal neighborhood disconnects people’s life from the sea, to a revelation of how we draw resource from our expanded geography to sustain our lifestyle that goes beyond our land’s capacity. The five artists have different backgrounds, with their own interpretations of land, they explore five environmental issues through unique artistic approaches. -----~---~----Wallace Chang’s Kai Tak River Green Art Fest “E-Co Habitat” (2012-) looks at a post-industrial landscape in Hong Kong, from a master plan level. Such altered / disturbed landscape is a common typology that early Land Art also explored. For example, the Earthworks: Land Reclamation as Sculpture Project in 1979, used land art as an approach to reclaim postindustrial landscape of abandoned quarries. Compared to the early Land Art post-industrial sites which were relatively far from human settlement, Kai Tak River is right at the heart of an urban area, that its derelict condition affected the immediate lives of many people. Thus, while both have the agenda to restore the scarred landscape for public use, Chang’s work at Kai Tak engages the public in the brainstorming / planning process, whereas the early Land Art’s public engagement came when the project was completed for public enjoyment. The promotion of awareness to post-industrial landscape is the same in the two eras, but the approaches are different. -----~---~----The HK FARMers’ Almanac (2014-2015) is about farming and the “commoning of pubic space”. Its significance is to turn an everyday practice into art. HK Farm also sees the universal / widespread impact of farming as a means of communication. Versus David Nash, a renowned British land artist, who chooses to live in the countryside with a hermit sustainable lifestyle and to create art about nature, HK Farm tries to do the opposite to go on the street directly. Both are using their lifestyles to make an impact on people, but with very different ways perhaps related to the era and cultural context. -----~---~-----
The Emptyscape Art Festival (The 1st and 2nd Festivals, 2013 - ) in Ping Che references the approach of Echigo-Tsumari Art Triennale (since 1996) in Japan, both are trying to use art to reveal the beauty and the value of rural village life. It is a typology of contemporary Land Art common across Asia since the 1990s. It is a celebration of land from the perspective of those who cultivate the land on everyday basis, versus early Land Art was often a dialogue between nature and the artist, where little human settlement or locals who run land practices were involved. It also relates to the different human settlement patterns between Europe / America versus Asia, and the historic context of how the different regions moved from agricultural society to modernization. In short, both projects - Echigo-Tsumari Art Triennale, and Emptyscape Art Festival - are to respect and recognize the significance of land-related practices. -----~---~----Hanison Lau’s Hok Shing Yee Ho – Story Telling Boat (2015) talks about the changing coastline of Hong Kong because of continuous land reclamation. His project explores what “land” and “environment” means to urban dwellers. Instead of directly celebrating pure nature, Lau’s work retraces how urban life was when connected to the natural elements, reflecting upon contemporary urban dwellers’ dissociation with the natural world. Hence, the material used in his project is an unconscious statement that reflects urbanity rather than nature. Lau’s work also takes one of the fundamental qualities of early land art – temporality – to a different dimension. While early land art accentuates on the temporal aspect of the ever-changing environment, Lau’s work reveals how Hong Kong’s conflicting definitions of public space causes “urban temporality” when doing art in the public. -----~---~----Kingsley Ng’s Spring: homage to Liang Quan (2013) is about the expanded geography we need to draw resource from, in order to sustain our lifestyle in Hong Kong. Ng also tactically uses the “nowhere yet everywhere” characteristics of light, to challenge our contemporary interpretation of site-specificity. Departing from the earlier Land Art work where natural materials are the key expression of the environment, Ng’s approach can sheds light on how nature is interpreted in the data-era of 21st Century Hong Kong. -----~---~-----
From the five projects, it can be seen that working directly with communities is a prevailing trend in pursuing contemporary Land Art in Hong Kong. The level of public engagement is a lot more involved compared to the early Land Art. This may be related to the highly-urbanized condition of Hong Kong, that project sites are often densely-populated areas versus the remote locations that early Land Artists worked at. If people are considered part of the site elements, the incorporation of the locals’ ideas about land, and their way of living with the land, should naturally become important in conceiving a comprehensive Land Art project. Hong Kong people’s view to land is shaped by the government’s land policy and our peculiar property development market, which directly affect citizens’ living conditions. Compared to the early Land Art that might touch upon more novel or poetic relationships about human and nature, the approaches on contemporary Hong Kong Land Art take a more grass-rooted direction to express what the everyday citizens experience as land issues. Contemporary Land Art in Hong Kong also shows a great departure from the early Land Art in terms of use of materials. While early Land Art projects often worked with local materials to reveal the site-authenticity and the art work’s integration to the environment, this formula does not fully apply to Hong Kong. Hong Kong being such an urbanized city, local materials found perhaps are not natural at all, but exacerbates the fact of our detachment with nature. Thus, Land Art projects in Hong Kong push the boundary of what is defined as site-authentic material, to use local yet non-natural material to connect to urban dwellers’ understanding of land. After all, the majority of Hong Kong’s population lives in urban areas. It may be too cliché, or nostalgic to the pre-development Hong Kong, if we were to lean on the Land Art exploration to the nature-emphasized approach. This may bring insights to the contemporary international development of Land Art, knowing that over half of the World’s population now lives in cities rather than rural villages. This tipping point would change people’s view, experience, and interpretation of land. Especially now that we have entered the digital era, the way that we receive information about a place, a landscape, or a natural element, could be highly technology-based. Hong Kong is not alone in this “digitally-attached” yet “physically-detached” mode of understanding nature. How would such type of relationship with the environment inspires new ways of Land Art creation in the future? The way these five art projects are placed in one exhibition facilitates dialogues and exchange on land interpretations and art approaches. Community Involvement Ng’s approach to Land Art takes a more philosophical direction to create a piece for audience to contemplate, rather different from the other four artists in the exhibition whose works are about direct impact to the society by working with the people and the physical environment. The difference in approach raises the question of whether community involvement is an essential part in the art creation.
Site-specificity These two approaches also touch upon how site-specificity is interpreted in contemporary society. Ng questions how the digital era is de-materializing our tactile experience with nature, while other four artists worked with four specific locales with charged site issues. Urban vs Rural The choice of working with an urban or a rural context among artists is another topic worth-discussing. Among the five projects, most artists work with an urban context – an immediate environment that most Hong Kong people experience. While HK Farm explains it as a deliberate choice because he believes the urban area is where to meet the ordinary Hong-Kong people, Emptyscape’s choice to work in Ping Che – a rural village yet under the pressure for urban development - is also a site-specific decision to look at urban from a rural point of view. Material When in discussion about land or environmental issues, natural materials are intuitive choices for art creation. For example, HK Farm uses real plants and soils to create urban farming planter boxes on rooftop and street farms to engage the public. Emptyscape works with rural materials appropriate to the village context for art creations in Ping Che. Yet, land issues could also be expressed in non-natural material, such as the Sampan that Lau makes by cardboard boxes – a common abandoned material found in urban neighbourhoods –to reflect the artificiality of urban environment. Temporality The five artists also view the temporal nature of Land Art differently. HK Farm and Lau take their art to the street level to provoke a new understanding of public space, i.e. their temporal art intervention is a means but not a product; the goal is to sow a seed in the people to nurture critical view towards public space. Emptyscape’s work at Ping Che, though temporal as art intervention, but is propagating of a continuous and long-term attachment with the land, through celebration of the everyday practice with the land through art. Similarly, Chang’s work at Kai Tak uses temporal art projects to create a sense of ownership among community living along the river. Natural Cycles The natural cycles, or the ecology of the land, is also a recurring theme among the artists. Chang’s work at Kai Tak is to reveal the beauty of how nature works along a restored water corridor. Emtpyscape’s Ping Che work shows their dedication to adopt the local farmers’ approach to work with land’s own rhythm. While HK Farm, though working in urban sites, brings the wisdom of natural cycles when engaging in farming activities, to remind urban dwellers the natural rhythm that we often forget when living in the conditioned urbanity.
