思瑟 桃勒絲

LZH： Since I believe people have no idea about your work in China， I will ask you some basic questions. How would you describe yourself？ As an artist？

ST： I call myself a professional ‘in-betweener’， because the sense of smell is universal and there is a world full of smells， and there’s a whole world to teach how to smell. Since I work all over the place， it’s hard to limit it to just… one… you know， niche， or a small niche category like art or creativity…. all the other things I do are as important as what I do in a creative context– so my most preferred professional title would be， a professional in-betweener.

LZH： That’s cool， because you work a lot on yourself， on your own sense of smell； and you also work on other peoples’ sense of fear. So what do you think of this？ I mean， as an artist， in a way you go in one direction - into the direction of discovering yourself - but in other ways you go another direction…

ST： I don’t see myself as an artist， to get back to where we started， but rather as a curious human being. As long as there’re footsteps on the moon， the sky isn’t the limit for curiosity.

One of my main projects has been to look into smell molecules at all levels： in relation to the human body； and， on a much bigger scale， in cities， like a microcosm of humanity， you know. And the whole oeuvre of my research on the human body started off with myself， asking “who am I beyond the way I look？”

I have a smell ID as unique as my fingerprints， so why don’t I know about it？ Why don’t I appreciate it？ And， what if I started to use that as my kind of image to the world？ You know， instead of sending out appearances of visual images.

So I started to collect my own smell， with the help of advanced technology， and then break down my smell ID to several molecules - as much as I could with the tools I had at my disposal. And with that result， the outcome of that analysis， I reproduced my own body smell with the help of chemical components… As you know I have a laboratory containing some 3000 chemical components， with which I try to reproduce the smells that surround me， smells that are out there in the world I’m participating in.

And then the second part of that body project， the “body smell-scape” project， was that I got commissioned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2004-6 to investigate the sense capacities of new technology. In my work， as you know， the technology is not so much in the result， but rather in the process： the way I work， the way I obtain my smells， the way I reproduce my smell， is where high-tech is important. Nevertheless， the way I presents the results of my work is also pretty advanced technology - but it’s not technology in our usual definition. It’s like invisible technology… the technology I used to put replicated sweat on to was very complicated， for example.

Anyway， the MIT project was interested in seeing if I could smell that people were anxious. And this was during the Bush government， when the whole notion of terrorism was all over the US press， and everybody was anxious and paranoid. Whatever border you crossed， these were the issues. So I worked with 21 men that suffered a serious phobia towards other human beings – there were different reasons， some racial， but all kinds of sophisticated， complicated reasons， etc. These patients were provided by several psychiatrists and psychologists all over the world， from China to California， and from Norway to South Africa.

The reason I chose men in this project was not because of statistical reasons， but simply because men sweat more， and I was keen to get results as quickly as possible， so this project was dedicated more or less to men. So these 21 men wore a device of mine， that collected their body sweat whenever they had an attack of fear. The device would send me the information overnight， which I would analyse and then replicate with chemical components， so in the end you had reproduced sweat from these anxious men.

Then I contained this fluid， reproduced sweat， with the nanotechnology called micro-encapsulation. This allows smell to be packed in nano-units， and I developed a binding substance that allowed me to connect an adhesive to the binder. So I was able to put it onto surfaces， let’s say a wall， or I could print it on paper. In presenting of the fear project， the wall became metaphorical to skin： so you could touch a person’s skin - that is， the wall - and you released the person’s sweat. This is how I used that medium to show my invisible message.

LZH： I think that’s a visible message. You know， a lot of time when we talk about human beings as individuals， we imply their skin color， their wearing a certain kind of dress， their behaviour - but some of these are constructed by society， so it’s not really“you”.

I think it’s very important nowadays that we know that we have particular DNA， and we have particular smells： we have something that’s not transferable and can’t be copied， and I think that’s something very interesting…

ST： I mean， in most parts of the world - I’m not so sure about how it is in China - but in most parts of the world we are born to interact around the place with our hands， and so we communicate our smells to society with perfume ads. The marketing made use of whatever our physiology left behind， and smell is never an issue in terms of everyday conversation. We cover up our body， our smell， and we are covering up every smell in our surroundings： we sanitise， we deodorise， we sterilise everything.. Because we think we protect ourselves like this. But we are reducing so much information， by removing so much information which I think exists in smells. Smell provides you with information that you don’t see， but nevertheless it’s very important information in context.

LZH： If we are too much blended into this multi-layered information， smell， or whatever， by living in society， that also triggers issues， these collective issues today： being involved in that society， and being yourself.

ST： The fact is， the metabolism or the body’s hardware - I call the senses the “software” -they are working independently of all this.

The tricky thing is that some of the processing happens consciously， and some happens unconsciously. In the case of the nose， this process happens unconsciously in most humans， but also… one fact here， which is very， very important， is that the nose knows everything long before the eyes ever start to process. But since these processes happen subconsciously， we’re not aware of what the nose is finding out， you know.

In my case， that’s different， because I decided to be conscious when I smell， so I can program my brain to say： “No， the nose is doing a job and the eyes are relaxing”， “No， now the nose and eyes are doing the processing， and ears are relaxing.” So I started to use my senses like… like on the computer I use different kinds of software for different purposes. And that is so amazing， it reveals qualities in life I never knew existed.

What it does， is that it brings back the whole playfulness which I think gets lost when we grow up， you know what I mean -this ability to understand the world from the point of view of play， and game， and joy… it has somehow become lost in all the serious issues we are confronted with everyday.

By bringing back the senses to where they’re supposed to be， in the beginning， one gets some amazing qualities back on track， you know.

LZH： You also work with the smell of the kitchen， and the smell of WWI， and the smell of someone’s mouth. For me that’s also very extreme， it’s a very personal kind of experience in the public area， especially when it’s related to culture and art. So what is really being triggered there？ People barely see things， but they do smell and react…what kind of reactions do people have when you showcase yourself？

ST： With smell people will react immediately， whereas with images， you go to rendering process in a part of your brain…oh， do I know this？ Is this familiar？ Have I seen it？ Do I like it？ Do I not？ And then you have the subconscious and you have a kind of emotional attachment. With smell you immediately think something， you are like - oh！ Got the touch -be it positive or negative. I took to be free in my research- I might have a Phd in chemistry， at the end of the day I might become a scientist， but， because smell is so much about life， breathing is my topic， I thought “it’s perverse to sit in a white square lab and do all the experiments with mice and rats”.

