計劃簡介 / 研究成果

二〇二〇年年初，新冠肺炎爆發並肆虐全球，各地政府採取的種種防疫政策，雖有助減少疫情造成的人命傷亡，但同時百業也必須停擺，市民生活大受影響。香港作為經貿及文化往來頻繁的國際都市，自然也難以倖免。不少行業在沒完沒了的限制成了常態之時，逐漸開始發展出各種應對策略，在疫情反覆下盡力渡過難關。為免防疫政策過度影響經濟活動，香港政府在限制社交距離的同時，也有向因工作需要而必須群聚的人士提供豁免。

惜這項豁免並不適用於劇場工作者。雖云疫情緩和之時，劇場也被容許有限度恢復演出，然而對香港劇人而言，反覆不定的疫情帶來的並非一種可勉力招架的所謂「新常態」，而是擺盪在全面停演與部分復演之間的永劫循環——舊一波疫情退潮，只意味著在新一波疫情來襲前，必須盡速完成製作並及時送到劇場上演，令人無所適從。大概只有理解劇人自疫情爆發以來那如情緒過山車般的經歷，才能真正明白表演藝術行業在疫情下不單遭逢多次停演的重大打擊，也在戰兢的創作中與不確定性角力，盼望最終能逃過演出夭折、努力付諸流水的命運。

也只有在這個背景下，我們才能明白，二〇二〇年以來興起的線上劇場，遠非一種時興的玩意，而是銘刻著在艱難時代下求存的印記，從中我們不但可窺見劇場工作者在理想和幻滅之間的掙扎，更能深深感受到他們如何在創作過程中迸發出驚人的適應力，並展現其對戲劇藝術擇善固執的精神。

在兩次深入訪談中，四個香港表演藝術製作團隊的代表，分享了自身在疫情期間製作線上劇場的經驗。各團隊擁有的製作資源及採用的美學策略均不盡相同，故此他們各自呈現的「線上劇場」面貌也各不相同。這些寶貴的經驗分享，當可讓我們更了解香港劇場如何面對現實難關，摸黑尋得一條又一條出路。

被催生與被自立的：疫／逆情下的線上劇場製作與創作

雖同被冠以「線上劇場」之名，但在疫情前投石問路、只留下模糊足印的零星之作，與疫情爆發後大行其道、透過密集實踐而漸見類型（genre）輪廓的演出，實難相提並論。如前所述，催生這次線上劇場風潮的第一因，與其說是主動積極的探索，不如說是現實的逼迫。然而現實中的不幸與無可奈何也有千百種，要探究其路向，便必須了解線上劇場這個「替代方案」，如何成為在不同劇團在現實中的創作出口。訪問中幾位劇場工作者的分享，相信可讓我們更深入了解不同團隊當初製作線上劇場的出發點，藉以進一步把握他們各自發展出來的美學構想。

對於委約製作來說，最後拍板決定權非在劇人一方，故這類製作團隊的情形可說是最為被動。如香港藝術節委約表演製作《鼠疫》（粵語版）的劇場導演陳泰然便表示，他從來都以在實體劇場表演為首選，排演時得知主辦方因第四波疫情而決定改成線上演出後，仍極力爭取在劇院作現場演出，惜無功而還，只能按委約方要求，將表演拍攝下來並放到線上供大家觀賞。

香港藝術節《鼠疫》（粵語版）

另一個較為普遍的情況，則是團隊在製作過程中得知作品無法在劇院上演後，因不願白白埋葬創作心血，故在直接取消節目和轉到線上演出兩者之間，無奈選擇後者。如同流劇團的《巴黎公社的日子》（下稱《巴黎公社》）導演鄧偉傑便憶述道，二〇二〇年中得知因疫情限制而無法進行現場演出，惟當時作品的排演進度已達四分之三，故因不希望浪費已付出的創作成果、錯失探討布萊希特劇場美學的機會，最終決定將演出拍攝下來，並以錄播形式呈現給觀眾。同樣，由香港演藝學院製作的《禁色》之導演潘詩韻也表示，是次表演為學院畢業班同學的課程，作品本來安排在學院的劇場上演，惟疫情爆發後學院學生必須留在家中，她詢問同學的意見後得知各人仍想繼續學習，故決定轉而將表演安排在線上實時進行，並於二〇二〇年五月底完成演出。

相比之下，香港話劇團《原則》二〇二〇年重演版團隊的創作原委及經驗則稍有不同。演出本來安排在該年九月底至十月進行，惜七月香港不幸出現第三波疫情，八月底疫情雖已趨緩、各種防疫限制也逐漸放寬，惟當局遲至十月方重開劇院，容許劇團在座位減半的情況下恢復演出。劇團無奈必須取消九月底的場次後，終能在十月初恢復進行現場演出，並同時決定推出線上直播版，為觀眾提供另一種欣賞表演的角度。香港話劇團高級經理（製作）黎栩昕解釋，希望可以讓更多觀眾接觸該作品，故決定另外加入串流直播的觀看選擇，以線下線上並行的形式呈現表演。然而，該劇導演方俊杰也坦言，自己始終以照顧劇院現場觀眾為首要目標，足見大部分劇人的首選，仍然是在實體劇場進行表演。

無論決定製作線上劇場的原因為何，反覆無常的疫情令各劇人皆手足無措，似乎大家當初主要仍是以兵來將擋的心態進行製作，故想法較傾向將線上劇場視為是一種權宜之計，也因此製作上多希望以一種「還原劇場」的方式處理演出。的確，實驗性背後是長期的思想與實踐的醞釀，非一時三刻可以完成，與其不切實際地期待疫情能瞬間為線上劇場提供大量創作契機，不如待那注定是帶點倉促的創作完成後，積極汲取經驗，為下一次演出作準備。

然而我們都知道，創作藝術的基本要求是對工具的熟知，要談得上還原，必然無可避免涉及技術層面的試驗及實踐。正因為如此，各團隊均也有在創作期間，進行過不少對拍攝技巧的摸索。劇人在訪談中，便與我們分享其如何各施各法，在未知的領域進行各種技術摸索。

如鄧偉傑就表示，《巴黎公社》拍攝一些演員較少的場景時，並沒有只限於選用錄像攝製慣常採取的「三機擺位」拍法，而是希望在鏡頭擺位上多花點心思。《原則》拍攝導演何小寶也指，自己特地為線上版設計了兩個獨特的攝影角度，其鏡頭分別位於舞台正上方及觀眾席面向舞台的正中位置，用以突顯劇中一些現場觀眾未必能察見的細節。同樣，《鼠疫》錄像導演吳卓昕亦解釋，她在拍攝演出時特別選取了較為寬闊的影像長寬比，有別於一般電影16:9的比例，藉以在取景時更能捕捉到表演場地的實際戲劇活動。

對於一些資源較為緊絀，但創作壓力相對較小的製作團隊而言，這種往往必需花費大量時間的摸索雖難免步履維艱，但同時也可能帶來一些意外的創作驚喜。《禁色》便在這方面給我們提供了非常值得參考的創作經驗。潘詩韻提到，學院雖然批准了將《禁色》改成在線上演出，也在宣傳及相關方面提供了充足的支援，但整個製作均由他們一手包辦，表演場景就是參與演出同學的家居空間，故可說是「零成本」的製作。她又補充指，同學們花費了不少精力，摸索如何在線上平台轉換場景，以至加入特別視角效果等的技術，幸而最終都藉著掌握平台的特性及多次嘗試，成功呈現他們希望帶給觀眾的演出效果。

