Category: visual analysis #5

In his two performances of The Failure of Defense, Dai Guangyu uses material, composition and performance to illustrate contemporary issues such as globalization, westernization, destruction of culture, (any thing more specific so those phrases would not sound general) etc. as they relate differently to China and the United states.

Guangyu’s use of the traditional ink uses the historical significance of the material to give cultural significance to the symbolism of the ink in representing themes such as globalization and westernization.(further clarify the connection between ink and globalization) Trained in classical calligraphy as a child, Guangyu’s use of ink is rooted in tradition both nationally and personally. In both performances of The Failure of Defense, the ink is used as the primary feature of his performance. However, what is unique from his other works, is that the ink, while still having traditional significance, does not represent Chinese traditional culture, but instead invites the viewer to interpret the symbolism of the black ink. The black ink is commonly interpreted to represent themes such as globalization, westernization, modernization, economic power and military power. In both pieces, the red ink seems to represent the culture of the country in each respective piece. The contrast between the two ink colors represents the contrast between traditional culture (red) and the other themes like globalization (black). Hence, the traditional material of ink is manipulated in this work to represent the dichotomy between tradition and threats to tradition and culture. (stay with the title as well as the central thesis of “failure of defense” in terms of color contrast between red and black?)

The composition difference between the original piece in 2007 (pictured above) and the rendition performed in 2017 (picture and link below) illustrate the different experiences of the US and China in respect their contemporary cultural (ten years apart, is it consideration of US-China relations?the analysis could be further supported with US-China relations). In the 2007 rendition, the black ink can be seen slowly overtaking the red shape of China, until the entire canvas is black and Guangyu even paints himself. (performance art is supposed to take the body as the site/medium) Common interpretations of this piece are that the black ink represents western culture and globalization, and how China’s culture has been erased by the nation’s transformation into a global power by failing to defend against the black ink. By the end of the piece, the red shape of China has been completely covered by ink, representing the dominance of globalization/westernization compared to China’s preexisting culture and traditions.

In the 2017 rendition, the black ink forms the outline of the United states while red ink drips from Guangyu’s leg to fill in the outline of the US. The contrast between the final compositions of the two pieces is that in one, China is covered by the ink and in the other, the US remains untouched by the black ink. One interpretation of this contrast is that globalization and westernization define the US and US culture, whereas they erase Chinese culture. If the black ink is seen as representing economic power, one could interpret that China has allowed the pursuit of economic power to prevail over the maintenance of traditional culture. In the US, however, the development of US culture has evolved in parallel with the pursuit of economic power, instead of one dominating over the other. The second rendition, however, can also be interpreted as an individual piece, not as a diad with the original work. In light of the 2016 election, the 2017 Failure of Defense could represent the US failure to defend against an extreme candidate and the social movements that led to his election. Overall, the compositions of the two pieces can be compared in order to analyze the contrast between the two pieces and their respective symbolism, but Guangyu can also adapt the original piece in order to speak to contemporary issues such as recent elections. (in consideration of China as the rising power and competent with US, the color and composition transition could make much more sense)

The performative differences between the two pieces represents the different experience of globalization (and the other themes) in China compared to the US. There are two main differences between the performance in 2007 and 2017: the first is that in 2007, China is painted in red prior to the start of the performance and in 2017 the US gets filled in during the piece. A literal interpretation of this difference is that China is a much older country, and existed with its culture and traditions long before the industrial revolution and globalization. The US, on the other hand, was established as a country at the beginning of this period of global transformation. As a result, US culture developed in parallel with globalization rather than being erased. This same interpretation applies with the other themes such as westernization, modernization and economic power. The second difference is that Dai Guangyu does not paint himself in 2017 as he does in 2007. As a Chinese man, Duangyu uses the significance of painting himself to humanize the symbolism of the work. As an audience member, there is much more empathy for a human being painted by the black ink and all that it represents. Therefore, Guangyu capitalizes on this emotional response to emphasize the human experience of culture being erased in the face of globalization. Guangyu uses enhance the experience of the viewer and further emphasize the symbolism, enhancing his overall goal to translate the different experiences of the US and China in the wake of globalization.

Overall, the two pieces are complex in their symbolism, lending themselves to many interpretations. Guangyu’s choice of material, composition and performance all complement one another in their symbolism and together create this complexity. The openendedness of the work lends itself to sparking conversation and thought regarding all that the piece can represent. This capacity for sparking conversation and contemplation is seemingly the goal of the work and is well executed in both renditions, demonstrating the timelessness of the work as it can continue to address contemporary issues.

