During the Opening, someone filled in a BLOG sheet for my attention. Here is what was written about my performance art:

“I didn’t know if I can interact with the performer and the communication of the following reflection which is inviting but the mask distances this. What are the barriers of communication in the work and other possible areas?”

My response:

Thank you for writing this reflection! Feedback for an artist – like myself – whose art is conceptual and requires the viewer’s genuine input or puzzlement to open the discourse, is invaluable!

You have already grasped the answer to your own question. I think ‘the barriers’ are ‘the point’. 1) The mask is clearly an un-nerving barrier to the viewer. It suggests someone who is here but not available as the mask has no opening mouth. (However, some people did push in close anyway and asked me questions expecting a reply through the plastic. Interesting, eh?) The mask observes you observing the art. 2) The mirror held by ‘the mask’ is also a barrier. If you come close to it, you will find yourself reflected back to you. In fact, you are observing yourself observing the art. 3) Not displaying ‘the obvious’ usual motifs (skull, fire, garbage) of environmental issues is also a barrier. Viewers need to think for themselves. 4) The bodiless feet are also a barrier to communication as their message is unclear. Again, viewers need to think for themselves.

I think ‘the barriers’ are ‘the point’. People are used to being ‘in charge’ and understanding things intellectually. This exhibition suggests other voices in the disciurse. Viewers are tipped out of their comfort zones to be led gently but firmly, given a chance to think about the world and its creatures. Here, intrigue through another’s voice prevails. Environmental issues are not black and white, are they?