mMK n AAA
HistoriCITY

Below is Jaspar LAU Kin Wah's interview with artist LAW Man Lok

Note: The first written interview was done on 18/10/2005, posted by Jaspar LAU Kin Wah (hereafter JL) from Chicago, Il in US, answered by LAW Man Lok (hereafter LML) in London the same day through email. On the 20/06/2007, JL posted the same questions with LML previous answers to LML in London from Hong Kong. And LML revisited it on the 21/06/2007. The two interviews are now combined together here. Each question was followed first with LML's answer on 18/10/2005, and then followed by the 21/06/2007 Revisit, marked at the beginning with (RV) and put in italics. If the answer of the Revisit version included the previous answer without any changes at all, (RV) was put at the end of that original paragraph. Also, LML's revisited answer used fonts in different sizes, this feature is retained in this copy (as much as like original).

JL: Why do you make art?
LML: Making art, to me, is a process of self learning & understanding (like a monk practicing Zen), via this process, one would also understand his surroundings more.
(RV) And after I understand more, I know I can no longer stay in the formalization of style / art. To certain extent, “making the work” is only the secondary part. The primary part is to be true to oneself, to recognize your political stand, your existence (social status), and your effort on practicing these idea. Well, maybe these again are basics yet most difficult thing to do. But I believe, when one understood these, he or she will know how to “make a work”. So, maybe, “Practice Art / Art Practice” is the terms I would use instead of “make art”. And somehow it makes artists more like monks.  In other words, maybe artworks are objects / practices of democracy, in order to test everyone's understand of freedom & limitation.

Why do you do paintings? Or, why not?
Well, simply because I feel happy when I paint. And I believe some of my imaginations are just perfect to be presented as a painting, instead of other artistic means.
(RV) Besides, obviously, it sales!! Painting is a practice developed when I was an infant, influenced by my elder brother. We start comic-ing at the very beginning; create characters and a world of our own ideas and rules.... It was kind of escapism, and learnt painting at that time means to learn some technical skills to support my comic.The time of seriously deal with the painting language should be studying undergraduate, probably influenced by all the good painters around me at that time. At that time I found social critique & art critique is my favourite approach. (And they are still my favourites.) But then, sometimes paintings still function as a therapy or escape to me. I have to emphasize this because I do not want to make a conclusion to them! I promise you they are just chaotic.

Why do you do installations? (Or do you have a name for those others products?)
After the study of Fine Arts in CUHK, I become more open minded in art making. And so the installations and mixed media are outcome after my study. I find that some ideas could be done better with some specific media. And, I do not have a specific name / term to them, though there is a general one in Chinese : “啲 o野”
(RV) After the undergraduate study, I am more interested in various ways of making artworks. And so installations and mixed media have drawn my attention, since they somehow provide more vocabularies for me to work on. This becomes very important when I find that my critique approach is leading me to contextual art. Maybe I would call these works “conceptual works”, (just because of convenience, I am not referring myself to Conceptual Art.) However, in Chinese, I usually call them : “啲 o野” (the stuffs), it is not a direct translation, but everyone in my generation use this to describe their works…anyway.

What is the relationship between these two kinds of output of yours?
They have no special relationship.
(RV) But now I also do performance, so if I feel appropriate, I would use all of them in my performance. For your interest, I like to use paintings as the backdrops.

What's your method of producing art works? Do you have concepts first? Or do you think people overlooked skills nowadays, or in your art?
Method… I don't believe it is important and so I don't think that much. At least I am not going for a standard method. General speaking, I make works in any method that I know. (RV)

I used to paint with text from poems / songs or an image at the very beginning, and then after something put on the canvas, I deal with visual elements and sometimes I develop the visuals from the starting point.While those installations and mixed media are depends more on the concept, I usually need to plan for making these works.

(RV) And yes, I think I have concepts first, no matter paintings or those “conceptual works”. About paintings, sometimes a text from poems / songs or an image (a visual concept) in the newspaper inspired me. While those “conceptual works” are more depends on the context that I am working with. After certain study of the context, I would come up certain concept, and then I plan it hard before to actualize the concept. It is exciting during the planning process, because there are always accidents!

“People”, so far, from the observation of HK art audiences that I have contacted, those who have NOT study art much DO focus on techniques and skills, and the issues and story behind the work comes second.