大地藝術的源流始於一九六零年代。在《見地》所展出的五件作品， 對於討論香港的當代大地藝術有何重要？ 《見地》所展出的五件作品，主題涵蓋一系列有關現今香港土地發展的重要議題。作品主題包 括：修復後工業地境、重新思考城鄉關係、透過市區耕種探討公共空間、批判填海工程如何令鄰 海社區失去與海洋的聯繫、揭露我們如何為了維持不可持續的生活模式，而必須從擴展化地理中 抽取資源。 五位藝術家/單位均來自不同的背景，對土地各有不同的詮釋。透過獨特的藝術創作手法，他們的 作品籌集了五個探討環境議題的方向。
-----~---~----鄭炳鴻的作品從地區宏觀的角度探討後工業地境。這種受破壞地境亦是早期大地藝術作品所經常 探索的對象。例如，一九七九年在美國舉行的《Earthworks: Land Reclamation as Sculpture Project》，便是利用大地藝術作為收復荒廢礦場的手法。 早期的大地藝術很多時候在遠離人煙的後工業場地進行創作。啟德河則剛好相反，位於市區的中 心。其被遺棄的狀況正影響為數不少的居民。兩種創作狀態均旨在修復遭受破壞的地境作公眾用 途。不同之處在於，鄭氏在啟德的作品在創作過程中尋求公眾的投入，而歐美早期的大地藝術， 公眾的參與多發生於作品完成後讓公眾進場享用和鑒賞的範籌。 兩個年代的作品均旨在提高大眾對後工業地境的關注，唯獨手法有異。
-----~---~----HK Farm的作品是關於城市耕作和「使公共空間平民化」的議題。它的重要性在於HK Farm的成 員把日常生活的習慣變成藝術。他們認為，耕作的廣泛散播可以看成一種溝通方式，藉此探索如 何可以將公共空間平民化。 著名大地藝術家 David Nash，從事而專注創作有關大自然的作品，所以選擇居於郊野，過着隱士 般的生活。跟 Nash 相反，HK Farm的作品則直接介入街頭。 兩者都嘗試從生活態度入手，影響群眾，不過手法大相徑庭。這反映出兩個年代和文化背景的差 異。
-----~---~----空城計劃在坪輋的作品，明顯引用日本越後妻有大地藝術祭的創作模式。兩者均嘗試用藝術凸顯 鄉村之美及其價值。這種創作模式，自一九九零年代起在亞洲流行起來。 這種藝術手法，旨在從每日均在孕育土地的農民的角度出發，歌頌人與大地之融和。早期大地藝 術作品，在人煙稀少的荒野進行，着重藝術家自身與大自然的對話，跟空城計劃與村民合作的創 作手法形成相比。這亦反映出歐洲、美國、亞洲各地的聚落形態之不同，以及歷史背景，由農業 社會進入現代化過程之差異。 總括來說，越後妻有大地藝術祭與空城計劃的第一屆及第二屆空城藝術節《坪輋．村校．展演》 （2013）和《坪輋村校之外》（2016），均十分尊重村民耕耘大地的手法，並嘗試將之融入大地 藝術之中。
-----~---~-----
劉學成的作品，講述香港因為填海而不斷變遷的海岸線。他的作品，探索「土地」和「環境」對 城市人的意義。 作品不是直接歌頌大自然。西營盤填海工程前，居民生活與海岸的磨合，劉氏的作品以反映出現 今城市人與大自然元素的割裂。因此，作品所選用的材料，不經意地反映出城市面向多於自然面 向。 作品同時亦將早期大地藝術的其中一個特質 — 時效性 — 帶到另一個層面。早期大地藝術作品 展露環境的變幻莫測，而劉氏的作品，則揭露因應對公共空間擁有不同理解而引致的「城市時效 性」。
-----~---~----伍韶勁的作品講述我們如何為了維持高質素生活方式，而從擴展化理中引入資源。 伍氏亦有策略地採用了光「無所不在，亦不知其所在」的特質，藉此挑戰我們現今對場地獨特性 的理解。 遠離早年側重於使用天然材料來反映環境的做法，伍氏的手法讓我們看到在二十一世紀的「資訊 時代」，我們可以如何重新詮釋大自然。
-----~---~----從展出的五個作品，我們可以看到，與社區合作，是香港大地藝術發展一個毋庸置疑的趨勢。與 早期大地藝術作品相比，公眾的參與度明顯提高了不少。 這或許是基於香港高度城市化的環境。因此創作的場地往往位於人口稠密的市區，而非如早期大 地藝術所取場的荒漠大地。如果我們將人看作地方的其中一個元素，而在作品中納入當地居民對 土地的理解，以及他們與土地的生活模式，那麼，這對大地藝術的理解可謂一個不小的突破。 香港獨特的地產市場不單影響着我們的日常生活，亦感染着我們對土地的看法。早年的大地藝 術，較側重於探索人類與自然的嶄新或詩意的關係，相較起來，香港當代大地藝術的手法，選擇 了較為草根階層的方向以表達市民日常所經驗的土地問題。 香港的當代大地藝術，在材料的使用上，跟早期大地藝術出現了不少變化。早期大地藝術經常採 用在天然地材料來顯視作品的場地真實性，及作品如何融入環境。但這模式在香港並不完全適 用。作為一個高度城市化的地方，在香港的環境裏找到的在地材料，往往並非天然。這些人造材 料突顯了我們與大自然的抽離。因此，香港的大地藝術作品，取材於在地人造材料的手法，把材 料忠於場地的的定義擴闊了。 香港有超過一半的人口生活在市區範圍。若我們堅持要純粹使用天然的材料創作大地藝術，這或 會顯得太過陳腔濫調，或不附合現實。 這發展亦可能為全球的大地藝術發展帶來新的氣象。現今的世界人口亦已超過一半活於城市。這 情況大大改變了人對土地的看法、經驗、理解。步入「資訊時代」，這些轉變更為顯著。在這世 代，我們往往透過電子媒介接收關於地方、地境、自然元素的資訊。香港並不單獨處於這與大自 然「數據上連接」但「實質上分離」的狀況。我們這種與大自然建基於資訊，但缺乏體驗的關 係，可以啟發我們創作出怎樣的大地藝術？
是次展覽一併展出五個作品，旨在促進藝術家對土地詮釋和藝術手法的溝通和互相感染。 社區參與 伍韶勁的大地藝術作品，採取了較為哲學的方向。他的作品讓觀眾沉思。其他四個作品，則都採 取較為直接的手法，希望透過與群眾和環境合作，製造影響。這些不同的創作手法，影響到社區 如何參與進各藝術作品的創作過程。 場地獨特性 以上兩種手法，均觸及場地獨特性的問題。伍氏詰問「資訊時代」如何令我們的觸感非物質化， 而其他的四個作品，均集中於探索具體的地方議題。 市區或鄉郊 選擇在市區或在鄉郊為創作地點，亦是一個值得討論的話題。在五個作品當中，多數都選址在市 區 — 大部份香港人切身體驗的都市環境。這是HK Farm有意識的選擇，因為他們希望在市區接觸 一般的香港市民大眾。空城計劃選擇在坪輋 — 一條備受發展壓力的鄉村 — 創作。這亦是一個建 基於場地的考慮，旨在要在鄉村的角度，回看城市。 材料 針對土地及環境議題，天然材料似乎是順理成章的選擇。例如，HK Farm用泥土及植物創造出市區 農場，放置在天台和街頭，讓公眾參與。空城計劃在郊外尋找材料，在坪輋創作出合適鄉村環境 的藝術作品。然而，土地議題亦可透過非天然材料來表達，例如劉學成用紙皮 — 在城市中常見的 廢料 — 創作出的舢舨，藉此反映城市環境的人工化。 時效性 五位藝術家對土地的時效性都有不同的看法。劉學成和梁志剛將他們的藝術帶上街頭，啟發大眾 對公共空間重新認識。他們臨時性的藝術介入，着重的並非結果，而是過程；作品意圖在市民大 眾的腦海中播下種子，孕育出對公共空間使用的批判角度。空城計劃在坪輋的作品，雖屬臨時性 質，但旨在透過歌頌村民的日常作業，提倡與土地建立長久關係。同樣地，鄭炳鴻亦透過在啟德 河引入臨時作品，讓附近的居民，對河道萌生歸屬感。 大自然韻律 大自然韻律，或大地的生態，是大地藝術家歷久常新的主題。鄭氏在啟德河的作品，沿着修復後 的河道展示出大自然運作之美。空城計劃在坪輋的作品，顯露出他們採用本地農民的生活智慧來 配合土地自然步伐的決心。HK Farm雖然是在市區耕作，在過程中卻運用自然韻律的智慧。這做法 旨早已習慣活在室內的城市人，重拾大自然節拍的觸覺。
Chang Ping Hung, Wallace 鄭炳鴻 Kai Tak River Green Art Fest “E-Co Habitat” 《 啟德河綠色藝術節「生。活共構」》(2012 -)
Bio 個人簡歷 Fellow of HKIA; Registered Architect in Hong Kong and China; Associate Professor, School of Architecture, CUHK; Director of the Urban Place Research Unit; Visiting Scholar in Harvard-Yenching Institute, Harvard University; Advisory Committee Member on Revitalization of Historic Buildings. He is both an architectural practitioner and theorist on urban design, cultural conservation and community participation. His award-winning designs range from urban washroom to university academic building. Also, he is a social activist to promote a civil consciousness on urban environment, community conservation and sustainable planning, including his recent advocacy on the redevelopment planning and architecture of Shek Tsai Leng [Dills Corner Garden] Elderly Caring District. He has been conducting research with exhibition in Habitat City and Bamboo Theatre. His latest research, Kai Tak River Green Corridor Community Education Project [HKADC 2013 Award of Arts Education, International Award for Public Art 2015], focuses on cultural identity and urban sustainability issues during the urban transformation process in Hong Kong and southern Chinese cities. To recognize his contribution to the promotion of cultural conservation, he was awarded Certificate of Commendation by the Secretary for Home Affairs in 2015. 香港建築師學會資深會員；香港及中國註冊建築師；香港中文大學建築學院副教授；社區營造學 社總監；美國哈佛大學燕京學社訪問學者；活化歷史建築諮詢委員。同時是城市設計、文化保育 及社區參與的建築實踐者及理論家；其設計由城市衛生間到大學教學樓曾多次獲獎；亦是社會推 進者，通過城市環境、社區保育及持續規劃倡導公民意識，更積極倡議石仔嶺老人院區規劃及相 關建築設計；其研究成果展覽包括「人居城市」及「竹跡。築跡」；近年研究「啟德河綠廊社區 教育計劃」 [香港藝術發展局 2013藝術教育獎, 2015 國際公共藝術獎] , 聚焦香港及華南城市都市 更新過程中的文化認同及城市持續發展議題；為表揚鄭氏對促進文化保育的貢獻，獲民政事務局 局長於2015頒發「嘉許狀」。
Intro 作品簡介 Since the Community Alliance of Kai Tak Development renamed the Kai Tak Nullah on 30 Sep, 2007, this very act has transformed itself from the acknowledgement of a concept, a rediscovery of urban ecology, into a community- based spatial planning. The entire process also reaffirms the possibility to combine community education with active learning experience. After five years of development, the project has vividly demonstrated the interactivity and proactive synergy of an advocacy model characterized by bottom-up public initiation and government coordination. From water purification to the creation of an ecological green corridor and from community revitalization to environment education, the ‘Kai Tak River’ symbolized the sustainable vitality of the grassroot community, and has embodied the local spirit of cultural diversity and inclusiveness.
