Multitude
The concept of “multitude” can be traced back to the discussion about individual resistance against imperialism between British philosopher Thomas Hobbes and Dutch philosopher Baruch de Spinoza. In Empire (2000) by Italian philosopher Antonio Negri and American philosopher Michael Hardt, the concept replaces the subjective concept of “class” in Marxism: the multitude, though being a group as a whole, also admits individual differences within the group, and can therefore transcends nation and class differences in the traditional sense.
In Taiwan, the term multitude is often mentioned together with anarchism, Marxism, activism and post-colonialism. Its relation to the context of anarchism can probably trace back to the “Taiwan League of Black Youth” in 1927 and other underground groups, such as “Ming Fong Theatrical Company” and “Lonely Soul Alliance,” or transnational network in Asia, such as the “Asiatic Humanitarian Brotherhood” that connect Japan, China and Taiwan. Activism, from a series of ideas about the body emerged after the lifting of martial law, also appeared in the streets accompanied with flourishing development of social movement and experimental theater.
Right before the lifting of martial law, CHEN Chieh-Jen’s staged Dysfunction No. 3 on Wuchang Street in Ximending: five young people with their heads covered with red sacks and eyes blindfolded with black cloth strips marched in a line, each had his hands one the shoulders of the person before him. After crying out loudly together at a specified moment, they fell to the ground one after another. For his performance, Non-Line (1986), LEE Ming-Sheng had planned to connect his studio with Taipei Fine Arts Museum with a line, with one end tied in his studio and another end pulled to the museum on February 28. Due to its sensitive political nature, Non-Line, after the plan was exposed, was never realized because the artist was forced to stay at home by the police.
The multitude is different from the “public” brought together by the new genre public art and community art and the “mass” in socially engaged art and relational aesthetics. Its emergence, most of the time, reflects the inadequacy of the system. Because it is associated with the tradition of resistance aesthetics, some of the discussions about multitude around 2010, have either juxtaposed art activists with social activists or explored possible ways of actions linking art actions and social movements.
After the lifting of martial law, as social structure and system grew more and more complex, resistance was no longer directed towards a clear target, and the focus of related discussions was shifted towards anxieties over neoliberalism, for example, KAO Jun-Honn’s The Ruin Image Crystal Project (2012-), CHEN Chieh-Jen’s Realm of Reverberations and TANG Huang-Chen’s In Search of Factures in Cities. It is precisely because of the fluid nature of multitude, “how does multitude become possible?” has become a question that practitioners are asking and exploring.
Reference
In Taiwan, the term multitude is often mentioned together with anarchism, Marxism, activism and post-colonialism. Its relation to the context of anarchism can probably trace back to the “Taiwan League of Black Youth” in 1927 and other underground groups, such as “Ming Fong Theatrical Company” and “Lonely Soul Alliance,” or transnational network in Asia, such as the “Asiatic Humanitarian Brotherhood” that connect Japan, China and Taiwan. Activism, from a series of ideas about the body emerged after the lifting of martial law, also appeared in the streets accompanied with flourishing development of social movement and experimental theater.
Right before the lifting of martial law, CHEN Chieh-Jen’s staged Dysfunction No. 3 on Wuchang Street in Ximending: five young people with their heads covered with red sacks and eyes blindfolded with black cloth strips marched in a line, each had his hands one the shoulders of the person before him. After crying out loudly together at a specified moment, they fell to the ground one after another. For his performance, Non-Line (1986), LEE Ming-Sheng had planned to connect his studio with Taipei Fine Arts Museum with a line, with one end tied in his studio and another end pulled to the museum on February 28. Due to its sensitive political nature, Non-Line, after the plan was exposed, was never realized because the artist was forced to stay at home by the police.
The multitude is different from the “public” brought together by the new genre public art and community art and the “mass” in socially engaged art and relational aesthetics. Its emergence, most of the time, reflects the inadequacy of the system. Because it is associated with the tradition of resistance aesthetics, some of the discussions about multitude around 2010, have either juxtaposed art activists with social activists or explored possible ways of actions linking art actions and social movements.
After the lifting of martial law, as social structure and system grew more and more complex, resistance was no longer directed towards a clear target, and the focus of related discussions was shifted towards anxieties over neoliberalism, for example, KAO Jun-Honn’s The Ruin Image Crystal Project (2012-), CHEN Chieh-Jen’s Realm of Reverberations and TANG Huang-Chen’s In Search of Factures in Cities. It is precisely because of the fluid nature of multitude, “how does multitude become possible?” has become a question that practitioners are asking and exploring.
Reference
- KAO Jun-Honn. Taiwanese Contemporary Art and Multitude Aesthetics in the Age of Neoliberalism. Doctoral Dissertation, Doctoral Program in Art Creation and Theory, Tainan National University of the Arts. 2017.
- CHIANG Po-Hsin (feature topic editor). “Anarchic Counterculture of Trans-East Asia.” Feature topic, ACT: Art Critique of Taiwan, July 2011, p. 4-110.
