【文化數據Cultural Data｜講座詳記】文化數據? Cultural data?

講者 Speaker：施永德 DJ Hatfield

今天要講的部分其實讓我有點困惑，如果是文化數據之外的主題，或許我會談很多自身聲音工作的創作，但因為今天的主題是文化數據，所以會讓我轉向比較學術性的層面。

我本身的專業是文化人類學，實際上我要談的問題是，到底文化數據是什麼意思？當我聽到這個詞，會覺得文化數據其實是相互矛盾的關係。我不太清楚文化數據的原因是，多數談論數據或data時，是有一些形式的，也是比較普及、有流動性的，因此可以做很多比較和批判。但就我所知，文化是個處理族群跟族群之間的理論，也是處理所謂文化差距的理論。所以文化跟數據其實很不一樣，如果相互比較的話，文化大部分的定義以質為主，並且蘊含某種文化判斷，或至少文化本身是一種價值的結構。我們大部分探討的問題是文化的在地性，我們會覺得台東跟台北的文化是很不一樣的，因此才有文化衝擊。所以這方面，我一直覺得很奇怪，數據有文化嗎？

我認為其實數據確實有文化，但是這種文化是在數據構造背後的，它來自某一事件，我們需要通過這事件才會架構出有流動性和普及的用途，以及價值判斷的數據，但是到底是誰可以做數據，而且到底是誰的知識有辦法成為數據，它背後是不是有一種殖民的結構？那所以我要探討的問題是，如果看到數據，有沒有辦法在數據上再想一些去殖民的事件。「數據其實是一種規模構造的過程」，意思是數據是比較宏觀的，所以有所謂規模構造，一般在英文來說，我們會說它是「project of scale」，本身是在構造某一種規模，例如用數據構造一個國家的資訊或國際的資訊，但實際上並不是每一個族群都有這種規模構造的過程。

所以實際上在某些方面，不同族群有的方式去做比較宏觀，或能夠反應國際、國家主流與事件的方法。但是我們會覺得這些方法太在地，好像不是數據，但它說不定是。我想講的內容是，數據來自某一種觀察的習慣，這些觀察的習慣是在某一個事件的共同體學到的，但在這些觀察習慣後，我們還需要一些協調的媒介以及指標的架構，才能讓我們的知識從非常在地、非常小的規模，擴展到比較大的規模。其實在學習一樣事情時，就需要不同的觀察習慣，這些觀察習慣會連結到不同的境界、場面，例如我們可以通過日常撿海膽的行為發現一些事，可能因為海膽越來越少，越來越難找，魚越來越難打，發現全球暖化或污染問題。所以實際上在部落有一種文化數據是來自我們日常生活事件的數據。

這聲音會讓你想到什麼場面。有人說是遊樂園，但是我相信在場很多朋友們可能會想到不一樣的東西。這聲音在美國是屬於我們的童年回憶，所以當我第一次來到台灣聽到很類似的聲音，並且跟我的室友說：哇！今天很熱，如果吃到冰淇淋有多好，冰淇淋車要來了。這時他們是以奇怪的眼神看我的。但是第二天又聽到這個聲音時，我室友跟我說：要去吃冰淇淋嗎，是冰淇淋車來了。結果我以為的冰淇淋車，事實上是垃圾車。我覺得這例子比較容易消化，也就是說，我們因為來自不同文化而有不同詮釋，而數據也是來自某種文化。所以我要問是，數據要我們去殖民（decolonize）。

這圖片是全台灣媽祖廟的分佈圖，我很好奇既然有這麼多媽祖廟，那它的歷史是怎麼樣的。在166年時，媽祖廟還沒有那麼多，應該只有兩三座，因為這時候是華人開始殖民台灣的時間；直到1800年，分布區域已經開始拓展到宜蘭；1900年左右，台東與恆春都能看到媽祖廟。實際上台東的媽祖廟很特別，它是剛好在牡丹社事件跟大港口事件以後所蓋的，這一片是華人最後殖民的地方，也是最後拉進大清帝國的一小片土地。我們平時看這種數據可能會覺得是宗教歷史、開墾歷史，那就是所謂的articulation，就是一個連接或是訴說的方式，因為articulation這個字很奇怪，articulate是能清楚表達的意思，但articulation是連結、連貫在一起的意思。從我們觀察的東西到轉變成數據，其實也是存在articulation的成分，如何連接、如何訴說。所以我相信大部分的人會覺得，媽祖廟在台的分布，可能只是一種開墾數據、歷史數據、虔誠的數據、宗教的數據等等，但是你很難想到，在台東，這就是殖民的數據。