這些從製作線上劇場而來的技術得著固令人感到欣喜，惟如前所述，以線上暫代線下本身便是種非常時期的非常手段，故劇人無可避免必須以一種「山寨製作」的精神，靈活地應對現實工作環境帶來的種種巨大限制。如果說《禁色》製作的挑戰之一在於演員必須就地取材，那麼同流《巴黎公社》的拍攝工作，則道盡在劇場錄製影像的難處。鄧偉傑表示，由於決定在劇團的排練室進行拍攝並在現場收音，故必須把冷氣關掉，惟當時正值盛夏，演員在拍攝時的辛勞可想而知。此外，排練室又位處工廠區，故須待下班時間後環境變得較寧静時，方能開始拍攝工作，因此演出及攝影往往會持續至晚上。《鼠疫》的拍攝難處同樣包括劇場的地理位置問題，如陳泰然便憶述，他們到了排演後期，才知道被安排在牛棚藝術村的劇場進行拍攝，必須在短時間內設法將場內的鐵柱融入到場景設計中。吳卓昕也表示，由於牛棚舞台的深度不夠，故必須盡量避免以遠景進行拍攝。

同流《巴黎公社的日子》（來源：同流Facebook專頁）

相對而言，《原則》雖說是在傳統的實體劇場作現場演出，線上版驟眼看來只是錦上添花的附加選項，但團隊同樣面對另外一些來自串流直播的挑戰。如何小寶就解釋，雖然現今拍攝機器相對已較便宜，但由於有觀眾在場，無法在演出進行期間移動攝影器材，故他必須事先「種植」不同位置，在劇院各處放置多部攝錄機。黎栩昕亦表示，為確保觀眾可以順暢無阻收看直播，必須事先聯絡網路供應商以取得充足的線路頻寬。此外，她又表示線上劇場必須解決不少版權問題，並解釋香港話劇團挑選了《原則》作線上直播，而非當時因為疫情而被迫停演的翻譯劇《父親》，其中一個重要原因就是後者本身已有電影改編版，故此幾乎不可能取得劇作的線上播放版權。同樣，她解釋必須為劇作中播放的音樂取得網上播放版權，故若要將一部採用大量流行音樂的劇作轉成線上演出的話，涉及的費用可能不菲，令製作成本大增。

剪不斷的今生今世：觀演—觀影文化的對話與互詰下的「現場」

戲劇與電影雖同屬表演藝術，但「隔行如隔山」，兩者各自的預設觀看模式實難作比擬，吸引的觀眾群也不盡相同。對創作人而言，形式上的轉化遠非止於學懂如何駕馭上述與拍攝器材或視訊會議有關的技術，而是必須深入虎穴，叩問及疏理兩種藝術的異同，並從中覓得自己的定位。

同樣，若然只是添加一個名為「線上」的標籤，便理所當然地期望觀眾自動從一種既有的觀演模式，過渡到另一種連創作人自己都仍然在摸索的觀演／映模式，則難免顯得一廂情願。幾位受訪劇人便跟我們分享了他們在製作線上劇場的過程中，怎樣處理與當代觀看文化接合時所遇到的挑戰，包括如何藉著重新思索劇場獨有的觀看模式，在錄像的殘影中留下一絲揮之不去的對「現場」的追憶及想望。

要創作出一部具有美學連貫性的作品，團體成員自身之間無疑必須首先形成基本共識，劇場與拍攝或錄像導演之間對演出媒介之定位也須保持一致，對以線上劇場為唯一表演媒介或「產出品」的團隊來說，則更自不待言。

如導演希望影像盡量翔實地記錄劇場的話，則如鄧偉傑所言，舞台和視像導演的溝通應要增加，從而確保舞台演出和錄像的差距不至於過大之時，又能保留舞台感。吳卓昕同樣指，導演之間必須有溝通，並表示明白自己負責的是「輔助」部分，即如何活用電影或鏡頭的語言，準確捕捉劇組整體創作。然而在時間催迫下，劇場導演便要與此前在戲劇製作中絕無僅有的拍攝或錄像導演迅速完成磨合，談何容易？

同樣，演員面對線上劇場這種新媒介，也必須花時間適應及調整自己的表演方式及心態。確實，習慣在眼見的時空中表演的戲劇演員，在舞台前架設好攝錄機後，並非便可輕易搖身一變，在鏡頭前若無其事地繼續演出，而是往往會有各種疑惑，無法估量其演出將如何被呈現在屏幕之前。要克服演員及製作者的心理關口，劇場工作者之間的溝通合作必須變得更緊密——正如吳卓昕所言，大家要一起看、一起討論，再考慮哪一種做法會較合適。當然，專業演員在鏡頭面前，往往就如潘詩韻所指，總是能不斷地適應舞台和錄像兩者間在節奏上的差異，並作出相應調整。

創作團隊尚且能在排演及後期製作階段憑著溝通與交流，共同發掘兩種形式交錯下產生的可能性，但相比之下，劇人卻無法控制觀眾如何接收演出影像，只能透過自身對當今媒體文化的觸覺，捕捉觀眾的觀看之道。媒體理論家奧斯蘭德（Philip Auslander）認為，現在所謂的現場演出已全面被媒介化，身處劇院的觀眾也只能藉由媒體觸摸現場；我們大可不必完全同意其稍嫌武斷的觀點，但也必須認知到無所不在的媒體對我們的影響，而觀眾在這個充斥視聽資訊的媒體世代，則只能往往以既有的消費媒介方式為據，有意識或無意識地將之歸類到自己熟知的領域。

比如說，觀眾實際在屏幕前觀看演出時究竟會有多少專注力，便成了製作線上劇場時必須仔細預估及考量的重要一環。如方俊杰便提到，觀眾在劇院現場觀看演出時，較能在轉場期間的瞬間暗場（blackout）之際靜心等待，但一旦轉成視像版，便無法立即習慣瞬間暗場，彷彿總希望舞台在變暗後立即進入下一幕。他總結道，劇場和電影的觀眾始終不同，劇場觀眾的參與度較高，電影觀眾的接收則較被動。同樣，吳卓昕以拍攝《鼠疫》時如何處理當中的轉景為例，說明觀眾看戲劇和電影時的預期有何差異。她解釋，觀眾固然清楚地意識到自己在觀看以視像形式呈現的戲劇演出，但往往仍會不自覺在瞬間切換成看電影或電視的慣常觀影模式，耐性也隨之變得很有限，這也令她在拍攝過程中感到掙扎，反覆思考應以電影常用的跳接方式處理轉景，還是該盡量保留舞台上的每一刻。

如何處理這個媒體「錯位」的問題，並重新定義或確認自己的目標觀眾，也許最能顯示不同劇人在線上劇場上的取態有何根本差異。如《原則》的製作團隊便傾向將串流直播及其後於戲院播放的錄製版，視為劇團拓展觀眾的方式之一。如方俊杰就表示，他認為《原則》線上版並非要取代實體演出，而是可以透過影像傳播，吸引更多觀眾日後進入劇場觀賞現場版本。故此對他來說，線上版的主要作用是配合現場演出，宣傳意味多於一切，並坦言其團體畢竟並非以製作自足的《原則》電影版為目標。黎栩昕亦指，有不少曾在進場觀看《原則》舞台劇的觀眾在看過電影版後，會反映說能在影片中觀賞到演員的細緻表情及情緒反應。故此，透過電影附加版本，劇場觀眾能夠彌補當初在現場錯過了這些細節的遺憾，影像版也因此算是建立在現場表演基礎上的一種「補完」。

這種以「還原論」為首要目標的線上劇場製作實踐，自然是處理線上劇場觀看模式的一種可能。確實，不少受訪者在訪談中念茲在茲的，是對於「舞台感」（鄧偉傑、吳卓昕語）、「劇場的味道」（方俊杰語），或「劇場感」（何小寶語）的關注或追求。對這些劇人而言，製作線上劇場的初衷是透過影像還原現實中的劇場空間，也因此對他們來說，當務之急是探討如何在數據傳輸中保留劇場的感覺或味道，在不完美的影像媒介下盡量呈現現實劇場的色彩，努力將劇場的「現場感」、「轉瞬即逝性」、「觀演互動」等特性保留下來。

