Oral History Experiment:
2022 Parklife Third-year Exhibit Curation Timeline

The Organization

"Parklife" originated from the 4th Public Culture Week organized by the Social Practice Center (SPC) at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK-Shenzhen) in 2020. Through salon discussions and other thoughtful forums, it delved into concepts related to the campus and parks. The aim is to utilize the sunken plaza, known as the "Little Park," as a foundation for localized practices, inspiring everyone to discover and create a 'Park Aesthetic' within the campus.

The Artists

Zihao Yang
Design Lead

Over three years at Parklife, Zihao developed a keen interest in social tension, particularly during the pandemic era. He explores people's stories through longitudinal studies, constructing word or graphic transcripts that reveal unarticulated behavioral patterns and background culture.

Dongni Huang
Concept Team Member

Dongni's research interests consistently revolve around digital culture and new media. Her expertise leans towards written expression, making her primary focus centered on delivering academic interpretations of relevant concepts. Amidst the pandemic, she endeavored to articulate and document thoughtful facets through artistic and creative avenues.

Qinyuan Chen
Graphic Designer

Originally, Qinyuan had intended to study abroad and had already secured an overseas undergraduate school offer. However, the pandemic unfolded during her senior year of high school, significantly altering her life trajectory. Consequently, she chose to apply to a domestic college in China, where she gradually discovered her passion for visual arts.

Xinyan Ju
Graphic Designer

In her freshman year of college, Xinyan initially pursued a major in Financial Statistics. However, the pandemic and a growing passion for social issues and design motivated her to change her major to visual communication. Now, she employs artistic forms like graphic design to actively participate in discussions on diverse topics and to convey shared emotions.

The Narratives Timeline

The Experiment

Focus Group vs. Oral History Interview

For the first half of the group interview, I've strategically opted for a focus group setting to leverage the power of collaboration in constructing a detailed timeline of the annual exhibit's curation process. This method aims to tap into the collective knowledge and experiences of the narrators, fostering a dynamic and inclusive discussion that enriches the narrative. Through open dialogue and mutual contribution, I anticipate a more comprehensive and nuanced exploration of the curation timeline. This collaborative approach allows for the weaving together of individual perspectives, contributing to a more holistic understanding of the annual exhibit's development.

Organic vs. Organized Conversation

The second half of the interview fosters collaborative engagement and encourages the natural flow of conversation. I allowed the narrators the freedom to express themselves organically, each contributing in their preferred order. The coordinator I assigned, Zihao Yang, played a pivotal role in steering the discussion, guiding narrators when relevance to specific topics was apparent. My involvement was limited to initiating topic shifts only when necessary.

Fieldnotes

This was my first attempt at conducting a group oral history interview, and I designed a structured interview, aiming to maintain a continuous and engaging conversation. Departing from conventional life review questions, I posed hypothetical scenarios to the narrators, prompting them to envision curating an exhibit without thematic constraints from the school. Surprisingly, their unanimous response suggested that the current post-pandemic era is deemed unsuitable for another exhibit aimed at healing. Most narrators resorted to checking social media or chat records to recollect their 2022 experiences, revealing the lingering trauma from the pandemic.

Dongni: I feel like I've experienced some memory loss.

Zihao: Honestly, when I try to recall things from last year, I can't remember anything. It's a disaster.

Dongni: I think I really need to check some chat records from that time. I feel like my defense mechanism has been triggered. My roommate, who studied psychology before, mentioned that particularly painful memories are generally not remembered very clearly.

The conversation then transitioned to an observation of the current public opinion on Chinese social media. A noticeable trend became apparent, spanning from public to private spheres, as people collectively avoided discussing the events of the past three years. This unspoken consensus seems to be influenced by the defense mechanism articulated by the narrators, contributing to a general reluctance to engage with the memories of that period on Chinese social media. The term "ridiculous and painful" aptly captures the emotional burden associated with those years, highlighting the intricate interplay of societal memory and coping mechanisms.

Zihao: I believe some people, like Dongni mentioned, naturally block it out of their minds and don't even want to recall the incident. It's even more challenging to have all the experiences laid out in front of them again, saying, "Look at how tough these three years have been for you." Many individuals simply don't want to talk about it anymore; for them, it's over. Personally, there were many small details from last year that I only remembered clearly when discussing them again. If you ask me to talk about my experiences during the pandemic suddenly, I also resist remembering it, and I think this might be the case for some members of the public as well.

Following that, I presented them with the question: When do they believe would be an opportune moment for the public to revisit the pandemic, fostering a collective healing process? Their responses offered insightful perspectives on the matter. By probing into the ideal timing for revisiting the pandemic for collective healing, the conversation delved into the intricacies of societal memory and the potential for communal catharsis. This inquiry tapped into the narrators' perceptions of when the broader public might be emotionally prepared to reflect on and collectively address the challenges and trauma of the pandemic era. Their responses not only shed light on the nuanced factors influencing the timing but also hinted at the potential effectiveness of societal healing processes.

Xinyan: Because I feel that the pandemic is no longer purely a natural disaster. For example, we often reflect on and commemorate events like the Wenchuan earthquake, or other significant incidents. However, events like the pandemic, including the previous SARS outbreak and major disease epidemics like the plague, are not frequently brought up for reflection or commemoration. This is because their nature involves not only natural disasters but also human-made disasters, revealing inconvenient societal issues that are challenging to discuss. Recollecting those two years, there was a sense of helplessness and despair, and I would wonder why things had to unfold in such a way. Reflecting on these issues now or discussing them publicly seems somewhat untimely.

Dongni: We haven't reached the point where everyone can sit down and have a thorough discussion about what really happened. Even memories are now susceptible to distortion, let alone the prospect of healing. Therefore, I don't think now is an opportune time.

Xinyan: What I want to say is quite similar. I'm curious about why we would bring this up again now. Is it to ensure that everyone remembers what happened during the pandemic, or is there another purpose?

Dongni: Avoiding any ulterior motives.

Xinyan: Exactly, exactly. I feel that if someone keeps insisting on the pandemic issue, many people might question whether there are hidden intentions or if it's influenced by external forces. So, while remembering is meaningful, I wonder what our current objective is?

Dongni: I believe it's a good time to bring it up only when we won't be questioned about having ulterior motives.

Concluding this part of the discussion, I presented the final question: "Do you think it's better to privately document these pandemic memories, or is it more appropriate to make them public, using an archival method that could potentially attract interest from the public in the future?" This question not only prompted my narrators to contemplate the delicate balance between personal reflection and contributing to a shared societal narrative but also served as a reflective moment for myself. It urged me to reconsider the underlying purpose of my thesis project, questioning the appropriateness of different approaches and timing. "What is the appropriate way, and when is the appropriate time?" I anticipate that this will remain an ongoing question for me, shaping the evolving trajectory of my project.