Through this comparison, my curatorial goal gradually becomes clear: to show how mythical animals form power structures on different scales, from family daily life to national history, and then to cognitive system.
通过这种比较，我的策展目标逐渐明朗：展示神话动物如何在不同尺度上形成权力结构，从家庭日常生活到国家历史，再到认知系统。正常推演应该是：先分析已经选择好的eryao的权力与神话动物的关系（家庭权力），然后横向搜索有关权力或者神话动物的展览，引发分析有没有不同尺度的权力去表达，再去找艺术家。最后确定选择好的艺术品清单。eryao定格动画/皮影。aiweiwei这个雕塑群。kiki的装置、插画或者别的。
1.选择艺术家eryao kiki aiweiwei 2.参考图片和文献
Myth and power: the change of research direction
This week, my curatorial research further focuses on the relationship between “myth and power”. At first, I mainly paid attention to Eryao’s work “Wish your child becomes a dragon”。
With the deepening of research, I began to learn from Roland Barthes’ point of view that “myth is not a story, but a communication system” and understood “dragon” from a cultural symbol as a mechanism: it naturalized the social expectation of success and identity through the repetition of language and images. This week’s research sources include the discussion of myth and semiotics in lecture, the reading of Barthes’s Mythology, and the analysis of the works of Ai Weiwei and Kiki Smith. On this basis, I began to establish a cross-work comparison framework and think about how mythical animals operate power at different levels.
In Er Yao’s works, “dragon” is a daily myth, embedded in family narrative, and constantly strengthened through intergenerational repetition. The circular structure of the image allows the audience to enter at any time, symbolizing the continuous reproduction of “success” by society. Here, power is a flexible and internalized existence.
Ai Weiwei’s Circle of Animals puts the zodiac animals in the historical and national context. These animal heads, which originated from Yuanmingyuan, became symbols of national trauma after being plundered, and were reproduced in contemporary times and entered the global market, making the myth operate among imperial power, national narrative and capital.
Group Curator: Hometown and the Structure of “Shell”
In the group project of JIJU Collective, on this basis, I put forward the curatorial mode of “image matching”: each person chooses two pictures, one from the original hometown and the other from Edinburgh (as the new “hometown”), and the two need to form emotional or memory connections. For example, I paired the Wukang Building in Shanghai with a similar building in Edinburgh.
In space, we plan to put the images on two opposite walls, and connect each pair of images with red lines, hanging above the audience, forming a structure similar to “shell”, implying the relationship between protection and connection.
At the same time, combined with Yuran’s idea, add a table to the space to display texts and brochures. This part also echoes my research on Publication Studio this week-myth takes effect through repetition, and publishing becomes the medium of this repetition.
Hi Luosijie, your new posts show evidence of SICP development which is good, however more work is needed on the content and particularly the logic of your ideas, and research supporting your commentaries.
In Week 4, you ask “How can narrative itself continue to operate in contemporary curation”…the question is not entirely clear, continue in relation to what? Also, narrative is a fundamental part of human perception…if you are making a point about conditions in which storytelling etc have changed (eg in an age of globalisation Week 1 course, saturation, etc) , be much more explicit, add research. Same for your comments on curation as more than fact or opinion, the nature of myth, and the role of ethics in your practice: ground this in texts/references/specifics. More reflection (LO3) on “non-belonging”?
Week 5: there is a lot of promising reflection (LO3) and research (LO1) in this,you’re your message needs work, you are covering such a lot of ground it’s hard to follow your thread. ‘Dragon narration’ does not make sense. So look at the logic of the ideas you present to make your argument. Contextualise shadow-play (shadow-puppetry is clearer) as a medium, culturally. The term ‘twinkling myth’ is not quite the right language, in the planning meeting outline what you mean so we can discuss. Add bio info where you can eg the film theorist Erika Balson, based at (provide link/insert hyperlinks). Good you reference the course in Week 5, more details, or something on folk heritage of shadow-puppetry. Add images to help communication.
Reading week and Interview posts can be combined into one (give clear simple post titles): who treats “tradition as a static inheritance”? Where is the outcome of the interview?
In your Pitch, it is not clear who the artists are apart from Er Yao? Be careful not to make an exhibition illustrate theory on myth, allow space for a range of audience experiences. Put your ideas in more research/context, what is ‘traditional art’ for eg.
In Week 6, it is good to see some more artist research, be careful not to duplicate any content (eg images) from other posts (the pitch). Make clearer the curatorial process that is going on here, what are you developing, how (where are you researching), what are the goals.
1) No separate posts for Ji Ju, look at the Blog Toolkit, it indicates you should integrate commentary in your post where relevant (some weeks will have less than others), use subheadings.
2) Summarise your research interview.
3) List references at the end in a full, standard format (does not have to be Chicago, that is one), including exhibitions.
4) Image choice directly relates to the contents/commentary, and connects with the need for extra research I mention: so in Week 5, for eg, what research could you do into “Traditional shadow play is rooted in folk performance and oral culture, but in contemporary times, it is often transformed into digital image form” (exhibitions that show this, images of those).