What is "I" & Video Made

Masao Miyoshi implies an essential point in his article "Who Decides, Who Speaks" 1that the inquiry into subjectivity can be conducted through the question "what I am not" rather than "what I am." Just as his opinion challenges our traditional cognition of "I," my video also hopes to show that the concept of "I" is constantly flowing and being endlessly reconstructed from the theme of the unstable relationship between man and the universe, nature, the so-called others and the inevitable blind spots of the man himself. "I" cannot be fully defined but should be understood and felt. As a Chinese girl with a background of living in both East Asia and North America, I made this video to express such a view that any individual, ethnic group, and region represented by East Asians should not be bound to specific time and space conditions. Instead, we should keep an open mind to their subjectivity research and constantly explore and discover the infinite potential of our "I" in the process of new historical and geographical changes. My own work on East Asia is a prime example of this potential being tapped.

Definition limits the possibility of "I." Through the video, firstly, I'd express that my action and "I" are not need to be deconstructed by the existing frame, "I" should be understood and felt. When I'm in western countries, I find people would ask each other where they are from due to their multicultural backgrounds, so I am from China. "A Chinese girl," they will assume I'm not resent to this concept, but if I'm good at math, people will say it's because you're Asian; if I'm careful, people will say it's a girl trait. People will first focus on my macro characteristics and denial of my inside-personal perspective. If there is something I suddenly want to do, people would say it's a long-term cultural influence, it's a family background, but it's more of a personal quality. As collectivism stands in the East, I am also classified into a specific group in the West. Individualism and subjectivity without prejudice are not reflected in minority groups. Therefore, for what is "I," I do not want to be explained by any existing concept, "I" should be understood and deeply felt. In the video, through the rotation and change of different figures, e.g., square and round, black and white, I'd like to express that we should reject the binary opposition: the opposition of subjective and objective as well as the resistance of the relationship between man and the universe. Moreover, I change the background from a starry night universe photo to Van Gogh's famous Starry Night. Although both represent a starry night, you can't distinguish between real and abstract. Theoretically, the photo's starry night universe is real, and Van Gogh's Starry Night is abstract, but the photo's starry night may be an abstract display of technological immaturity, and Van Gogh's Starry Night is an actual painting. In addition, when the background is Van Gogh's famous painting, I also put different subjects in the image, such as a monkey, frog, girl, etc. Generally, the figure in the front is always prominent and acts as the dominant subject. However, as the background is a valuable painting, the figure in the front or the scene in the back, which is the dominant subject, is worth thinking about. When you're trying to describe something, the definition of the subject limits its possibilities. People constantly construct and deconstruct "I," studying and debating whether people are made up of particles or sensory bodies, whether it is thinking and heartbeat or the invention, control, and use of technology that makes people unique. However, "I" does not need to be recognized, understood, and felt; it is fluid, and the definition differs in different situations. "I" is actually based on intuition and beyond intuition, based on the concept and beyond the concept.

"I" cannot be completely defined. Subjectivity is fluid and constantly being reconstructed. You are me, I am everything, and everything has "I." Firstly, I construct blindspots through the constant flickering of the universe.,expressing any perspective is inevitably subjective, limited, and cannot be an objective cognitive subject. Secondly, I create cognition by changing subjects in the context of the universe, such as monkey, frog, girl, mother, male, female, dead body, oil, etc.; this illustrates finding what "I" am in constant denial of what "I" am not, and at the same time express that the subject "I" is fluid, not immutable. It can be the flow of cognition from dead bodies to oil of the same subject at different times or the flow of male and female of distinct subjects. In addition, it's not just humans that can be the subject "I," as the subject is fluid, when you imagine yourself as a tree of nature, "I" is a conscious tree. The cognition of the relationship between man and nature should go beyond the traditional philosophical thinking of dividing subject and object. Man and nature are the unity relation of mutual subject and object, mutual end and means. Nature satisfies both the material needs of humans and the cultural and spiritual needs. In the earliest totem worship of human beings, nature is the belief object of human emotion maintenance. It is not a single object but integrates with "I" and inspires the sustainable subjectivity of "I," so there is "I" in all things. Moreover, the physiology and consciousness of "I" should be deconstructed. Ideologically, I prefer to be identified as a person rather than a woman, the mobility of the subject should be unrestricted. Objectification of women is the embodiment of the abduction of female self-consciousness. Female fertility is regarded as the subject of women: when a woman becomes a mother, her primary subject is no longer herself, but her identity as a mother, and the mobility of the subject is unilateral. I think it's more important to emphasize the commonality of the "I" in men and women to show this unity in consciousness, not minimize the physical differences between the sexes nether to celebrate the characteristics of one or the other. Overall, "I" cannot be wholly defined because there is no absolute same or different "I," just like the thinking of the constant reconstruction of human subjectivity. On the one hand, people are rational legislators; on the other hand, people are unconsciously or subconsciously enslaved. The self-expansion and self-disgust caused by the constant deconstruction of subjectivity with a frame failed to understand and feel real "I." The world can't be defined either because when we get up every day, things in the world have changed, but we still think of it as the same world.