So， since at the end of the day， what I’m concerned with is humanity and life， I decided to use the creative world as my platform to show my research and to ask my questions. And by doing that， I’ve gained the freedom of subjectivity. In science， you play as “we” and you have to be objective： you write the paper， you hope somebody publishes your paper， and you go on and on… while in my case， I use myself to ask questions.

Thus， my research is placed in the context of art and design： generally speaking， the“creative world”， the platform of creativity， because nobody asks what I study as long as I deliver. And I have the right to be subjective， and have the right to ask some questions that I would never ask in science. But in this case I ask as Sissel， but not as “we”.

So that’s it， I’ve always been trying things out on myself before I try it out on somebody else.

LZH： Do you consider yourself like - nowadays a very popular “identity” - an activist？

ST： No， I characterise myself as a sophisticated human being…

LZH： So you participate in the society in a very different way？

ST： Yes， I engage in society. I am not an activist at all， I am not a provocateur in terms of the definition of provocation. I’m provoking with my work yes， but that’s not for the purposes of provocation to make …disturbance. It is happening anyway， but that is not the main intention.

LZH： I understand your way is very scientific： you do a lot of research， you go to many places.

ST： The process is the product. The process is the most important part of my work： what you’ll see， what you hear， or what you read about…is just a long journey. My final conclusion is just a micro statement compared to all the materials which are there. So bits and bytes drop here and there， some in the creative world， science world， commercial world…the main research， which has to do with the nose and chemistry，and smell， is endless. It’s like a train that will never stop - you might stop to get petrol or food， but it goes on and on and on…

LZH： Do you consider yourself more …subjectively working or objectively working？

ST： I can only be subjective， and I decided to take that position. Otherwise I would have been a hardcore scientist， and super objective. In the subject of science you are not allowed to be subjective at all： you personally might ask a question， but you have to operate and to augment the research， not only for your own point of looking， but more generally. Yeah - that’s what science is.

Art just has to be subjective， and I need that freedom. Because there’re so many unanswered questions， where the is nose is concerned. And I want to answer them by doing， and having that freedom that the creative world provides me with.

LZH： I remember very strongly in， about 2008， when we showed your work， in MUDAC， And I remember that a lot of people got offended immediately， and they were actually people who work in the field of art. So I was quite surprised because I think normally people give each other a kind of space， a kind of understanding， and somehow in the art world， there is no such…“compromise”.

ST： The art world is very stereotypical！ Maybe it has changed now…that was 2006， one was in 2008.. it’s a long time ago， the world has become a little more tolerant since then and it goes very quickly. I’m becoming a bit more famous so people know who I am， but， still… I had a big， big project in the Museum of Contemporary Art in Tokyo， so they invited me to do smell work. They knew my work， and I was happy to participate. I went to Tokyo， and after two days， they started to complain：

“Oh Ms Tolaas， it smells in your room.”“You must be kidding… you think I came across half the world to produce a work that doesn’t smell when my work really is about smell？ Why did you invite me？“Oh yes， but I think we have to give people masks to enter your room…”“I’m sorry？”

Yeah， there were all these issues… to make a long story short， I went back to Berlin， and after two weeks， they called me and said：“Ah Ms Tolaas， your room is smelly， it’s still smelly.” I said， “Ok， you call the guy who next to me， he had a big， big screen with thousands and millions of pixels， do you call him to say there’s too much to look at？” and I never heard back from them.

It’s not only about the administration or the curators， it’s also the institutions that are not updated enough for the time they’re operating in. You’re dealing with a lot of old fashioned institutions： “Art is to look at， art is maybe to hear but you have to be silent， you have to have headphones， you should this and that， you shouldn’t touch art” …you know all this conservative stuff！

S o i f y o u a r e s o courageous to invite someone like me， at least you have to prepare the institution for what is coming！ But most of these institutions in the art world， they are not able to do that， for whatever reason.

L Z H ： I t h i n k that’s a very i n t e r e s t i n g question， the point you raised. As I understand， there are a lot of institutions- f r o m m y p o i n t o f view – that are supposed to be standing on a position of neutrality – making a bridge for art and truth to the audience， and bringing points from the audience back to art so that people can find ground for communication. But nowadays there are so many questions and“obligations” from the institutions… they do fulfill a lot but they become censors.

I had a similar experience in England， in 2009， people from the institution thought the art presented was too brutal， too bloody， too much killing… we always have to confront this kind of situation and find our way out. As you said， there’s more tolerance in this， but that triggers the issues in the art system - the system needs to change， but how are we going to change it？ I’m also deeply impressed by the way you’re telling me： “Let’s change the world”. Let’s say， “l(fā)et’s change the system”， but how can we do it？

ST： You have to make your own system. It’s tough to change the existing one， so you make your own - that’s one part of the solution - you know， otherwise it will take too much time or cost too much money – there are enough people around who are willing to do that. In the general art world， it’s so commercial - it’s all about … it’s becoming like the new IT bag. All the other…amazing art and creativity going on， it’s hard to have a chance to survive in that commercial context.

So I mean， it depends what you want to do. If you want to go on with an ambitious project and to put it in huge institutions like museums， it’s always problematic. I think in general， the MoMa is not as important as it has been， but they still use the argument： “Oh we don’t have any money， but you should be happy to be exhibited at MoMA.” That destroyed one of my most important pieces- the smellscape in Berlin， at MoMA， which they had for free. It is devastating， but that’s exactly what’s happening…they are not prepared for the smell.