其實不要只說台灣沒有看到數據，美國最近有一個很嚴重的問題，年輕人會拿槍到學校掃射，每一次掃射，民眾就會有會反映槍枝過多、太容易取得槍械等等，但因為新聞的頻率與循環，讓我們很快就會忘記，直到下一次掃射。但在槍枝與殺人案層面其實有很多明顯的數據，如果我們只看一些已開發國家的數據，會發現如果某個國家普片擁有私人槍枝，那麼有一半的殺人案，包括自殺案是使用槍枝來犯案的，就是所謂positive correlation（正相關），這種數據超級明顯。在澳洲，有一段時間，很多人用槍枝自殺，當他們看到這些數據後就決定需要管制槍枝。所以有一個法令是，如果自願把槍枝還給政府，政府會幫你們收。當時因為已經達到共識，大部分的人都願意執行，執行之後發現自殺率開始下降，因為用槍實在太簡單了。我們看到這種數據會認為結果很明顯，但奇怪的是，在美國有某種文化是讓我們不看到這種數據的。所以數據除了是文化所產生的，但其實很多數據也因為文化而讓大家看不到。我覺得今天討論到的河川問題也是如此，台北市淡水河是因為牆讓我們看不到，就算羅大佑在1986年唱的超級市民，一直在唱淡水河有那麼多漂浮物，但是因為有牆隔絕而讓我們看不到，就沒有理會河川汙染的數據，我覺得美國最近就是這樣。

前面其實是在講文化跟數據之間的關係，但是我覺得其實在空總有某一種數據，但我們可能沒注意到它，因為他用的是我們不習慣看的指標。我不知道有多少人去過實驗建築區，那邊有兩棵樹，其中一棵南洋樹，另一棵是波羅蜜，但我不說它是波羅蜜，而是Pacilo。這種樹在台北好像不多，但是這種組合在東部是非常常見的。由麵包樹、波羅蜜、檳榔樹、芒果樹、龍眼樹做組合，甚至若要做考古學，我們可以由看到這種組合，得知哪裡曾經有人居住過。現在有些人家也可能會種，因為這些樹非常有用。所以這讓我很好奇，為什麼在空總的宿舍中，剛好中庭裡會有這種組合？都蘭部落跟新埔部落曾經有人在這邊服務過，他們說在空總服務的時候確實有那棵樹，當時好像是有一位faki (指男性的前輩)在那邊種的，年代不詳。但當你看到它的時候，會有一個很特別的感覺，只要用心，你會感覺到在殖民政府的土地上，有一棵讓身在異鄉時，不那麼想家或者更想家的樹。所以在某方面，這兩棵樹對我來說，讓我感覺到其實有很多歷史是我們沒有注意到的，因為我們可能會覺得空總就是中華民國空軍的總部，就是一個外來殖民政權的空間（對不起，因為我是在台東，我會用一個外來的稱呼來表示），是一個禁忌的空間，它不屬於民眾。但是因為有人在這邊種這棵樹，讓我們想起早期有多少原住民在這邊服務，以及要怎麼了解原住民的歷史和各種矛盾的情懷。那到底空總之於原住民歷史和原住民在空總的歷史，其中的定位是什麼，我們要如何探討這些歷史？因為在部落的日常事件跟我們觀察的習慣，所以說不定這棵樹可以連結到不同的歷史。