Although there are different perceptions of subjectivity in different cultures in the East and the West, "I" has infinite possibilities. "I" still exist and is immortal when "I" travel through history and time. I put AI's face in the starry sky and integrated it into the background, referring to the similar expression of the Video Letter from 2Terayama Shuji and Tanikawa Shuntaro: "I" can be a space that expresses the constant possibility for the future and the definition of the subject will change with the development of science and technology. In addition, the relationship between man and nature is not only an experienced relationship but a unique and inseparable relationship that occurs in the integration of the two. When "my" eyes "see" nature and make a conscious reaction, the two are merged within time and space. Unlike the relationship established between animals and nature, ontology and subjectivity will always exist as long as there is an objective. When people react with nature, the concept of "I" has been combined with the particles of nature or the universe to become a "community of destiny." The acoustic sounds of trains and bamboo flutes in the video and the visualized old photos will bring your mind back to the past in a moment. The existence of thought and consciousness, as the initiator, becomes the witness. At the same time, the possibilities of "I" in the space of time are infinite.

Thinking about subjectivity is very important for East Asian studies. From Yoko Ono's Cut Piece,3 we know that no one knows what will happen in the future, and the subject is open to the unpredictability of the future. Under the influence of the rapid digitalization and intelligent transformation of cities and society, the future of "I" has infinite possibilities, such as AI and the concept of digital man. The various photos in this video are in different locations over Niagara Falls, taken from different angles, showing the blindspots. But more importantly, these faces of "people" of all ages are all AIs. As AIs are no longer purely "tools" but have more and more human-like nature, nowadays definition of "I" is offended. Moreover, constructing a virtual metaverse will lead to more extreme data monopoly and a new surveillance society. Our past and present interpretation of East Asian people, East Asian issues, and our connection to these issues are an attitude toward the future. We need to deeply recognize that the "I" does not need to be defined but understood, and "I" will always flow: you are me, I am everything, and everything has "I."

1Masao Miyoshi, “Who Decides, and Who Speaks?: Shutaisei and the West in Postwar Japan,” Duke University Press, January 1, 1970, https://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/2167/chapter/249588/Who-Decides-and-Who-Speaks-Shutaisei-and-the -West, 22.

2 “Shûji Terayama & Shuntarô Tanikawa Video Letter (Video 1983) - Imdb,” accessed November 23, 2022, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1181937/.3 “Moma Learning,” MoMA, accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/yoko-ono-cut-piece-1964/.

Bibliography

Miyoshi, Masao. “Who Decides, and Who Speaks?: Shutaisei and the West in Postwar Japan.” Duke University Press, January 1, 1970. https://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/2167/chapter/249588/Who-Decides-and-Who- Speaks-Shutaisei-and-the-West.

“Shûji Terayama & Shuntarô Tanikawa Video Letter (Video 1983) - Imdb.” Accessed November 23, 2022. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1181937/.

“Moma Learning.” MoMA. Accessed November 22, 2022. https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/yoko-ono-cut-piece-1964/.