具體而言，這些受訪團隊主要透過拍攝及後期製作的針對性處理，在影像的傳輸或拍攝過程中刻意保留劇場的慣習，藉以留住劇場色彩。如鄧偉傑便為上載到網上的《巴黎公社》演出影片設下觀賞期限，並解釋此舉與觀眾在現實進入劇院時必須遵守特定規則的情況相若，兩者均與劇場文化有關。除了透過劇場獨有的儀式感喚起觀眾的認同外，《巴黎公社》的影片本身亦與普通電影不同，未有在錄像開首或結尾加入影片標題及製作人員名單，刻意與電影典型的自我呈現保持距離。同樣，《原則》串流直播版本也在開場前特意拍攝觀眾魚貫入座的情況，除了能讓大家目睹疫情下觀眾席呈現的特殊景觀外，我們也可以將之理解為將屏幕前的觀眾帶到劇院，邀請線上觀者與現場觀眾同呼吸的一種嘗試。

面向那理還亂的來世：（線上）劇場尚未完成的美學探索

藝術貴乎多元，觀眾固然與珍視現實劇場的創作者一同引頸以待，期盼疫情結束後能盡快重新迎來全院滿座的一刻，但我們在這次對演藝界而言有如例外狀態般的失重創作環境中，也得見不少傳統劇場工作者順水推舟，利用這次特殊的線上劇場熱，在大眾媒體領域上下求索，並推出了不少充份利用媒體作為創作主軸的線上作品。

自二十世紀初大眾媒體興起至今，形形式式的媒體早已跟大部分人的日常交織得難分難解，故媒介化的表演確值得我們加以探索。真實得往往只淪為時髦語的「媒體即訊息」（the medium is the message），便說明了媒體如何逐漸融入我們生活當中，以無所不包的臨在方式統攝我們的感知。面對媒體那來勢洶洶的天羅地網，劇人反其道而行，將作品轉化成一種游走在流行媒體間、在重重折射中伺機重構虛擬與現實時空的演出，見證了戲劇界如何探尋媒體在表演藝術上的可能，也體現了劇人在創作中廣納百川的開放精神。

藝術創作總是環環相扣，新科技帶來的從來都不單僅是創作藝術工具上的新選項，也同時迫使創作人再次擁抱混沌。劇人必須仔細入微地重組傳送—接收過程中的一磚一瓦，並從中思考藝術作品的整體形式及其美學指向，其構想的深刻程度遠超所謂以科技加持藝術一類的淺見。事實上，單是從默片過渡到有聲電影的歷史，便不單見證了演員的聲音如何魔幻地出現在本來只有動作及表情的電影，也讓我們觀察到表演藝術如何牽一髮動全身，促使製作人必須摒棄過往行之有效的創作策略，重新思量敘事以至演員表演方式在新媒體下應扮演的角色。

故此，我們在創作時無可避免必須徹底撇除一切有關媒體類型的先見，以最處境化的角度考慮媒體各自獨有的敘事空間及其與演員演出之間的張力。正如陳泰然在分享《鼠疫》拍攝過程時所言，遇到如演員是否該看鏡頭這類涉及戲劇—電影語言交錯的情況時，他必然會以戲劇構作的整體角度作判斷，而非只是架空創作現實，單純只考慮技術問題。

又如潘詩韻在分享《禁色》製作過程時所言，我們必須留意觀眾實際是在採用何種視角觀看演出，因為對她而言，必須將演出的線上平台自身視為一個自足的舞台，並弄清楚其美學特色，包括演員與觀眾如何在平台建立觀演連繫。也正因為如此，她以大眾於疫情期間在家觀看Netflix的慣習為參照，透過將演出分成七集上演，把作品轉化成一部一連七晚播放的連續劇。她續指，每種藝術形式均有自己的特色，故此沒有所謂誰取代誰的問題，也不應去考慮如何適應（adapt）電影語言，反而應多思考如何充份利用特定平台或媒體的特性進行創作。

香港演藝學院《禁色》——西門．史提芬斯

然而，看上去希望保留「劇場感」的製作團隊，主要著眼點雖為傳統劇場，但這並非便必然代表著一種拘泥於既存體系的保守創作態度。如鄧偉傑分享《巴黎公社》的製作過程時，便憶述自己當時曾有好幾次在思考甚麼才是舞台感，並認為是否應保留如瞬間暗場一類構成傳統舞台的部分，實在很取決導演希望如何在舞台上詮釋劇本。他舉例說，那半至一分鐘的瞬間暗場可能是留給觀眾進行思想沉澱的機會，並指如果我們以這種角度作考量的話，保留該段沉默的時間便變得異常重要，而非因循守舊的做法。

循鄧偉傑的看法推演，我們甚至大可將這種在影像中呈現一些在畫面中看似格格不入的傳統劇場實踐，視為是主動形塑劇場觀看模式的嘗試。此舉雖可能令看慣當代緊湊剪接影片的觀眾感到突兀，但從另一個角度看，不啻是一種形式上的「種植」，也是主動形塑觀看文化多樣性的嘗試，故當然也應被視為是另一個層面的實驗和藝術實踐。

或許，我們應當策略性地發展一些新詞彙，藉以令劇人及觀眾在談論線上劇場創作時，能更精準地指向相關的藝術關懷。如陳泰然便指，從理解電影和舞台兩者關係的角度看，《鼠疫》只是一個十分初步的嘗試，並認為電影始終是一套十分特定的語言，甚至不應被視作是慣常定義下的語言。又如訪談中何小寶提出「混合媒體」或潘詩韻提出以「鏡頭語言」取代「電影語言」等，均是超越戲劇—電影兩者間非此即彼的關係，以及探究媒體藝術各種可能性的嘗試。

另一方面，創作者無論是偏向以媒介還原劇場，還是較希望探索媒介如何可以反過來重構演出，劇本作為戲劇的骨幹，在媒介化的線上演出中仍是個舉足輕重的創作元素。在當代劇場百花齊放的劇本題材及紛陳的敘事策略上，如何看待媒介與劇本結合的問題，也十分講求劇人的眼光及判斷。

如方俊杰便以《原則》為例，指出由郭永康編寫的劇本並非一部只敘述單一時空的實時劇作，而是涉及一種時間上的過渡，故需要一個較廣闊的視角處理創作，藉以產生一種「劇場的味道」。問及哪些劇本較適合在線上呈現時，他認為有較多過場及瞬間暗場、需頻繁轉景一類的作品，較不適合作拍攝。鄧偉傑則表示，因《巴黎公社》的畫面和敘事變化較複雜，自己特別要求呈現三個特別能突顯布萊希特劇場特色的畫面。潘詩韻則表示，《禁色》的劇本語言十分強烈（intense），甚至有近乎詩化的語言，人物的感情濃烈非常，每一場均為獨白或雙人戲，拿捏得不準確的話，便很難呈現人物的處境，故也必須按情況選取合適的鏡頭。

談到這次線上劇場的美學實踐特色，我們當然不能忽略「沉浸式劇場」及「互動劇場」這些受不少劇人青睞、甚至儼然成為了線上劇場的主要詮釋及創作方向的時興標籤。然而，與其一窩蜂製作過份賣弄單一概念的藝術作品，似乎我們更應在線上劇場的發展方興未艾之時，回到「劇場是甚麼」的根本問題。如上文提及對戲劇感的追求，及對媒體特性的探索，均可被視為是觀照戲劇本質的嘗試，而非因為一時的創作焦慮而選擇迎合市場。

