圍群 MONUMENT of APRON

亲爱的联合公告：

针对“匿名计划1”的补充提案，我们认为有必要在2016年12月会议记录的基础上，进一步以书面形式详述我方关于联合公告“帆布包计划”的意见。“联合 United”与“分销 Distributed”两个词之间的对应意味极为巧妙，而我们的确有意图将帆布包计划的“展示 Display”部分进一步带入“动议 Motion”的范畴，使该计划的形式、呈现方式及其偶尔引发的景观效应，与艺术生产主体间的关系变得更为一致。

对于你们向艺术从业者免费发放印有标语的帆布袋一计划中涉及的“动议”，我们理解的角度似乎更为务实——在呼吁改变的特定语境中，“公告”必须大致划定一个有历史根据或推测性的行动路径。我们不能满足于一种“T恤哲学”，只有行动起来，才能推动“动议”的进程，使我们质问的生产关系得到重置。

在首次“匿名计划”中，联合公告向艺术从业者免费发放印有标语的帆布袋和T恤，这些产品来自于网络零售巨头淘宝的工业量产，以此将矛头指向艺术行业的种种不公正现象，据联合公告成员形容，这一行动有点像是展览的开幕或者项目的发布。这样的“噱头”的确可以引起我们的关注，但其漏洞才是促使我们参与的主要原因。针对这些漏洞，我们的提案是建立在对你们原本的“动议”的认同之上的一次简单延续，并与你们抱以类似的态度，即认为批判是一种有建设性的、使人团结起来的形式。

我方附议。我们认为除了应该重新思考本次计划中“延伸品”的形式与围绕着这种形式的意识形态宣传之间的关系，还应该记录它们不同的生产方式，这种批量的生产方式与美术馆、艺术家、实习生以及礼品店构成的庞大星图具有某种类似的矛盾和价值评估。生产的附加信息应该被透明化：以每一只包夹带一本小册子的形式。淘宝和其他大卖场给消费者制造的是一种主动选择的错觉，而我们强调的是生产过程的透明，而非成品本身的吸引力。这种关于细节的文献看似无聊，却是决策的实际过程中至关重要的记录，因此，也即是一种参与——艺术界非常擅长对其进行范围划定。

虽然我们尚且无法解决所有艺术劳动者面临的不公与剥削等严峻问题，但至少我们可以将本次动议作为一次实验，尝试进一步面对这些问题，而不仅仅是揭发而已。作为揭发者，我们渴望将被掩盖或被忽略的事实公之于众；而作为艺术家，我们在批判机构的同时与其有着千丝万缕的联系。正因如此，我们可以（并有义务）利用面前的素材，无论是数据，还是口口相传的经历，从我们赖以生存的体制内部颠覆一些符号，建立新的指涉关系。每一个试图为艺术创造更好环境的机构都应有相同的野心，每一个在艺术中处理身份政治议题的作品亦是如此。

虽然你们的帆布包计划是一次匿名的、游击式的行动，但在我们通过标语鼓动同行加入队伍的同时，我们应确保生产这些标语载体的并非看不见的双手。我们必须更好地了解我们作为集体（艺术家不再是工作室里的孤立个体）的生产手段，才能改善现状，协商变革。

再次重申我方附议的立场。这封公开信将会是一系列动作中的第一步。

此致敬礼

展销场

Dear United Motion,

Based upon the proceedings of the meeting a fortnight prior, we would like to further express in writing our intention to expand on the aforementioned ‘tote bag motion’. The irony of this ‘聯合 United’ and ‘分銷 Distributed’ production should not be lost, and it is indeed part of our intention to push the initial ‘展示 Display’ of United Motion’s opening intervention further into the realm of ‘Motion’, whereby the relations between the subjects of artistic production will find greater parity with the degree and manner of the work’s form, display and, sometimes, spectacle.

Our understanding of the ‘motion’ you reference with slogan-bearing tote bags distributed freely to art publics begs a slightly different practical trajectory from the 公告 (the former of which must, in the specificity of a request for change, outline a larger path, either historically or speculatively, of action). And it is only by such action that we may move beyond the surface of t-shirt philosophy into the processes of ‘motion’, whereby the very relations which we question can begin to be reconfigured.

The first 匿名計畫 project involving industrially made bags and t-shirts purchased from online retail giant Taobao in order to lambast injustices within the art industry was, statedly, like an ‘opening’ for the exhibition to follow. Indeed, this splash was perhaps enough to catch our attention, but it is to a greater degree the notation of several oversights which spark our engagement. Our proposal, therefore, is simple, and is a continuation of your initial motion, bearing this certain manner of critique as a form of constructive solidarity.

We second your motion. Our request is not only a reconsideration of the form of these schwag goods in relation to the propaganda beset them, but the documentation of various modes of their production—the very contradictions and value assessments that intersect within the starry configurations of the museum, artist, intern and gift shop. These minor inventories shall be made transparent as a small publication to be integrated with each bag. Just as Taobao and the megamarket give, there will be an illusion of choice. What we stress, however, is the transparency behind production rather than only the vibrancy of the finished product. Such documentation of detail may appear banal, but we consider it an accounting crucial to a real process of decision making, and therefore a question of participation, something of which the art world is actually extremely adept at delimiting.

While we are certainly far from resolving the enormous disparities and exploitations within artistic labour, what we can do is consider the motion itself as an experiment and attempt towards addressing them beyond the initial blowing of a whistle. As whistleblowers, we have a desire to expose that which is hidden or overlooked. But as artists implicated in varying relationships with the very institutions which we critique, we also have the possibility (and responsibility) to use the materials before us, the data and/or the narrated sharing of experience to subvert signs and create new signifying relationships from within that very system in which we are enmeshed and dependent. This is an ambition of every art organisation seeking better conditions for the cultivation of art, and it is present within every play of identity politics within art. From our faceless, nomadic bearings here, we still demand the need to tie the call to arms of a hashtag to the material witness of the hands which put it into production. We must gain a better understanding of our (as one no longer merely dwells in the individual artist studio) means of production in order to improve the conditions by which we can negotiate them.

Again, we second your motion. This is merely the first in a series of compositions.

Yours truly,

Display Distribute