我對自己的自我認同是，我是一個有時候玩聲音工作、聲音藝術的人類學家，在以藝術處理不同文化與文化數據問題的層面。我講最近的一個Project，我在每天凌晨兩三點鐘會到秀姑巒溪的出海口，去撈吻仔魚，只要月亮對、水流對，就會下去撈吻仔魚。我們用的工具是三角網，一方面它是一個傳統生存技能和工具，但另一方面，這些行為也是社交、心理醫療、集體工作、生產及構造我們社會的重要事件。所以我一方面是在做秀姑巒溪的聲音地圖，從出海口一直到瑞穗一帶已經開始做，而另外一方面則是探討出海口在秀姑巒溪阿美族的生活中是什麼角色，這種環境對他們的社會、文化認知來說，其實是非常重要的。在聲音工作方面，其實就是錄水下和水上的聲音，以及跟朋友互動的聲音，有些是類似採訪錄，有些是一邊工作一邊互動的聲音。在呈現的方面，會發現三角網跟普通看到的三角網完全不一樣，因為網袋太長，有十米，但其實裡面塞滿漂浮物跟垃圾，一直到這邊才塞滿土，所以除了聲音外，還有戶外的呈現。

我們可能沒辦法看到某一個媒介或文化，因為那是我們日常生活中的東西，雖然說需要通過文化或媒介，接觸到他人和大自然，但是我們幾乎沒有注意到它，我們確實看不到，所以我在錄音方面也做了一個奇怪的遊戲。這是用水下麥克風錄製聲音，但是它有受到某一種干擾，因為我為了讓麥克風不要流走，需要用浮標固定著，當我用浮標固定的時候，就會聽到魚線的聲音，所以後面”滋滋滋滋”的聲音是魚線的聲音。剛開始我覺得這絕對是失敗的，但它後來變成這作品裡面的一個圖像。要感覺到這個媒介的存在，其實我需要通過浮標跟魚線，才能讓你聽到水流有多急，它是一個媒介，也就是說判斷水流湍急與否的來源是來自魚線的聲音，而不是水聲。這樣的話，我們是否能更加注意到數據其實有一個媒介的結構，背後也有一種由文化所產生觀察習慣的事件。我覺得這件作品是要讓我們看到生存技能不只是生存技能，也是生命的來源，它就是我們的生活，而不只是一個工具。但另外一方面，我想強調我們的生活中其實需要這些媒介與文化，這樣才能更進一步呈現文化數據的差異，並將數據「去殖民」，這樣的做法可能是我們的第一步，謝謝。

http://djhatfield.com/

https://taiwansoundscapes.org/about-dj-hatfield/

The subject today confuses me at the beginning. What does ‘cultural data’ mean? When I learn this term, I’d think of how culture and data are contradicted. Most of the time when we are discussing data, there’s a certain form – a more popular, fluid form with which is easier to compare and critique. However, to my knowledge, culture is a theory that we use to deal with between groups – a so-called theory to process cultural difference. That is why culture and data are two immensely different things: if we are to compare the two, culture defines a quantity, a quantity that also possesses some cultural determination or a least it’s essentially a value structure. The problem we usually discuss cultural locality – we would think that the culture in Taitung is a lot different than the culture in Taipei, ergo the culture shock. That is why I thought of this as strange – is data cultural?

I believe data is cultural, but it comes from the back of data structure, a sort of event. We need to go through this to construct its employment with fluidity and popularity, and the value determined data. However, who makes the data, and whose knowledge has the right to become data? Is there a structure of colonization behind it? That's why my question of discussion will be how to think of problems of decolonization on data when we see data.

Data comes from a habit of observing, and the observing comes from the symbiosis of some events, but after the observing, we need some media to mediate and a paradigm structure tofollow, to let our knowledge expanding through local, tiny scope to more significant scope. When learning something, it needs different habits of observing, and these habits will connect to various extents, latitudes. Such as things we would discover to everyday picking of sea urchins. We might find out the problem of global warming or pollution due to sea urchins are harder to find; fish is harder to catch. So actually, there’s a kind of cultural data comes from things happened in our day to day life.

What does this sound make you think of? This sound is my childhood memory in America, so when I first came here and heard something familiar, I told my roommates: “Wow, it’s so hot today! Wouldn’t it be nice to eat some ice cream?” They then looked at me with this odd look. Then came the second day with the same sound, I told my roommates: “Want to get some ice cream? The ice cream truck is here.” It turned out. My so-called ice cream truck was a garbage truck. I believe it’s easier to digest with this example, and that means the interpretation goes differently in different culture; hence data also comes from a particular culture.