陳泰然便觀察到，不少劇人在製作線上劇場時，彷彿被迫走出自己的創作安舒區，接觸一些平素沒有觀看自己作品的觀眾，並指不少創作者仍顯得有點著急，彷彿急切希望尋得一種萬靈丹，藉以確保演出可以找回劇院那上千人的目光。他表示，自己作為一個藝術創作者，最重視的還是如何可以製作出一種美學上的形式（pattern），以及如何最終令觀眾有美學上的得著。

總結：有今生，也有來世？如何展望後疫情的線上劇場

展望將來，如果說這次的線上劇場熱，說到底不過是種缺乏選擇下發展出來的權宜之計，那麼疫情後的線上劇場又將何去何從？我們在此再次看到劇人的不同想法及其各自的創作關懷。如鄧偉傑便表示，線上劇場有很大發展空間，但坦言作為創作人，仍最希望在實體劇場空間進行創作。潘詩韻則認為，線上劇場不應單是一種解決疫情期間創作問題的應對方法，而是個可以供大家長久創作的舞台，她認為只要形式和內容可以緊扣的話，其實不同類型的作品均可透過線上劇場形式呈現。吳卓昕亦認為，現在很多人的心態有點本末倒置，似乎是因為疫情期間不能製作舞台劇，故才嘗試涉足線上劇場，而不是打從一開始便以媒體融合的角度進行創作。

但無論劇人創作取態為何，相信線上劇場還是有其獨有的存在價值。訪談中，不少劇人均提到如何充分利用線上劇場跨時空的特質，將戲劇延伸至海外並呈現給各地觀眾，或是透過資料庫的形式，為過去曾上演的演出注入第二生命。

黎栩昕便指，《原則》有兩至三成的觀眾來自外國，可見有不少海外觀眾均有興趣觀看香港劇場演出，並指會在日後研究在劇團資料庫內，挑選一些作品並將其以線上形式呈獻給大家。方俊杰也認為，香港觀眾開始接受上網觀看特定節目必須付費的安排，冀望業界人士將來可以共同建立一個平台，把自己團隊的作品上載到網上，為香港劇場表演創建一個資料庫。進一步而言，劇場既為我們共有文化記憶，亦可助我們建立一種新的跨地域劇場文化。如陳泰然便表示，越來越多人到不同的地理空間生活，故此不受地理環境限制的線上劇場，可讓我們思考究竟劇場可以如何存在於這些人之間。

然而虛擬空間提供再多的可能性也好，總仍難免受現實物質條件的制約。製作線上劇場往往所費不菲，故此其創作實踐亦得有相應的財政支持作為創作資源，方能在日後繼續順利發展下去。如方俊杰便坦言，從財政收支角度而言，製作線上劇場在此刻無疑是不划算的，並明言分別只是虧多還是虧少。陳泰然也指，如果需要進行串流直播的話，便必須安排各種配合的器材及人員，成本無可避免會大增，也因此早在製作之初便已排除了直播的選項。

引言

著名的國際文學理論家和樂評家愛德華．薩依德（Edward Said）曾在〈極致瞬間〉一文中，批評當時的古典音樂會如何僵化：

「兩小時的古典音樂會已經『凝固』為一成不變的商品，……，對於『表演體系』的標準化規定可謂事無鉅細，面面俱到—包括衣著、曲目安排、演奏者的行為舉止、演奏風格、觀眾的行為、票價的制定、演出形式、表演者的身份，等等。….最無趣的表演幾乎無一例外來自於那些乖乖接受兩小時不自然的拘限，毫無怨言地做機械肢體活動的音樂家。」[1]

薩依德大抵沒有想到三十三年後的全球新冠疫情，才促進全球樂團思考音樂演出的其他可能性。本文以此作引言，並以「疫中作樂」為題，旨在寄語全球疫情雖令香港音樂藝術工作者面對業界寒冬，但他們的堅毅和對音樂的熱誠令他們捱過每一波疫情。而這種疫中作樂的智慧更在他們如何應對每一波疫情中突顯出來。

新冠疫情自二〇二〇年起至今仍未結束，因疫情未有消退和受到香港政府《預防及控制疾病（規定及指示)（業務及處所）規例》（第599F章）有關公眾娛樂場所條文的限制，香港藝術團體暫時最多只可以銷售場地85%座位的門票。除此以外，香港藝術界分別在二〇二〇年連續受到四波新冠疫情的衝擊，平均每季一次。而每一波疫情都會在一至三星期內引發表演場地關閉，令業界不止疲於奔命，更令生計大受影響。縱然政府有直接發放資助支援自由藝術工作者，但資助最多那一次也只有一萬港元。雖然雪中送炭，但若以香港政府統計處2019/2020 每月平均住戶開支達三萬零二百三十元[2]作指標，只能說是杯水車薪。而香港舞台藝術從業員工會曾於二〇二〇年七月向約四百名會員進行「有關受疫情影響及抗疫援助成效」問卷調查，「結果顯示接近四成人沒有獲得政府任何補助。」[3]。毫無疑問，政府在平衡公共衛生安全和行業生計明顯仍有很大的改進空間。

然而，疫情為全球藝術界帶來比金融海嘯破壞力更強的災難，但同時催生網上演出的機遇。縱然大環境處處受限，但不少香港藝術工作者仍本著「獅子山精神」，在有限資源下探索了表演形式數碼化、藝術科技的可能性、觀眾拓展、收費模式等等。即使成效不一，但至少也是整個行業拓展數碼化的一個重要契機。

「演上線」計劃乃是國際演藝評論家協會（香港分會）網上年鑑系列一個延伸。理念之初是希望為香港藝術發展在疫情之中所遇到的網上演出問題和相應的解決方法作一個紀錄，並深信這些紀錄能夠為香港藝術團體日後如何發展數碼演出和資產作參考。值得留意的是，在各波疫情之中，第五波疫情實施最嚴厲的關閉表演場措施，霍啟剛議員也曾在立法會向行政長官反映文藝界「沒有地方練習和錄影」[4]，可見第五波嚴厲社區隔離措施已令香港藝術界網上演出大受阻礙。然而，由於第五波疫情不在本文篇幅以內，所以不作探討。本文主要就香港音樂藝術界在二〇二〇年至二〇二一年網上演出第一至四波疫情發展，不論在演出形式、數碼技術、平台發佈和曲目選擇等方面作出分析。但在分析前，先要討論一下全球現有網上音樂會演出模式，並分析當中利弊，為下文每一波疫情的分析建立一個理論基礎。

全球及香港網上音樂會千禧後的發展

網上音樂會在疫情前已在發展中，但並未成為主流。其實早於二〇〇七年蘋果便推出「蘋果音樂節」，以先直播，後串流放映，免費讓Apple Music 及iTunes 用戶欣賞。

二〇〇八年，柏林愛樂開展了「數碼音樂廳計劃」，並於二〇〇九年一月現場轉播第一場高清音樂會。二〇〇八年至二〇一六年間德意志銀行為主要贊助。柏林愛樂在準備此計劃時，把音樂廳規劃成一個專業的錄影棚，加設六部高清攝錄機及控制室，讓技術人員可以在直播時即時轉換畫面。在疫情期間，更升級所有設備至支持4K和HDR格式 。而數碼音樂廳採取混合收費模式，觀眾可以選擇訂閱一星期、月費或年費，豐儉由人。

