Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
This chapter considers questions of cinematic space in the seemingly deterritorialized contemporary Taiwan cinema. I focus on Tsai
Ming-Liang and his Taipei TrilogyRebels of the Neon God (1991),
Vive LAmour (1994), and The River (1995). As figured in those
extraordinary films, Taipei is a city devoid of historical specificities
and depleted of spatial immediacy. Often described as counterdramatic or antimelodramatic, Tsais films cinematize the impossibility of the Now which best characterizes the postcolonial conditions
of Taiwan. Compared also with the retrospective narrative forms of
Wang Tongs films discussed in chapter 5, this peculiar ahistoricity
in Tsais cinematic representation of Taipei begins to gesture toward
some possible ways of understanding the impact of globalization in
Taiwans cultural landscape near the end of the twentieth century.
My discussion of Tsais Taipei Trilogy seeks to elucidate two
particular spatial features of 1990s Taipei, most aptly described as
homelessness at home and connectedness by separation. These two
conditions shed light on the problems of failed reciprocity and the
impossibility of human relationship through spatial proximity, and
they characterize the dialectics of the local and the global with even
greater urgency than Edward Yangs works in the 1980s. First of all,
the breakdown of the traditional family in Tsais films is at once the
cause and the effect of urban living, emphatically portraying family
life as being away from home. Furthermore, in depicting Taipei as a
modernizing city, Tsais films capture new urban spaces at moments
of transition. Whereas the urbanization process figures in Tsais films
as endless construction, the state of building new roads, new parks,
160
Taiwan Cinema
and new apartments is shown as always incomplete and the coexisting old always in disrepair. The spatial quality of this transitional
realm is marked by the characaters connection to as well as separation from one another; a spatial paradox that is reflected in their
movement within those spaces. In short, the urban space in 1990s
Taipei in Tsais films is marked by the breakdown of spatial meaning
which calls attention to the impossible Now that is finally the condition of national cinema in the global age.
*
The result of the vote was an affirmation of change; Rebels won out
over Hill of No Return and was named by the jury the best film of
the year.3
What precisely was the nature of the change that these critics saw
in Tsais film? One juror, New Cinema veteran Xiao Ye, emphasizes
the heavy or solemn sense of history in Wangs Hill. While he
basically concurs with that view, another juror, film historian Lu
Feii, goes further and states that Rebels is completely different
161
[from Hill] in that it is non-historical and non-moralistic . . . its narrative style is non-linear and non- classical.4 In short, Rebels is
characterized in a negative register vis- -vis the established paradigm. Compared to New Cinema films of the 1980sLu specifically mentions both Hou Hsiao- Hsien and Edward YangRebels
signals a change toward a different representation of history, a
different historiography that focuses on the Now and departs from
the nostalgic and historical retrospection of past experiences. 5
What the Now encounters here is a cinematic evacuation of historicity in the representation of Taipei as a postcolonial city. The breakdown of history takes the forms of the collapse of domestic space,
and the alienation and paradoxical conflation of the public and the
private. Author of a comprehensive book devoted to Tsais films to
date, Wen Tian-Xiang, sums up this tendency in terms of the personal
and the collective that was at the core of Taiwan cinema in the previous decade.
In contrast to New Taiwan Cinema in the 1980s that either rewrites
Taiwans history from a macro-historical perspective or reconstructs
Taiwans past from a micro-historical point of view, collective memory
is the common thematic of the cinema. Tsai Ming-Liangs films, digging deeply into modern subjectivity almost without any sense of historicity, undoubtedly surpass their predecessors frameworks and are
open to a different kind of cinematic reflective gaze.6
162
Taiwan Cinema
To analyze Rebels of the Neon God, Carlos Rojas begins by introducing a documentary Tsai Ming-Liang makes four years later on his
163
164
Taiwan Cinema
165
166
Taiwan Cinema
167
returned from one of his overseas trips, Ah-Rong goes back to inspect
the supposedly vacant apartment. After making sure that it is clear, he
moves his belongings from his car into the apartment. While he is taking a hot bath, however, the other illegitimate occupant, Xiao-Kang,
returns with a watermelon. Ah-Rong grabs his clothes and begins
a hide-and-seek dance with Xiao-Kang, unbeknownst to the latter.
From the room where he sleeps, Xiao-Kang walks all the way across
the hallway into the room that Ah-Rong uses. The camera slowly
pans, following him as he strides from one room to the other, until,
with a dramatic and exaggerated movement, he rolls the watermeloncum-bowling ball along the hallway until it smashes against the far
wall and breaks into juicy pieces.
