This is an era in which “technology” has begun to permeate our daily lives, not in a “silent” way, but rather a direct one. As a result, “technology” is slowly becoming the center of our discourse – either in a threatening, fearful or overly optimistic manner. This may be an effect of Moore’s Law: the cycle of technological development is shrinking to a visible level, becoming more and more integrated and intelligent. This tendency is also spreading in the art world: it is no longer stable, unchanging or eternal, but rather, increasingly, enact has become the premise of art’s dialogue with the world – art is not about encompassing all this knowledge and expanding it; rather, it is about finding space of enaction in these fields, expanding the scope of experience, and making it more and more accessible to all. It is not to encompass all this knowledge and expand it; rather, it is to find in these fields a space to enact and to expand the scope of the discourse and expression of experience.

We focus on and try to define enactivism in art by this exhibition because for many artists, especially those who work in the media of painting, the recognition and emphasis on process has become part of their daily creation; yet unfortunately, most of the abovementioned artists, due to the lack or ambiguity of the language, have not really recognized their own understanding of process as a valuable perspective. We reinforce the concept of “enactivism” in this article and in this exhibition in order to establish a linguistic anchor for the above understanding, and hope that through this work we can provide contemporary art viewers and collectors with a new path to perceive such works.

In the context of art, both in art history and in contemporary times, we use the terms ” artwork” and “work” very habitually to describe the products offered by artists, i.e. “the result of (creative) work” – the artwork; and the process of producing the artwork – the work. The result of the (creative) work” – the artwork; and the process of producing the artwork – the work. As a cognitive framework, “work-artwork” plays the role of an underlying, fundamental, common-sense consensus in the cognitive model of art. As pointed out at the beginning of this article, this cognitive framework is by no means truthful; on the contrary, it lacks rational and logical foundations. Therefore, some artists use Hume’s skepticism as the most important tool in their work, and through their doings, they question the cognitive framework of ” artwork-work”, i.e. “process-result”, and emphasize another cognitive framework which is “process-centered” framework. These artists are the enactivist artists that we are concerned with in this exhibition.

Enactivism artists may work in the media of painting, installation, performance, sound or conceptual, but this is just one aspect of their work. In a deeper dialogue, they will tell you that the real object of their work is not these specific pieces, but the process of generating them. This kind of talk is often confusing, as if we can understand it but it is not convincing. For this exhibition, we have selected seven artists: He Wei, LODTALAD, Lei Ming, Sima Yuan, Shohei Yamamoto, Stephen Gleadow and Yunfeng, and set the focus of the exhibition on the concepts of these artists’ work, the structure of the working process, and how they allow randomness and improvisation to participate in and determine their own final results. At the same time, in the writing of the exhibition, we use enactivist discourse to analyze each artist’s work in detail, in the hope of evoking a new way of perceiving his or her work, and defining a standard of value. At the same time, we hope that the textual meanings constituted by the enactivist creativity will continue to generate new meanings as the historical context continues to change, resulting in the transmutation and flux of meanings.