二〇〇九年一月，YouTube 開展了YouTube 交響樂團計劃，鼓勵全球古典音樂樂手提交音樂錄像以獲邀到美國卡內基音樂廳演出，更有趣的是YouTube 用戶可以投選他們喜歡的樂手到美國演出，這也是現場音樂會未能做到。而譚盾《第一互聯網交響曲「英雄」》也結合了遴選者的錄像於YouTube 發佈。二〇一一年YouTube 交響樂團移師到澳洲悉尼歌劇院舉行，並進行免費網上現場直播，更特別要求每位樂手即興演出一段音樂。二〇一一年YouTube 交響樂團的悉尼演出是由Hyundai 現代汽車贊助，演出片段也於演出後五天內得到全球三千三百萬人觀看[5]。

由以上可見，網上音樂會早在十多年前已開始發展。由於製作目標不同，也分別發展出不同的收費和免費的模式。但不論那一種模式，也需要有贊助商支持，並相信音樂這個世界共同語言能夠為他們帶來全球曝光率才能得以發展。而以上這些模式，部分在疫情之中以其他方式出現。

那麼香港樂團在疫情前如何發展其網上音樂會？本文希望在探討香港樂團每一波疫情如何應對前，先討論究本地樂團在疫情前是否有足夠資源、人材和技術去發展和管理數碼資產。文中的數碼資產指樂團任何可供觀眾欣賞的數碼制作，不限形式及網上發表平台。香港音樂藝術界在疫情前已開始發展網上音樂會或音樂會前講座，大多都是採用免費模式，現列舉部分活動如下：

所以香港音樂藝術界在疫情前已開始嘗試安排免費網上音樂會，但未大力發展任何收費模式。然而疫情前，香港樂團若要發展網上音樂會也會面對場地配套、攝影器材及人才、成本收益、平台發佈和觀眾拓展這五方面的問題。筆者在二〇一九年安排網上古典音樂會直播時最大挑戰是音樂會場地並沒有架設寬頻線，即使另外鋪設，也所費不菲。更甚的是，不少場地設計是難以接收網絡訊號，再加考慮上音樂廳聲效，合適做現場直播的音樂廳其實少之又少。二〇一九年若要在一個月內安排網上直播並有穩定網上串流的音樂廳，首選必然是香港大會堂音樂廳，但我們只可用4G LTE 行動Wi-Fi分享器，並使用流動數據把音樂會錄像於網上發佈。若電訊公司的網絡不穩定，也會影響到音樂會串流質素。另外，疫情前香港仍未形成網上節目收費的環境，而租用攝影團隊和器材並不是一般藝團能夠恆常負擔，所以只能選擇免費播放作觀眾拓展，因此網上音樂會並非香港樂團首要發展項目。硬體上的場地配套和攝影器材或許可以透過資金解決，但如何確保網絡穩定和直播畫面配合音樂轉換順暢，藝術行政人員則需要有網絡串流、剪接和樂曲的知識才可減低網上現場直播「畫面和音樂未能配合」的情況。另外演出前如何處理演出者和平台版權問題，也是一個值得注意的地方。

如果我們借用菲利浦．科特勒在《行銷5.0》指，不論公司和顧客都要具備數位能力才可推動數碼轉型，甚至提出「這場危機（新冠疫情）確實暴露了特定顧客族群和產業業者數位化的準備程度，有些根本缺乏準備。」而香港樂團、音樂藝術工作者及其觀眾正正是菲利浦．科特勒所指缺乏準備的產業。疫情前的香港音樂觀眾主要是享受免費網上音樂會，並未有消費網上音樂會的習慣。而樂團在面對場地設備和人才方面，都未有太多資源大力發展網上音樂會或數碼化。所以不論「九大」[6]還是中小型香港樂團和其觀眾，在疫情前未算有充足準備去應付突如其來的數碼轉型，更遑論香港樂團發展其數碼資產。

若我們向流行音樂生產業借鏡，它們因疫情而大力發展網上音樂會，並為了加強網上音樂會獨有體驗，不論華語樂手林俊傑、韓國樂手Super Junior和美國樂手Billie Eilish 也在線上演唱會加入XR元素，讓樂迷有另一番體驗[7]。KKTIX票務及虛擬場館事業群總經理林怡君也在訪問中分享：「去年疫情爆發之後，海外藝人粉絲見面會或演唱會一下子都沒有了，開始討論轉成線上的可能性。尤其，海外藝人巡迴演唱會都是固定的，一旦檔期取消，曝光量也會減少，勢必得想方設法舉辦活動，線上就是彌補回來的選擇。」而在筆者執筆期間，香港流行音樂會也嘗試發展現場和網上音樂會並行的雙軌制。

從流行音樂在網上音樂會的發展，我們也可以留意到網上音樂會發展趨勢為觀眾提供現場音樂會未能感受的體驗。這可以是香港樂團未來發展的方向，但場地、資源和觀眾是否足夠支撐整個發展卻是一個未知數。

所以下文會在每一波疫情先勾勒出新冠疫情對香港樂團的影響，並以全球網上音樂會的方式為例。本文也會討論每一波疫情限制和數碼資產帶來的機遇，同時也會討論業界在每一波疫情下如何精益求精。

第一波疫情（二〇二〇年一月二十三日至三月二十日）： 如何在缺乏場地演出下與觀眾連結

自二〇二〇年一月二十三日發現第一宗新冠疫情，康樂及文化事務署（康文署）在一月二十九日宣布關閉轄下演出場地，香港各樂團，甚至香港藝術節也宣告取消。香港各表演團體在第一波疫情未見明朗下，也採取不同的策略與觀眾連結，從中也發現各樂團的資源如何影響他們應對疫情。而在第一波疫情中，不論九大和中小型藝團，它們未有採取任何收費模式，免費給觀眾欣賞。以下簡述第一波疫情網上音樂會的主要模式：

網上社交平台即時直播

由於當時疫情未限制在非康文署場地進行演出，西九自由空間旁的留白Livehouse仍可安排免費網上音樂會直播，並後來成為#LivehouseAtHome 系列，每逢周五至周日安排一系列本地音樂串流直播表演，帶來爵士樂、另類音樂、古典及獨立音樂的網上表演。「六個星期的 #LivehouseAtHome 串流直播表演錄得全球超過 110,000 人次觀看」[8]。整個系列截至執筆為止，每場演出平均有接近一千次瀏覽，最高瀏覽量的錄影至今錄得四千四百次瀏覽。

樂手在家演出錄影

專業樂手在家演出也是第一波疫情常見的網上演出模式，也樂見不同樂手用不同方式分享他們疫情下的生活和以樂曲鼓勵大眾齊心抗疫。至於在發佈平台上，除了社交平台Facebook 外，也會選擇發佈到其他免費串流平台如YouTube。在這個階段，香港管弦樂團自二月二十日起平均三至四天發佈一段短片，而香港中樂團自三月十二日起每天發佈一段短片。觀眾也對此反應不錯，也多認識了不同樂手鮮有在音樂廳展現的音樂世界，如香港管弦樂團中提琴首席以鋼琴演奏《天空之城》主題曲或香港中樂團笙演奏家魏慎甫在影片演奏《射雕英雄傳》的不同聲部時，不忘加插幽默的「帶頭盔被扑傻瓜」片段。

然而，第一波可以開展此系列的樂團只有香港管弦樂團和香港中樂團，其他香港樂團，特別是沒有駐團樂手的樂團則未有以此方式與觀眾連結。

聲蜚合唱節在第一波疫情下推出第三部「合唱微電影」 一《兩。生》（Double Lives）。由於此影片是香港特別行政區政府「藝能發展資助計劃」的資助計劃一部分，而該計劃早於二〇一七年成功申請。我們很難說這部微電影因疫情而生，但這個形式相比其他網上音樂演出，明顯在視覺上更勝一籌。然而，這部微電影截至筆者執筆之際卻未足五百次瀏覽，實在令人感到可惜。