All the while Ah-Rong is shown ducking under the bed, crawling through glass doors to the balcony, climbing through windows
between rooms, and hiding under the bed, all in a strenuous effort
to evade Xiao-Kangs detection. However, when Xiao-Kang finally
realizes that he is not alonea fact betrayed to him by the last bit
of the bath water being sucked down the drain as he urinateshe
in turn assumes the role of an intruder and begins to run and hide
as well. The hide-and-not-seek chase becomes a mouse-and-mouse
game, one in which there is no pursuer, only the pursued. Hallways,
doors, and window frames, all become multilayered blockades and
veils that are mobilized to turn the emptiness of the apartment into a
venue for the performance of a particularly ironic space of presence
and disappearance.
It is a space over which neither of the two men has legitimate claim,
a space that both can occupy, temporarily at best, as their borrowed
home. Xiao-Kang and Ah-Rong continue to interact with each other
further until one morning the realtors surprise visit forces both to
sneak away together. Homeless but not without means of transportation, the two young men take a trip to the columbarium where XiaoKang works as a salesperson. The seemingly endless rows of container
spaces in different sizes recall the nameless corridors of hotel rooms
for nightly rental in Rebels as well as the high-rises and apartment
buildings for sale in Vive LAmour. The connection is drawn through
the explicit commercialization of spacesfor the dead and the living
alike.
What the film emphasizes, ultimately, is not living space offered
up for occupation. Instead, the commercial effort of selling places is
constantly shown as a futile act. The meticulously portrayed daily
routine of the woman realtor is a case in point. Always fashionably
168
Taiwan Cinema
dressed and zooming around in her small white car, the realtor is
often shown jaywalking and climbing atop her car to put up for-sale
signs. Several times when she is speaking to potential buyers, either in
person or over the phone, she is the only one who is shown talking on
screen: never a word in return, never any communication nor reciprocation. A good example is a scene when she holds an open house for
a ground-floor unit; the visual representation of the space she sells is
stunning but also typical in its striking barrenness.
The sequence begins with the woman realtor putting up bright-red
signs on trees and utility poles in various public locations near the
unit for sale. After placing one large sign on her car, she is shown
in a long shot entering an empty ground-floor storefront unit whose
sliding glass doors are also lined with blood-red signs banning solicitation. It then cuts abruptly to the inside of the property, where the
realtor is squatting on the floor making a phone call. The bleak interior of the location is twice emphasized. First, the sudden change from
exterior to interior highlights the stark contrast between a seemingly
busy neighborhood and the gutted interior of the unit. Second, the
realtors crouching figure in the mid-ground is cast against the glass
doors with the now inverse for-sale signs that admit partial sunlight
from the outside. This is a spatial relay that calls attention to the emptiness of the unaccounted-for foreground of the shot. An ensuing shot
shows that empty space as truly empty, a mere continuation of space
with visible signs of walls torn down and rooms demolished. This is
an emptied- out space, a space of disembowelment.
Disemboweled, but not for long: these spaces are soon to be peopled by new occupants, at least according to the realtors affirmative words about how they are fit for family living. More often than
not, however, the various urban spaces Vive LAmour shows remain
in an odd state between unused and unusable. Indeed, those various
commercial and residential spaces the realtor tries to sell are some
examples of this dis-utility. What is represented, in other words, is
neither what things were nor what they will be; it is change materialized by the cinematic capture of the very in-between moment of
transition. The representation of the Ta-an Forest Park [Daan senlin
gongyuan] comes to the forefront as an emblematic image of a Taipei
caught between stagesbetween demolition and rebuilding; between
disembowelment and refilling; and, finally, between an old location
in ruins and a new location that has yet to come into being.
This state of construction by destruction forms the basis for Yomi
Braesters hypothesis about Taiwans New Cinema, what he has
169
termed the poetics of demolition. For Braester, like any historyrich city, Taipei offers a palimpsest of a layered growth.19 Among
the hundreds of years of Taipeis history, he focuses on Taipeis
reconstruction period since the late 1970s which entailed a massive
demolition of old neighborhoods, the evacuation of entire communities, and the construction of new landmarks: a government-led
urban replanning that results, Braester laments, in the erasure of
older Taipei spaces and, ultimately, the erasure of memories.20
However, by [embracing] the changing cityscapes and [establishing]
a dialogue with the landmarks of destruction, Vive LAmour is one
prime filmic example that exercises what may be called a poetics
of demolition . . . a paradoxical practice of writing through erasure,
building through tearing down, remembrance through amnesia, and
identity formation through the unmaking of social ties.21 As a strategy of resistance, in short, this poetics of demolition enables films
to [negotiate] between spatial belonging and urban alienation and
to take part in the public debates on urban planning and channel
civic resistance to more complex politics of memory.22 This poetics of demolition is, finally, a promise of political, ideological, and
identificatory gains through the cinema, a belief in direct correspondences between cinematic representation and the kind of activism it
ostensibly advocates, or, at least, a recuperative revision that redeems
the ruins only by displaying them.
