“QK” (qiao qi 蹺蹊) is an adjective in Chinese that has been colloquialized to mean something weird or unreasoning. Art finds the recent G.O.D. incident utterly QK. It decides to present itself as an organized/ disorganized, directional/ non-directional exhibition to multi-channelize the one-sidedly infernal affairs.

There are at least 14 QKs at work:
What is the core problem for culture? Who decides what is or is not a problem?
Does exercising authority solve problems?
How are the limits of “Security” and “Purification” to be drawn?
What is a “taboo”? Who decides? Why? What are its histories?
When does taboo become a tool that controls cultural expression?
Can creative practices be evaluated with a certain standard? Are there good and bad creative practices?
How is this standard defined? How is the good and bad articulated?
What are the cultural meanings of humor?
What does cultural expression mean in a commercialism-driven society?
What more can mass produced creativity and products mean other than profit making tools for corporations?
Who draws the line for cultural expression and cultural control?
Does the appropriation of cultural symbols require control?
Must the goal of social order be attained at the expense of cultural expression?
What kind of a cultural life are we living?

Art responds to the 14 QKs by affirming the importance of discussing them in specific contexts and revealing the complexity that governs these questions. The aim is not to liquidate or becloud black and white. Rather, in face of the already beclouded black and white, art looks for colors that are deeper and sediment in cultures and histories.

Click here to view more: http://soundworkshongkong.net/wordpress/