在第一波疫情下，本地樂手和藝團仍在探索網上演出的各種可能性，不論在形式、曲目和平台均作不同嘗試。縱然以上三種形式之中，微電影不論在整個藝術價值和影片質素上遠勝其他選擇，而且樂曲和舞蹈影像非常連貫，還可以考慮日後於大型屏幕放映。但要留意聲蜚合唱節自二〇一七年起開始籌備這個資助計劃，並不像其餘兩種方式那樣可以即時回應疫情。而網上即時直播和樂手在家的錄影所製造的真實感，營造如布希亞（Jean Baudrillard）在《擬像與擬仿》（Simulacra and Simulation）提出的「超真實」（hyperreality）。這些影片質素不一，如網上現場直播更只是由一個鏡頭拍攝，沒有任何剪接，而且大多只是家用或入門級的專業攝影器材。但這些影片的真實性比真人騷更真實，除了他們有共同以音樂抗疫的信息外，更重要是這些影片大多在非公共空間（留白Livehouse亦非公共空間）或私人地方（如樂手的家中）拍攝。而這種真實感在香港市民自SARS第一次經歷這種大規模隔離後其實有安撫作用，至少令人感到不是只有自己因疫情未能如常工作和生活。相比之下，聲蜚音樂節的《兩。生》（Double Lives）以其合唱學院演唱之蒙台威爾第（Monteverdi）牧歌《狠心的亞瑪麗莉》（Cruda Amarilli）及《噢米提諾，親愛的米提諾》（O Mirtillo, Mirtillo anima mia）為配樂，結合形體和大自然影像所製作的微電影，只能說是生不逢時，其真實性與其他形式實在比下去。然而，這些高質素的錄像製作在餘下的疫情卻大受歡迎，也印證了布希亞的理論之餘，更重要是走數碼化路線不一定要新科技。在合適的時機下，家用拍攝器材也有很好的網上回響。

第二波疫情（二〇二〇年三月二十日至七月八日）：面對全球音樂演出所帶來的挑戰和拓展數碼資產與商界合作

第二波疫情其實是緊接著第一波疫情，而康文署也於三月二十一日宣布表演場地繼續暫停開放，並於五月二十六日宣佈於六月一日重開表演場地。與此同時，柏林愛樂在三月初便以「贈券」方式，讓全球觀眾可免費透過網絡收看數碼音樂廳推出選自庫存中的特備節目。而美國大都會歌劇院於三月二十日推出免費網上節目系列Nightly Met Opera Streams，每日安排過去十四年曾錄影的節目。在這個階段也突顯了樂團數碼資產的優勢，不單止可以在疫情嚴峻環境下拓展觀眾，更重要是向全球展示其高質素的藝術作品。

這段期間各樂團的在家音樂系列也隨著表演場地重開而結束，但它們和不同商業機構和團體合作，以便進行網上放映。香港樂團網上音樂錄影發佈也沒有較第一波疫情頻密，反而走向電視台節目質素，也進行了不同的探索。另外值得一提的是中小型樂團Music Lab和Live House Wontonmeen合作的一場收費網上直播音樂會《Show Must Go On-Line》，並於Zoom平台發佈以微電影形式拍攝的音樂錄像。相比之下Music Lab 算是疫情之中推動網上收費音樂會的先驅。現簡述第二波疫情不同的合作模式：

• 與商業機構合作

香港管弦樂團和香港中樂團在這個時期絕對是表表者，它們分別與3香港合作進行網上直播音樂會。在3香港和其他機構的支持下，香港管弦樂團成功舉辦第一個網上直播音樂會，而香港中樂團則舉辦全港首個5G Live戶外網上4K直播慈善音樂會。這個形式不但滿足了觀眾對真實感的要求，更重要的是讓全球觀眾知道香港的樂團如其他國際知名樂團一樣，有能力舉辦高質素的網上直播音樂會。

• 與電視台及電影院合作

香港小交響樂團則是與ViuTV 及MOViE MOViE戲院合作，為香港觀眾帶來“Back On Stage”現場錄影演出，除了做到把音樂帶「入屋」外，更著重錄音及錄影過程達到電影院級數。與其他樂團相比，香港小交響樂團集中資源在高質素的音效和畫面上。

而香港管弦樂團也於六月五日發佈在RTHK 31台《演藝盛薈．音樂到會》的錄影。由於是電視台拍攝，再加上音樂是大家耳熟能詳的皮亞佐拉《自由探戈》，該錄影截至執筆之際已有超過十八萬六千次瀏覽量，為整個Phil Your Life with Music系列之冠。

• 與藝術團體或場地合作

香港中小型藝團大多透過這種合作方式發佈免費網上音樂會，如康文署、大館表演藝術部和亞洲文化協會（香港中心），當中包括香港弦樂團賽馬會音樂能量計劃《美樂共賞》社區音樂會系列和襄聲平台2《襄序曲之春》線上音樂會，為樂團提供網上直播支援或場地不等。

以上各種合作模式不少也是在第一波疫情時開始商討，並在第二波疫情開放場地時錄影或製作。這除了顯示各樂團有能力進行不同數碼製作外，也開始拓展把其演出放在不同平同發佈，甚至銷售的可能性。而香港中樂團更推出「香港網上中樂節」，透過公開徵集作品，播放一系列本地專業和業餘樂團的錄像，算是在疫情中開創網上音樂節先河。但有一點要留意，雖然香港觀眾開始接受欣賞網上演出的模式，但未成為主流。更重要的是，香港不同樂團在此刻沒有像柏林愛樂或美國大都會歌劇院那樣發佈昔日錄影限時重溫。相信除了存檔的錄影未能作出放映外，另一個可能性是要處理網上放映的版權。

第三波疫情（二〇二〇年七月九日至十一月二十日）： 線上線下音樂會如何共存 中小樂團如何發展數碼資產

場地在此階段關閉七十六日，代表第三波疫情有超過一半時間是不能進行演出。這段時間各樂團主要回歸場地現場演出，能夠同時兼顧數碼錄像製作和發佈的樂團也只有香港中樂團。這個階段大部分網上音樂演出和節目均由康文署製作。

但這些數碼錄像製作更不止以音樂會為主，更趨向電視節目化，如香港中樂團的中樂MV《追月》和康文署的《爵士「不」取消》系列。前者尤如流行音樂錄像，後者在爵士樂演出中加添演奏者講解，讓整個音樂節目更具吸引力。

中小型樂團也大多回歸舞台，而仍有發展其數碼資產的藝團，如美聲匯和竹韻小集等，與康文署合作不同網上節目。而中小型藝團美聲匯也開始透過中介，讓他們的作品在內地及其他地方播放。康文署新視野藝術節雖然取消，但加添網上演藝平台「更新視野」，實行線上線下節目並行。以音樂作品來說，當中最兼備數碼和現場演出元素為《空氣頌》。聲音劇場（丹麥）透過氣流與煙霧的縹緲投影與香港兒童合唱團在香港公園「同台」演出，完全打破地域和疫情界限。除了現場演出外，更有網上版本，讓更多未能參與的觀眾可以在網上感受科技和自然環境的無縫結合。

第四波疫情（二〇二〇年十一月二十一日至二〇二一年十二月三十一日）： 香港音樂藝術界經歷疫情後的成長

第四波疫情只有約兩成時間關閉表演場地，但有幾件對香港發展數碼節目的大事發生，包括虎豹樂圃開展「遊弦活樂」線上音樂節全直播節目、康文署文化節目組Facebook 和YouTube 更名為「藝在「指」尺」、香港藝術節並行網上及現場演出，和香港藝術發展局的Arts Go Digital 節目於二〇二〇年十二月三十日開始發佈獲資助的節目。筆者特別提及虎豹樂圃開展「遊弦活樂」線上音樂節全直播節目，因為是首個在古蹟活化場地舉辦的網上直播音樂節。這個場地若非早前有和流行音樂合作直播音樂會的經驗，要處理一個先天設計不是為古典音樂會設計的場地進行古典音樂會的演出，其實也有一定難度。另外，二〇二一年第49屆香港藝術節的開幕演出，香港中樂團的「樂旅中國」作網上與現場同步演出，雖已不是新鮮事，但也算是香港首個大型藝術節作此安排。