Some of the audience wanted to smell， and the work fell down and got destroyed. MoMa said “You should be happy to be at MoMa”， I mean， be happy to be destroyed at MoMA？

It’s very often the case. More and more young people started to do their own presentations， their own way of showing their interest and their work， so I don’t see that as a problem. I am not so familiar with how it is in China but I have a feeling that more and more alternate situations are popping up. People you introduced me to - they are much more tolerant and much more creative and curious about how to present what for which kind of purpose， not just for the mainstream… I think it’s changing. I always find a way， somehow it’s strange， and I never really care so much.

LZH： I think it’s important， we can’t just tie ourselves up. We always have to reach the general public and communicate with other people. What you do with the kids？ And to bring your work into the context of Olympics…it’s always reaching to and bridging a much broader public.

ST： Also most of all， my works concern children. I mean， generally， people are reactive： like I said before， they react to smell so quickly， and a lot of people to have fun. My experience is， wherever I do workshops with smells， be it for kindergartens， 6-12， or Mercedez CEOs， nobody leaves the lab without a big smile on their face.

The more extreme the smells are， the more fun people have. And that tells it all， having people getting upset about my work is because it’s so direct that sometimes people react immediately. If you get upset about a picture， they can at least leave the room and get reactive on the street. In my case they are reacting immediately， ‘cos smell is so quick. And that， I think， is a favour of smell， getting it out and moving on.

LZH： I think your works… it doesn’t matter what kind of smell it is， it could be soap or cheese， but people do share it with their original human taste or sensors.

ST： Yes， it’s touching， and smell is emotional. Also people are really … since smell is so much related to one’s personal history， it reminds you of things： it triggers memory， it triggers the past - and these are qualities， these can be things - in both ways quality -that disturb or make you happy.

When I showed my smell project in Korea， I had very old man who was crying in front of the wall…and my translator told me that last time he smelt human sweat was during the Japanese-Korean war， and he was so touched by the piece. His grandson asked me， “Sissel， could you send my great-grandfather a small bottle of this sweat？ He would be very， very happy.” And I did it， and I got this very amazing email back about how much his great-grandfather liked it. You know， these are small moments when you think “mission accomplished”.

Like， in MIT， one woman was passing by the wall， everyday on the way to work. And she was so obsessed by the scent， she was kissing the wall every morning for 3 months.

So sometimes the wall had red lipstick， some times it had violet or pink， and I spoke to her， and she said： “every time I stood in front of this guy （the abstract， invisible wall）， he’s calling.” So she got a kind of relationship to this “person”. And you had other people who got disgusted - “oh， this is awful！ Body sweat！”

Again， because we have no clue， we don’t have a chance to find out what the smell is. Especially in the US， where “smell” is kind of taboo， and often something to be too aware of. You have to deodorise everything. I mean…since my works are mostly contextual and site-specific， and sometimes some works travel and expand， or they’re displayed differently due to site conditions， it’s very very interesting to see where the work has been found or where I conduct my research. It’s very different if I make a work travel. LZH： You do your work in a very long time process， what’s y o u r m e t h o d behind it？ And w h a t m a k e s your interest continue with t h i s k i n d o f research？ ST： Since I use scientific models or methodology to find the result， I’m not just sitting around and doing abstract painting， or using metaphorical， abstract smells. So I can’t be sitting around and mixing smells， and saying：“Oh this is the sea…”“This is Berlin..” - that would be easy. I really pay lots of attention to the reality that I am in， and try to go beyond the surface with scientific tools to capture and make an image of the invisible… I make an image of the invisible， I analyse the invisible， and I reproduce the invisible. That’s a long process， and primarily the long process is because nobody has done it. I need to find possibilities to do this， and find sponsors who would help me to do it. It’s a lot of work to break down smells into thousands of chemical components - I mean， who want to do that for free？

For me it’s very important to do it like that and that’s the way I work. Sometimes a process can take a month， sometimes 2 weeks， sometimes 5 years…and with the city smellscape projects， they always took longer， because the cities were far away and I couldn’t stay there continuously…Also because I’m after smells that are there permanently， and to really assure yourself that it’s “permanent”， you have to visit the smell at different times of the day， different times of the year…it’s not just “grab something and to pretend that this is the case”.

I really try to precise， even from a subjective perspective. Sometime it’s long， sometimes it’s short， all depends. After all these years， I’ve slowly built up some reputation and collaborations， with amazing companies that facilitate me to work quick and efficiently， to get things done in speeds that I was dreaming about 10 years ago. We are doing Istanbul and I have 2.5 months： I’m supposed to find neighbourhoods， smells， in a month.

The company who supports me set up a lab in Tel Aviv， in the Middle East， to facilitate me to do fundamental research in a very complicated situation. These are qualities， and improvements of my working conditions - which are amazing.

Working in Detroit or Kansas City for 6 years is also down to that： I didn’t have time to go every month， it’s far away， and funding it… I wouldn’t say that to invite Sissel you need 6 years of planning. No， I can do it in a week. .if you have a million I’ll do it in a day， hahaha. I’ll turn the world upside down.

But the problem is…no， not the problem... I’ve been very keen on my life， and I want to contribute a better quality of life for everyone. That’s been the main drive of what I do， and I think about how I can achieve it， make people wake up， challenge people to use their bodies and senses in a different way， a more sophisticated way， or “proper”way. It’s not always related with money.

So I am now starting to see an opportunity to turn some of these amazing research works into commercial applications. To earn some fundamental money， that’s what I’m starting to do and that’s a completely direction for me. And it opens up completely new ways that I will approach my knowledge for different displays， in different institutions and locations， wherever the work is going to be shown.

I’ve worked with several hardwares and softwares， I’ve been making a lot of analog tools and this is fantastic. I never thought I would do it， I thought I was against the commercial world， but now the world is ready， and that’s what I say…I think the time is right now. I never had so m u c h r e q u e s t s i n m y l i f e a s m u c h a s I h a d i n l a s t a couple months. It’s cool.

I think we can start to change the world now， get ready to start， start in China.

LZH： We can do that， China is definitely the place for you.

ST： The world is divided， for me it’s not a negative thing. However， in the Western part of that world， including US， people are so spoiled， they just want to consume， and there’s no more showing any passion or enthusiasm towards anything.

