當代臺灣遷移電影：論陳界仁《殘響世界》與高俊宏《博愛》中的空間、歷史、觀眾

Contemporary Taiwanese ‘Relocated Cinema’: Reviewing the Dimensions of Space, History and Spectatorship of Chen Chieh-Jen’s Realm of Reverberations and Kao Jun Honn’s Boai

數位紀年的中外影像藝術屢創新意，繼「展覽電影」與「藝術家電影」等形態之後，另種主要在影像投映、展映地點及觀眾面向上體現殊異表徵與涵義的「遷移電影」應運而生。顧名思義，其顯著特點是藝術家不單將動態影像移置戶外放映，還引領觀眾前往現場，進而在創作者、作品、空間及觀眾之間締造一種迥異於電影院與美術館（或畫廊）的觀影經驗。陳界仁的《殘響世界》（2014－2016）與高俊宏的《博愛》（2016），可視為臺灣遷移電影的代表作。兩位藝術家皆以帶領觀眾造訪歷史遺址，加上導覽、放映及論壇等形式，與歷史展開對話。於此語境下，本文擬從三個面向探問遷移電影：在當代影像藝術的遷移母題上，《殘響世界》與《博愛》的裝配表徵，如何在差異於影廳與美術館的影像投映、空間移置及觀眾動員形成環環相扣的新意。就遷移電影的美學與政治而言，兩位藝術家涉及影像、空間與觀眾的放映行動並非偶然，實則在共時與歷時上和一些中外世界重要作品形成遙相呼應的系譜及精神結構，形塑跨時代、跨國、跨語言的現實意識批判與政治藝術範式。從遷移電影的諸眾式觀眾勞力上，兩部交匯於電影與當代藝術研究的跨域之作亦在空間部署與諸眾式觀眾等層次上，展現跨界連結與思辨。

The digital era has been marked by an explosion of new concepts in moving images. In addition to ‘cinema of exhibition’ and ‘artists’ cinema’, one of the latest additions is ‘relocated cinema’. As the named indicates, relocated cinema literally relocates screenings and audiences to some other terrain to create an entirely different sort of spectatorship from those created by cinema and museums. In the current context of Taiwan, relocated cinema is perhaps best exemplified by Chen Chieh-Jen’s Realm of Reverberations and Kao Jun-Honn’s Boai (Universal Love), both of which adopted the format of artists taking audiences to visit historical ruins, and organizing docent tours, open-air screenings and forums to encourage the participants to build a dialogue with the past. This paper aims to take these two films as case studies to explore three aspects of relocated cinema: Firstly, for the migration motif in contemporary moving images, how the interconnected ‘plug-in’ features of these two films are comparable with the image projections, spatial layouts, and audiences mobilizations of cinemas and museums will be examined. Secondly, for the poetics and politics of relocated cinema, these features are not accidental products. Our research suggests that the characteristics they display link the two films to the genealogy and structural framework of classic cinematic masterpieces, but also give rise to a critical and political-artistic paradigm. And thirdly, for the spectators’ participation in relocated cinema, it can be argued that the two films, straddling the disciplines of cinema studies and contemporary art, formulate a cross-disciplinary discourse that inspires fresh ideas of spatial arrangements and multitudinous spectators.