Such a reflectionist approach is flawed by its supposition of a neat
corresponding relationship between social reality and its representation. Braesters close attention to the history of the specific place for
the Forest Park is, nevertheless, helpful for a productive reading of
the final sequence of Vive LAmour. The space for the Forest Park had
long been designated as the Reserved Land for Park #7. For years
after the Nationalist government relocated to Taiwan in 1949, the
area was mainly a juancun (military dependents village) occupied
by military personnel and their families, a particularly poor neighborhood whose inhabitants lived in overcrowded shacks. As Taipei
became more prosperous and urban beautification more valued, this
squalid area increasingly became an eyesore, a past that the modernizing city was all too eager to jettison. After some 40 years, the
government declared in the early 1990s that most of the buildings
were illegal and the area was to be razed to clear the land for a stadium or a park. For people who had lived there for decades, homes
were turned overnight into a space in which they themselves suddenly
became occupants of a borrowed space: from residents to squatters,
170
Taiwan Cinema
all it took was a policy change and the spatial memory, and the sense
of belonging with it, was trashed and then erased.
After much controversy and great difficulty with evacuation, this
piece of land was cleared, both literally and figuratively, in 1992.
Construction of the Forest Park quickly ensued. What Vive LAmour
captures is the park at this particular point of transition:23 a perfect stage for the spatial drama that has been playing out in this film
precisely because its ephemerality is situated right between appearance (or the projected park under construction) and disappearance
(of the slum demolished). The irony is impossible to miss. Whereas
the appearing of the park is the disappearing of a local community,
the disappearance of that piece of urban history makes way for the
very appearance of an emerging public green space. 24 The role of the
park will need to be placed with all other buildings and structures
that collectively make up the urban space of Taipei. That is the same
dynamic of all the living spacesagain, both for the living and the
deadamong which the characters navigate their way. And this is the
context within which a productive analysis of the final sequence of
Vive LAmour must be placed.
The last sequence takes place after a night of entangled erotic
encounters and alienation. As Xiao-Kang lies on Ah-Rongs bed masturbating, he is surprised by the sudden return of Ah-Rong with the
realtor. Hiding under the bed, Xiao-Kang is both a part of and apart
from the sexual act on the bed. Trapped and aroused, Xiao-Kang
resumes his masturbatory act and the mechanical squeaks of the box
springs seem the most fitting accompaniment to this strange mnagea-trois. The morning after, the realtor leaves while Ah-Rong is still
asleep. Her car doesnt start, so she walks into the Ta-an Forest Park
in the gray light of an overcast morning. 25
One of the first shots of Vive LAmour shows Xiao-Kang on his
moped riding along the edge of the Ta-an Park; what we see then
are only the construction fences at its perimeter. The activity inside
the park is shown by the piles of dirt dug up by the bulldozer parked
quietly to one side. A low-angle shot accentuates the obtrusiveness of
the few apartment buildings just outside the park in the background
with balloons and banners signaling units for sale. The realtor then
walks into frame from screen right and, as the camera pans left following her along the half-paved walkway, her figure is dwarfed by the
imposing presence of the yellow dirt piled far higher than her height.
What follows is a tracking shot of her wandering through the park;
her deliberate pace, as if strolling in a lush forest, is utterly at odds
171
172
Taiwan Cinema
If I paraphrase: even though the film does linger around the imminent
loss of any traditional emotional anchormainly, the heterosexual
familyit in fact valorizes some emergent possibilities of human relationships, best exemplified, of course, by homosexual, or, as they call
it, other or heterotopic eroticism represented by the highly dramatized kiss between the two young men. If traditional, heteronormative love has indeed failed, the homosexual or alternative love is
still without consummation.
*
173
174
Taiwan Cinema
175
176
Taiwan Cinema
177
178
Taiwan Cinema
179
180
Taiwan Cinema
181