In between the natural flow of river and artificial exploitation, the trace of the ‘Kai Tak River’ development has compressed a hundred years of vicissitudes. From a natural bay, league of 13 villages, the WWII aircraft shelter, factory culture, creative communities to ecological restoration, the river has enriched the historical resources from a humanity perspective and brought about an opportunity for active learning. 「啟德河」自2007年9月30日起由啟德發展民間聯席命名後，由一個概念的認知，對城市生態的 重新發現，到今日演變為「以民為本」的空間規劃，並確立了可即可及、生活學習結合社區教育 的場所；前後經歷約五年的發展與深化，當中體驗了「民間起動、政府配合」的倡導模式所發揮 的互動及積極互補的成效。在自然流向與人工開拓中，「啟德河」所疊加的痕跡是壓縮了的百年 蒼桑，由原生海灣、十三鄉約、二戰機庫、工廠文化、創藝群組、到生態復修等，無不豐富了人 文環境的歷史資源，更誘發了自主學習的機遇。
Interpret 詮釋 To Chang, people in Hong Kong understand “land” mostly from the perspective of how the city is formed, instead of pure naturalist view. Land in Hong Kong for him, conceptually, is being “captured” rather than “nurtured”. So as a waterway – the natural Kai Tak River was channelized to become an artificial nullah to serve urbanization’s need. Growing up next to Kai Tak Nullah, Chang has childhood memories of adventures along this discharge watercourse. His experience with a nullah – a dominating urban infrastructure common in the 1960s / 70s Hong Kong, and the mixing of industrial discharges and waste from domestic squatters, made him wonder about the meaning of a “river”: can it be an interactive platform where different forms of lives co-exist? Through the water cleaning process, Chang is amazed with how nature works as an agent to heal a wounded landscape. The water purification process of Kai Tak Nullah not only resolved the water pollution problem, the improving physical environment also welcomes the community to witness and engage in the evolution process of transforming this post-industrial landscape. 對鄭炳鴻來說，香港人對「土地」的認識，普遍來自城市，而非大自然。香港的土地，對他來 說，在概念上是被人類「奪取」，而非「孕育」。因應城市化的需求，啓德河不再是一條天然河 道，而被改建成一條人工引水道。 於啟德明渠附近長大，鄭炳源有不少沿着水道探險的童年回憶。他對明渠 — 在六、七十年代頗為 常見的城市基建 — 和渠中混合着工業與木屋區家居廢料污水的記憶，不禁讓他思考「河流」的意 義：河能否成為各種生命互利互生的平台？ 透過水的淨化過程，鄭感受到大自然作為復修環境創傷媒介的功能。啟德明渠的淨化，不單解決 了水質問題。實質環境的改善，更加讓整個社區見證及參與這後工業地境的演化。
Create 創作 Chang values the community as a key factor to the revitalization of a post-industrial landscape. In his project, Chang establishes a series of engagement activities to empower
the people to generate concepts of environment changes through art creations. Through engaging the community to the idea of green art, the locals create a collective expression of their vision for this neighbourhood. They are encouraged to have a “living dialogue with the river”. Through the idea of “aesthetics of sustainability”, Chang hopes the “new artistic inputs also demarcate their significance towards a humanistic appreciation.” While some may see this as a “community-engagement art”, Chang believes this project in fact touches upon the “art of engaging the community”. Kai Tak River is the living environment to the community, Chang finds it most intuitive to use water as the initiating element to speak about environment with locals. Chang sees the beauty in the complex, overlaying cultural impressions of a “river” (for the older generation), a “nullah” (for the mid-age generation), and a “restored ecological corridor” (for the younger generation). Among the multi-generation community, this project brings out aspirations of what this waterway means to the Kai Tak neighourhood. 鄭炳鴻視社區為復興後工業地境的一個重要元素。在他的作品中，鄭氏安排了一系列活動，讓群 眾參與藝術創作，生成有關環境轉變的概念。透過社區參與綠色藝術，群眾集體創作出他們對鄰 舍的願景。鄭氏希望群眾都能夠與河流以生活對話。透過討論「可持續性的美學」，鄭氏希望「 新的藝術介入，可以界定其對人文共賞的重要。」 有人會認為鄭氏的作品是「群眾參與式藝術」，他卻認為自己的創作是「參與社群的藝術」。對 社區來說，啟德河是一個有生命的環境，鄭氏認為用「水」來引發居民說出對環境的想法，最為 合適。
對鄭氏來說，社區藝術的意義，並不在於在計劃完結的時候，得到一件完成的藝術作品。世上並 沒有一幅稱得上是「完美啟德」的圖畫，有的，是每個參與者都有份的集體想像。計劃的目的， 是要培養對土地的歸屬感，引發出居民對社區的自豪感。 這種建基於社區的後工業地境修復手法，和早期大地藝術作品所用的手法截然不同。早期大地藝 術家的創作地點，往往是遠離人煙的後工業用地。相反，啟德是一個高度城市化的地方，人與地 方經已變成密不可分。因此，鄭氏在創作過程中讓社區參與，而並非如早期大地藝術家般，在作 品完成後才讓公眾享用。兩種模式都旨在修復後工業地境給公眾使用，惟其使用的手法不同而 已。
Project 展望 Chang interprets that land in Hong Kong is mostly considered as commodity, rather than art. Such concept relates to the value system that converts attached land to detachable currencies. To Chang, “land (in Hong Kong) is treated differently beyond its locality.” To project way forward for a new value towards land, Chang believes that cross-disciplinary dialogues between humanities and science, visual arts and civil engineering should be encouraged. Given Hong Kong’s “unique geographical and cultural condition”, Chang believes there is a unique role for Hong Kong Land Art to express and explore our identity and context.
鄭氏認為不同世代對啟德河所擁有的文化印象互相重疊，很有意思。老一代，記憶中的「河流」 ，中年人認識它為「明渠」，年輕一代，則看見「復修後的生態走廊」。這些不同的理解，反映 出啟德河對幾代人的不同意義，豐富了他們對啟德河社區的期望。
On how future discussions of environment will continue to develop in Hong Kong, Chang is concerned with the over-emphasised scientific figures or the ambitious planning goals. He hopes that Land Art could bring stimulations, inspirations, and imaginations to how we should treat our land and ourselves in the urban environment.
Critique 評論
鄭炳源認為香港人普遍將土地看作商品，而非藝術品。這概念涉及到將連繋社區的土地看成可分 拆的貨幣的價值觀。對鄭氏來說，「（香港的）土地離開了自身的地域，往往不被同等對待。」
In this project, Chang hopes to promote a new paradigm towards land – “Land is for us to nurture, not for us to capture.”
面對如何可以給予土地新的價值，鄭氏相信跨專業（從人文學科到自然科學，視覺藝術到土木工 程）的交流十分重要。
Responding to typical engineering approach to Hong Kong’s environmental improvement works, Chang consciously aims to establish a humanistic approach to our environment, that citizens can “design together, build together, and enjoy (the space) together.” He wants to nurture a social movement and culture, that people can be part of the process to imagine and conceive the possible future of their own environment.
香港的地理及文化背景獨特，鄭氏相信我們擁有一套自家的大地藝術的手法，以表達我們的特性 身份和景況。
To Chang, community art is not to achieve one finished art piece at the end of the project. There is no single picture of an “ideal Kai Tak”, but every participant contributes to the collective visions of this river. The goal of this project lies in cultivating a sense of belonging to the land, and initiating citizen’s pride to their community. 鄭氏希望藉作品提倡新的範式去面對土地 — 「土地應由人們孕育，而非奪取。」 有見及香港環境改善工程一般由基建主導，鄭氏希望可以引入人文主導的手法，令市民可以「集 體設計、集體建造、集體享用」。他希望孕育出一場社會運動，推動社會氣氛，令民眾可以積極 參與對於未來環境的想像和創造。
對於香港的環境問題日後將如何發展這討論議題，鄭氏表示關注數據的過分着重的趨勢，或過於 野心化的發展計劃。他希望大地藝術可以為我們自身和我們看待環境的方式帶來衝擊、啟發和新 的想像。
Emtpyscape 空城計劃 Emptyscape Art Festival 《空城藝術節》 (The 1st and 2nd Festivals 第一屆及第二屆, 2013 - )
Bio 簡歷 Established in 2011 by a group of mulit-disciplinary profession, Emptyscape aims to research and explore the history and characteristics of emptied spaces. We wish to explore the future potential uses and re-representation of these spaces through art intervention, and hence, raise the public awareness of use and discourses on public space. Besides the 1st Emptyscape Art Festival held in 2013, we have also curated a series of events namely, Forum Series 2012, Party of the Rock in 2012, The Diminishing Classroom Mini Concert – Unplugged (2012), Party on the Short (2013), Dances with the green – An Exhibition on the Northeastern New Territories (Art Installation) (2014), Party in Kee Sum Café (2014). 2011年成立的藝術團體，願景是通過藝術實踐及跨領域協作，研究與介入城市裡的邊緣空間， 重啟這些空間的諸多可能性，並開拓這方面的公共論述。除了2013年第一屆空城藝術節(坪輋•村 校•展演)，亦曾策劃吉場展演講座系列(2012) 、崖上的Party (2012) 、消失的教室無電插音樂會 (2013) 、埋岸的Party (2013) 、原地.踏步：新界東北藝術展(裝置部份)(2014) 、祺森的 Party(2014) 等。
Intro 作品簡介 Since Emptyscape’s establishment in 2011 to its 1st Emtpyscape Art Festival held in 2013 and till today, Emtpyscape’s goal has been persistent and consistent. They take artists and visitors to spaces that are abandoned and forgotten, sometimes being labelled as “Ruins”. They would like to dig deep to the history, reveal the stories behind these spaces and most importantly to explore the many possibilities of reusing, re-interpreting or redefining these spaces, from all perspectives, through art interventions and interaction within the community. Ping Che had been a very unique location for us to achieve our visions. There, resides many villages who shared the similar ideology that there is a strong tie between the community, the people and the area they live in. They welcome all kinds of dialogues and interactions, encouraging all kinds of revitalization and exploration of their village site. In early of June 2013, Ping Che Village School Art Festival was held in the Former Ping Yeung Village School in Ping Che, Fanling of the New Territories. Artists and participating groups were invited to produce/ perform site-specific artwork and performances. The festival encompasses a large variety of exhibits, events and activities including exhibitions of art and photography, concert, performances, screening, forum, workshops, guided tours of the village, bike tour and soccer match. Through these events and activities, villagers, artist and visitors are encouraged to explore, rethink and interact with the abandoned site.
