C&G Art Department創辦人張嘉莉（Clara CHEUNG）於International Association of Art Critics Hong Kong發表了一篇名為《Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of ritualistic practices in 2014)》的學術文章，旨在探討民間宗教鬼神習俗若放在畫廊空間內再現，能否有效地鼓勵觀賞者把傳統祭祀融入生活去重塑後殖民地時代的文化身份認同。Clara與浸大CVA校友蟻穎琳一樣，有按照中大文化研究系教授何慶基博士辦《盧亭神話》專題展的策展理念，以超現實主義的油畫手法，繪畫魚頭人的戲玩幻像，兌現洪席耶及Walter Benjamin主張敘事性創作及玩味的精神，道出一切歷史也是像神話般由管治者虛構的哲學迷思。 Clara認為《盧亭神話》此「偽民族志」旨在以visual artifacts兌現人類學考察重視的material culture，乃「關係美學」的一種，又被稱作「關係藝術」，是美術實踐上所呈現的一種模式或者趨勢，最早發現並提出者為法國藝術評論家Nicolas Bourriaud。Nicolas Bourriaud認為「關係美學」並非獨立的私人空間，而在理論或者實踐上從整體人類關係和社會背景發展的藝術實踐模式；這時藝術家應當被視為呈現關係美學的「催化劑」，而非整個藝術概念的中心。

1. 從偽民族志到超現實主義繪畫之
《盧亭神話》系列創作
SÉRIE CRIATIVA "O MITO DE LO TING" - DA
PSEUDOETNOGRAFIA À PINTURA SURREALISTA
講者：李冠良（浸會大學當代中國研究社會科學碩士、香
港中文大學藝術文學碩士）
講座地點：香港人文學會 / 講座日期：2023年6月23日

2. 張嘉莉 CLARA CHEUNG
 2002年畢業於美國Rhodes College，獲
學士學位，主修純藝術和電腦科學
 2007年獲嶺南大學文化研究碩士學位
 曾任中大藝術系MAFA課程兼任講師，任
教「Special Topics in Studio Arts」科目
 C&G Art Department創辦人
 其journal article《Reconstructing the
Hong Kong cultural identity by
reconnecting with history through art
exhibitions and performative rituals
(from the construction of the “Lo Ting”
myth in 1997 to the revival of ritualistic
practices in 2014)》於International
Association of Art Critics Hong Kong刊
載

3. 張嘉莉 CLARA CHEUNG
 其《盧亭神話》油畫於英國曼撤斯特市
中心5 Kelvin Street展出

4. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 “Lo Ting was a species, half-human, half-fish, indigenous to Hong Kong
and somewhat other-worldly looking. In the past, they populated the area
around Tai Hai Shan, which was also called Tai Yu Shan, or Big Fish
Mountain - one of the old Cantonese names for Lantau Island,”
described by Oscar Ho in the article “The History of Lo Ting.” There
existed several ancient Chinese literature references about southern
China portraying characters similar to Lo Ting. For example, “New
Stories from Canton (Guang Dong Xin Yu)” published in 1662-1722,
“Knowledge from Canton (Yu Chung Kin Mun)” from 1777,“Collection of
Lingnan Narratives (Ling Nan Cong Shu)” from 1835, “Notes on the
South (Nan Yue Bi Ji)” from 1809, “General Records of the Sun On
County (Sun On Yu Zin)” from 1819, all contain passages about the half-
human and half-fish creatures which were mysterious, able to get in-and-
out of the sea quickly, not able to speak human languages, but had tails,
red hair and a few other features with different descriptions in different
versions. The first three titles listed above all used the term Lo Ting to
call this kind of human-fish-creature that lived around Big Fish Mountain
in Hong Kong. The “Collection of Lingnan Narratives” also specifically
identified Lo Ting as the descendant of Lo Chun who fled to southern
China after leading a rebellion / uprising against an oppressive regime in
the year around 400 AD in Jun Dynasty.

5. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 盧亭外貌

6. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 Despite these records from the earlier days, there was
not much discussion or acknowledgement of Lo Ting in
Hong Kong before 1997, until Oscar HO curated the
exhibition, titled “Museum 97: History・Community・
Individual Exhibition” (“Museum 97”) in the handover
year. As part of the series of Hong Kong Arts Center’s
cross-disciplinary cultural programs titled, “Hong Kong
Incarnated” in response to the handover of Hong Kong,
“Museum 97” was a large-scale art exhibition starting on
23 June 1997, consisting of five different sections and
involving more than 200 artists and participants. The
five sections include “Prelude,” “(I) The Prehistoric Hong
Kong Museum,” “(II) The Pre-97 Hong Kong Museum - A
Community Project,” “(III) Museum of Personal
Histories,” and a special section with videos and
installations.

7. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 何慶基博士
 於中大文化研究學系任教策展學科目
 90年發動《盧亭神話》系列之
「psuedo-ethnography」專題展策展項
目

8. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 Definition of “ethnography”
(e.g. Bronislaw Malinowski)
 Long-term field visits
 Experientially intensive
 Solitary data collection and
analysis
 Participant role
 Insider knowledge
 Recording
 Data session groups
 Field-observer role
 Background knowledge
 Conservation
 Notes and transcripts
 Coding and sequential
analysis
 Communicative activities

9. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 如幻似真的考古學、人類學發現，以material culture形式呈現
說謠言故事的文化

10. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 如幻似真的考古學、人類學
發現，以material culture形
式呈現說謠言故事的文化

11. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 如幻似真的考古學、人類學
發現，以material culture形
式呈現說謠言故事的文化

12. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 就連P1X3L的Phoebus及
George也於ViuTV《香港秘密
搜查館》節目內赴大澳考察盧
亭足跡，到處問大澳街坊有沒
有見過、聽過盧亭的存在

13. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 It was a casual conversation between Oscar Ho and
Leung Man To, who was part of the curatorial team for
the prehistoric section in “Museum 97” that sparkled the
idea to rewrite Hong Kong’s ancient history and research
on Lo Ting, recalled by Oscar in the sharing session of
his retrospective exhibition at para/site art space in
2004. Leung told Ho that a small group of ethnic
minorities within the mainland were rewriting their own
history when facing extinction. While the question of
Hongkongers’ cultural identity has been tackled already
by many cultural practitioners since the early 1990s, Ho
and his teammates wanted to address this very same
question in a different way: by re-constituting a local
myth with the powerful language of a history museum in
the prehistoric section of “Museum 97.” A team of five in
the curatorial committee for this section included art
curators Oscar Ho and Louis Yu, and cultural critics,
Leung Man To, historian, Hung Ho Fung and fiction
writer, Tung Kai Cheung. Working initially with one or two
references about the Tanka indigents and Lo Ting, they
fabricated a more comprehensive “history” for Lo Ting, in
collaboration with twenty-two artist units whose role was
to create visual artifacts for this fabricated “history.”

14. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 In the exhibition catalogue of “Museum 97,” the life of Lo Ting was
written with a formal style as in historical writing. Different artists
contributed various artworks, sculptures and paintings to help
illustrate the “history” in a contemporary art gallery, which was
turned into a history museum setting with dimmed lighting and
informative captions. Two famous visuals from this exhibit, that
can still be easily found online nowadays, include the woodblock
print of Lo Ting by Taiwan artist Hou Chun Ming, and the life-size
sculpture of Lo Ting. (Image 2 and 3) Both are imaginative
representations of Lo Ting. Other parts of the exhibition include
artworks and artificial artifacts that revealed the “history” of Lo
Ting. For example, an oil painting by Wong Hai in the style of
classical history painting depicted the story of the Lo Ting people
being massacred by a Song Dynasty army in 1197. Another art
group with Phoebe Wong and Lydia Ngai addressed the food
culture of Lo Ting by exhibiting a few fish dishes, including fish
ball. At the center of the corridor between the 4th and 5th floor of
the gallery, a black-and-white fish image approximately 8 feet in
length was displayed in a crooked fashion that went along the wall
and the horizontal platform on the corridor. The middle portion of
the fish image was flattened on this platform and covered by a
shiny red cloth, and a few dishes containing printed-out images of
the fish dishes specially made for the project. On the side were
also captions describing the food culture (Image 4). “There was
not much instruction about caption writing in the form of history
museum’s style for the participating artists, but we spontaneously
understood what and how to present the works in the show, in
order to fit in the larger narrative of Lo Ting,” recalled by Phoebe
Wong.

15. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 侯俊明乃台灣著名版畫藝
術家

16. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 In a newspaper exhibition review of “Museum 97”, local art
critic Man Kit Wah compared the Lo Ting section with the
other parts of the show in 1997: “the pre-historic section
[was] the richest part amongst the three major sections in the
exhibit... The tale was started with the pre-historical
mythologies of the human-animal species, the ancestors of
the Tanka tribe who were the first residents of Hong
Kong. Then the story went on to exhibit how Tanka were
suppressed before and after the colonial period… The
exhibition was a critical discourse about the suppressed
subgroup of Tanka… under the urban development of Hong
Kong throughout history… After all, no history is neutral… but
the second and third sections of the whole exhibition seemed
to be less suspicious, and did not involve too much of a pre-
dominant discourse.” While Man was skeptical about the
historical content presented in “Museum 97,” another pair of
visitors’ experience was the opposite. Oscar Ho
remembered encountering a pair of father and child in
“Museum 97.” The father treated all the materials very
seriously and taught his child the history of Lo
Ting and Tanka according to the information and artifacts
from the exhibition. Oscar Ho also mentioned in a previous
communication that he, at one point, felt uncomfortable and
was in a dilemma about whether to reveal the myth to be true
or not.
文潔華教授
浸大電影學院榮休教授、
藝術發展局藝術評論範
疇當選代表

17. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 “To believe in myths is to believe in an imaginary real, and that
is the same with history. A constitutive imagination determines
what we can or cannot see in history,” stated by Leung Man To
in the exhibition catalogue of “Museum 97.” On one hand, the
myth construction project of Lo Ting made use of the language
from a history museum that plays the role as the authority of
history writing in contemporary society. On the other hand,
the on-site archeological research and tours at Lautau Island
invited the audience members to get out of white cube
galleries to develop an even closer connection with the place’s
history, the historical myths and the imaginary “real.” While a
museum visit is a modern kind of ritual, the practice of
archeology is also the belief in modern science about finding
physical proof. Relying on codes and languages from modern
society’s ritual practices, the Lo Ting project nevertheless was
constituted in the safe zone of a contemporary art
framework. The gallery space made sure all exhibited items
could always be just “art” but not necessary part of the “real
life.” Once the 'serious' father realized “Museum 97” was
actually a contemporary art exhibition, he should have also
realized that it was the presentation of an alternative
history. Ho’s concern should then be alleviated.

18. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 Barthes once pointed out, since
“myth is experienced as
innocent speech…it is very
resistant to resistance.” In the
hand of a tyranny authority,
mythical speech may become a
tool to facilitate its facist
policies. However, the mythical
language can also be a tactical
tool for resistance by a
suppressed group in society,
since mythical speech is difficult
to be dealt with by the authority
as well.
Roland Barthes

19. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 “To believe in myths is to believe in an imaginary real, and that
is the same with history. A constitutive imagination determines
what we can or cannot see in history,” stated by Leung Man To
in the exhibition catalogue of “Museum 97.” On one hand, the
myth construction project of Lo Ting made use of the language
from a history museum that plays the role as the authority of
history writing in contemporary society. On the other hand,
the on-site archeological research and tours at Lautau Island
invited the audience members to get out of white cube
galleries to develop an even closer connection with the place’s
history, the historical myths and the imaginary “real.” While a
museum visit is a modern kind of ritual, the practice of
archeology is also the belief in modern science about finding
physical proof. Relying on codes and languages from modern
society’s ritual practices, the Lo Ting project nevertheless was
constituted in the safe zone of a contemporary art
framework. The gallery space made sure all exhibited items
could always be just “art” but not necessary part of the “real
life.” Once the 'serious' father realized “Museum 97” was
actually a contemporary art exhibition, he should have also
realized that it was the presentation of an alternative
history. Ho’s concern should then be alleviated.

20. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 Unlike the Lo Ting project, the above cultural practices were all
conducted outside of the contemporary art
framework. Originating from religious and folk-populist culture,
these performative rituals are not merely attempts to constitute the
revival of certain religions, but are conscious acts to re-connect
the contemporaries in Hong Kong with its invisible ancient
past. The unwritten but desired laws for the current social and
political system are being presented through the tales of
mythological figures and ritualistic actions. If rituals performed
within an art framework can be easily separated from life and,
therefore, easily lose its mythical and intimate essence, then
ritualistic practice within everyday life helps preserve such
essential features. It is not an easy task though. Since history is
not neutral, a clear judgment must be made about the selection of
which historical path to follow. How to make sure the mythical
path re-incarnated with the chosen past can help develop a
group’s cultural identity, but at the same time, not be extremely
exclusive? It is not only a moral question, but also a political
question.

