Of Sight
In terms of form, the works I recently photographed can likely be viewed as individual pieces without a clear connection between them. I know where I want to shoot and whom I want to photograph, and I am aware of some ideas and influences that have been on my mind. However, I have very little control over the final presentation of the photos, which is precisely what I enjoy. There are many details within them that consistently resonate with my interests. This method of creation is free, but as Jeff mentioned, if they don’t turn out to be good works, they are likely bad, with little middle ground.
The main subject that appears in my photographs must physically exist, but the alterations I make often increase the uncertainty when viewing them. This uncertainty stems from the ambiguous relationship between myself and the subject. Sometimes, I approach the work with a calm and neutral demeanor, taking an observational stance when making photographic choices. Other times, I may be emotional, projecting my feelings and experiences onto the photos and subjects. These two approaches influence my decision-making when handling a photo. Through this process, I express my understanding and experience of the landscape of consumerism, its alienation, and estrangement. Here, consumerism not only represents consumption behavior but also includes the intake of resources and the alienation resulting from such behavior. These behaviors reinforce and influence each other, forming the underlying logic of our lives.
The encounter between myself and my subject may be the result of intentional search or the sudden appearance of the subject before my camera at a particular moment. For me, the questions raised by their appearance are roughly the same: what is the relationship between living environments and the alienation of individuals? In the face of alienation and deepening estrangement, how do technology and its by-products affect our aesthetics and ways of viewing and experiencing the world? Does the uncertainty of my relationship with the subject exist within the context of consuming landscapes? Beyond my own sensory actions, is it influenced and constrained by the entire environment and context? Does the consumer landscape, infrastructure construction, and space established by capitalism also reflect its dominance within the photograph?
According to The Uncanny Monster of the Optical Unconscious: Walter Benjamin's Visual Symptomatology of Modernity, Benjamin "observes the micro-vision of the modern life world, which is a critical perspective." "The individual's present life experience is transformed into a collective jungle of dreams, memories, imagination, and utopian wishes, and constitutes a promise of attributes." In my works, contemporary landscapes and fictional illusions coexist. By blending these elements, I blur the boundaries, reflecting the confusion of contemporary individuals under modernity, capitalism, and the dominance of spectacle.
Regarding Benjamin's analysis of modernity, he discussed symptoms and numbness—concepts closely related to those explored by Debord. I consider myself a consumer of spectacle and illusion. The content I capture is my record and analysis of spectacle. In a way, I am my own surgeon. By giving myself creative freedom (which I appreciate), I tend to create or replicate spectacles, which may be a source of uncertainty in my work. This uncertainty prompts me to take a position. If I capture these images and modify them according to my ideas, then the photos become about me, and viewers may ask: what is your stance in creating these images? Are you critiquing or documenting? In truth, it's not entirely either. As the creator, I don't hold a definitive position, but I would say that, when viewed in the context of an entire series, they are somewhat critical. They "reveal the truth of modernity, express utopian desires in a redemptive way, and maintain a critical stance when those desires fail to materialize." As the creator, I find it sufficient for the audience to question and doubt. In doing so, while questioning the photographer, they are also reflecting on their own viewing perspective.
Regarding spectacle, Debord asserted that post-capitalist society is essentially an accumulation of numerous spectacles. People's pursuit of spectacle is spontaneous, and spectacles are increasingly spiritualized, making them harder to detect compared to their practical or surface presentation in the last century. I believe this spontaneity is a deeper reason why I resonate with the photos I take. To some extent, I, too, have been conditioned. The act of taking photographs has become a way for me to resist spectacles through "drifting." In these photos, I reassemble and retell the external manifestations of spectacles, distinct from their original intent. For example, wind turbines, oil pipelines, and abandoned mobile phones create a cyclical pattern. I think this process aligns closely with Debord's concept of drifting. I move from one environment to another, oscillating between imagination and reality—a relatively non-radical form of resistance.