Leong Chi Mou’s solo exhibition organised by the Macau Art For All Society is part of the "Urban Identity"- New Immigrant Artists Exhibition Series. "New immigrant" suggests an external view of locality. In other words, it shows a certain built-in heterogeneity in the social field. In this context (Macau) where regional identity is inherently multi-layered, as roots and nomadism are the standard norms concerned, Leong uses the following methods of work in his creative process: 1. Transplanting contexts of images. 2. Explaining the reasonability of the ambiguous interpretations within a specific statement in a certain context. 3. The appropriateness of misplaced identity. He especially uses the inverted Said doctrine* (See note). With Leong, the "other" not only compromises with a confrontational attitude, but also highlights its own differences in a proactively welcoming manner. During this process it has gradually grown to form a new autonomous force. Under the "aesthetic" mask, new voice is emerged. In addition, Leong's studio has also been arranged into an heterogeneous space.

 

Chi Mou is a person with a story, and the story leads to creation. In this world where nothing is new, the story is as the ancient poet has written, "not supposed to be the same yet ought to be the same from the ancient ones; not supposed to be different yet ought to be different from the ancient ones." We might as well make a comparison between Chi Mou’s stories and the ancient tales:

 
Chi Mou’s first motivation for using images to discuss and narrate is the dilemma when he desires to integrate into the mainstream values of the consumer society: On one hand is his desires to get along with his friends who are moving further and further, yet he cannot accept the individual’s alienation that pan-capitalisation society is bringing about. On the other hand is the extravagant desire to maintain independent values. A long time ago Leo Strauss wrote about Spinoza’s personal training notes. Spinoza’s writing had been a suspension of values, paradoxical yet tolerant, in which he corrected himself in a circuitous discourse. In order to find a balance between the consistency of his own view of truth and the necessity of integrating the mainstream values of society, he had tried tirelessly to repeat, and to accurately grasp the possibility of multiple interpretations coexisting in a system, yet retaining the position of interesting prejudices. Comparing to the story of Chi Mou, it is an experience of painting and decorating the surface of a gold watch, leading to paintings called "Kun" and "Peng". In "Kun", his recognition of the social decency showed-off by the gold watch is an admission ticket that he can hold on, and the content of the picture also uses factors that are popular in the current society (auspicious ornamental fish, canned food representing the breath of consumer daily life and the eye of Horus representing the mysterious). The language of expressions also adopts the techniques that are popular in the contemporary art industry (dislocation, collage, paintings made on an easel yet beyond the rules of the rectangular shape, marked as "Made in Macau"). Then he mournfully named the painting "Kun"- which suggests an unbearable spirit of humiliation. This work has repeatedly led to mild criticisms and adopted a tension state of mind that both opposes and agrees, so that the reserved paraphrase dimension is no longer inappropriate. In this way, viewers are led to a space where they can judge by themselves and are free to extract any imaginations they need from Chi Mou’s works.

 
However, Chi Mou still feels the depression and the boredom in the air, so he made the long-screen painting "Maha Bharata" and replaced "salvation" with "free will". Back to the story of the ancient, the gentry of the Six Dynasties discovered (invented) the aesthetics of scenery. Landscape was a balancing mechanism, as the opposite/psychological compensation of chaotic social space, and was favoured by literati. Ruan Ji had composed 82 poems of "Yong Huai", in which hideous and surly images popped up in the hidden landscape every time. Nevertheless, these terrible scenes were always found in the pure lyrical/pure description of the simple and clean, dragged back to the simplicity of "Pastoral Melancholy". It is like the restless aurora and twisted evergreen trees on the mountain. Therefore, pretending to be calm, and not deliberately concealing the turbulence and the noisy; the gloomy thoughts of caring for the world’s current affairs penetrates into the pleasant travelling of the landscape.

 

Finally, I couldn't help but imagine a scene: Chi Mou is happy for no reason, unaware of the dance of his hands and feet; while the phone is placed aside, but making no sound. The images are becoming more and more useless for words, and finally only the imagery imprinted by the current of thoughts was left behind. He not only enshrines a self-carved Buddha statue, but also reverently takes over the work of restoring the holy icons. Once upon a time, there was a sick man named Vimalakirti. He was too knowledgeable that when he argued he appeared to be losing his mind. Not a single Buddhist saint nor arhat was able to win an argument with him. Finally they went to visit Vimalakirti. Therefore, he no longer developed profound theories, and relied his discourse only on specific scenes and feelings, such as artist-like sensibility, to initiate convenient methods, without having to say clearly, nor can he say anything clearly. Later, what he had said as a layman, was elevated and categorised to the status of “Sutra”, just as a venerable one’s. As a Mahayana practitioner who transcended direct transmission, he acquiesced himself to be regarded as a reincarnated person with a background, or he can be just like the audience. He was an ordinary layman who presided over the teachings of Dharma.

As for us, we are all immersed in the happiness of the sky full of flowers and rain, forgetting the way back.

 

 

 
 Curator
 Lei Lai

 

(*Note: Said's criticism of non-Europeanism as a mis-plantation of taste originally criticises: 1. The prejudice of the mainstream of Western culture when viewing the culture of the other 2. The internalised “other” invented for itself in the late stage of advanced capitalism 3. It is a consumption by the eye at no cost / a spectacle of curiosity 4. Projection of dialectical opposites of oneself 5. Self-estrangement / a mediator of evasion)