墓之墓 Grave of Grave | 朱樂庭 CHU Lok Ting

Grave of Grave
Fractured gravestones, white cement

A set of 16
40 × 76 × 30 cm each

2022

Graves lie abandoned, forgotten, fragmented, and often demolished, marking a second death in the worldly realm. They no longer solely commemorate the deceased; instead, the graves themselves become subjects of reflection. In this graveyard of graves, they honor the memories of a bygone era.

墓之墓

墓碑殘件、白水泥

一組十六件

40 × 76 × 30 cm 單件

2022

墳墓荒廢、失祭、毀壞，最後被拆除，宣告人在世上的第二次死亡。它所紀念的不再只是墓主，而是墓碑自身；它來到一座屬於它的墓園。它們所紀念的是記憶與世代的消滅，與一段段無名的往昔。

I traverse the echoes of history, encountering only vast stretches of desolate land, where unmarked gravestones lie silently scattered.

If an individual is the basic unit that composes history, their graves become remnants of a fragment of the past. Gravestones serve as material relics, while words extend memory, allowing communication to bridge the divides of time and generations, imbuing these stones with profound commemorative significance. The gravestone signifies the past, also symbolizing memory, solemnity, and finality. When one encounters and studies a gravestone, it becomes a meeting point of the "present" and the "past," evoking awe for the passage of time and the sorrow of being a mere passerby. Crafted from stone, these gravestones are meant to endure; they aspire to last for millennia, seeking permanence and immortality for both the commemorated and their traces. Yet, as time passes, the gravestone inevitably deteriorates, reflecting the fate of the deceased. Even the most enduring stone cannot withstand the ravages of time, where forgetfulness and decay are the norm.

The end of an individual’s life does not signify the conclusion of all social ties. Graveyards and tombs enable the living to maintain connections with the departed until the fractured gravestone heralds a person's second death in the worldly realm. The remnants of gravestones used in this work originate from Diamond Hill Cemetery. During a visit last year, I witnessed a pile of broken gravestones discarded alongside other refuse, awaiting removal by a dump truck—indistinguishable from mere garbage, revealing the ultimate fate of humanity. This sight profoundly shocked me. There is a saying that as long as a person remains in the memory of the living, they have not truly died. Graveyards and tombs thus offer a sacred space for remembrance. The carefully constructed, maintained, and honored graves reflect the living's deep respect for the deceased and may serve as the only tangible proof of their existence in this world. However, memories do not endure; with each generation, graves fall into disrepair, neglect, decay, and ultimately demolition, symbolizing a final farewell from this world.

Established in 1938, the Diamond Hill Urn Cemetery (also known as "New Kowloon No. 8 Cemetery") primarily contains the graves of working-class citizens from that era, characterized by their relatively simple structures scattered across the hillside. The remnants of gravestones from this site seem both famous and anonymous; their names buried by history, their identities somewhat elusive. In Grave of Grave, the nameless gravestone remnants were collected from the wastes, and each piece was embedded in white cement to create uniform rectangular forms, aiming to "restore" the gravestones. They are neatly arranged for display, as if one were wandering through a cemetery. True to its title, Grave of Grave represents a graveyard of gravestones. The broken gravestones are excavated, repaired, and exhibited, removed from their original home at Diamond Hill Urn Cemetery. They no longer commemorate the deceased but instead honor the gravestones themselves. They have arrived at a cemetery that belongs to them, commemorating the obliteration of memory and generations, rather than the deaths of those who once inhabited this space. They embody the remnants of the site, not the remains of a body.