21. Reconstructing the Hong Kong cultural identity by reconnecting
with history through art exhibitions and performative rituals (from
the construction of the “Lo Ting” myth in 1997 to the revival of
ritualistic practices in 2014) {* written by Miss. Clara CHEUNG}
 If rituals performed within an art framework can be easily separated from life and,
therefore, easily lose its mythical and intimate essence, then ritualistic practice
within everyday life helps preserve such essential features.
 e.g. Clara’s distribution of barbie dolls with the heads and upper bodies of salty fishes

22. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》油畫創作
 蟻穎琳 2008年於香港浸會大學視覺藝術院畢
業，現於香港居住及工作。繪畫是她主要創作
媒介，作品多以對偶式呈現。內容圍繞自身經
歷、香港風景和城市生活細節。其中魚人為角
式經常出現，錦鯉魚臉隱藏著人們的表情，欲
言又止，以不同姿態和身份置身人群中，描繪
當代人生活之事。早期創作受十八－九世紀繪
畫及夢境影響，著重人物形態，部分描述愛情
關系。近年時常以香港自然風境和城市景象為
背景，專注顏色運用，嘗試探索以顏色筆觸引
發情感閱讀的可能性。
她近年參展包括《認真接力派對》(WURE
AREA 2023)、《請試著以雙手摘霧》(安全口
畫廊 2021)、《光輝》(唐人藝術基金會 2021)、
藝倡畫廊 x 法國五月藝術節聯辦項目《中國超
現實主義 》( 藝倡畫廊 2021)、界自然基金會
香港分會主辦 《海洋的印記》(海港城美術館
2020)、香港巴塞爾藝術展 2022 (藝倡畫廊)、
亞洲藝術文獻庫的周年籌款拍賣會 2020、個
展 《如果看見他請告訴我》(Touch Gallery
2022) 《不見不散》(YY9 畫廊 2015)、《魚人
閱讀時間》( 艺鵠 2012) 等。
尋人告示 | The
Missing Notice
Oil on wood panel, 30
x 45 cm
2022

23. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》油畫創作
 請看看有沒有見過這個人 | Giving Notice
Oil on wood panel, 64.5 x 45 cm
2022

24. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》油畫創作
 “我沒有帶泳衣”| “I did not bring my swimsuit.”
Oil on canvas, 100 x 50 cm (2015 -2018)

25. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》油畫創作
 "你很快會著陸了" | "You will be landing, very soon."
Oil on panel, 53 x 36cm
2018

26. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》油畫創作
 一隻跑過的松鼠 | A
Running Squirrel
Oil on canvas, 88 x 100
cm
2015
 一個星期六的中午， 男女
魚人正在香港動植物公園
散步。女魚人正在閱讀
Thomas Hardy 的小說
《遠離塵囂》，正讀到那
新娘竟然去錯了教堂。忽
然她覺得肚餓便提議小食
亭買麵吃。此時一隻松鼠
跑過。

27. 蟻穎琳《盧亭神話》
油畫創作
 Let’s Try Catching Steam
with Bare Hands | Group
exhibition presented by
Gallery EXIT
直至分秒倒退 | Lay Here
and Forget the World
 夏力道 | Treacherous Trail
Oil on wood panel, 46.2 x
62.2 cm
2021
 船灣淡水湖 | Plover Cove
Reservoir
Oil on wood panel, 46.2 x
62.2 cm
2021

28. 參考書目
 專書
 David Clarke, “Hong Kong art: Culture
and decolonization”. Hong Kong: Hong
Kong University Press, 2001.
 David Clarke, “Hong Kong art
bibliography”. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press, 1st Edition in 2003.
 圖錄
 《香港三世書之再世書：盧亭考古新發
現 = Hong Kong reincarnated: new Lo
Ting archeological find》，香港：香港
藝術中心，1998年出版。
 “Mapping Identities - The Art and
Curating of Oscar Ho”, published by
Para/Site Art Space, 2004. (Collection
of Asia Art Archive: MON.HHK)
 “Deconstruct and Edit: Oscar Ho on the
Art of Curating”, published by MCCM
Creations, 2016. (Collection of Asia Art
Archive: MON.HHK)
 “Museum 97: History – Community -
Individual Exhibition”, Oscar Ho (ed.),
exhibition catalogue, Hong Kong Arts
Centre, Hong Kong, 1997.
 月刊論文
 Oscar Ho, “Hong Kong: A curatorial
journey for an identity” in: Art Journal,
Winter 57/4 (1998): P.39.
 Oscar Ho, “The History of Lo Ting”
in: Driving Lantau: Whisper of an
Island, Lo Yin Shan. Hong Kong:
MCCM Creations, (2012): P.171-177.
 Man Kit Wah, “History Museum 97”
in: Hong Kong Economic Journal. 25
June 1997.