下文主要以Arts Go Digital 作為分析香港中小型樂團和音樂藝術工作者在後疫情時代的得著，特別是Arts Go Digital 獲資助的樂團和音樂藝術工作者大部分在疫情之後已有機會進行網上演出，包括香港作曲家聯會、一才鑼鼓、竹韻小集和美聲匯。

Arts Go Digital 大部分音樂節目的意念有趣，而且幫助了不少本地藝術家發表新音樂作品，但呈現方式卻有很大差異，當中涉及資助額、藝術家數碼知識和製作數碼節目經驗。由於每個申請團體或藝術工作者只有三十萬至五十萬元進行數碼創作，若與不同藝術家進行合作，如一才鑼鼓在新網站發表了過百首微音樂新作。從作品量推算，它們可以用運用在數碼呈現的資源有限，因大部分資金會用作支付版權費。而一才鑼鼓再自行推出了十二集網上YouTube 節目作推廣，不計較瀏覽數字，已算是把資助金額物盡其用，又如何計較在數碼呈現上是否合乎美學呢？另外，藝術家的數碼知識也大大影響音樂作品的美學呈現。以鄺展維和梁基爵的網頁作比較，分別在音樂意念和故事性很強，但其網頁呈現卻大大影響了觀眾對音樂作品探索的意欲。前者的網頁實在似中學生初學網頁的作品，若要連結上《22世紀殺人網絡》經典黑底螢光錄字的大量數據跳動動畫，也甚為牽強； 後者在進入網頁後，會自動播放音樂和動畫，明顯可以讓人探索不同房間內容。事實上，網絡世界有如此多節目選擇，網絡觀眾不會像現場觀眾般有耐性探索一個視覺或資訊上毫不吸引的網頁。當網頁不吸引時，觀眾便沒有興趣點擊任何連結。若網頁沒有自動播放音樂，基本上觀眾在沒有聽到任何音樂作品下，便因視覺不吸引，很快轉向瀏覽其他更吸引的網頁或節目。然而，梁基爵也在訪問中分享『申請到50萬資助，他笑仍是「有少少賴嘢，做大咗個頭，大家都蝕晒本」』[9]。若具備數碼知識的音樂家也感到五十萬其實不足以製作互動元素和美學兼備的音樂網頁時，其他缺乏數碼知識的音樂家在製作相同質素網頁時更為百上加斤。所以香港藝術發展局在資助數碼作品時，也應考量藝術家的數碼知識是否足以讓作品在網絡上有合適的美學呈現。當然，音樂創作者本應只需集中音樂創作，但疫情也突顯他們的數碼知識如何大大影響作品在網絡的呈現。

鄺展維《下一個現場》

梁基爵《超連結大廈》

而疫情中的數碼錄像經驗，也大大影響樂團在Arts Go Digital 的作品。本人認為眾多Arts Go Digital 的音樂影片之中，美聲匯的《冰上〈冬之旅〉》音樂和視覺俱備，把 《冬之旅》這個故事在溜冰場上拍攝，加上柯大衛的落力演出及成博民和劉中達的導演手法，整個網上觀看體驗不單止出色，也感受到《冬之旅》那種寒徹骨的無奈。同時也看到美聲匯在與康文署及其他團體的合作之中，吸收了不少錄像製作經驗，並把傳統音樂作品透過專業的錄像製作提升至另一個新高度。

結語

疫情突顯香港樂團和音樂藝術工作者不得不走向數碼化。但整個過程之中，除了突顯業界缺乏場地和器材支援外，更重要是大部分香港樂團和音樂藝術工作者在疫情前未具備足夠製作專業質素的網上或電影節目能力，以確保其創作在不同平台呈現專業質素。當政府在支援各樂團和音樂藝術工作者創作以保生計，是否更應同時考慮如何幫助業界提升他們的數碼知識水平，以應付全球競爭激烈的網絡世界呢？

然而，這些專業質素的數碼節目是需要大量資金的長久支持，並非一時三刻可見到成果，而樂團和音樂藝術工作者更應考慮的是：自己的作品是否適合結合藝術科技或走向數碼化？如果是朝這個方向發展，是否把自己的音樂作品直接放上平台，還是要針對平台的觀眾在形式上有所改動，以確保觀眾有一個完善的音樂藝術體驗？如果並非朝向這個方向發展，其實不應為受資助而「科技」。這無疑確保生計，但卻是浪費社會資源。

[1] 薩依德：〈極致瞬間〉，載《音樂的極境》（Music at the Limits），第141 – 142頁，雷淑容編，莊加遜譯。廣西：廣西師範大學出版社，2019。

[2] 香港特別行政區政府統計處：〈2019/2020住戶開支〉。

https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/tc/scode290.html

[3]大學線：〈藝術疫轉｜新冠肺炎疫情下暫別理想　藝術工作者能屈能伸〉，《香港01》，2020年12月20日。

https://www.hk01.com/sns/article/562567?utm_source=01articlecopy&utm_medium=referral

[4] 立法會：《會議過程正式紀錄》，2022年3月23日。

https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/chinese/counmtg/floor/cm20220323a-confirm-ec.pdf

[5] Melissa Lesnie：〈YouTube Symphony attracts 33 million views worldwide 〉，《Limelight》，2011年3月25日。https://web.archive.org/web/20110411054027/http://www.limelightmagazine.com.au/Article/252414,youtube-symphony-attracts-33-million-views-worldwide.aspx

[6] 九個主要藝團為香港管弦樂團、香港中樂團、香港小交響樂團、香港舞蹈團、香港芭蕾舞團、城市當代舞蹈團、香港話劇團、中英劇團及進念．二十面體。

[7] 馬瑞璿：〈線上演唱會憑什麼賣四千　解密背後酷技術〉，《今周刊》，2021年7月14日。https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/183015/post/202107140027/

[8] 立法會：《西九文化區推廣表演藝術及場地營運的進度匯報》，2021年3月1日。

https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr20-21/chinese/panels/wkcdp/papers/wkcdp20210301cb1-635-1-ec.pdf

[9] 明報：〈科網世代：揼網頁拍片 藝術「超連結」〉，《明報》網站，2021年4月11日。https://ol.mingpao.com/ldy/cultureleisure/culture/20210411/1618080594766/%E7%A7%91%E7%B6%B2%E4%B8%96%E4%BB%A3-%E6%8F%BC%E7%B6%B2%E9%A0%81%E6%8B%8D%E7%89%87-%E8%97%9D%E8%A1%93%E3%80%8C%E8%B6%85%E9%80%A3%E7%B5%90%E3%80%8D

Let us recount the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak: at first, people thought that it was a localised epidemic, and did not expect it to spread for a long time. Epidemic prevention and quarantine measures started to be implemented in various places, but they were not stringent on the whole. Or perhaps it would be more apt to say that even if the authorities did not state it, people were generally thinking, “The pandemic will be over soon, so we should try to minimise the impact of prevention measures on normal life.” Thus, “normal life” became antonymous with “global pandemic”: as COVID-19 began to break out all over the world at an unimaginable rate, we also seemed to have gained a renewed understanding of the term that we know as “globalisation”.