我穿過重重的歷史，只看見大片荒蕪野地，一座座無字碑縱橫，寂靜無聲。

如果一個個人是組成歷史的基本單位，他們的墓便是一個個往昔的遺物。碑是歷史的物質遺存；文字作為記憶的伸延，使人的溝通穿越今昔之隔、世代之隔，賦予碑明確的紀念性內涵。碑指示過去，象徵回憶、肅穆與終結。人訪碑、讀碑，是「當下」和「過去」的相遇，觸發我們對時間的敬畏、過客的愁情。以石造碑，是期望金石永存，可垂萬歲，盼人及其跡永恆與不朽。然先是人殁，後及碑殘。即使是金石之堅，在時間下難盼永恆，遺忘與煙滅乃是常事。

個體生命結束後，並不代表一切社會關係的完結，墳場墳墓讓生者與逝者延續這個社會關係，直至破碎的墓碑宣告人在世上的第二次死亡。作品中所用的墓碑殘件均來自鑽石山墳場。在上年參觀鑽石山墳場時，看見一堆破碎的墓碑就這樣連同其他廢物被棄置在墳場之外，候待泥頭車收走，與垃圾無異。此景象震撼我內心，原來人的終局不過如此。有一說認為，只要一個人仍停留在生者的記憶裡，他並未真正死亡。墳場、墳墓正正是讓人實踐紀念的場域。悉心建造、照料和拜祭的墳墓代表生人對逝者珍而重之的紀念，也可能是人曾在此世的唯一實體證明。然而記憶不會長存，隨著世代更替，墳墓荒廢、失祭、毀壞，最後被拆除，象徵人正式告別此世。

鑽石山金塔墳場（又稱「新九龍八號墳場」）在1938年建立，因所埋葬的大多屬當時之平民階層，墳墓形制相對較簡陋，縱橫遍佈整個山頭。[1] 出自這裡的墓碑殘件，似是有名，卻又是無名的；他們的名字被歷史掩埋，身份似有若無。作品拾取垃圾堆中的無名墓碑殘件，將每一件嵌入白水泥之中，倒模製成同一尺寸的長方體，以「復原」墓碑。它們被整齊排列展示，猶如身處墓園。作品名稱墓之墓，意即墳墓的墳墓。殘碑被掘起、修補、陳列，脫離了它們原屬的鑽石山墳場；它所紀念的不再是墓主，而是墓碑自身；它來到一座屬於它的墓園。它們所紀念的是記憶與世代的消滅，而不再是曾經生活在那裡的人的死亡；它們陳列的是這些地點的遺物，而非人類的遺骸。

Outside Diamond Hill Cemetery, a pile of broken gravestones discarded alongside other refuse, awaiting removal by a dump truck—indistinguishable from mere garbage

在鑽石山墳場外，一堆破碎的墓碑就這樣連同其他廢物被棄置在垃圾堆中

The Diamond Hill Cemetery is located next to the Diamond Hill Crematorium, together on the slope of Nam Shan Mei

鑽石山墳場毗鄰鑽石山火葬場，座落於南山尾大片山坡之上

Michel Foucault introduced the concept of "heterotopia" in urban space in 1967, identifying graveyards as one such heterotopia: a spaces that only begin to function after an individual's life has ended, distinguishing them from the daily understanding of "time," and gaining a semblance of eternity amidst constant decomposition and disappearance. The display of Grave of Grave preserves historical contexts and tangible markers, allowing viewers to reconstruct the graveyard as a realm of "heterotopia" and commemoration. If ruins are the material remnants of history, then the void left behind represents mourning, a subjective imagination, like a formless monument standing still. The remnants of gravestones are repaired into white rectangular forms, with the repaired parts resembling the void that signifies the past without restoring it. This void is envisioned as an empty wilderness, where what encapsulates historical memory is not the dilapidated buildings or decayed objects, but a unique, perceivable "site," imbued with a "subjective reality" by the observer. Here, we can borrow art historian Wu Hung's interpretation of "void": "...it is the visitor's recognition of a place that stimulates emotion and thought", "...one feels that one is confronting the past, both intimately linked with it and hopelessly separated with it." This gaze into the "void" evokes sorrow for the past, as the audience becomes aware of an unnamed history, their sadness stemming from this direct confrontation with history.