Going to China， going to Russia， going to India and going to the Middle East is like a wake-up call for me. People are so curious， and enthusiastic， passionate for what you tell them， it’s amazing， and that makes one wants to do more， contribute more， develop more and be creative. The context you do thinking is so important for your thoughts！

So being in Berlin where creativity is the capital of the city， it becomes alibi of doing nothing.

What do you do？ I am creative？ I’m working on a project， what does project mean？ All these abstract words.. But if you go do Russia， “What you do？” “I am working on changing the world…” and people have ideas and they are doing it！

LZH： Different societies produce different attitudes， and I think a lot that if I continue do intellectual work， I could really produce something very solid.

ST： Absolutely， you need application， as long as you can combine it with some stuff， thoughts out there， your thoughts will also make sense.

LZH： Tell me more about your next action？

ST： Istanbul. Tel Aviv， and I’m doing these analog devices for Austria， I’m doing a project in London on the subject of Home， also another project in New York for the most innovative chemist of the year. I’m going to US for a week to do lots of talks. And I’m also doing a project in Geneva with dancers， in collaboration with Isabelle Luis…all stuff. And I’ll go to China.

LZH： One terrible question for you： how can you pass on your knowledge to younger generations？

ST： That’s easy， give me a situation I’ll transfer everything.

LZH： With your “hardware”？

ST： Not with my hardware： start with my own body.

If a young person comes to me， the first thing you have to go through is what to change in yourself.

LZH： Sissel， how did you start？

ST： I started with myself.

LZH： Where am I now？

ST： I’m working on you. Listen let’s be child again， let’s start to find out what the body can do， where are the censors， how do they work and how can they be absolutely maximal.

Then， that’s the first step. there’s unlimited possibilities.

LZH： That’s why you teach a lot in universities ST： For me education is investment to the future. You’ve got to transmit your knowledge for your future purposes， I do a lot of workshops and yeah， that’s it！

LZH：（我假設(shè)中國的讀者對你的作品還沒有太多了解，因此我會從較為基本的問題開始）

簡單介紹一下你的身份？

ST：我稱自己為一個職業(yè)的“中間人”，這個世界充滿了各種各樣的氣味，這個世界也應(yīng)該教會人如何去聞這些氣味。我的工作內(nèi)容和地點(diǎn)多種多樣，非常難以把自己局限在某種小眾的藝術(shù)或者創(chuàng)意領(lǐng)域里，換句話說，對我來說在其他領(lǐng)域所做的事情跟在藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域里做的是同等重要的。因此我最希望當(dāng)?shù)氖且粋€“中間人”。

LZH：非常有趣，我知道你的大量作品是關(guān)于你自己的氣味的，你也創(chuàng)作關(guān)于他者的恐懼的氣味作品。那么作為一個藝術(shù)家，你如何看待這種自身的向度，和他人、社會向度之間的關(guān)系？

ST：回到我們最開始所說的，我不認(rèn)為自己是一個藝術(shù)家，我是一個“好奇者”。既然月亮上能有了腳印，天空便不再能限制人的好奇。我的主要研究方向是對氣味分子的調(diào)查，尤其是它們?nèi)绾温?lián)系到人的身體。另一個研究方向則在更廣的城市維度，城市就像是“生命”的宏觀版本。簡單來說，我的作品從我自身出發(fā)，探討的是 “ 除了可見的外表，我還是什么？”

就像我的指紋一樣，我的氣味也是獨(dú)一無二的身份標(biāo)簽，但為何我并不知曉？為何我不懂得欣賞？如果我開始用氣味來投射這個世界而非視覺圖像，會有什么樣的結(jié)果？

抱著這個念頭，通過現(xiàn)代科技支持，我開始采集自己的氣味。使用手頭能有的科學(xué)工具，我盡可能地把我的氣味（我的“標(biāo)簽”）分解為分子，并通過這一過程記錄我的氣味組成，進(jìn)而用化學(xué)成分重新合成了我自己的味道——你知道，我的實(shí)驗(yàn)室里有超過3000中化學(xué)成分，我使用它們來復(fù)制和重現(xiàn)我身邊的各種各樣的味道，來自這個我們所參與的世界的味道。而這個項(xiàng)目的第二個層面，則是在更廣闊的城市維度。我受到麻省理工學(xué)院的委任，在2004到2006年之間進(jìn)行氣味圖景的工程，來深度調(diào)查科技和感官之間的課題。在我的創(chuàng)作中，過程中的科技要遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于在展示中的科技，比如說，我尋找氣味和重現(xiàn)氣味的過程中要用到大量的非常復(fù)雜、尖端的技術(shù)，然而最后的呈現(xiàn)卻不是“高科技”的。

在麻省理工的項(xiàng)目中，我希望找到人們緊張焦慮的“氣味”。那時候剛好是布什政府執(zhí)政，偏執(zhí)和恐怖主義的氣氛彌漫在媒體上，也彌漫在美國民眾之間。那時候很多老百姓都有焦慮傾向，因此我找到了21個因?yàn)榉N族歧視或其他各式各樣原因受到焦慮情緒困擾的男人，讓他們參與我的創(chuàng)作。這些人的選擇參考了來自加州、中國、挪威和南非的心理醫(yī)生的推薦意見。

我選擇男人參與這個項(xiàng)目的原因并非因?yàn)槭裁磾?shù)據(jù)上的理由，而只是單純因?yàn)槟行粤骱垢啵虼宋夷塬@得更為明顯的結(jié)果。這21名參與者腋下帶著一個我的設(shè)備，當(dāng)他們因?yàn)榫o張、焦慮流汗時，設(shè)備會探測到，并返還給我。我通過這個設(shè)備來分析他們的汗水氣味，并將其分解為化學(xué)成分，最后我得到的是男人緊張時汗水味道的復(fù)制品。

