For this assignment, I visited the Water Stories exhibition in BioBAT Art Space. I don’t like this exhibition, and I think this is worth discussed. The major reason that cause this dislike is because most of the works there, especially the interactive installation, their usage of input data is not interesting for me. I always want to find surprising connection between input data that artist selected, and the output. But the majority of works there give me a sense of “randomness”. What I mean by random, is that the input data selection (ex: the CO2 concentration in the room) is not helping the project in terms of context, and it feels like it wouldn’t make much difference if the input data is selected otherwise. The other problem I noticed, is that some of the work, are more of “display” of what can be achieved by bio-material, instead of having some interesting background or context. The other problem is that, due to the nature of this exhibition, most of the work is about preserving the environment, which, for me, narrowing down the possibility of broader topic exploration. It feels like all the projects are sending the same message, which I don't appreciate. Again, this is just my personal taste, I believe there are people who like the exhibition, but I think it’s important to reflect my true feeling of the exhibition, and make analyze.

This experience actually brings me back to the artworks that are showcased in the last class that I truly like. The underwater sculpture, and the Roden Crater. I think both of the work intrigue me by its unusual use of including space, and bring in the perspective of other nature form through the space inclusion. Both of these works make me feel like, instead of “trying to become” other life form, we are “awakening” into other life form’s perspective in these experience. They are full of imagination and inclusion. They are not forming a pre-assumption that how other life form view the world. I think that is precious.