- KAO Jun-Honn and Gong Jow-Jiun (feature editors). “Active Diaspora and Multitude Re-Territorialization: Cultural Resistance under Neo-Liberalism.” Feature topic, ACT: Art Critique of Taiwan, October 2011, p. 4-98.
諸眾（Multitude）
諸眾的概念在西方可以溯源到英國哲學家霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes）與尼德蘭哲學家史賓諾沙（Baruch de Spinoza）對於個人如何對抗帝國主義的討論當中；在義大利哲學家奈格里（Antonio Negri）與美國哲學家哈特（Michael Hardt）的著作《帝國》（2000）裡，則被用來取代馬克思主義「階級」的主體概念：諸眾雖是一個整體，但也承認了內部個體的差異性，因此能夠超越民族與一般定義上的階級差距。
在臺灣，諸眾一詞時常伴隨著無政府主義、馬克思主義、行動主義、後殖民主義被提及。其無政府主義的脈絡興許可以追溯至1927年的「臺灣黑色青年聯盟」及其後地下化的「民峰劇團」、「孤魂聯盟」，或亞洲地區的跨國連線，如串聯日本、中國、台灣的「亞洲合親會」等。行動主義的部分從解嚴前後一系列對於身體的思考，伴隨著社會運動與小劇場的蓬勃發展，出現在街頭。
解嚴前夕，陳界仁的《機能喪失第三號》（1983）在西門町的武昌街發生，五名戴著紅色頭套、眼蒙黑布的年輕人以手搭肩，連長一串隊伍前進，在特定時間點五個人齊聲吶喊並接連倒下；李銘盛的《非線》（1986）原定於二月二十八日從自己的工作室拉一條線，通往北美館，因涉及政治敏感因素，計畫曝光後，預計實行的當日藝術家就被警察監禁在家中，《非線》因此成為未竟之作。
諸眾一詞有別於新類型公共藝術與社群藝術所凝聚起的「公眾」（public），以及社會參與式藝術與關係美學當中的大眾（mass）。其出現往往反映了體制的不足，正因為本身帶著抵抗美學的傳統，在2010年前後，在一些關於諸眾的討論當中，或將藝術的行動主義者與社會運動人士並置、或討論藝術行動與社會運動間可能的行動方式。
解嚴後，因為日益複雜的社會結構體體系，抵抗的對象不再明確，相關討論轉往對於新自由主義的焦慮當中，如高俊宏的《廢墟晶體影像計畫》（2012-）、陳界仁的《殘響世界》、湯皇珍的《尋找城市裂縫計畫》等，也正因為諸眾的流動性質，「諸眾如何可能？」也成為實踐者們所關注的問題。
參考文獻
在臺灣，諸眾一詞時常伴隨著無政府主義、馬克思主義、行動主義、後殖民主義被提及。其無政府主義的脈絡興許可以追溯至1927年的「臺灣黑色青年聯盟」及其後地下化的「民峰劇團」、「孤魂聯盟」，或亞洲地區的跨國連線，如串聯日本、中國、台灣的「亞洲合親會」等。行動主義的部分從解嚴前後一系列對於身體的思考，伴隨著社會運動與小劇場的蓬勃發展，出現在街頭。
解嚴前夕，陳界仁的《機能喪失第三號》（1983）在西門町的武昌街發生，五名戴著紅色頭套、眼蒙黑布的年輕人以手搭肩，連長一串隊伍前進，在特定時間點五個人齊聲吶喊並接連倒下；李銘盛的《非線》（1986）原定於二月二十八日從自己的工作室拉一條線，通往北美館，因涉及政治敏感因素，計畫曝光後，預計實行的當日藝術家就被警察監禁在家中，《非線》因此成為未竟之作。
諸眾一詞有別於新類型公共藝術與社群藝術所凝聚起的「公眾」（public），以及社會參與式藝術與關係美學當中的大眾（mass）。其出現往往反映了體制的不足，正因為本身帶著抵抗美學的傳統，在2010年前後，在一些關於諸眾的討論當中，或將藝術的行動主義者與社會運動人士並置、或討論藝術行動與社會運動間可能的行動方式。
解嚴後，因為日益複雜的社會結構體體系，抵抗的對象不再明確，相關討論轉往對於新自由主義的焦慮當中，如高俊宏的《廢墟晶體影像計畫》（2012-）、陳界仁的《殘響世界》、湯皇珍的《尋找城市裂縫計畫》等，也正因為諸眾的流動性質，「諸眾如何可能？」也成為實踐者們所關注的問題。
參考文獻
- 高俊宏，《新自由主義時代的台灣當代藝術與諸眾美學》，國立台南藝術大學藝術創作理論研究所博士班博士論文，2017。
- 蔣伯欣策畫，〈東亞安那其—藝術行動主義與諸眾的蜂起〉專題，藝術觀點，47期，頁4-110，2011.7。
- 高俊宏與龔卓軍策畫，〈主動離散‧諸眾結界—新自由主義下的文化抵抗〉專題，藝術觀點，48期，頁4-98，2011.10。