接下來，我使用一種叫做“微囊化”的納米技術(shù)（將氣味分子以微型膠囊方式封裝，只有觸碰才可釋放）對這些液體汗味制品進(jìn)行封裝，把氣味封存進(jìn)納米單元里。接下來我使用某種粘合劑，使得這個味道能被附加到物體表面上——比如說墻面或者紙張。所以在“恐懼項(xiàng)目”里，墻成為了人類皮膚的隱喻，你觸摸一個人的皮膚——在這里時墻壁——這個人的汗水氣味便會釋放出來。這便是我展現(xiàn)我的隱形訊息的媒介。

LZH：我想這是一個有形的訊息...在很多時候，當(dāng)我們討論到人類作為個體時，我們會討論他的膚色、著裝風(fēng)格、行為習(xí)慣，另一個角度來說，你也是由社會所塑造的，因此“你”并不是完全意義上個體的“你”，因此在今天，能夠意識到我們有獨(dú)一無二的DNA、獨(dú)一無二的味道，一些無法被掩蓋或轉(zhuǎn)讓、使得我們成為“個體”的特點(diǎn)，是非常重要的。

ST：我認(rèn)為，在世界上絕大部分地區(qū)（我不完全確定中國的情況），我們生來雖與世界交流，但我們卻使用香水傳達(dá)自身的氣味。 市場在使用科學(xué)的產(chǎn)物，而氣味也不再是日常溝通的話題。我們掩蓋自己的體味，我們甚至掩蓋生活環(huán)境里的各種味道，我們使用除臭劑、清潔劑、清新劑……如是等等。我想，或許因?yàn)槲覀冋J(rèn)為這是一種掩藏和保護(hù)自我的方式，但是除掉了氣味，大量不可見卻非常重要的信息也隨之流逝了。

LZH：嗯， 如果我們過多地融合這些多層次的信息，這也引發(fā)了一些當(dāng)下的集體化現(xiàn)象：你是要做自己呢？還是要充分地介入社會？

ST：事實(shí)上是，身體的代謝，或者說作為“硬件”的身體（我把感官稱為“軟件”）本身的運(yùn)作是獨(dú)立于社會的。其中微妙的地方是，有些身體的代謝或感知過程是有意識的，有些卻是無意識或者潛意識的。對于嗅覺器官鼻子來說，它的過程是潛意識的——事實(shí)是，你的鼻子對世界做出的反應(yīng)，要遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)在你的眼睛之前。但是因?yàn)樗墓ぷ魇窃跐撘庾R層面的，我們往往不能直接地意識到。

在我的創(chuàng)作中，這個情況得到了改變，因?yàn)槲覜Q定要對我的嗅覺產(chǎn)生自主認(rèn)識，這樣我就能給大腦“編程”：“嘿，現(xiàn)在我的眼睛需要休息，讓鼻子來工作”，或者說：“哦不，現(xiàn)在是眼睛和鼻子一起工作，耳朵可以放松……” 用這種方式，我像用電腦一樣運(yùn)用我自己的感官，它們就像不同的程序，可以幫我達(dá)到不同的目的。這個過程非常的有趣，它揭示了很多我以前都沒有留心過的細(xì)節(jié)。

我想，這個實(shí)驗(yàn)讓我重新獲得了在成長過程中所失去的那種游戲感- 那種通過玩耍、游戲和歡樂來理解世界的視角…它隨著我們的成長，隨著我們每日面臨的嚴(yán)肅生活事務(wù)而漸漸流逝在了時光里。而我將這些敏銳的感覺帶回來，回到它們與生俱來的位置，讓它們重新稱為我們感知世界的一個部分。

LZH：你的創(chuàng)作也關(guān)于各種各樣的其他氣味，比如說廚房的味道、一戰(zhàn)的味道…在我看來這是非常有意思的，你通過這些項(xiàng)目，是想激發(fā)什么呢？在你的作品中，人們很難直觀地看見，他們只能聞到，并通過嗅覺做出反應(yīng)，能否告訴我，你的作品都得到過怎樣的反饋？

ST：人們對于氣味的反應(yīng)是非常迅速的，對于圖片來說，人們大腦會有一個處理過程：“我知道這是什么嗎？我見過它嗎？我喜歡或不喜歡它？”接下來你才會在潛意識層面對圖片產(chǎn)生一些情感關(guān)聯(lián)。而對于氣味來說，你可能來不及做太多反應(yīng)，你的身體就會直接反應(yīng)：“哦！”不論這種反應(yīng)積極還是消極，它都不存在太長的處理過程。我認(rèn)為這是一種自由，如果按照原來的職業(yè)規(guī)劃，我可能已經(jīng)是一個化學(xué)博士，最后成為一個科學(xué)家，但氣味是如此的關(guān)乎我們的生活，呼吸是我感興趣的主題，我覺得坐在一個白盒子一樣的實(shí)驗(yàn)室里用老鼠們作實(shí)驗(yàn)不是我想要的。畢竟，我真正想探究的是關(guān)于人和生活的話題，所以我選擇用創(chuàng)意行業(yè)來作為自己的發(fā)聲平臺，來展示我的研究和我提出的疑問。和科學(xué)不同，創(chuàng)意的行業(yè)給了我更大的自由。在科學(xué)領(lǐng)域，你必須扮演“我們”的角色，必須保持客觀中立，你得寫論文，還得有人發(fā)表你的論文，等等等等...在我的創(chuàng)作中，我代表作為“Sissel”的自我，而非代表“我們”來提出問題。

LZH：你會認(rèn)為你自己是（這是一個現(xiàn)在流行的“身份”）激進(jìn)主義者嗎？

ST：不，我是一個智慧的人（笑）。

LZH：所以，你用和激進(jìn)主義者不一樣的方式介入社會？

ST：對，我不是“介入”而是“參與”這個社會。我完全不是一個激進(jìn)主義者，從激進(jìn)主義的定義來說，根本不是。我的作品確實(shí)帶有一定的挑動性，但其出發(fā)點(diǎn)并不是為了激進(jìn)的目的。換句話說，我的作品的性質(zhì)決定了它會激發(fā)社會反應(yīng)，但“激進(jìn)主義”本身和我的初衷并不相關(guān)。