Zhang Dali is one of the most famous artists who did graffiti art in the streets of Beijing. Between the years 1995 and 1999, he did a series of graffiti of the profile of a bald head on buildings waiting to be destroyed in the urbanization effort by the Chinese government. In his series “Demolition and Dialogue,” Zhang Dali “hoped to engage the city in a “dialogue” with himself” by putting his likeness throughout the city. However, as Wu Hung remarks, from simply observing the nearly four hundred photos he had access to, “one gains less knowledge of Beijing than of the artist’s contested relationship with the city” (Wu, 2000).

This picture stuck especially because it not only contains the signature outline of the artist, but also himself as part of the art. Clearly, Zhang is trying to make a statement with his own presence, but it is unclear to me exactly what he is trying to say. There are a few features that singles this photo out from the other few hundred in the same series: the artist himself and the female body statue he is sitting on. (are you going to develop this idea?)

As Zhang mentioned to Wu, putting “a condensation of my own likeness as an individual” allows him “to communicate with the city.” Therefore, the bald head serves as a representation of the artist. Hence, it would be redundant if Zhang had intended for his own presence to simply place himself in the artwork. Therefore, his choice to be in the artwork himself must symbolize something other than his own identity. In my opinion, Zhang Dali himself in the piece represent the thoughts and opinions of the artist, being inside his representative head.

 

Instead of scribing his signature slogan of “AK-47” on the wall, Zhang writes it on his forehead. This slogan is usually written somewhere close to the graffiti image on the wall, sometimes completely inside the head. Because images of guns are prohibited in China, the slogan, representing a powerful assault rifle originated from the Soviet Union, symbolizes military power and threat. If we replace the strain of words with the actual image of the weapon, the image becomes a gun pointing at the artist’s head. In this case, Zhang chose to put it on his forehead instead of that of his likeness, maybe to signify that the metaphoric gun is pointing at and threatening his thought, or who he really is.

 

All the while, he is sitting on a statue of a female body, in a gesture that can only be interpreted as his dominance over the female body. Whether or not Zhang is championing a specific gender power dynamic is unclear, but it is sure that this is his way of engaging the city into a dialogue about the topic. As Wu writes, “the question these photographs evoke is not so much about the content or purpose of dialogue, but whether the artist’s desire to communicate with the city can actually be realized—whether the city is willing or ready to be engaged in a forced interaction.”

Wu Hung, Wu. “Zhang Dali’s Dialogue: Conversation with a City.” Public Culture 12, no. 3 (January 2000): 749–68. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-12-3-749.

Urban transformation in China is a mixture of violence, destruction, and exclusion. State exploits ordinary people to build the infrastructure, but ignores their petitions and voices. Jin Feng’s Wordless Petitions (2006) employs ordinary people as subjects and redistributes visibility from the glorious Chinese urbanization to the migrant workers. This article explores the composition, color, and site of Wordless Petitions, which all reflect the cruelty imposed on the workers in the process of urban transformation. 

The gestures and facial expressions of these workers indicate that they are subject to poverty and harsh living conditions. Their positions against the wall and impatient gestures mark the endless waiting for the government to accept their petitions. (in terms of composition) The immobility gesture of standing or squatting also signifies their hopelessness as if the time is frozen and they have to stay in this static poverty forever. There are elders, children, and adults among these workers, however, they all show a dull and listless facial expression. One can read from the children’s concerning faces that their future is destined to be despairing. The burden of raising a family has erased the smile and positive expression from all adults in the picture. And workers all have their heads slightly lowered facing the ground to convey the passive feeling and repression from the state. Only one of them looks up to the sky, but not in a positive or hopeful way. She stands in the center among these workers as if she represents all of them to ask for an explanation of this unfairness from heaven. (the significance of the composition because of the collective identity of migrant workers and their sheer numbers against the wall. The long line of the migrant workers, the sculpted bodies, and silenced faces ….. assert a powerful petition against social injustice)

Besides, Jin sheds light on the dispossession of these migrant workers through their appearances and the empty cardboard. The clothes are all oversized and scruffy on them as if the clothes have been reused for many years and even passed around families. The two naked boys in the picture wear adult size slippers because the family cannot afford to buy them new shoes. The picture also shows that all female workers do not wear makeup and have the same ponytail hairstyle, which is the most convenient for them to get ready for the labor-intensive day.