Ping Che Village School Art Festival has attracted over 2000 visitors over the two-week programme. This year, at the 2nd Art Festival, Emtpyscape brought visitors to go beyond the Former Ping Yeung Public School (where the 1st Emptyscape Festival was held), and explore the wider area of Ping Che. They hope visitors would enjoy strolling around, be inspired by the artworks, meet new friends and comprehend a different perspective of this village in the North and the concept of abandoned spaces. 《空城藝術節》 從第一屆(2013)到現在，意念依然簡單，希望把藝術家和觀眾帶到城市邊緣的另 類空間，享受不一樣的創作與觀賞經驗。藝術節的焦點依舊放於閒置空間，或一般人所認知的「 廢墟」。然而，藝術節的作品與廢墟美學無關，相信大家共同關懷的是展望這些空間由下而上再 生的種種可能。 這種種的不一樣其中定必因著與他共同策劃藝術節的坪輋村民，他們有心有力讓「空城計劃」深 深地體會著整片村落和社群生活的美好願景。 「空城計劃」於2013年6月初使用粉嶺坪輋坪洋公立學校校舍進行為期四天的「坪輋。村校。展 演」藝術節。藝術節邀請本地視覺藝術家及表演藝術團體以”因地制宜” (site-specific)的形式展 演。節目包括藝術展、攝影展、音樂會、表演藝術、放映會、論壇、工作坊、導賞團、單車遊和 足球賽。透過一系列的展演和活動，他們期望參展的藝術團體、村民和到訪的人能一起去了解和 探索這所學校，並重新想像閒置空間的可能性。 藝術節於兩星期內吸引超過2000人到訪和參與活動。 藝術節從上屆的場地─被閒置了約十年的坪洋公立學校一一出發，延伸至坪輋的幾個生活著的角 落。希望參與藝術節的每位觀眾，通過步行能與藝術作品，村落，和人交會，都能獲得一次難忘 美妙的經驗，獲得一顆能種於心裡的種子，讓你內心所相信的理想生活發芽。
Interpret 詮釋 Emtpyscape was initiated by a quest to explore “why there are vacant lands in Hong Kong not being well-used?” The journey started in the relatively urban context of Hong Kong, where land has such a high monetary value that it is rare to be abandoned. While the majority of Hong Kong’s population live in the urban areas, our “back garden” of the New Territories is often being forgotten, especially when local farming has lost its importance since 1980s when most of the agricultural supplies are provided from Mainland China. Farmers then either sold their land to developers or rented it out for storage facilities. Such rural derelict scenes alerted Emptyscape, and the emergence of HKSAR Government’s NorthEastern New Territories Development Plan exacerbates this group to challenge what it means by urban-rural relationship in Hong Kong. Emtpyscape’s work reveals the ever-changing land policy and its consequences to people’s way of living. From the post-war period when the government encouraged citizens to move to the New Territories to farm for providing Hong Kong’s food supply, to the rapid urbanization by the first phase of new town planning since the late 1960s to transform rural to urban, to now the post-2000s when city-dwellers realize their disconnection from nature and grow with interest to “move back to the countryside”; Emtpyscape’s work at Ping Che offers a wake-up call to how Hong Kong’s contemporary land development may head to.
空城計劃成立之初，是為了探討:「香港為什麼有閒置空間未被善用？」。這歷程始於城市化的香 港-- 一個因地價昂貴而理應絕少有空置土地的城市。 香港的大部份市民都生活在市區，忽略了我們新界的「後花園」。自一九八零年代起，大量農產 品從中國大陸入口，令本地農業日漸式微。本地農民不是將土地賣給地產發展商，就是出租作貨 倉之用。這些荒廢了的鄉郊土地令空城計劃感到關注。香港特區政府的新界東北發展計劃，令空 城計劃更希望探討香港城鄉關係的意義。 空城計劃的作品揭露了不斷演變的土地政策，和人們隨之而改變的生活方式。政府在二次大戰後 鼓勵市民遷入新界耕作，以供應香港的糧食。自一九六零年代後期，新市鎮發展令鄉郊急速變得 城市化。到二千年後的現在，市區居民猛然醒覺他們已與大自然越發疏離，甚或對「回歸田園」 產生興趣。空城計劃在坪輋的計劃成為了讓他們思考香港現代土地發展方向的當頭棒喝。
Create 創作 During Emtpyscape’s 2013 “Ping Che Village School Art Festival”, the reuse of the Former Ping Yeung Public School was a meaningful step in the project. While a school is symbolic to the growth and the nurturing of young souls, the decision to work at the abandoned campus of a village school marks Emptyscape’s approach to gradually cultivate (or in this case, to re-cultivate) villagers’ sense of ownership to their land. This also echoes the fact that the former school’s construction was the works of the students and teachers in 1950s, Emptyscape’s decision to create art work at the school reiterates the creation process that the villagers had almost 70 years ago. It shows respect and bring pride to the work of the locals. In 2016’s “Beyond the Village School”, Emtpyscape expanded their scope to the actual village area, knowing this is the way to outreach to more locals. To Emtpyscape, many villagers are artistically-creative, because they live and work closely with the land on a daily basis. Such rural experience inspires them to have unique connection to the land. Emptyscape invites the locals to be part of the creative process with artists, to bring in site-specific quality to the project, and such site-specificity manifests the interpretation of the local people, their practices, and their way of life. 空城計劃於二零一三年舉辦的「坪輋。村校。展演」藝術節進駐了閒置的坪洋公立學校，是創作 上十分有意義的一步。學校象徵了培育年輕人成長的地方。重用閒置村校就象徵了空城計劃有意 慢慢建立（在今次而言是重建）村民對自己土地的歸屬感。這也不約而同地回應了一九五零年代 的校舍是由學生和老師親自建設這段歷史。空城計劃決定在此村校創作藝術，重拾了大約七十年 前由村民發起的創作歷程，而且是對村民的貢獻和親力親為手法的尊重。 空城計劃於二零一六年的「村校之外」，將計劃擴展到村落之實際生活範圍，為的是要接觸更多 村民。以空城計劃所見，很多村民都滿有藝術細胞，因為他們的日常作業就和土地有緊密接觸。 這種鄉村經驗啟發了他們對土地的獨特聯繫。空城計劃邀請村民與藝術家一起創作，突顯當地人 如何詮釋他們生活和工作的態度，給過程注入了因地制宜的獨特性，。
Critique 評論 Through Emptyscape’s work in Ping Che, it brings awareness to the rural culture in Hong Kong. It reveals the harsh reality of how everyday citizens have become victims in the ever-changing government land policies. Anthropologically, people often have a long-term relationship, both mental and physical, to the land. The post-war government policy, which encouraged citizens to move to the New Territories to farm, created the situations of many “non-indigenous villages”. The livelihood and family of these villagers were anchored in the fields, though they do not own the right to the land (versus indigenous villagers own the right to their land). Thus, life at a non- indigenous village on government land is at the mercy of government’s development and land policies. The threat of potential urban development at Ping Che forces villagers to have a transitory relationship with the land, which is not intuitive. Emptyscape’s work here is to reveal the merit of local culture, and the value of how these villages, though not indigenous, also carry a significant part of Hong Kong’s history. Emtpyscape’s work at Ping Che is considered as modelled after the Echigo-Tsumari Triennial Art Festival in Japan, because both projects aim to use local’s grounded wisdom to create art, to reveal the beauty and the value of rural village life. As a common Land Art typology across contemporary Asia, this type of art creation crossed-over with villagers reveals the different human settlement patterns and their related historic context between Asia and otherparts of the world. For example, the urban-rural relationship was a thoughtthrough topic in 19th Century Europe, as a reaction to the Industrial Revolution. Garden City Movement came as a city planning ideology to mediate between urban and rural in late 19th Century Europe. Meanwhile, Asia’s urban-rural dilemma only came in post-WWII because of our later development. Asia sustained the small-scale family/village-style of land production until very recent, versus in the West agricultural production has gone to mass production using machineries by post-WWII period. This is why, when touching upon land topics in rural Asia, our direct and intuitive association goes to the agricultural villages, and the “masters of the land” are the farmers who work the fields on a daily basis. By inviting these “masters” to be part of a Land Art project becomes a common practice to sustain the “living heritage” and to pass on the knowledge about the land. 空城計劃透過在坪輋的作品為香港帶來了對鄉郊文化的關注。 它揭示了一般市民殘酷地成為政府朝令夕改的土地政策的犧牲品。在人類學上，人們常常對土地 有長久的身心連繫。二次大戰後政策鼓勵市民搬入新界耕種，造成了很多「非原居民村」。這些 村民從事與土地有高度接觸的工作（即耕種）並落地生根，但他們並沒有土地業權（相反，原居 民則擁有地權）。因此，座落在官地上的非原居民村完全受制於政府的發展和土地政策。面對浮 動的城市化發展，坪輋村民被迫和土地建立一種過客式的反自然關係。空城計劃的創作展示了， 即使他們不是原居民，卻已萌生了一種在地文化，這也是香港歷史的重要組成部份。