LZH：我認(rèn)為你的工作方法是很科學(xué)的，你會走訪很多地方，做大量的研究。

ST：過程即是產(chǎn)物。在我的創(chuàng)作中，過程是最重要的部分。展覽本身，或者說最終呈現(xiàn)的成果本身只是一個大故事中的小句子，你看到的、聽到的、讀到的內(nèi)容背后，還有大量的信息。一點(diǎn)一滴地積累，可能來自于創(chuàng)意領(lǐng)域、科學(xué)領(lǐng)域、抑或商業(yè)領(lǐng)域。我的主要研究——關(guān)于鼻子和氣味化學(xué)的研究——是無止盡的。它仿佛是一趟永無終點(diǎn)的列車，它可能會停下來加油、補(bǔ)給，但是旅程會永恒持續(xù)。

LZH：你認(rèn)為你的工作方式是偏主觀多一點(diǎn)，還是客觀多一點(diǎn)？

ST：我只能是主觀的，并且我選擇了主觀。就像我剛才說的，如果不從事現(xiàn)在的工作，我可能會成為一個絕對客觀的科學(xué)家。在科學(xué)領(lǐng)域里你不會被允許做一個主觀的人，即使你提出了一些主觀的命題，你的研究、推理和論證過程絕不可能只來自于你個人的視角，而要是客觀而普遍的。

藝術(shù)則不同，藝術(shù)只能是主觀的，而我需要這種主觀的自由。關(guān)于鼻子和氣味，有太多尚未被解答的問題，我希望從藝術(shù)的視角來探究這些問題的答案。

LZH：我還記得，2008年的時候你在MUDAC（瑞士洛桑）展出過你的作品。我記得當(dāng)時很多人表現(xiàn)出了抵觸情緒，令人驚訝地是，這些人幾乎都是藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域的工作者。我當(dāng)時感到非常驚訝，因?yàn)槌＠碇拢胀ǖ挠^眾留給作品和人比較大的空間和理解，然而在藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域，理解和妥協(xié)卻少很多。

ST：藝術(shù)世界是非常刻板印象的！或許現(xiàn)在有了改觀，變得稍微多一些容忍，發(fā)展得也很快。當(dāng)然我也有了一定的名氣，所以可能人們知道我的作品因此變得更為容忍。盡管如此，改觀卻也沒想象中那樣大，我在東京當(dāng)代美術(shù)館展覽過我的作品，他們邀請我去參展——這代表他們知道我的作品，我也很樂意參與，我去了東京，然而開展兩天之后，人們開始向我抱怨：

“托拉斯女士，你的展覽空間里聞起來有氣味。”“你一定在開玩笑吧，我的作品就是關(guān)于氣味的，你們認(rèn)為我飛了大半個地球過來，會去做一個聞起來沒有氣味的作品？那你們?yōu)楹芜€邀請我參展？”

“啊，是，可是我認(rèn)為我們應(yīng)該給進(jìn)入你展覽空間的參觀者發(fā)放口罩。”“哈？”

我感到很驚訝，也感慨藝術(shù)界這樣那樣的事情依然時有發(fā)生。兩周后，我回到了柏林，他們又給我打了電話，說：“托拉斯女士，你的展覽空間依然有味道，還是有味道！” 我說：“好的，請給我隔壁展廳的哥們打電話，我記得他參展了一個巨大的熒幕，里面有成千上萬個像素，你來找我抱怨我的作品有氣味，那你也應(yīng)該跟他說，他的作品要看的太多了，眼睛負(fù)擔(dān)太大！” 后來，他們再也沒有聯(lián)系過我。這樣的事情不是只是管理人員和策展人的問題，歸根結(jié)底還是因?yàn)樗囆g(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)們沒有更新自我，來適應(yīng)他們所存在的時代的現(xiàn)實(shí)。我們作為藝術(shù)家，在跟不少傳統(tǒng)守舊的藝術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)打交道，他們認(rèn)為藝術(shù)是用來觀賞的，或許可以用來聆聽但必須帶上耳機(jī)并且保持安靜，你應(yīng)該做這個，做那個，你不應(yīng)該觸摸藝術(shù)品...等等等等保守的觀念！

所以，如果你有足夠的決心來邀請一個像我這樣的藝術(shù)家，那至少你需要讓機(jī)構(gòu)準(zhǔn)備好，知道參展作品的現(xiàn)實(shí)！但是很多藝術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)并不能做到這一點(diǎn)，不管是因?yàn)槭裁礃拥脑颉?/p>

LZH：我認(rèn)為這是一個非常有趣的問題，從我個人角度來看，藝術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)應(yīng)當(dāng)處在一個中立的位置，連接藝術(shù)和觀眾，并且將觀眾的想法和觀點(diǎn)回饋給藝術(shù)，從而建立這樣一種互通的機(jī)制。然而，當(dāng)下很多藝術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)有太多所謂的“義務(wù)”，為了完成這些義務(wù)，它們從溝通的支持者變成了審查者。

2009年在英國，我遇到過一起類似的事件，機(jī)構(gòu)邀請藝術(shù)家參展，看到展品時卻認(rèn)為它太殘忍、有太多殺戮元素…因此作為藝術(shù)家，我們經(jīng)常會遇到類似的情況，并且得從中找到出路。就像你說的，藝術(shù)世界有了更多的容忍，但問題依然存在，而這觸發(fā)的其實(shí)不只是藝術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)本身，而是藝術(shù)系統(tǒng)的問題——系統(tǒng)需要更新，但是我們?nèi)绾胃滤课疑羁痰赜浀媚愀艺f過：“讓我們來改變世界吧”，試想，如果讓我們來改變藝術(shù)系統(tǒng)，我們怎么做？

ST：你必須創(chuàng)造出自己的系統(tǒng)-去改變現(xiàn)有的系統(tǒng)你需要付出極大的努力和成本-我認(rèn)為創(chuàng)造自己的系統(tǒng)未嘗不是一種選擇。在藝術(shù)領(lǐng)域里，太多商業(yè)的元素，雖然有很多優(yōu)秀的藝術(shù)和創(chuàng)意在發(fā)生，但在這種藝術(shù)/商業(yè)的語境中生存也并不簡單。