In all demonstrations and petitions, people hold cardboard with slogans and words on it. However, just as the title indicates, these cardboards in workers’ hands are wordless and empty. Two explanations can relate to this blank feature of cardboard. One explanation is that these workers have too many petitions and complains that would never fit in the limited space on cardboards. Another explanation is that the workers lost their identity and language along with the dispossession of their social status and lands in the process of urbanization. (wordless petition: the voiceless migrant workers turn their silence into petitions)

Last but not least, the use of the golden color and the red-brick wall both illustrate the exclusion of migrant workers. Jin paints golden color on the clothes and faces of these migrant works to refer to their invisibility and the lack of identity under the progression of the state. On the other hand, the golden outfits, which appear like soldiers’ uniforms, glorify the sacrifice of workers. Ironically, the state deprives workers’ identity in the same way as their treatment to soldiers. Jin chooses the red-brick wall as the site because one would directly connect the red-brick with workers. However, one would never connect workers with fine-designed architectures, which seem to be a privilege enjoyed only by upper-class citizens. Both the color and the site reflect the violence done to these workers.

Jin brings visibility of the destruction to these migrant workers through the depiction of gestures and appearances of workers, the use of color, and the site in Wordless Petitions.

In “Cities in between Villages,” Marco Cenzatti proposes a process of urbanization different from the traditional model. (please follow up or introduce the different model immediately) Through examples of villages in the Pearl River Delta area (or PRD), he provides a path that can help villages avoid the destiny of becoming dilapidated “Villages in the City.” The PRD model contains various aspects unique to the Chinese political history, but Cenzatti argues that through the industrialization of villages, people can achieve the same result of an urbanized area as the traditional urbanization process. According to him, the villages will eventually become a sort of suburb where urban and rural coexists. In this process, villages will not only get to improve the physical neighborhood, but also have an active voice in deciding the direction of their urbanization.

(please define and clarify a specific characteristic of the different model as the guiding topic for this section) Cenzatti points out that villages in PRD developed due to open-door policy and transportation infrastructure, while city development was limited at the time. Trade through the Township and Village Enterprises (TVE) helped villages accumulate capital and encouraged industrialization process. Helping to develop the trade relationship are the villagers who emigrated to more developed areas. Thus, villages in PRD became area of diffused urbanization. Image 1, although not from PRD, captures this change in action in a similar coastal area. In the picture, there are two sides: one with tall residential buildings in construction, one with existing village houses. The background of the right side, however, differs from the foreground in that there are already some newly built apartment buildings. Therefore, this is a village that has quickly developed through trade in TVEs, and large amounts of residential space is needed to accommodate the migrant workers contributing to the industrialization process. The wide and fresh-paved road provides evidence for the development of traffic infrastructure that Cenzatti claims to be necessary in the PRD urbanization model (still like to learn what type of model it is).

On the other hand, cities expand under the financial and political ambition of the municipal governments. Rural land is converted into “city” land as the only way to accumulate government wealth. (yes, can you make an argument based upon the comparison between the locally built urban villages and officially managed urban complex) The money raised is then used to build place-making projects such as monuments, museums, theaters, etc. Again, traffic infrastructure remains an important component here to help connect the larger city and to move migrants and workers between villages and cities. Eventually, villages get absorbed into cities as an industrialized district and not villages in cities. The author gives the example of Guangzhou and its Panyu County to prove this point. Panyu County started as a small village, but the open-door policy and development of transportation infrastructure boosted population and economic growth. On top of that, all those changes were planned and financed by the local government. By underlining the role of government, Cenzatti hints at how village governments can decide the fate of the village themselves. Image 2 shows a computer-rendered image for the plan for Wanbo City in Panyu County. It shows a residential, recreational, and commercial complex with skyscrapers, row houses, and large parks — all characteristics of an urban area. The fact that the Panyu municipal government can now afford to entire urban complexes proves that trade and transportation is a good way out for villages that might be on their way to be absorbed by the city.

Cenzatti presents the PRD model in a fairly positive light, where villagers, migrants, and the city all win because of the urbanization of villages. However, there isn’t a clear theoretical start for this development. Cenzatti attributes the economic development in PRD villages largely to the open-door policy in the 1980s, but it can be a lot more difficult for villages to compete with big businesses nowadays. Without the starting capital, it can be very difficult for villages to escape the fate of becoming a village in the city.