(RV) So far, from my observation of HK art audiences, “People” who have NOT study art much DO focus on techniques and skills, and their understanding on techniques and skills are usually equals to polishment, decorative details, craftsmanship…etc. And therefore the context, issues and story behind the work comes secondary. On the contrary, artworks that do not involve much skills or techniques (e.g. like works of Toni Sehgal) are easier to be appreciated for those have studied art. Maybe they have read the development / history of art, and thus they can easier to recognize the alternative artistic quality of these art-pieces, said the philosophical side.

Mm…there are “skills” in my works, waiting someone to discover. (RV)

Who are the artists that influenced you the most?
Too many wor, Leonardo da vinci, Duchamp, Andy Warhol, Keith Haring, Tezuka Osamu (手塚治虫), Kurt Chan, Mr Lui, Luke Ching, On, Kongkee, Jeff …all those who I met at my study period. (RV)
So, do u want to know artworks that influenced me the most?

(RV) Too many wor, I took everyone a bit. I don’t think I can have them all here. I believe in “There must be a teacher when one walked within a group of three.” (三人行必有我師焉). One can learn from everything if he wished to. Leonardo da vinci, Duchamp, Hans Haacke, Santiago Sierra, Tino Sehgal, Andy Warhol, Takashi Murakami, Jean Michel Basquiat, Keith Haring, Mucha, Gerard Hemsworth, Jonathan Messe, Tezuka Osamu (手塚治虫), Xu Bing, Huang Yong Ping, Jaspar Lau, Wucius Wong, Wilson Shek, Mr Lui, Kurt Chan, Luke Ching, On, Kongkee, Jeff Leung, Au Hoi Lam, Wong Tin Yan, Bell Hui, Emanuel, Frog Morris, Jon Meyer…all my classmates from CUHK and Goldsmiths.

Who is/are the most important contemporary artist(s) in your mind?
Buddha, Duchamp & Jesus Christ.
(RV)
Mortal Level (Alive, HK, below 40): Kwan Sheung Chi, Tozer Pak, Luke Ching
Mortal Level (Alive): Takashi Murakami, Hans Haacke, Thomas Hirschhorn
Mortal Level (Dead): Andy Warhol, Joseph Beuys, Marcel Duchamp
Answer at the bottom of my heart: Law Man Lok, Law Man Lok, Law Man Lok
Immortal Level: Jesus Christ (Superman), Buddha (Overman) & Lao Zhi (Wise man).
Yes, no female just a coincident.

Why do you decided to go to London to have your further study?
Colleges here accepted my application. (RV)

What do you expect that could happen to your art after this study?
??? I expect my art would have a positive development.
(RV) I think after this study, I have a more concrete touch with the contemporary art / cultural theories, the causes and effects in art history, the current global / social context… Besides, it helps me to understand more on those art practices that I always interested to, but never know where to start. As a result, I am also exploring performance now…

Is there some special thing about the arts in Hong Kong that you only notice after being in UK?
Still a short time in UK, hard to tell. Arts in HK and UK are more or less the same. What makes different is the environment, first of all, the market here is much better, at least, larger. Secondly, I feel the population (as well as proportion) of UK people that love and respect art are much larger than HK; visual, performance, music… both commercial and non-commerical ! They like and proud of that.According to this, maybe what is “Special”… is that no rich people (like Lee Kar Shing) in HK recognize the potential (commercially and culturally speaking) of contemporary art. It isn't it strange? They understand the “value” of antiques but not the contemporary art (future antiques).
(RV) According to this, maybe what is “Special in HK”… is that no rich people recognize the potential (commercially and culturally speaking) of contemporary art. Isn’t it strange? They understand the “value” of antiques but not the contemporary art (future antiques). Maybe this again reflects the HK business man’s has no adventure mind. They only follow the most advance fashions, but they never discover, create, research and develop their own. I mean, if I am rich and interested in car, I would not be satisfied by shopping them, I must be those have my own factory to invent new engines and energy. We really do not care about “core value”, they regard it as a marketing slogan without substances and practices. (maybe, follow / copy / buy from New York and London is the most “creative and innovative” thing they can think of…)And as everyone knows, the living style in HK is too packed, too rush. One has no time to sit down have a talk, to think, to understand oneself properly. I have to emphasize this again because that really makes the whole city suffocate and therefore de-create the young people and art!!