歸根結(jié)底還是看你想做什么，如果你很想順從現(xiàn)有的系統(tǒng)，并以在大美術(shù)館展出為志，你便需要適應(yīng)很多東西。我個人認(rèn)為MoMA在今天地位其實(shí)遠(yuǎn)不如前，但是他們還是會使用那一套理論：“哦，我們沒有錢，但是你能在MoMA展出，就應(yīng)該很開心了。”

事實(shí)上，MoMA幾乎摧毀了我的一個作品，在柏林為他們免費(fèi)展出時，他們根本就沒有對氣味做好任何的準(zhǔn)備，那次展出的結(jié)果簡直是災(zāi)難性的。MoMA認(rèn)為，在它們那參展的藝術(shù)家應(yīng)以此為榮——拜托，你們幾乎毀了我的作品，還叫我以此為榮？

另一個角度，有越來越多的年輕人開始發(fā)掘他們自己的呈現(xiàn)方式，他們自己的展陳系統(tǒng)。我不是特別了解中國，但是我能感到在中國也有越來越多這樣的“替代”系統(tǒng)正在雨后春筍般地出現(xiàn)。比如你介紹我認(rèn)識的那些中國人，他們是如此的有創(chuàng)意、對世界是如此的有好奇心，他們有獨(dú)到的展現(xiàn)自我的方法，并且拒絕跟隨大流。我認(rèn)為這是藝術(shù)系統(tǒng)正在發(fā)生改變的訊號。

LZH：我認(rèn)為這一點(diǎn)非常重要，我們不能自我束縛。我們必須接觸到大眾，去跟觀眾交流。我認(rèn)為在你的創(chuàng)作中，那些針對孩童的工作坊、或者奧運(yùn)主題的作品，都是在試圖鏈接你的藝術(shù)和大眾。

ST：我的作品很多時候跟孩童有關(guān)。在我的工作坊里，人們對氣味的反應(yīng)被證明是如此迅速，參與者有時是小孩，有時是奔馳的CEO，但共同之處是，他們都度過了一段愉快的時光，離開實(shí)驗(yàn)室時臉上掛滿笑容。

有趣的是，氣味越是極端，人們越是感到快樂。很多人對我的作品感到不適，很大一部分原因是氣味是如此直接的元素，人們會本能地產(chǎn)生反應(yīng)。如果你對一張圖片的內(nèi)容感到不適，你可能會至少等到離開房間，走到街上才產(chǎn)生反應(yīng)。但是在我的作品中，反應(yīng)幾乎是實(shí)時的。

LZH：我認(rèn)為，在你的作品中，氣味本身如何并不是關(guān)鍵，它可以是肥皂味，也可以是乳酪味，重點(diǎn)是人們對這些氣味的反應(yīng)是來自于人體感官的本能感知。

ST：是的，氣味是感性的，因此這種反應(yīng)也是能打動人的。尤其是氣味很多時候是跟人的個體記憶有關(guān)的，它會激發(fā)你的回憶，這些都是有質(zhì)感的東西-不論是帶來煩悶的、還是帶來快樂的氣味，在情感上都充滿了質(zhì)感。當(dāng)我在韓國展出我的氣味項(xiàng)目時，有一位百歲老人站在我的氣味墻面前痛哭失聲，他的曾孫告訴我，他上一次聞到類似的汗水味道是在日韓戰(zhàn)爭期間，因此這個味道觸發(fā)了他久遠(yuǎn)的記憶。那個年輕人后來寫信給我說：“Sissel，你能給我的曾祖父寄一瓶展出時使用的汗液氣味嗎？他一定會非常開心的。” 我寄了給他，后來他回復(fù)了很多感謝的郵件。你知道，在藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作中，有很多這樣讓你覺得“任務(wù)完成”了的瞬間。

我的氣味墻在麻省理工展出時，有一位女士每天上半時都會親吻其中的一款氣味，在展出的3個月期間，她每天都這么做。我后來找到她問起原因，她說：“每次我站在這名男子面前（帶有氣味的墻仿佛是一個無形、抽象的男子），他都在呼喚我。”因此在三個月的時間里，她和這個“男人”產(chǎn)生了一種非常微妙的情感聯(lián)系。當(dāng)然同樣的，也有人因?yàn)橛憛捄刮叮械椒浅５牟贿m：“天那！太可怕了！這堵墻散發(fā)出難聞的汗臭。”

在一堵空白的墻面前，我們沒有任何線索來知道它散發(fā)出的氣味到底是什么。尤其是在美國這樣一個大家都掩藏氣味的國家。

我的絕大多數(shù)創(chuàng)作都是情境化的、跟地理位置息息相關(guān)，有時候作品會巡回展出，再根據(jù)不同地點(diǎn)的情況進(jìn)行修改或擴(kuò)展。對我來說，作品所創(chuàng)作的地點(diǎn)、也就是我做研究的地點(diǎn)和它最后展示結(jié)果之間的關(guān)系是非常有趣的（就像在除臭劑盛行的美國，展示汗味時公眾的反應(yīng)）。

LZH：你的創(chuàng)作往往需要很長的時間，你的創(chuàng)作方法論是什么呢？又是什么讓你持續(xù)地對這樣的創(chuàng)作保持興趣呢？

我的創(chuàng)作方法論和模型是基于科學(xué)的，我并不會坐在那里做一些抽象的幻想，或者使用隱喻性、抽象的味道。我不會坐在那里，混合各種氣味然后說：“哦這是大海”，“這是柏林的氣味…”，如果是這樣的話，那也太簡單了。事實(shí)上，我會花大量功夫來研究我所處的現(xiàn)實(shí)，并且透過科學(xué)工具的表面，來捕捉和重現(xiàn)無形的事物給普通大眾。

我繪制無形者、分析無形者、甚至重現(xiàn)和復(fù)制無形者，這就是我工作的本質(zhì)，而這樣的工作是漫長的過程，因?yàn)闆]有先例。我需要研究要實(shí)現(xiàn)我的目的，有這樣的可能性，并且需要尋找愿意支持我做這件工作的人。老實(shí)說，做氣味分析和分解是巨大的工作量，誰愿意免費(fèi)來做這些工作？