The work centers on monuments but can also be understood through the concept of the "counter-monument." Traditionally, monuments are established by authority to glorify official histories or legitimize political ideologies, or to commemorate victims of the Holocaust and wars. To subvert the collective memory of authority and injustice, counter-monuments emerged as a significant category of post-World War II German public art. While personal gravestones do not fit the conventional definition of a monument, they face the same dilemma: people tend to externalize the memories that should be remembered onto these stones, rather than internalizing them within their hearts. The responsibility of remembrance is handed over to the stones, while the monuments’ function of reminding us of the past is suspended. Erecting a monument becomes a form of self-comfort, as the desire to leave a mark in the world ultimately leads to the realization that nothing is truly preserved. Forgetfulness transfers the responsibility of remembering to the stone, which leads to decay. The works of "counter-monuments" do not aim to provide comfort; rather, they seek to capture the profound emotions felt when individuals confront the past—moments of doubt, fear, awe, and sorrow. This connection to the past transforms history from mere cold stones and words into active memory. This is an act of memory work (Erinnerungsarbeit) aimed at properly engaging with the process of remembering. It involves not only memorializing the past but also emphasizing its impact on the present; it seeks to convey the material remnants from the past while fulfilling the moral responsibility to acknowledge the debts owed to the different communities who once existed here but are no longer present, transferring the responsibility of memory from stone back to the living.

Mainstream history attempts to be comprehensive and authoritative, yet often falls short. Only countless micro-histories can construct a broader perspective. The remnants of gravestones are not only relics of an individual but also artifacts of an entire generation: they are fragments of a vanished era, intentionally or unintentionally severed from their original context, becoming part of contemporary culture. Thus, these artifacts possess both a sense of the past and the present; they are rooted in history but belong to this time and place. Grave of Grave does not aim to nostalgically reconstruct the past or advocate for the preservation of every remnant; instead, it seeks to capture those intense emotions when people feel they are directly facing the past, revealing the tension between transience and continuity, destruction and survival, disappearance and visibility. Reflecting on the past allows us to pursue forward-looking inquiries. Life and death are cyclical, and under the passage of time, eternity is difficult to grasp; ultimately, we are all mere passersby in history.

傅柯（Michel Foucault）在1967年提出城市空間中「異域」（Hétérotopie）的概念，其中墳場屬異域之一：墳場是在個人生命終止後才開始運作的空間，與日常和傳統的時間斷裂，在不斷分解、消失間獲得近似的永恆。[2] 作品的陳列透過歷史場域的保存與有形標誌，使觀者感知地方記憶，在展覽場地重構墳場「異域」與紀念的場域。如果廢墟是歷史的物質性遺存，歷史痕跡消逝後的虛空便是一場悼念、一個主觀想像、一座無形的紀念碑佇立。殘碑被修補成一個個白色立方體，修補的部分形同虛空。它指示了過去，而不再現過去。虛空被想像成一個空廓的曠野，裡面凝結著歷史記憶的不是荒廢建築或衰敗之物，而是一個特殊的、可感知的「現場」（site），它被觀者賦予一種「主觀的實在」（subjective reality）。[3] 在此可借用藝術史學家巫鴻對「虛空」之詮釋：「……激發情思的是觀者對這個空間的記憶和領悟，而非可視、可見的外部特徵……面對著歷史的消磨所留下的沈默虛空，觀者感到自己直面往昔，與它絲絲相連，卻又無望地與它分離。」[4] 正是人對「空」的這種凝視引發了對往昔的哀傷，觀眾意識到自己正面對一個無名的往昔，過客的悲傷正是由直接面對歷史而引起的。