I am curious the many Mazu Temples in Taiwan and what their histories are? When Chinese People started to colonize Taiwan, there weren’t so may Mazu Temples, probably only two to three temples. Until in the 1800s, their migrated area expanded to Yilan, and in the 1900s, Taitung and Henchun are seen with Mazu Temple. In truth, the Mazu Temple in Taitung is pretty unique – It was built after Mudan Incident and Cepo, the last place that was colonized by Chinese people and the last small piece of land to bring in Qing Dynasty. Usually, when we see this type of data, it'd put us directly into the connection with religion and historical reclamation, and that's where the “mode of articulation” come into place, a way to connect, to narrate. The word “articulate” is strange. Articulate means “express clearly”, but articulation also means “connect and associate.” From what we had observed to turn into data, it is also a part of articulation – how to connect, how to put into words. I believe most of you would think that the existence of Mazu Temples is just a part of the data on reclamation, history or religion or faith, but maybe it’s hard also to relate this to simply a colonized data in Taitung.

Don’t just say that Taiwanese people don’t see data. There is recently a severe problem in the US, where young people do gun shooting in school, and whenever this happened, people would start to reflect on how there are too many guns and the access of guns is too easy. However, because of the news cycle and circulation of the media, we forget quickly. There area lot of precise data of guns and murders, such as if some country universally owns guns, then half of the killings, including suicides were carried out with weapons – this is the so-called positive correlation, a kind of prominent data. For example in Australia, there was a time when people committed suicide using guns, and when they saw the data (of the percentage how many people were using weapons to commit suicide), they started to push a new law to safekeeping the guns for those who hand them over self-willingly. At the time, most people were willing to do it, and the suicide rate started to go down after that. The result is evident to us when we look at this kind of data, but what’s strange is how a particular culture in the US doesn't show us the data. That's why not only data is generated by culture but covered by some to stop people from knowing either.

I always feel that there’s some data that we didn’t notice in TAF. There are two trees in the experimental architecture space at the A dormitory, one’s Norfolk Island Pine, and the other is a jackfruit tree, though I don’t call it jackfruit but Pacilo. There isn’t many this kind of tree in Taipei, but the combination of the breadfruit tree, jackfruit tree, betel nut tree, mango tree, and longan tree is common in eastern Taiwan. If we are doing archaeological research, we can even know who has lived here before by this combination. So I’m curious that how come there’s this combination in TAF? I have asked many people and found people from Atolan Tribe and Xinpu Tribe who have served here. They said that when they were here, these trees were there, and perhaps were planted by a faki (elder male). Therefore when you are looking at the trees, you’ll feel like that even you are on a colonized land, and there’s a tree that makes people away from their home feel more or less homesick. These two trees give me a feeling of how there is more history that we hadn’t noticed before because we might think that TAF is just a headquarter for Taiwan Air Force, a space that came from a foreign regime and it doesn’t belong to the residents. However, because someone planted the trees here and that makes us think how many indigenous people served here and how to understand the contradicted feeling of indigenous history. What exactly was the position that’s lying between indigenous history and the history of indigenous people in TAF? How do we investigate these histories? By noticing the day-to-day happenings and our habit of observing, the trees connect us to different histories.

My identity for myself is an anthropologist who also dabbles in sound art. I implement art in different culture and cultural data. We need the culture of media to be close to other people or nature, but we hardly even notice it. I took the underwater microphone to record sounds, but because I didn't want my microphone to float away, I used buoy and fishing thread to tie it down, and the soundbite came out with ‘tzu tzu tzu tzu’ sound that made by the fishing thread. I thought this was a failure at first, but then it became the image of sound. I want the audience to feel the media and know that I have to make this through the help of buoy and fishing thread. It’s a media, what you are hearing isn't the sound of the water but a knowing through the fishing thread to realize how the water was rapid. Can we pay more attention to how there's a media structure behind data, an event that occurs by the culture of the habit of observing? In my opinion, this work is to let people see a living skill is not just a living skill but it’s the beginning of life and not just a tool. On the other hand, though, I want to stress that we need media and culture as such to present the difference between cultural data with a step forward, to decolonize the data, and maybe this will be our first step to do so.

http://djhatfield.com/

https://taiwansoundscapes.org/about-dj-hatfield/