空城計劃在坪輋的計劃可視為以日本「越後妻有大地藝術祭」為藍本的藝術節。為兩者都包含以 當地傳統智慧來創作的藝術，並且展示了鄉郊生活的美麗和價值。這種與村民合作，共同創作的 大地藝術類型在現今亞洲非常普遍，它展示了不同種類的聚居模式和亞洲與其他地區不同的歷史 背景。例如十九世紀歐洲城鄉關係作為對工業革命的回應，花園城市運動作為城市規劃理論來緩 和城市和鄉郊的衝突已經得到廣泛討論。亞洲的城鄉矛盾在二次大戰後才湧現是因為我們發展較 遲所致。從歷史演變看來，亞洲直到近代仍保留著小規模的家庭/鄉村式土地生產模式，西方農業 在二次大戰後已轉變為大規模機械化生產。當我們談及亞洲鄉郊的土地問題時，我們直覺會想到 農村，而平日在農地耕種的農夫就是「土地的師傅」。當我們想延續這些活現傳統和將土地智慧 流傳後世時我們都習慣邀請這些「土地的師傅」加入參與創作大地藝術。
Project 展望 In Ping Che, Emptyscape ultimately asks if urbanization is the only way to go, and the current top-down government new town planning is the answer to our countryside. Emptyscape hopes to showcase the beauty of rural living in Ping Che, to convince people on the merit of sustaining this alternative way of living. This is why, to Emptyscape, they value the impact of how the experience of art would inspire people. They aim to depart from the conventional mode of art creation and venue setting, to promote the understanding of a place and its context through first-hand experience with art in the landscape. Emptyscape’s work in Ping Che also inspires other rural areas in Hong Kong that may face similar urban encroachment issues. For example, the Ng Tung River Art Festival (2015) was conducted in reaction to the potential development threat along the Ng Tung River. Such grass-root initiatives slowly form a network to exchange and share ideas on urban-rural relationships, hopefully to gather a collective voice to represent an alternative interpretation of our New Territories. 空城計劃在坪輋其實想探討城市化是否唯一可行之路;及現今香港的發展模式 — 政府主導的新市鎮 規劃 — 是否適合我們鄉郊的唯一答案？ 空城計劃希望可以展示出坪輋鄉郊生活之美，進一步說服人們延續這種美好的另類生活模式。 對空城計劃來說，他們十分重視這些藝術體驗能怎樣啟發人們提出新的詮釋。空城計劃旨希望在 傳統的藝術創作和場地環境之外另闢蹊徑，提倡透過第一身地境藝術的體驗去了解一個地方和它 的內涵。 空城計劃在坪輋的創作亦啟發了香港其他面對城市化蠶食的鄉郊地區。例如「梧桐河藝術節」 (2015) 就是因梧桐河隨時受到發展威脅而生。這些由草根發起的行動慢慢組成一個網絡，不斷激 發和交流關於城鄉關係的意見，期望匯聚成為一把有力的聲音引領社會，為新界探索另一發展模 式。
HK Farm The HK FARMers’ Almanac《香港農民曆》 (2014 - 2015)
Bio 簡歷 HK Farm is an organisation of Hong Kong farmers, artists and designers founded in April 2012. Working in the city, farmers Glenn Eugen Ellingsen, Michael Leung and Anthony Ko collaborate with communities and organisations to highlight the importance of urban agriculture and locally produced organic food. In the summer of 2014, HK Farm took over Spring Workshop’s main terrace for a year-long residency. Their activities included community-based farming, an autumn harvest workshop, seed-bombing with students, planter-building workshops, documentation of both the terrace farm and HK’s farming protagonists, a talk-to-your-plants sound and photo booth, a winter discussion and finally The HK FARMers’ Almanac 2014 2015, created during an intensive three-day embodied knowledge book sprint. The residency concludes with 100 almanacs being distributed across the world to various institutions and farming collectives. Planters, soil, plants and trees were shared to other farms and community spaces across Hong Kong. This graph maps the people who created the almanac and the locations of the 100 Almanacs, planters and the new relationships/collaborations formed along the way. The map was created in April 2016 as a way to explore new agricultural milieus amidst the global movement.
Intro 作品簡介 The HK FARMers’ Almanac 《香港農民曆》 (2014 – 2015) The HK FARMers’ Almanac (2014 – 2015) concludes and has been distributed across the world, to our friends and to some strangers. In today’s neoliberal capitalist world, the challenge of survival weakens communities resisting displacement and from being uprooted. This year welcomes an additional HK$19.6 billion budget to the controversial high-speed rail project, direct action against illegal dumpsites overlooked by the government and the continuous land grabbing in the North East New Territories by the developer’s fork. Spring is here again… 《香港農民曆》(2014 – 2015) 是向我們的朋友，以及一些陌生人，總結了我們一年裏的工作。在 現今後自由主義中的資本主義社會，人為了掙扎求存，社區對被遷移及連根拔起的防禦能力與日 俱減。在今年的財政預算中，政府增撥近二百億給高鐵工程。相反，新界東北的持續非法傾倒泥 頭問題，卻完全被政府忽視。 初春之際…
Kai Fong Pai Dong (neighbourhood street kiosk) 《 街坊排檔 》 Kai Fong Pai Dong is a self-organised space collaboratively run by 14 people, to support the neighbourhood from the bottom-up. The green metal structure is located where Hamilton Street meets Canton Road in Yau Ma Tei, an intersection home to a fruit and vegetable market, hardware shops and several nursing homes. Kai Fong Pai Dong relies on mutual aid, empathy and community support, and empowers
A digital version of the Almanac can be downloaded here:www.tinyurl.com/HKalmanac.
those that run it and the neighbourhood community.
HK Farm 是一個由香港農夫、藝術家、設計師所創辦的組織，於二零一四年四月創立。活躍於城 市，Glenn Eugen Ellingsen、Michael Leung 和 Anthony Ko 三個農夫與不同的社區及組織合作， 強調城市耕作及本地生產有機食物之重要。
《 街坊排檔 》是由十四位街坊自我管理的空間，從下而上地支持社區。
二零一四年夏，HK Farm 進駐Spring工作坊的天台，歷時一年。他們組織的活動包括:社區耕種、 秋收工作坊、轟炸式播種、花槽製作、記錄天台農場及其重要人物、「與植物對話」聲音及拍照 攤位、冬季討論會，及最後，在一個歷時三天的密集「知識體現製書工作坊」中完成了《香港農 民曆》(2014-2015)。
《 街坊排檔 》由街坊互相支持，互助互愛，賦權予管理人及其社區。
駐場的一年，以分派一百本農夫年曆至世界各地的機構和農業合作社作結。剩餘的花槽、泥土、 植物、樹苗等，則分贈香港各處的農莊和社區空間。 這圖表描繪出《香港農民曆》的製作者和一百本《香港農民曆》、花槽所派送到的位置，以及沿 途建立的所有人脈、合作關係。地圖於二零一六年四月完成，用以探索環球流動中的嶄新農業空 間。 《香港農民曆》的電子版本可以從以下網頁下載：www.tinyurl.com/HKalmanac.
綠色的金屬結構位於油麻地的咸美頓街和廣東道交界，與水果疏菜市場、五金鋪、護理院相鄰。
Interpret 詮釋 When Michael Leung, one of the members of HK Farm, first arrived in Hong Kong six years ago, his experience with the land started when he was looking for an apartment. The ever-increasing rent in Hong Kong leads him to have a different perspective to the Cantonese colloquialism “wan sik” (「搵食」) – the term literally means “to seek the next meal”, which can be interpreted as a means of survival. Hong Kong’s working class is overwhelmed with full-time labour in order to pay extortionate rents. “Wan sik”’s tone of survival hints a shared anxiety amongst people in Hong Kong, linking to the rampant capitalism, oligarchy and lucrative attitude towards land as property here.
HK Farm’s initial interest in farming started from awareness to food safety issues, such as the fake egg incidents earlier on. The members realise the importance of “grow your own food”, so at least you know where your food source is.
In Hong Kong, a pai dong is a local street stall for venders to sell fresh produces or daily items. It is considered a grass-root mode of commerce that thrives with the community and neighbourhood.
HK Farm’s interests in farming started from a shared belief in food safety and access to local and organic food. For some members the activity of urban farming offered a nod to their family’s history or passion for gardening. On their first rooftop farm in 2012, one member of HK Farm stated that “farming is a political act”. A simple sentence, that re-connects HK Farm unintentionally to the political, four years later, in this Land Art exhibition. Some might question such a politicalisation of urban farming, after all, is it not just about growing food, sharing it on Facebook and eating it home? No, they call this “leisure farming”.
While early Land Art often interacts with natural landscapes in the wild, the works that HK Farm does, reveals that it is the urban landscape that relates to people in Hong Kong the most. Rooftop farming is a common landscape typology in the late 20th / early 21st Century globally. This model works perhaps from a farming perspective, but lacks strength when in discussing about public space (because it is restricted to a limited community and some rooftop farms in Hong Kong are private to some extent).