Do you think of being an artist as your career? Why?(Why have you abandoned the art administrator role? Is that related?)
To me, being an artist is a kind of being a human living with attitude. Career, you mean earn a living by making art (selling art)? Sure, I hope so. Why? Because it is a happy thing to earn a living with your interest. Why I begin the art administrator role is because the art-related job variety in HK is narrow. I abandoned the art administrator role because its time for something new. And in HK, art administrator's job nature is quite boring. Sometimes you just cannot tell why it needs an art background person to handle this job, maybe someone from translation, BBA or premise management could do better. Situation will be better in alternative art space, but they usually have no resources and promotion chance. (By the way, in London, there are a lot of jobs need art background persons, even practical fine art, with a considerable salary package)
(RV) Part of duties of an artist is to redefine its career nature. In my opinion, being an artist is a kind of being a human with self awareness and therefore a living attitude. But if you mean earn a living by practicing art (selling art), I am also interested. It is a happy thing to earn a living with your interest. The reason I worked as an art administrator is because the variety of art-related occupation in HK is so narrow. After several years, I felt I have done with this role and I need something fresh badly, and I knew, I need to practice art. In addition, the job nature of art administrator in HK is so boring (back to my time). Sometimes you just cannot tell why it needs an art background person to handle this job, maybe someone from translation, BBA or premise management could do better. In terms of fun, it would be better in alternative art space, but they usually cannot show the staff a stable career path. And what is worse is that they are always lack of resources. You better prepare to work from 9am to 10pm without any cover or backup when there is an exhibition coming. Someone called it rare experience but I would call it uncivilized. Its irony that an organization pushes their staff in such an uncivilized way under the banner of art, isn't it? (By the way, in London, there are a lot of jobs really need art background persons, even practical fine art, with a considerable salary package) I mean, if the situation keeps the same as my time, any other boring office job would be better than being an art administrator in Hong Kong. Because, at least you would not expect too much without the name of art.

You also write about art, but why is there more reviews of others rather than artist's writings? Do you think art critic is your friend?
Text and language has its limitation, while the sense of a piece of art is much more than that. (言有盡而意無窮). As an artist, has the artwork shown is already enough. Making is writing, and artwork is the text. But sometimes, exhibition requests an artist statement, so I have written some artist statements for caption purpose. Also, I write on my sketch book and save some thoughts in my computer. These help me to think. I just feel these texts are not necessary to share with others. I write others and share it, since I want to consolidate what I get & learn from these works.
(RV) Text and language has its limitation, while the sense of a piece of art is much more than that. (言有盡而意無窮). As an artist, has the artwork shown is already enough. Practicing is writing, and the artwork is the text. But for practical reasons, usually artists need to write artist statement for caption purpose. I also write on my sketch book and save ideas in my computer, these help me to think. Besides, if someone invited me (like what we doing here), and I am available, I would write. And maybe I would write more as I have more experience in writing artist writings now.I write others and share it, since I want to consolidate what I get & learn from the works I have experienced.
These articles are outcomes from my digestion, not others. Through sharing, magic of communications appear when there is someone (include the artist) give feedback. I can learn more by this process.Buddha and Jesus also don't leave the world a text (不立文字). Their apprentice did. Every text limited by the context of its time being. I do not intended to be those great artists or philosophers who wrote something and then being quoted everywhere. I want to influence people around by my art, and then they influence other by their art…
Finally, I believe making friend is nothing about his or her job. (RV)

My suggestion for the coming Wed (18th July) session

James Elkins, Our Beautiful, Dry, and Distant Texts – Art History as Writings (Routledge, 2000)
Preface (xi- midpage xiii) and
Chapter One [whole chapter if you got the time, or just the marked paragraphs as in the copy at AAA: p.11 header Normal Art History to p.12 midpage, p.19 from “Hence, to inquire …” from lower mid page to end of paragraph, p.20 from new paragraph “In art history, …” to end of paragraph, p.21 first paragraph, to p.23 midpage ending with “objectivity”, then p.24 bottom paragraph to p.26 “of its silence.”” on the upper page.]

I will try to be better prepared and do it as a (hopefully still just an informal) presentation, which could involve exchanges and dialogues, follow with discussion on any raised issues.

Then we will share with Leung Po and others on our own writing production. (Since I see myself not doing any art history writings at all, I think of sharing my encounters with Art History in the university and how I note my writings as wholely different from them.)

That is the present planning for the coming session.Hope to see you all on Wed.

Andrew Lam's suggested readings for the coming 8th August session

Chapter 25 Hans Belting, “The End of Art History”
From Eric Femie ed., Art History and Its Methods – A Critical Anthology (London: Phaidon, 1995), pp.291???/293-295.

Chapter 6 “The End(s) of Art History” (pp.156-181)
of Donald Preziosi, Rethinking Art History: Mediations on a Coy Science
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989).

“Introduction” (pp.1- 17)
of Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrard, Feminism and Art History
(New York: Harper and Row, 1982).