至于說我的工作周期，有時是一個月，有時是兩周，有時卻是五年，這完全取決于項(xiàng)目的性質(zhì)。對于城市氣味圖景系列，它們往往要花上更長的時間，因?yàn)槲覠o法持續(xù)性地居住在這些城市，但是為了尋找到“永恒”存在在那里的氣味，我必須走訪多次，在一天中的不同時間，一年中的不同時間，這個過程絕不是走馬觀花地逛逛，隨便采集一些味道，就說這是這個城市的氣息。

盡管我的出發(fā)點(diǎn)是主觀的，我仍然盡量讓過程準(zhǔn)確。有時候久一點(diǎn)，有時候又很快。在這幾年間，我緩慢建立了一定得名氣，也尋找到了靠譜的合作伙伴，這些公司為我提供了迅速而高效率的工作環(huán)境，讓我能以10年前做夢都想不到的速度進(jìn)行工作。我現(xiàn)在在伊斯坦布爾做一個2個月的項(xiàng)目。而支持我的公司給我建立了一個在中東的實(shí)驗(yàn)室，來支持我做基礎(chǔ)的研究工作。這是我在工作條件和環(huán)境上非常大的改善，而我也非常高興。

另一邊，在底特律和堪薩斯城的工作則斷斷續(xù)續(xù)地持續(xù)了六年，因?yàn)槲覜]有可能每個月都去，同時資金的支持也不夠…種種原因，這并不意味著要讓我做項(xiàng)目就得花六年時間，如果我有一百萬，我說不定一天就能做出來！哈哈！（笑）

我希望一直關(guān)注生活的質(zhì)感，也希望能將這種質(zhì)感帶給每個人，這就是我做創(chuàng)作的最主要的動力：喚醒人們的感官，讓大家用不同的身體感知來體驗(yàn)這個世界。這些驅(qū)動跟錢就沒什么關(guān)系了。現(xiàn)在，我看到越來越多的機(jī)會能把我的創(chuàng)作也應(yīng)用到商業(yè)中來，來獲取一些非常基本的資金過日子。這對我來說跟藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作是完全不同的方向，卻也打開了很多我之前沒有料想到的機(jī)會，商業(yè)項(xiàng)目讓我從不同的角度切入我的知識，從不同的方式展示作品，介入到不同的機(jī)構(gòu)和環(huán)境中去。我跟各種各樣的硬件和軟件公司合作，為它們提供各式各樣的模擬工具——我從未想過這會成為我工作的一部分，我以為我是徹底反對商業(yè)世界的，但現(xiàn)在我感覺這個世界也準(zhǔn)備好了，時機(jī)到來了。在過去的幾個月里，我收到了前所未有之多的邀請。

我想，我們可以開始來改變世界了，我們可以從中國開始。

LZH：當(dāng)然可以，中國很適合你！

ST：哈哈。我認(rèn)為這個世界始終是分割的——這并不是一件消極的事。所謂西方的世界，尤其是美國，人們被寵壞了，他們的消費(fèi)是如此的輕易，以至于他們很少再對事情有極大的熱情和投入。

而去到中國、俄羅斯、印度和中東國家的經(jīng)歷，對我來說就像是一個醒鐘。這些國家的人們是如此的充滿好奇，他們擁有西方人已經(jīng)流失的那種熱情。這種熱情讓人想做更多、貢獻(xiàn)更多、成長更多、變得更有創(chuàng)新。因此，你進(jìn)行思考的環(huán)境對你產(chǎn)生的思想是至關(guān)重要的！

而在柏林這個創(chuàng)意是資本的城市，創(chuàng)意有時成為了不做事情的借口。“你是做什么的？”“我是創(chuàng)意界的。”“我在做一個項(xiàng)目”……項(xiàng)目到底是什么？你懂的，大家都用這些抽象的詞。然而，如果去俄羅斯，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)聲稱自己在用創(chuàng)意改變世界的人真的在改變世界！

LZH：不同的社會環(huán)境會產(chǎn)生不同的態(tài)度，我自己也認(rèn)為，如果我持續(xù)性地、不斷的投入在知識工作中，最后我將會產(chǎn)出一些真正有價值的東西。

ST：肯定的，你也需要應(yīng)用，你需要將你的思想和周邊的環(huán)境、和這個社會的各種思想產(chǎn)生鏈接和溝通。

LZH：請告訴我你下一步的計劃？

ST：我目前做的項(xiàng)目是在土耳其的伊斯坦布爾和以色列特拉維夫，同時也在為奧地利研發(fā)一些模擬工具。我之后會為倫敦的一個關(guān)于“家”的項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行工作，也在參與紐約一個關(guān)于“年度最具創(chuàng)新化學(xué)家”的項(xiàng)目——因此我將會去美國一周，做一些演講。啊，我之后還會跟日內(nèi)瓦的一個舞蹈家（Isabelle Luis 伊莎貝拉·路易斯）進(jìn)行合作，當(dāng)然，我還要去中國！

LZH：這可能是一個極其糟糕的問題，你怎么將你的知識傳遞給年輕一代？

ST：那很容易，給我一個環(huán)境，我會傳遞我有的一切。

LZH：用你的“硬件”和“工具”還是？當(dāng)然不是，我會用我自己作為傳遞的媒介。 ST：如果一個年輕人來找我，我將帶他做的第一件事就是反思自己。

LZH： Sissel，你是怎么開始創(chuàng)作的？

ST：從自己開始？

LZH：我此刻在哪里？

ST：聽著，讓我們再一次變回小孩，讓我們來尋找我們的身體能做什么，我們的感官都在哪里，怎么使用，怎樣最大化我們對世界的感覺。

這便是我的第一步，它開啟了無數(shù)可能。

LZH：這也是為什么你在大學(xué)教書了？

ST：是的，老話說教育就是投資未來。你必須把知識傳遞給下一代。