The engagement in farming makes the members of HK Farm more in touch with land issues in Hong Kong. From the difficulty in finding urban locations for rooftop, to sourcing soil and realising some very good farmlands in the New Territories are already bought up by property developers, HK Farm witnesses and hears collective stories about land issues of Hong Kong from people they meet through farming activities. 當HK Farm其中成員Michael Leung 六年前初次來臨香港，他與這片土地的初次接觸，是尋找居所 的經驗。香港永遠在飆升的租金，令他對廣東話俗語「搵食」一詞別有體會。除了字面解釋的「 尋找下一餐膳食」意思外，「搵食」亦可解作生存的手段。香港的勞動階層必須全職工作，才能 夠負擔沉重的租金。「搵食」包含掙扎求存的調子，反映出香港這寡頭政治、極端資本主義社會 純粹視土地作為財產的態度。 HK Farm 對耕種的興趣源於對食物安全和本地可及的有機食物的共同信念。城市耕種的活動， 對其中成員來說，是對家庭經歷或對園藝熱情的應可。二零一二年，在HK Farm 的第一個天台 農場，其中一員稱「耕作是一個政治行為。」這是一句簡單的說話，但不經意地，於四年後的今 天，在這個大地藝術展覧中，把HK Farm連接重新連繋到政治。有人可能會質疑城市耕種的政治 性。城市耕種不是為了種植食物、在面書上分享，和在家中享用食物收成嗎？不是，那些他們認 為是「消閒耕作」。
HK Farm’s decision of disseminating some of its Spring Workshop planters to the Kai Fong Pai Dong (a self-organised space collaboratively run by 14 people) creates a new paradigm of what it means to conduct contemporary Land Art in Hong Kong, where the core discussion of what environment means to our urban dwellers lies on the streets. Through the Kai Fong Pai Dong, HK Farm aims to push the idea in the “commoning of public space” on Hong Kong’s streets. HK Farm的核心理念，是要讓民眾參與城市耕作及有機食物。雖然HK Farm花了三年時間在大廈天 台和露台種植。他們意識到天台畢竟不能讓所有人踏足，亦不容易讓人見到。相比近日普遍的街 頭城市耕作，例如「金鐘農耕實驗社區」和芒果王的農場（游擊城市耕種），和日漸增多的郊野 社區種植，也許香港的天台農場是界乎私人和公共的空間，普通市民難以享用。所以，自《香港 農民曆》完成以後，及對與芒果王一起耕作的興趣漸增，HK Farm 現探討其他與街坊社區、可在 街頭進行的城市耕作手法。 在香港，排檔指在街頭售賣蔬果和日常用品的攤檔，一般被視作基層憤鬥作業的模式。
農場的工作，令成員有機會親身接觸到香港的土地問題。由尋找合適地點的困難，到尋找泥土， 得知新界的優質農地很多都已遭發展商收購。HK Farm親身見證，並從他們所接觸到不同的人或 事，理解到香港土地的的集體故事。
雖然早期的大地藝術創作多位於野外並與天然地境互動，HK Farm的工作，顯示出在香港，城市 地境更能讓人有所共鳴。天台耕作，於二十世紀後期至二十一世紀初，在全球都十分普遍。這模 式在農業角度或較成功，但基於其空間上的限制，而香港某些天台農場亦是私人地方，在公共空 間的討論卻不太相關。 決定把在Spring工作室所制作的種植花槽在《街坊排檔》分發 (一個由十四位街坊自我管理的空 間)，為香港的當代大地藝術開創了新的範式，讓核心的環境討論發生在街頭。透過《街坊排檔》 ，HK Farm希望在街頭推動「將公共空間平民化」這想法。
Create 創作
Critique 評論
The core philosophy of HK Farm is to engage people with urban farming and organic food. HK Farm spent three years farming on building rooftops and terraces, however, HK Farm now realizes the rooftop has its constraints of inaccessibility and lack of visibility. In comparison to the commoning of recent ground floor urban farms such as the Admiralty Demonstration Farm and Mango King’s farm (a guerrilla urban farm), and the increase in community-based rural farms, Hong Kong rooftop farms, with their grey area of being public and/or private, are somewhat inaccessible to the general public. Following the completion of the Almanac and an increased interest in farming with Mango King, HK Farm now explores alternative urban farming approaches that happen on the ground level, with neighourhood community.
The Kai Fong Pai Dong creates a meeting point and opportunity for neighbours to meet. They hope to connect to the community by having farming activities there. “Farming” then becomes the “communication platform” for (latent) neighourhood gardeners and farmers to establish a potential “kai fong” (neighbourly) relationship. HK Farm thinks this is a way to build a self-sustainable community that “shares, mutually aids, and supports each other with resources and scattered knowledge”. Being in Yau Ma Tei, and old neighbourhood with many “subdivided-units” (劏房) and several nursing homes, the Kai Fong Pai Dong also hopes to offer a different space for resting and contemplation.
Compared to the early Land Art that works with remote landscapes with limited population, the land issues in Hong Kong are provocative to a level where they affect everyday life situations of ordinary citizens and the ability to “wan sik”. Thus, the observations that the 14 members of Kai Fong Pai Dong make, and the community (art) approaches that they intuitively and collectively apply, are addressing and accommodating to the relatively grass-root working class demographic, broadening the spectrum of Land Art audiences from the typical middle-class museum-goers to the wider public. Their work further democratizes the understanding and literacy to land issues. Kai Fong Pai Dong’s work is also comparable to the early Land Artist, David Nash, in the way that both are trying to use their way of life as an art form, to express their pursuit of sustainability. While Nash moves to live and work in a remote village in Wales, U.K., submerging himself to the rural environment to be inspired for Land Art creations, those that open the Kai Fong Pai Dong get themselves a stall on the street so as to get in touch with the everyday people to share their thoughts on society, street culture and the environment. Their different approaches, though both are about “way of life as art”, perhaps reference to their different era, background, and cultural context. 《街坊排檔》為街坊提供了聚腳的機會和地點。HK Farm希望透過耕作活動來聯繫社群。這樣， 「耕作」變成了一個平台，讓社區內(潛在的)花王與農夫建立「街坊」關係。 HK Farm認為這做法可以建立一個自我延續的社群，讓群體把大家當作資源和零散的知識來「共 享、互助、互相支持」。
At the street level, HK Farm hopes that the Kai Fong Pai Dong’s farming activities could inspire more locals to take ownership and to expand the street farm, both socially and spatially. HK Farm hopes the community support and the locals’ sense of ownership to the street farms could inspire the government or policy-makers to incorporate ground floor urban farming as a recognized activity and be granted significant permanent locations that build on what Farms for Democracy and Very MK done at Admiralty and Kowloon Park respectively in the past couple of years. HK Farm成立以後，他們的種植曾經歷幾回搬遷。從Spring工作坊的位置，花槽獲分派到不同的社 區，給予對城市耕作有趣的人士使用。HK Farm把這視為訊息的傳播，將「自己食物自己種」和 「公共空間平民化」等想法散播開去，藉此希望花槽在其他地方，仍然能夠達到他們的目的。 HK Farm將他們的工作以「蟲洞」概念形容 — 將兩個極端的狀況連結起來。在他題為「由（屋 頂）上而下，由下而上」的文章中，他指出，HK Farm在新界由遭發展商買下的土地上取得泥 土，用作市區種植。一方面，他們認為在那些土地上的肥沃泥土不應浪費，另一方面，他們認為 這「資源」在香港市區的散播，形成了一個無形的網絡，能夠把城市中的農場與受壓迫的郊野接 連起來。 在街頭，HK Farm希望街坊排檔的耕作活動可以啟發更多街坊主動帶領及擴展市區耕作，無論是 從社會或是空間的層面。梁氏希望社區的支持和街坊自主的街頭種植，可以啟發政府和政策制定 者，令他們認可街頭種植，並劃出長遠地方用來作市區耕種，承傳「民主耕地」和「旺角天台農 場」這幾年來在金鐘和九龍公園的實踐。
是一個舊社區，存在不少劏房和養老院。《街坊排檔》亦希望透過提供不同的空間，讓人得以喘 息、思考。 相對早期在荒漠進行的大地藝術創作，香港尖銳的土地問題影響着市民的日常生活，和他們「搵 食」的能力。因此，十四位《街坊排檔》的成員所做的觀察，以及他們直覺地和集體地應用的社 區藝術創作手法，旨在針對草根勞動人口所需，從而將大地藝術的受眾擴闊至參觀藝廊的中產階 級以外的公眾。他們的作品延伸了土地問題的民主化，增長了一般人對議題的認識。
《街坊排檔》這作品，與大地藝術家如 David Nash 的作品，都嘗試將生活看成藝術，反映對可 持續性的追求。Nash移居到威爾斯的偏僻村落，在郊野的環境中尋找靈感；而《街坊排檔》的成 員則在繁忙的街道上擺檔，接近市民大眾對社會、街頭文化、環境的所思所想。儘管他們所採用 的手法有所不同，作品都反映出他們的時代、個人、文化等背景，但他們同樣把生活當作藝術看 待。
Project 展望 Following their one-year residency at Spring Workshop, the wooden planters have been disseminated to different groups and communities in Hong Kong interested in or practising urban farming HK Farm also refers to what they are doing with a “wormhole’ concept – connecting two extreme situations through a portal. In their essay “Roof(top) Down, Bottom Up”, they refer to the fact that they take soil from developer-purchased farmlands in the New Territories for urban farming. On one hand it is because they believe the richness of soil in those farmlands should not be wasted, on the other hand they picture that such a “resource” is being used and spread out at different parts of the city, creating a network of urban farms that symbolically connects back to the “evicted rural Hong Kong”.
With special thanks to Spring Workshop for HK Farm’s one-year residency (2014-15) and for publishing and distributing The HK FARMers’ Almanac. 特別鳴謝 Spring工作室接待HK Farm 於2014-15年進行為期一年的駐場計劃，並出版及發行《香港農民曆》。
Lau Hok-shing, Hanison 劉學成 Hok Shing Yee Ho – Story Telling Boat 《學成貳號 — 拖船仔講故仔》 (2015)
Lau chose to walk this route because the tramway was originally the coastline packed with piers where fishing boats off-loaded their catches, and the Park was indeed the ocean before land reclamation. His idea was to lead the boat back to the ocean and to restore the past in another time and space. Lau hopes people would rethink about the transformation caused by urban development and the relation between such development and the living space we share.
Bio 個人簡歷 Hanison Lau uses sculptural form to present his ideas; his 3-dimensional pieces speak some of his personal stories, presenting different visual elements with ready-made materials. He usually employs history and literature, especially adapted from Chinese culture as referential languages and properties to appropriate his works. He used sculpture and drawing to represent the poetic elements vested in contemporary visual art form, and his works demonstrate a strong record of personal action. Lau has now been working as an independent artist and Lecturer at Hong Kong Baptist University. He received his Bachelor Degree of Arts (Fine Art) and Master Degree in Fine Art at RMIT University in 2005 and 2007 respectively. He was selected as one of the highlighted artists by the Hong Kong Art Promotion Office for its “Artists in Neighbourhood scheme II 2008”. He took part in the Artist-in-residence project in Portland, USA in 2008 and South Korea in 2010, 2011, 2013 and 2014. In the last few years, he has been exhibiting his works extensively in USA, Paris, Australia, China and Hong Kong. His work has been collected by various local and overseas collectors. 2005年取得澳洲皇家墨爾本大學藝術學士學位，2007年完成該校的藝術碩士學位。自2003年起, 劉氏積極參與多個本地聯展;2006及2008年曾於香港舉辦「規律 － 劉學成個人行動」、「詩前想 後」、「乞泉齋內的水動山靈」、「測不準定理」及「向你好說你好」等多次個人展覽。2007年 被選為香港藝術推廣辦事署「藝遊鄰里計劃」的推介藝術家之一， 2008年於美國波特蘭參與駐場 藝術創作，2010至2014年次多於韓國參與藝術家進駐計劃。2011於中國天津舉辦「求不得」混 合媒体作品個人展覽。曾於2004及2005年兩度入選「夏利豪基金會藝術比賽」。作品為中國、美 國、韓國及香港等地的私人收藏家及公共機構收藏。
Intro 作品簡介 Sai Ying Pun was once a hilly old district situated by the coast. Shops located near the seaside mostly ran fishery-related businesses. The area was best known for Salted Fish Lane which mainly dealt with salted fish trading. It was one of the main characters of Sai Wan’s townscape. As a result of rapid development of Hong Kong, the salted fish industry declined. In order to inherit and raise public awareness of this traditional industry, Lau tried to revive old elements in an artistic way. He collected cardboards from Centre Street to make a 1:1 Sampan, then marched the boat along the tramway from Salted Fish Lane all the way to Sun Yat Sen Memorial Park.
