What is the key to decide the difference between "the real thing" and "fake"? What is the value of a surface of an image? I always depict asking to myself concerning “the interval of the torsion of the truth and falsehood” and replacing the things put on a surface of a thing while repeating a round trip between the surface of material and of imagination.

The city of Yokohama where I was born has a historical background that early opened in Japan, and has been a pioneer of the Westernization of the country. Which is correct, to recognize Western and Oriental or is multiplied a hybrid style as "innovative real" or to regard it as "banal sham?"   And the legitimacy itself in the West might be a fake made in the end of repeated imitation, the addition of scheme that real originally was in Japan, the mode of value judgments when you measure the real purity may sometimes get reversed, to the fact that both can affirm the legitimacy I was interested. Should we think about the values of the hybrid as either "deterioration" or "evolution", that is the question trailing for ages, I have been depicting through the production implications for the answer.

Akira Ishiguro



私が生まれた横浜は日本でいち早く開港し文明開化の先駆けとなった歴史があります。 西洋が東洋と掛け合わされたハイブリッドな様式を「斬新な本物」と捉えるか「陳腐なまがい物」として捉えるか、そもそも西洋の正統性自体が模倣を繰り返した末のフェイクであり、日本に元々あった本物という図式を加えると本物の純度を測るにあたり様式の価値判断によって時に逆転し、双方が正統性を肯定できることに興味を持ちました。ハイブリッドを「進化」と捉えるか「劣化」と捉えるか、これはいつの時代も引きずっている価値観であり、私はそこへの示唆として作品を通じて提示しています。


石黒 昭