在《Kai玩笑—火炭社區藝術展》，CULTaMAP有幸邀請到陳智德、劉建華與羅文樂*來就社區文化的議題作一番對話。前者兼有學者陳智德和詩人陳滅的雙重身份，後兩者從去年10月起榮升油麻地上海街實驗藝術空間活化廳「廳長」，他們對社區藝術的看法可以碰撞出什麽火花呢？

發現社區從文學開始

對話的地點就在陳列著西西縫製的毛毛熊展覽廳內。不聽陳智德講，也許很多人都不會知道原來西西曾以文字傾注對本土社區的關懷。文學對社區的關注由來已久，卻成了“長期被淹沒了的聲音”，回顧這些聲音則可以作為「今日在文字中延續這些話題的依據」。不同於近年關注社區的觸發點在於政府爲了發展經濟而犧牲部份社區利益，西西那代人關注社區則源於當時城市化的起步、對香港身份的迷思等。

在《我城》中西西寫到，當時停於紅磡的火車車廂有時會掛著一個「有」字的木牌，表示車廂中載著要北上安葬的先人棺木，小說的主人公在這些車廂前卻魔幻地看到它載著的是明渠、街道、移去填海的山、古老的郵政局、鐘樓等舊物。對城市發展舊物消逝的惋惜這般得到抒發，有如哀悼先人。這段現實與魔幻並行的敘述，在陳智德的解讀中，是在一個被以為無記憶無國籍無文化身份認同的地方也會漸漸生出「有」的可能性。在今天，「發現文化和將香港賦予『有』的可能性，其基礎在於對社區文化的發現與重新觀察」。

社區居民到底需要什麽？

親身營運實驗藝術空間的劉建華則有另一種關注社區文化的視角。上期CULTaMAP的周年回顧特稿就憶起去年「牛角告急」時，有大專院校的攝影老師帶著學生到牛頭角下邨社區採風，全然一副獵奇的姿態而欠奉對居民生活的尊重。那當一些掌握話語權的「文化人」紛紛對社區藝術指點江山的時候，我們又有否問過生活在社區的居民到底需要的是什麽呢？針對這個問題，劉建華則主張對社區文化原汁原味的呈現，而非經過「藝術加工」的再現。如果居民希望辦繪畫興趣班、補習中心，那藝術空間何不為其服務？以藝術之名搞社區中心也未為不可嘛。這股體察民情的勁頭也在活化廳力撐八十後、加映社運電影的活動中體現無遺。

呈現與再現 不應偏廢

但哪有作家、藝術家在作品中不是從自己的視角再現社區生活呢？反過來，社區居民究竟要什麽，難道與藝術無關？退一步想，這並非一個非此則彼的判斷題。在文化藝術對社區的關注中，呈現與再現大可並行不悖。

*註：因版位有限，羅文樂先生的精彩對話未能記錄，敬請見諒。

To Present or To Represent the Community Culture? - A Dialogue between Chan Chi Tak and Jaspar Lau

Reporter, translation: Nadia Lo

During Fotanian Open Studios, CULTaMAP was honoured to have invited Chan Chi Tak and Jaspar Lau over to give a talk on community art. Mr. Chan was a scholar and poet, with the well-established pen name, Chen Mie, while Mr. Lau has begun to direct the experimental art space, Wooferten, since last October. A conversation between them on community art is highly anticipated.

Rediscover the Community from Hong Kong Literature

If it’s not for Mr. Chan’s talk, people probably would not have noticed that Hsi Hsi has written abundantly about local communities in her literature works. And so have a bunch of Hong Kong writers active in the 1970s. Yet their voices “have long been ignored.” “Reviewing them would lay foundation for today’s writers who would like to carry on the tradition,” said Mr. Chan, who cited Hsi Hsi’s work heavily. In Hsi Hsi’s fiction My City, she employs the magic-realistic style of writing and writes about the community in Hung Hom. The hero envisaged the old objects, such as an old street, an old post office and an old clock tower etc., put into train compartments to ship away, just like what was then done to the late people in coffins. Those train compartments always hanged outside a board reading “There is”. This is understood by Mr. Chan as Hsi Hsi’s discovering the possibilities that “there is” in a city assumed as of no memory, nationality, or cultural identification, for the writer reveals her sentimentalities when she noticed in this city, objects with cultural meaningfulness were gradually disappearing due to urbanization. To redeem the possibilities that “there is (culture and everything)” in Hong Kong, in Mr. Chan’s opinion, people nowadays would have to rediscover the community.

What do the Residents of the Community Really Need?

Running an experimental art space himself, Jaspar Lau examines the issue of community culture from another perspective. He would ask what the residents of the community really need. Before the demolition of Lower Ngau Tau Kok Estate last year, there were some photographers who heavily exploited the community with their cameras, without fully respecting the residents’ life, acting like intruders. This is definitely not what the residents need. Nor do they need some so-called cultural elites or artist overriding their opinions and telling them what community art is. According to Mr. Lau, if it delights the residents, why not turn the art space into a community centre? Thus, it makes more sense to present the community as it is for Jaspar than represent them from an artist’s perspective.

Presentation and Representation do not Contradict

Yet there is a great deal of possibilities for artist to work on community art without ignoring the need of the residents. The perspectives of presentation and representation can coexist and bring more diversity to the community art.