西營盤是坐山面海的舊城，近海一帶的商舖大多從事與海洋產業有關的行業，最有名當選鹹魚 欄。鹹魚欄顧名思義此地商舖以售賣鹹魚為主業，是西環風貌的一大特色。 香港急速發展，人民生活水準提高，飲食習慣也隨之改變，近年鹹魚業也逐漸息微。 為了令市民再度關注此傳統行業，也可以承傳此本土文化，劉氏我用藝術手法將新的元素注入當 中，在正街街市收集一些紙皮為材料，在鹹魚欄本地與學員一同利用紙皮併合成一些坐椅和一艘 與實物同大的舢板，完成後劉氏我沿著鹹魚欄所在的電車路拉著舢板一直走向中山公園，因為電 車路對出之處本是漁船泊岸上落漁獲之碼頭，而中山公園所在之地未填海前本為海洋，劉氏我 的概念是想把舢板再次放回海裏，猶如時空交錯般將過去還原，懷念昔日香港還是漁港的人情風 貌，也令觀眾反思發展帶來的改變與自身生活空間的關係。 最後舢板到達中山公園後停放在草地上，把紙皮椅子放置在舢板四周，邀請周圍的街坊巿民坐 下，與劉氏我一同談回憶說故事，細訴西營盤的過去、現在與未來。
Interpret 詮釋 To Lau, the natural resource of the Earth should be shared among all people on this planet. If land is considered as a natural resource, then he questions the notion of why land is linked to a monetary value. This leads to the approach of his many projects, in which he brings art to the streets, to critique the definition and management of public space in Hong Kong. Lau is native to Sai Ying Pun. His interpretation of land relates strongly to the coastline. The Sai Ying Pun fishing industry prospered with its access to water; a community dependent on the trade of salted fish and sea produce grew onshore. Lives on the land and water are interdependent. Such trade and communal activities helped Lau to define public space iin his early years. The interactions among the locals, traders and buyers activated the streets as a shared space. The land reclamation along the coastline of Sai Ying Pun’s coastline made changes to this neighbourhood. The newly-reclaimed area provided more land for commercial and residential development, but took away the coastline where the fishing industry hub was. The relationship among the land, the water, and the people, was weakened. 對劉學成來說，地球的資源應為世人所共享。如果土地亦屬天然資源的話，他質疑，為何土地會 與金錢對等？他的不少創作都建基於這疑問。他把藝術帶上街頭，藉此批評香港公共空間的定義 和規管。
劉氏在西營盤長大。他對該地的理解，與其海岸線密不可分。西營盤過去因其海邊的地理位置， 發展出蓬勃的漁業；社區經濟很大程度依賴買賣咸魚及其他海產。陸地與海洋有不可分割的關 係。 這些貿易及公共活動，在劉氏的童年留下深刻的印象，啟蒙了他日後對公共空間的理解。本地 人，有的是商販，有的是買家，一起構成了充滿朝氣的街景。 填海工程大大改變了西營盤。填海出來的土地帶來了更多的商業及住宅空間，但亦奪去了漁業的 命脈。這轉變令土地、海洋、人類之間的關係變得疏離。
Create 創作 Lau’s cardboard Sampan, when brought to the streets on Sai Ying Pun, serves as a symbol to bring back memories and remind the old community members about the ways of life in the past. This familiar object of a Sampan becomes the channel to engage active public participation and interaction, inducing dialogue between the artist and the community members. This contemporary approach of taking art to the streets allows immediate reactions from the audience; Lau thinks it works particularly well at the current Hong Kong setting that general public does not have a strong museum visit culture. Contrary to the classical art which audience may have to study and research, in order to understand, Lau believes such topic about disappearing neighbourhood culture has an urgency to benefit from a direct and immediate delivery of message to audience. Early Land Art used local materials, often natural materials, for art creation, in order to address environmental issues. Hong Kong is such an urbanized city, Lau uses local yet not natural materials in his art creation – cardboard boxes that elderly scavengers collect (for recycle) to make a living – to reflect on what it means by “environment” in such an urban neighourhood. 劉氏的紙皮舢舨，在西營盤的街道上出現，變成一個，讓老街坊憶起從前生活方式的標記。舢舨 作為街坊所熟悉的物件，變成讓公眾參與及互動的渠道，鼓勵社群與藝街家對話。 將藝術帶進街道，走進群眾的當代藝術手法，可以獲得觀賞者的即時反應；劉氏認為這方法十分 適合不習慣參觀藝術館的香港公眾。相較於必須經過領略和鑽研才能學會鑑賞的古典藝術，劉認 為，探討消失中的鄰里文化這等帶急切性議題的藝術創作，更適合直接走進社群，而不適合放在 藝術館裏讓人沉思。 早期的大地藝術，利用當地而且往往是天然的材料來創作作品，用以回應環境議題。在香港這個 高度城市化的地方，劉氏亦就地取材（雖非天然材料），用退休老人收集（來循環再用）的紙皮 箱來創作作品，令我們思考「環境」對城市鄰舍的真正意思。
Critique 評論 If one of the fundamental qualities of early Land Art is the temporarily of the work since it is often vulnerable to the elements in the landscape, Lau’s project here explores a different dimension of “temporarily” created by conflicting understanding of public space. Lau’s story-telling activities on the streets perhaps are experiments to explore how the locals and the land management authorities perceive land and public space. His artistic action of bringing along a cardboard Sampan to public parks and streets, draws attention from park securities and police to advise him to leave. The “temporarily” of his Sampan activities reveals the management authorities’ view on what it means by public space. 如果早期的大地藝術作品的其中一個特徵是其時效性（因為它們會隨環境而轉變、消散），那 麼，劉氏的作品亦探討了各階層會對公共空間相互矛盾的意義而產生的「時效性」。 劉氏在街頭講故事活動，可被視為一種實驗，探索街坊與管理機關如何看待土地和公共空間。他 將紙皮舢舨帶到公園、街道的藝術行為，經常吸引管理員和警察的關注，並被勸喻離開。舢舨活 動的「時效性」，揭露了管理機關對公共空間的定位。
Project 展望 Lau compliments that Hong Kong people’s understanding of public space has got more sophisticated, especially since the Umbrella Movement in 2014. The locals who see his work on the streets find it “normal” and “common” that people are expressing ideas in public spaces, versus the earlier shy attitude on this matter. Lau observes this higher acceptance towards art in the public, and sees it as an improvement. He hopes the public could engage in using public spaces more proactively. Even if he is not organizing any art activities, the locals could still make use of public space with reasonable terms according to their interest. To Lau, his active participation with his art on the streets of Sai Ying Pun is a way to bring back the street life and sense of public space he experienced while the fishing industry was once prosperous. 劉學成認為香港人對公共空間的理解漸趨豐富，尤其是在二零一四年的雨傘革命之後。街坊在街 道上見到他的作品亦不感奇怪，認為有人在街道上表達想法，是正常不過的事情。這跟以往一般 路人會較為害羞的傾向形成對比。劉認為大家對藝術在公共空間出現的接受程度較以前為高，這 是一種進步。 他希望公眾能夠更加主動投入使用公共空間。在他沒有籌辦藝術活動的日子，街坊仍可以按照他 們的興趣來靈活地使用公共空間。對劉氏來說，他主動地透過藝術的介入，是希望藉此拾回從 前，當漁業還十分興旺的年代，那豐富街頭生活和鄰舍精神。
Special Thanks 特別鳴謝： The Conservancy Association Centre for Heritage (CACHe) 長春社文化古蹟資源中心
Kingsley Ng 伍韶勁 Spring: A Homage to Liang Quan《 泉：向梁銓致敬》(2013 -)
Bio 個人簡歷 Ng Siu-king, Kingsley holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in New Media from Ryerson University, Canada; a Master of Science degree in Sustainable Design from The University of Edinburgh, Scotland; and a Master of Fine Arts degree from Le Fresnoy – Studio National des Arts Contemporains, France. His interdisciplinary conceptual art vividly expresses abstract ideas and history and shows strong concern for humanistic issues and a distinctive regional culture. His work has been showcased at the Guangzhou Triennial, the Shanghai Expo, the Echigo-Tsumari Art Triennial and various exhibitions in France, Italy and Canada. He won a Hong Kong Arts Development Best Artist Award (Media Arts) in 2013, Hong Kong Young Design Talent Award in 2008, and a Hong Kong Contemporary Art Biennial Award in 2009. In 2013, he received a fellowship from the Asian Cultural Council to attend an artist residency abroad. He is currently assistant professor at the Academy of Visual Arts of Hong Kong Baptist University. 伍韶勁於加拿大懷雅遜大學取得新媒體藝術系學士，英國愛丁堡大學取得可持續設計理學碩士， 及法國國立當代藝術工作室Le Fresnoy 取得藝術碩士文憑。其跨媒體概念藝術，往往滲入強烈的 人文議題和地域文化，呈現抽象的意念及歷史。 作品曾於廣州三年展、上海世博會、日本越後妻有大地藝術三年展，以及法國、意大利和加拿大 等地展出。2013年獲「香港藝術發展獎年度最佳藝術家獎」 (媒體藝術) ，2008年獲「香港青年設 計才俊大獎」，2009年獲「香港當代藝術雙年獎」，2013年獲亞洲文化協會獎助金參與海外留駐 計劃。現於香港浸會大學視覺藝術學院擔任助理教授 。
Interpret 詮釋 Ng interprets “land” as one of the Five Elements (五行)in the Chinese cosmic belief – a culturally constructed concept of how we relate to the Universe. In the Chinese character of “land”, the top horizontal stroke represents the surface of the ground, and the space between the top and bottom strokes symbolises the space where life is conceived. The extrusion of the vertical line that goes beyond the top stroke then means the emergence of life from the ground. Thus, land to Ng is also the medium that nurtures growth and life. To Ng, the meaning of art is closely related to the practice of farming. The Chinese character of “art” (藝) embeds connotations to farming procedures such as ploughing and seeding – steps to prepare the land for further use. Ng interprets that an art process is a cultivation, using artistic expressions to interact with audience to prepare them for new interpretations. His interest in contemporary environment lies in the growing distance between man and nature. We now live in the “data-era”, receiving information so quickly and casually that we rarely take the effort to fully understand the origins of matters. In this art piece, Ng takes us on a journey to trace back to the origins of sources, of bottled water available in Hong Kong. He aims to map out this system through artistic expressions for audience to contemplate on our connection with water. 伍韶勁理解「土」為中國五行之一。五行的意義包含由傳統文化所建構的宇宙觀。中文的「土」 字，上下有二橫。上的代表地表面，上下橫中間的位置則代表生命形成的空間。豎筆畫穿過上橫 則代表生命的出現。所以，伍氏亦理解「土」是生長和孕育生命的媒介。 伍氏認為「藝術」和耕作有密切關係，中文「藝」字包含犁地和撒種的字根 ─ 兩者都是把土地作 耕種用途的準備步驟。伍氏理解藝術創作為默默耕耘的過程，透過藝術培養及感染觀眾對事物有 新的詮釋。 伍氏對當今環境議題的興趣，在於人和大自然逐漸疏離的情況。我們活在「資訊時代」中，雖不 斷接收大量訊息，卻無暇細味和發掘訊息背後的底蘊。那麼，我們該如何理解自然現象呢？
Intro 作品簡介
伍氏的作品，以找尋香港瓶裝水的源頭，帶領觀眾進尋找根源的經歷。他的目標是用藝術手法描 繪萬物根源的系統運作，使觀眾思量自身與水的關係。
Bottles of spring water from around the world were purchased from a local supermarket. The daylight condition at each of the springs, on the exact date when the water was sourced, was collected as datasets from nearby weather stations, and simulated as a sundial of light and shadow, radiating from a glass of water.
