THE WRINKLES OF REBELLION
 
                                                
Contemporary art’s subjectivity includes a political dimension, namely a certain distrust of the existing order. Within this we can find a basic attribute of contemporary art—a dissatisfaction with and rebellion against the extant situation. But this basic desire has sunk into a kind of crisis of institutionalization, that is, wrinkles have appeared in our rebellious behaviour, leading to a kind of crises of self-identification.  
We do not rebel against the part of ourselves which has been institutionalized, within which lies our normalized rebellious stance; neither do we rebel against our own knowledge, technology, or slogans. We have occupied this word “rebellion,” become its master, and it, our servant. We, as the rebellion of the master, or rebellion’s master, are convinced of our possession of it, we no longer need to think about it. Rather, our thinking simply no longer requires this rebellious dimension. As far as we are concerned, “rebellion” is “ours.”  
At the same time, this self-identified rebellion has itself become separated from “rebellion,” something self-evident, standardized as part of our behaviour. This standardization of rebellion in turn gives rise to our own products. We substitute rebellion with these products, and obtain rebellion through the process of using them. It then also becomes a commodity; through consumption we satisfy our imaginary rebellious desires. We can enjoy rebellion at our dinner parties, but nobody can guarantee we’ll ever be able to truly apply it. This rebellion-turned-commodity has already been turned into a substitute-product, it’s been encoded, and is available for sale. Advertisements may publicize it, to help it stand apart; we can use very “conventional” methods of payment to easily and quickly purchase “rebellion.”
We can choose a design, like a tattoo—a gun or an eagle, a dagger, a slogan…? We can choose where to put our “rebellion”—on the belly? The left arm, or the inside of the right thigh? But, as we’ve already purchased it, we’ve lost the opportunity to genuinely act upon our rebelliousness. Today, the logic of purchase is “zero” logic, it has already become the “primary power” of the precise encoding of reality; it guides us in implementing a well drawn out plan. This purging of the cognitive dimension of “rebellion” was actually according to plan.
Now, since we exist in this dissatisfying order of reality, shouldn’t we re-learn what “rebellion” actually is?
 
汪建伟
Wang Jianwei