作品以碑為題，卻又可以以「反紀念碑」（counter-monument）的理念來理解。傳統意義上的紀念碑一般指涉由權威樹立，以宣揚官方光榮歷史或將政治理念合法化，又或紀念大浩劫（holocaust）和戰爭犧牲者的建築。[5] 為顛覆權威與不公的集體記憶，反紀念碑成為二戰後德國公共藝術的一大類別。屬於個人的墓碑不屬於傳統意義上的紀念碑，卻與紀念碑面臨同一困局。人將應該記憶的歷史外化在碑上，而沒有內化在人心中；記憶的責任被推給了石頭，碑提醒過去的功能被懸置。立碑成為一種自我安慰，人想在世間留下什麼，卻始終沒能真正留下。遺忘令記憶的責任被轉交給石頭，繼而邁向毀滅。「反紀念碑」的作品不是要成為人們的撫慰，反而希望抓住一些特定時刻中，人們感到自己直面往昔的那種震撼情感，可以是一點疑惑、一點恐懼、一點敬畏、一點哀傷。與過去有了情感上的連結，歷史不再僅是冰冷的石頭與文字，而將被活化成記憶。這是一項記憶工事（Erinnerungsarbeit; Memory Work），期待能展開妥善地記憶過去之過程，它不僅涉及將過去紀念碑化的過程，更著重過去對現在的影響；它並不只希望流傳來自過去的物質，而更必須善盡道德責任，保持對那些曾經在此卻不復存在的不同群體負有債務之感，將記憶的責任從石頭上卸下來，從新植入活人心中。[6]

主流歷史企圖周全、權威，實際卻掛一漏萬。只有無數微觀歷史，才可以構成更宏觀的視野。殘碑除了是一個人的遺物，也是一個世代的遺物：它們是一個消逝世代的碎片，有意或無意地從原始的語境中割裂開來，成為當代文化的一部分，遺物因此同時具有過去性與當下性，它植根於過去，但又屬於此時此地。[7] 作品不在於懷古、重構過去，或呼籲保育所有來自過去的一切，而是希望抓住一些特定時刻中，人們感到自己直面往昔的那種強烈情感，展現「轉瞬即逝與綿綿不絕、毀滅與存活、消逝與可視可見之間的張力。」[8] 觀乎過往，可讓我們具備前瞻式的尋求。生與滅無往不復，終究是循環，在時間下難盼永恆，我們都只能是歷史的過客。

[1] 高添強：〈香港墳場發展史略：1841-1950〉，載張燦輝、梁美儀合編：《凝視死亡——死與人間的多元省思》，香港：中文大學出版社，2005，頁228。

[2] 梁美儀：〈香港墳場：城市空間的「異域」〉，載張燦輝、梁美儀合編：《凝視死亡——死與人間的多元省思》，香港：中文大學出版社，2005，頁258。

[3] 巫鴻：〈廢墟的內化：傳統中國文化中對「往昔」的視覺感受和審美〉，載巫鴻著，肖鐵譯，《廢墟的故事：中國美術和視覺文化中的「在場」和「缺席」》，上海：上海人民出版社，2017，頁24。

[4] 同上註，頁28。

[5] 黃慕怡：《遺忘的權利：從反紀念碑的記憶工事探討〈歐洲猶太人受難者紀念碑〉》（國立臺灣師範大學美術學系博士班美術理論組（西方美術史）博士論文，中華民國一〇八年八月），頁4。

[6] 同上註，頁5。保羅．利科（Paul Ricœur）著，李彥岑、陳穎譯，《記憶，歷史，遺忘》，上海：華東師範大學出版社，2018，頁112。

[7] 巫鴻：〈廢墟的內化：傳統中國文化中對「往昔」的視覺感受和審美〉，載巫鴻著，肖鐵譯，《廢墟的故事：中國美術和視覺文化中的「在場」和「缺席」》，上海：上海人民出版社，2017，頁69。

[8] Hans Frankel, The Flowering Plum and the Palace Lady, p109-110. 載巫鴻：〈廢墟的內化：傳統中國文化中對「往昔」的視覺感受和審美〉，載巫鴻著，肖鐵譯，《廢墟的故事：中國美術和視覺文化中的「在場」和「缺席」》，上海：上海人民出版社，2017，頁33。