Create 創作
藝術家在本地一家超市購買了來自世界各地的瓶裝礦泉水。根據各礦泉水入瓶當天當地的氣象數 據，他以日晷模擬當天的光影，從水杯折射出來。
Contrary to the early Land Art that uses on-site natural materials to bring environmental authenticity to an art creation, Ng here “de-materializes” the water, yet contextualizes our “data-era”. The bottled water is detached from its source; we do not have direct relationship with its origin’s landscape anyway. It is only the imagination of the origin being left, hence the visuals on the screen. He also contextualizes the phenomenon that we receive environmental information through screens during our “data-era” these days, rather than tactile experience with nature.
This paradigm shift responds to the strict belief of early Land Art that the use of authentic material is to reveal the materiality of a place. Ng embraces this logic and tradition, and applies it to how we use screens and information these days, to reveal our distance with the origin of sources. The use of a screen to represent the sky’s ambience of the place and time when the water was bottled, exacerbates the fact that we rely on data to understand nature, rather than a first-hand experience. Ng also expresses how he uses light as a medium and an approach to tell stories. Light is an element that can be everywhere, yet can be nowhere. This concept relates to how the showed ambience light can represent a specific place, yet it can be referring to a “generic” space without identified location. It reveals our contemporary mental state of being oblivious to where our natural resource comes from, yet in reality the resource we take does have an original locale with specific environmental conditions and unique light quality. The definition of site-specificity of materials we use in our contemporary life is being challenged. 早期大地藝術利用在地天然材料為藝術作品帶來環境真實性。伍氏的創作則有所不同，他將水這 材料「非物質化」，並把「資訊時代」具體化。瓶裝水脫離了它的源頭；我們對其源頭之地境沒 有絲毫頭緒，唯一剩下的只有對其源頭的想像，即是螢光幕上的影像。伍氏進一步考量我們在「 資訊時代」下經常以螢光幕接收環境資訊的現況，而甚少會再親身接觸大自然。 這範式轉移，正回應了早期大地藝術藉着運用在地材料來反映地方性的執着。伍氏承繼了大地藝 術的邏輯和傳統，但以展出現代人只用螢光幕接收資訊的情況，反映出我們和事物源頭之隔閡。 利用螢光幕顯示瓶裝水入瓶當日的天色和時間這手法，凸顯了我們依賴資訊來認識大自然，而不 再親身接觸大自然這一景況。 伍氏用光作為說故事的媒介和處理方法。光「無所不在，亦不知其所在」。這概念正好對照作品 中，環境裡的光既可代表一個特定地方，也可以代表任何一個地方。雖則天然資源的源頭都確切 來自特定的環境，受獨特的光所照耀，但我們對這一無所知。作品旨在挑戰我們日常生活中所使 用材料的場地獨特性之定義。
Critique 評論 ISpring: homage to Liang Quan does not have a physical site. However, the fact that the work does not take place in a physical location might as be considered as a site-specific response to the concept of land in contemporary Hong Kong. If Land Art is a response to the genius loci of a place, then, sensitivity to cultural practices, and to how people’s relationship with the land is culturally governed, is indispensable. In the context of Chinese culture, people’s actions in the environment are regulated by cultural conduct – may it be philosophical principles or vernacular fengshui. We see Mother Nature as sacred. We feel in awe with nature, that often we prefer to leave it intact rather than disturbed. Thus our practice of Land Art has very different implications as compared to the historical strand from the 1960s, in which site was largely a “new territory for exploration” to the American artists. Land Art in our context calls for alternative strategies.
《泉：向梁銓致敬》 雖然沒有一個特定的環境場地，但這「非場地性」也可以視作表達現今香港 土地概念的手法。 若大地藝術是對一個特定地方的回應，那麼，對文化風俗和人們與土地關係之文化制約的敏感 度，都是必不可少的。在中國文化裡，人們與環境的互動多被文化作風-- 如哲學思想或傳統風水 概念--規範。以中國文化來說，我們認為大自然是神聖的。我們敬畏自然，甚至敬而遠之。所以， 我們的大地藝術創作與早期的同類創作有不同的含義。若六十年代的美國大地藝術家把環境當作 「新疆土」來探索，那麼，香港的大地藝術可以探討其他策略以迎合我們的景況。
Project 展望 Spring: homage to Liang Quan offers a possible new approach to the understanding of Land Art, Comparing to the early work that mostly engaged with a tangible landscape, this art piece sees land not just at a physical level but also a philosophical level. Compared to other artists engaged at the frontline of Land Art to create direct impact to society, Ng hopes that “Spring” creates a different way of interpretation of land through resonance. While some projects insert a concrete, tangible, and macro view through active interaction with the land, “Spring” offers an observation of an element – water - from a micro scale to reflect upon its impact to macro scale. Ng offers no answer through his art piece, nor to intervene / intercept with a real community. Instead, he posts a question to make us to be more aware and attentive to a complex system around us. This approach echoes the Asian Buddhism’s “out of world” (出世) approach, to engage issues with a more philosophical level (rather than “into the world” (入世) materialistic level). While the early Land Art projects were mostly from the Euro-American context, this Asian philosophical way of seeing the relationship among man, the spiritual aspect of nature, and our physical world, injects new art forms to contemporary Land Art. 早期的大地藝術，多運用手觸可及的地境。和這手法相比，《泉：向梁銓致敬》開創了一個對大 地藝術嶄新的理解方向。 現代大地藝術的另類方向，不只是從物質層面看待土地，更深入到哲學層面。相較其他藝術家在 前線為社會製造實質影響，伍氏希望《泉：向梁銓致敬》以共鳴/回響引發不同的方式詮釋土地。 有些作品選擇主動與土地接觸，為土地注入一些具體的、觸摸得到的、宏觀的看法，但《泉：向 梁銓致敬》卻透過由微觀到宏觀來觀察水這素材，反映水對社會的衝擊。 伍氏沒有在他的藝術作品中給予對於環境的明確答案，亦沒有介入一個實質的社區。他以他的藝 術作品詰問我們，要更關心注視我們身處這個周密的環境系統。 他的處理方法猶如佛法中的「出世」，以哲理啟示世間問題（相反佛法中的「入世」是表達比較 進入物質世界的手法）。早期大地藝術以歐美哲學思想作主導，伍氏則以亞洲哲學觀察人、大自 然靈性、物質世界三者之間的關係，為現代大地藝術帶來新氣象。
Special Thanks 特別鳴謝： Osage Gallery I 奧沙畫廊
Supported by:
Venue Subsidised by:
Special Talk Sponsored by:
Communications Partner:
贊助：
專題講座贊助：
Divis ion of La n d sca p e A rch it e c t ur e
場地資助：
傳訊策略夥伴：
Special Thanks: 特別鳴謝：
The Conservancy Association Centre for Heritage (CACHe) I 長春社文化古蹟資源中心 Osage Gallery I 奥沙畫廊 Spring Workshop I Spring 工作室 Website 網站: www.bit.ly/landarthk Enquiry 查詢: landart.hk@gmail.com