Relativism is beneficial but rather in the domain of esthetics. It is good that standards are never absolute in nature. Everything that exists is exactly alike, which is one of the most important beliefs in the Asian outlook on life. Man and his ego are exactly the same as the universe. The lack of difference does not apply to the material domain, but to existential identity, which can be understood as an individual value (THE HARMONY OF HALL OF CULTIVATING MIND WITHOUT FURNITURE). This happens when everything we see becomes a whole (?) A problem arises with individual value, unless it is embodied by the Emperor for every individual citizen. All material phenomena make up a void, although probably not meaning absence, which is a fact (because everything we see or have seen becomes a whole). Unless those lackings do not affect the whole. The lack of throne, Emperor, or other objects, does not mean that they are absent. “Identity” remains exceptional (no Emperor or throne), although it loses individual value. “For Mao Tse Tung, who lies in a mausoleum set perfectly across from the Emperor’s palace and the Great Hall of Harmony without Throne and Emperor” (THE HARMONY OF GREAT HALL OF HARMONY WITHOUT THRONE AND EMPEROR). Perception of the inner world, or the nature of things or phenomena, consists of the deconstruction of esthetic illusion (removing the throne and Emperor to attain greater harmony). Emptiness in reality is the accumulation of many things or phenomenon. Meaning that “emptiness” is continually a process of deconstructing accumulated things, which produces the phenomenon of moving or shifting accumulated “objects”. If we want to show form and emptiness in a social dimension, it will be a “populist” solution. People “secretly” want to feel part of all these processes, which are really only a “workshop” for transforming the environment and people for one’s own use.
Space must be reduced exclusively to opposition alone, meaning solely to extremes. Our times, media and market prefer “expressive” events and personages, and that is the reason for shaping the life of all of us according to these rules. In spite of displaying a very “politically incorrect position” or even total hypocrisy. Everyone wants to find their place in that relationship or game. The goal here is freedom, although it is a freedom that is construed as dominating over others. You are free if you think as I do. And that seems to be a historic “necessity” today. But great ideas and utopias always perish in detain, falling into dogmatism. Imagine a good society as a finite creation, perfectly defined in the smallest detail. A creation that should not be changed and every change must be for the worst. Stagnancy and monotonous autoreproduction are designed to be the utmost happiness. The capacity to act is overtaken by the capacity to foresee consequences. Even when we know how everything will end for us, we act based on assumptions whose falsehood is apparent to us.
Confucius (Kong-Fuzi) said that Li (one of the major concepts of Confucian philosophy) was not established once and for all and changes depending on the specific situation. Li sets forth the standards for behavior, meaning good manners and politeness, and includes moral standards and social institution, and it would seem that practicing Li leads to compliance with social standards at the expense of one’s own individuality. According to Confucian philosophy, the individual is not an isolated island. Quite the contrary, the individual only lives in the network of ties to other people, although it would be an error to say that according to Confucius, Li is something constant and totally unchangeable. He felt that it is changeable over time and depending on the situation.
Since there is no one Li encompassing all the relationships and situation, there has to be something over and above this higher rule.
Confucius never provided a definition for this concept, so in lieu of a definition, we can use Benjamin’s version of the Hasidic proverb noted by Gershom Scholem and related to Ernst Bloch: “In order to change our reality and world, all we have to do is move everything a bit forward, everything will stay the same and nothing will change, but nothing will ever be the same”.
How can we move “LIUSHUI ZANG” a bit forward, so that it is not associated with social welfare, which not only causes side effects in the public domain, but itself is also a byproduct of side effects for the public domain. But even so, it is important and it enjoys the reputation of being an honest system, rather than honesty itself.
Liushui Zhang
Installation.
Digital print (wallpaper), 123″ x 90″.
Video with audio, 1h 14 min. loop.
year: 2011
Displacement & Emptiness
Relativism is beneficial but rather in the domain of esthetics. It is good that standards are never absolute in nature. Everything that exists is exactly alike, which is one of the most important beliefs in the Asian outlook on life. Man and his ego are exactly the same as the universe. The lack of difference does not apply to the material domain, but to existential identity, which can be understood as an individual value (THE HARMONY OF HALL OF CULTIVATING MIND WITHOUT FURNITURE). This happens when everything we see becomes a whole (?) A problem arises with individual value, unless it is embodied by the Emperor for every individual citizen. All material phenomena make up a void, although probably not meaning absence, which is a fact (because everything we see or have seen becomes a whole). Unless those lackings do not affect the whole. The lack of throne, Emperor, or other objects, does not mean that they are absent. “Identity” remains exceptional (no Emperor or throne), although it loses individual value. “For Mao Tse Tung, who lies in a mausoleum set perfectly across from the Emperor’s palace and the Great Hall of Harmony without Throne and Emperor” (THE HARMONY OF GREAT HALL OF HARMONY WITHOUT THRONE AND EMPEROR). Perception of the inner world, or the nature of things or phenomena, consists of the deconstruction of esthetic illusion (removing the throne and Emperor to attain greater harmony). Emptiness in reality is the accumulation of many things or phenomenon. Meaning that “emptiness” is continually a process of deconstructing accumulated things, which produces the phenomenon of moving or shifting accumulated “objects”. If we want to show form and emptiness in a social dimension, it will be a “populist” solution. People “secretly” want to feel part of all these processes, which are really only a “workshop” for transforming the environment and people for one’s own use.
Space must be reduced exclusively to opposition alone, meaning solely to extremes. Our times, media and market prefer “expressive” events and personages, and that is the reason for shaping the life of all of us according to these rules. In spite of displaying a very “politically incorrect position” or even total hypocrisy. Everyone wants to find their place in that relationship or game. The goal here is freedom, although it is a freedom that is construed as dominating over others. You are free if you think as I do. And that seems to be a historic “necessity” today. But great ideas and utopias always perish in detain, falling into dogmatism. Imagine a good society as a finite creation, perfectly defined in the smallest detail. A creation that should not be changed and every change must be for the worst. Stagnancy and monotonous autoreproduction are designed to be the utmost happiness. The capacity to act is overtaken by the capacity to foresee consequences. Even when we know how everything will end for us, we act based on assumptions whose falsehood is apparent to us.
Confucius (Kong-Fuzi) said that Li (one of the major concepts of Confucian philosophy) was not established once and for all and changes depending on the specific situation. Li sets forth the standards for behavior, meaning good manners and politeness, and includes moral standards and social institution, and it would seem that practicing Li leads to compliance with social standards at the expense of one’s own individuality. According to Confucian philosophy, the individual is not an isolated island. Quite the contrary, the individual only lives in the network of ties to other people, although it would be an error to say that according to Confucius, Li is something constant and totally unchangeable. He felt that it is changeable over time and depending on the situation.
Since there is no one Li encompassing all the relationships and situation, there has to be something over and above this higher rule.
Confucius never provided a definition for this concept, so in lieu of a definition, we can use Benjamin’s version of the Hasidic proverb noted by Gershom Scholem and related to Ernst Bloch: “In order to change our reality and world, all we have to do is move everything a bit forward, everything will stay the same and nothing will change, but nothing will ever be the same”.
How can we move “LIUSHUI ZANG” a bit forward, so that it is not associated with social welfare, which not only causes side effects in the public domain, but itself is also a byproduct of side effects for the public domain. But even so, it is important and it enjoys the reputation of being an honest system, rather than honesty itself.