XIANG ER

日常性的帆布存在，以一種PVC塑化纖維去成型，以一種具有萬種可能的變化性，

帆布雖然沒有足夠的張揚和誇耀，但卻多了幾分隨性和低調。

在台灣各處，充斥著跟帆布相關的一切，從店家營運的帆布遮雨棚、戶外設置大型

廣告、工業建設布材、農用、住家車棚，婚喪喜慶，以一種臨時搭建的姿態短暫留

存在我們的記憶裡。它具有某種保護及阻擋作用，並被認知為一種強韌的戶外存在

之材質。

從CANVAS命名也容易指向對於繪畫基底(西化)的解釋。作於對應感，帆布繪畫對

於保存時間的限度延展，增加極大的保存性，反觀在台灣戶外日常性帆布，它如同

將未來將到來的破敗與損毀感，提前的顯現在這些戶外臨時帆布上，PVC帆布對於

強韌的象徵，並未顯現在台灣下的氣候影響力。

在脆化及崩解的狀態下懸掛著，台灣各處都存在的景象，有點螢光綠的正面，背後

襯著鮮橘色，軍綠色偽裝在某處，它成為人造片段中的片段。我將破敗老化的片段

重新印製(輸出)在PVC帆布上，使其全新化，試圖創造一種新的修補感，如同對應

現實中，殘敗後經過人為的重新修補，與其說是反映出欲蓋彌彰的全新立體造型，

更接近的感覺是一種物件恆定用法的一種堅持(某種個性上的)，帆布被日常所運用

殆盡，並持續殘存於某處。

對於創作者(我)本身的位置於何處?只是作為此物件的提及者?自己曾多次反問自己

。或著直接說明日常物件是否跟我有強烈的生命經驗連結? 日常物件有許多不會被

明確解釋的部分，或是它從未成為人們所認為是主體的敘事經驗，說不定我的角色

，就是讓物件參與自己的創作生命經驗。

Canvas exists as a kind of PVC Petrochemistry fiber in daily life and shows

variation of thousands of possibilities. Canvas stays rather low key than bragging

loudly.

Canvas is used everywhere in Taiwan. The canvas sunshades, outdoor

advertising billboards, industrial construction materials, agricultural tools, house

carports… etc. It represents a sturdy material which provides some kind of

protection, and it is also briefly retained in our memories as the makeshift stance.

Named it “CANVAS” is easy to make observers point it to the explanation of

painting (westernized). As in the corresponding sense, canvas painting has

extended the storage limit, and increased great preservation. On the other hand,

outdoor temporary canvas always shows the damaged sense which in advance

of the future will come, PVC canvas did not appear its tough symbol in Taiwan

climate influence. 

Being hanged in the state of embrittlement and disintegration is a normal scene

of canvas in Taiwan. Little fluorescent green in front, set off fresh orange behind,

military green camouflage somewhere, it becomes fragments of artificial

fragment. I reprinted (output) aging fragments on PVC canvas, making it new,

and trying to create a new sense of repair, as corresponds to reality, artificial re-

repairing after the ruins. Instead of saying it as the reflection brand new modeling

of something men tried to cover up badly, it is more close to the constant using of

object in 

insistence(on some kind of personality) . Canvas is exhausted by routines and

continued remaining in somewhere.

To the creator (I), where is my position? Just as those mentioned in this article? I

had asked myself many times. Or whether there is an intensive link between daily

objects and my living experiences? There are many parts without clear

explanation when we mentioned about daily objects, or we could say that daily

objects had never being the main narrator in men’s consideration. Maybe my role

is letting the objects involved in the creation of my own living experience.