2
The interaction between objects and images in the narratives of art history has always been an unavoidable process of dynamic proof. However, it doesn’t always work perfectly for both of them. The exhibition intends to make a group of objects that had never encountered each other meet in the space of Galerie Nichido. If art history is a practice of processing objects and objectivity, let us go back to art to reflect on the meaning objectivity brought us. The exhibition isolates the ancestry of “objects” and “roles” from historical narratives in history, presenting them in front of us. The embarrassment that objects experienced and the prospects objects delivered are shown to us at the same time.

3
“Spivak in 1987 said: ’It is the questions that we ask that produce the field of inquiry and not some body of materials which determines what questions need to be posed to it’. I agree with this but I would update it to suggest that the ‘field of inquiry’ is one that is negotiated between the ‘questions that we ask’ and the materials we think are-but may not end up being-appropriate for answering them. Put another way, I argue that critics and historians should implicitly configure the art work as a subject, which materializes as a subject-in-making with and through, their personal investments—and
sited engagement—rather than as an object to be explained. ”

4
The future has been decided, only the past is unpredictable. The exhibition does not so much treat history as substance material, object of speculative thought, creators of revolutions and inventors of prediction, or recognizing its recursive power as social and psychological force, lead us to reconsider our perception towards time, history and object, as well as our previous methods of reclaiming power in the perspectives of life and thinking, in the matrix of interwoven histories.

Special Thanks to
Peng Liang-Min , Peng Liang-Kun , Peng Ya-Lun , Emily Lee