![\"\"](\"https:\/\/randian-art.s3.ap-east-1.amazonaws.com\/2022\/09\/zh-hant\/Paula-Tsai-curator-MG_7553_xsm.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nRandian<\/strong> met curator Paula Tsai to talk about \u201cSEE\/SAW.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Iona Whittaker:<\/strong> How does the installation work? It must be a very quick process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paula Tsai:<\/strong> The format is 6 weeks and 14 collectives, with a new show every week. On Sunday night after we close we start taking down the previous week\u2019s exhibitions, then we start fixing the walls etc., and then Monday is the day people usually move in and start installing the next show. But it works because the nature of some of these collectives is more performative \u2014 they don\u2019t really do much on-site, like both of this week\u2019s participants 8mg and Irrelevant Commission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> How long have you been working on this exhibition project?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Since August. This show came about because I went on a couple of research trips with Bao Dong and Sun Dongdong for our forthcoming \u201cON | OFF\u201d exhibition; the idea was further developed during the ICI Curatorial Intensive session at UCCA. I met these collectives for the first time and thought, \u201cWow, I like what they\u2019re doing.\u201d I wanted to do a show, because I think that how collectives practice is so interesting \u2014 in particular their relationship with institutions, because we have a different structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> In what sense?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Well, we have never really worked with an experimental format such as changing the show every week and letting the artists push the rules inside the museum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> That\u2019s what\u2019s nice about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Usually our process is that we work with an artist for months, incubating a final proposal, and then it\u2019s so refined, so beautifully executed \u2014 which is great, and that\u2019s how an institution should function, but then one also thinks about other possibilities for working.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> And you have that nice space aside from the main hall\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Yes, and it\u2019s good to do this because we are presenting these collective voices and saying \u201cWe recognise you, and we know you\u2019re there.\u201d I think that\u2019s important.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> But there aren\u2019t going to be any collectives in \u201cON | OFF,\u201d only individual artists?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> No, but many of those individual artists are in collectives, so it\u2019s a nice lead-up, seeing their collective practice first and then their individual practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> So how many of the artists in \u201cON | OFF\u201d are also involved in collectives, roughly?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> There\u2019s a good 20%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> It really seems as if collectives are on the up at the moment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> That\u2019s definitely the trend, or the hash tag at the moment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> Why now, do you think?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> I think it\u2019s something that\u2019s particular to this generation. You\u2019ve always had collectives, but more so now just because a lot of them come out of the academic system; they\u2019re all in studios together \u2014 Double Fly, for example, are all classmates who got together because they wanted to continue working together and hanging out after they graduated. This is very much in the spirit of that generation. Then you have ones like Guest. They didn\u2019t go to school together but they met and then decided to come together. For a lot of them it\u2019s about the sharing of information \u2014 they all have an abundance of information coming to them every day, and it\u2019s much quicker and more efficient to process it within a group. What they contribute to the group and what they take away from it is significant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> I wonder if anything significant has come out of it for you, thoughts it has provoked?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> In the beginning it was the whole notion of collaborative and collective efforts. Each collective interprets this very differently and that impression was pretty immediate. We chose the ones that are still producing works, not considering whether they were practising collectively in the sense of making one work together or in the sense of doing projects together \u2014 there was no discrimination: \u201cIf you\u2019re still creating works, then you\u2019re invited.\u201d Then we see how they want to present themselves as a collective. The way they react to how the show is scheduled each week and who they\u2019re paired with gives a sense of what they think collectivity or collaboration is about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> So that is part of what audiences can get from seeing SEE\/SAW?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Yes. It\u2019s very interesting \u2014 and also because an institution, by definition, is also a collective. So it\u2019s a big collective working with smaller collectives, and how these collectives view that relationship and how they engage with us is relevant. I also want to do things that break away from institutional norms; collectives are a really good way to do that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> I wondered also about these \u201cON | OFF\u201d and \u201cSEE\/SAW\u201d titles. Is there something significant for you in the idea of a see-saw?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Well, the format was one of the first things that was decided. Two equal sides with something in the middle that can connect or separate them \u2014 therefore, something between the two connected rooms that form the space in which SEE\/SAW is shown\u2026. And then trying to find a good name for it. Splitting it up doesn\u2019t mean you want to compare and contrast; keeping that hole or passage in the middle means that the passing of information should be uninhibited. But not a lot of the collectives have been using that channel yet; those who have been in there so far have effectively seen it as two separate spaces, but I hope that somebody will approach it differently. In the beginning I had fantasies about them going crazy and running between the spaces or playing games. \u201cSEE\/SAW\u201d is supposedly more lively than stable. There is not supposed to be a winner \u2014 it\u2019s something that\u2019s quite back and forth, but never gets off track. That\u2019s the idea. And then of course see-saw plays also with the act of changing the show once a week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> How closely did you work with the artists in terms of what they designed for the space?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> I wanted to leave it in their hands by saying, \u201cOkay, this is the idea of the show and this is what we\u2019re going to be looking at. Please propose something.\u201d But it was not as if I was saying, \u201cYou give me a proposal, and I say \u2018yes\u2019 or \u2018no.\u2019\u201d It was more that I was going to say \u201cyes\u201d to pretty much anything they wanted to do, within the boundaries of certain rules like setting things on fire and appropriateness\u2026. Unfortunately not all of them have been that risky. 8mg did ask me if they could take a brick out of the UCCA fa\u00e7ade and replace it with their own. Technically, I have to say, \u201cNo, you can\u2019t.\u201d But I wanted to encourage them to push this boundary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> Any feedback yet from the public or press?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> I think many people\u2019s impression is a bit \u201cWhat? Why is this exhibition so unrefined, and how do we read it?\u201d; we do try to bring in as much didacticism as we can without being overwhelming. The feedback I\u2019ve received so far is that a lot of the collectives are saying, \u201cOh, what are those guys doing?\u201d and looking at each other. And some of them say, \u201cOh, been there, done that!\u201d or \u201cOh, that\u2019s what they always do\u201d!<\/p>\n\n\n\n IW:<\/strong> So, inter-collective politics!?<\/p>\n\n\n\n PT:<\/strong> Yes! I am not sure yet what the public are getting out of it. This is one of very few occasions where UCCA has actually had on-site performances, or when artists have just come and gone as they wished and can put something into the exhibition space if and when they choose. Artists are constantly at work in the space, for instance when Double Fly were painting in there every day \u2014 that\u2019s something that\u2019s never been done at UCCA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSEE\/SAW: Collective Practice in China Now<\/a>\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n UCCA<\/strong><\/a> (798 Art District, No. 4 Jiuxianqiao Lu, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China) Nov 20 \u2013 Dec 30, 2012.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" by Iona Whittaker \u7231\u5b89\u963f \u201cSEE\/SAW\u201d is the c … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/randian-art.s3.ap-east-1.amazonaws.com\/2022\/09\/en\/Double-Fly-UCCA__0002-e1354791156133.jpg\")