The pandemic was like a radiocontrast agent that identified networks of contemporary global human interaction. We suddenly discovered that even though we often say that cyberspace has eliminated the physical distance between people in the Internet Age, the reality is that it has never replaced face-to-face communication. Be it from the macro perspectives of economics and culture, or at the micro interpersonal and social levels, the same holds true. The so-called “normal life” refers precisely to this kind of “physical contact” between people.

Deaths, quarantines, and lockdowns continued to take place worldwide, and one cannot help but be reminded of literary imaginings the likes of those observed in Albert Camus’s The Plague, or omens pointing to civilisational collapse such as the Black Death during the Middle Ages. However, what is in the imagination stays in the imagination. It turned out that the coronavirus did not lead to excessive speculation about “Armageddon”. The death toll gradually became a number, and the majority of governments around the globe soon made the “resumption of normal life” their goal.

The problem is that the term “normal life” has been completely redefined over the two or so years of the pandemic. People lost the opportunity to communicate face-to-face while undergoing quarantine, but their desire to interact did not only not vanish, but transformed into two types of mindsets. The first hoped to use “staying in touch” as the new definition of “normal life”, even if it was only by online means. Consequently, videoconferencing software suddenly became a necessity of life, while “working from home” also became the new normal; the second was the complete opposite and loathed “online communication”. Reiterating the negative and “technophobic” remarks about social networks mentioned in the past, those of this mentality drew on such commentary to justify the need to “resume (pre-pandemic) normal life”.

Because of the emergence of effective vaccines, some governments were able to propose “coexistence with the virus” as a condition for resuming normal life, and subsequently accelerated the pace of restoring operations across all sectors in society. On the other hand, some governments insisted on a “zero-COVID” policy, thus resulting in a delayed recovery. However, regardless of policy, there is no way of avoiding one fact: having lived in isolation and completely replaced face-to-face communication with online interaction, people can no longer pretend that they don’t need – or at least don’t need to rely on – online communication. To put it in another way, the quarantine life amid the pandemic has forced us to contemplate which aspects of “normal life” still require “physical experience”. And how does the “normal life” that we now lead online differ from the way we used to live?

It was under this backdrop that contemporary theatre was thrust into uncharted territory. Into the third year of the pandemic, Hong Kong theatre still has not “fully” returned to the pre-COVID “normal”. This problem is attributed to at least three factors:

The first has to do with the operating and production “norms” of theatre troupes. Due to fluctuations in the COVID-19 situation and the government’s anti-epidemic policies, performance venues were closed at short notice from time to time, or required to operate at reduced capacity and accommodate fewer performances. On January 29, 2020, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department announced the closure of all performance venues for the first time. With the pandemic remaining persistent in the past two or so years, venues have closed and reopened repeatedly. At the same time, audience numbers, as well as the epidemic prevention requirements for performers and viewers, have also been changed every now and then. Such circumstances made it impossible for troupes to carry out production planning in a “normal” way. On the one hand, they had to bear the risk of increased costs resulting from not being able to perform or the reduced number of shows and audience members. On the other, they had to formulate backup plans to reduce the corresponding pressure, such as switching to the streaming of live or recorded performances.

The second is related to the viewing “norms” of audiences. Spectators are no longer strangers to “online theatre viewing" after living in isolation. The virtual world became indispensable during the pandemic, and even things that we used to think were only possible onsite could be done online. “Working from home” is a clear example. Others such as online classes, online lectures, virtual museum tours, and even online Chinese New Year gatherings, have also become commonplace. Putting it in another way, when we plan an activity nowadays, “onsite” and “online” are both options. Because of COVID-19, people are more inclined towards the latter choice. Theatre audiences are also fully understanding of a troupe’s decision to present online performances, and have gradually grown used to this kind of viewing experience.

The third pertains to the “norms” of the theatre itself. Although it seems that we have become accustomed to the virtual life, and increasingly see “onsite” and “online” as two equal options that do not connote “normal” or “backup”, with the popularisation of “online theatre”, we (including creators, audiences, and critics) must also reconsider a question regarding the nature of theatre itself: If it does not take place onsite, is theatre still theatre? Or we could ask the following: What kind of theatre can theatre be if it does not take place onsite? The global pandemic has not only fundamentally changed the mode of theatre creation, but also inspired our imaginings of contemporary theatre. While the number of Hong Kong theatre productions has drastically diminished over the course of the pandemic, the discourse on contemporary theatre aesthetics has unexpectedly flourished.

What is certain is that the (forced) online shift has greatly stimulated the minds of theatre creators, spectators, and critics alike. Creators must take practicality into account and consider how transferring a performance to cyberspace will affect its aesthetics and production conditions, as well as how it will change the way they create; audiences need to learn to adapt to this structural shift in order to enjoy a viewing experience that is similar yet different to that of the past. Such audience experiences may either be more autonomous or more constrained; as for critics, in addition to commenting on the merits and shortcomings of individual works, they must go one step further and pay attention to how this kind of revolution in the realm of theatre influences the presentation of works, audience reception, as well as the future development direction of the discipline, and even how it may lead to the rewriting of contemporary theatre modes on the theoretical level. These are all issues that Hong Kong theatre must examine in the (post-) pandemic era.

Creators mainly dealt with theatre’s online transition in the two following ways:

The first was to regard online performance as an expedient measure to maintain regular presentations. With many works originally intended for in-venue performance being “forced” to go online, creators often did not give too much thought to “online performance” as a mode, and could only use the easiest method of playing back the recording of the actual performance or dress rehearsal in the theatre. The camerawork in these recorded performances is relatively simple, with hardly any consideration given to the differences between live and screen viewing. Thus, the resulting footage is often dull.

The second was to stream previous performances online to maintain a troupe’s exposure. With the reopening of venues remaining in a state of indefinite postponement, some of the bigger and more established troupes made their back catalogue available for online viewing for a limited time. These videos were originally only recorded for documenting and archiving purposes, and not intended for public broadcasting at all, so the quality is generally poor.

There are quite a few examples of the two above cases during the early days of the outbreak. However, creators, troupe operators, and viewers alike were generally dissatisfied with these “works” – the main reason was not creative quality, but rather, the “online” presentation format. Let us cast aside purely technical issues such as streaming platforms first – many theatre companies were not familiar with what “online theatre” was at all, while spectators were also unaccustomed to the corresponding viewing experience. Theatre audiences require “training”. That is to say, they gradually become acquainted with the “liveness” of the theatre through frequent attendance. This “liveness” includes the rational processing and judgment of the content and messages of a work. More importantly, it also involves the integrated perception of various senses, i.e., a kind of “experiential” or “immersive” affair. Online viewing completely nullifies this experience that theatregoers have accumulated over many years. A lot of audiences had bad experiences with online viewing because they felt removed. The specific contributing factors are as follows:

The first was the lack of liveness. The Internet and the camera became barriers between the audience and performers. Viewers were clearly aware from the very beginning that they were not in the same physical space (the theatre) as where the performance was taking place, thus the theatre experience which they have come to know so well could not be reproduced.

The second was the loss of the sense of ritual. One enters the auditorium, the lights dim, and then the performance begins – this was a mandatory “ceremony” for theatregoers in the past. However, online viewing has eradicated this ritual. Firstly, spectators could not “go to the theatre”, nor could they interact with other audience members and creators before and after the performance. This already marks the first step in “the loss of the sense of ritual”. Viewers also did not have to watch a show at a fixed time and place – they simply did so “in the comfort of their own home”. While viewing a production online, they would either do other things at the same time, or be distracted by activities that usually take place at home, such as eating casually, chatting with family members, and going to the toilet. This further diminished the sense of ritual associated with going to the theatre. In terms of sensory perception, the experience was not much different from watching TV or surfing the Internet.

The third is sensory restriction. One of the advantages of live theatre is that the audience has the freedom to choose what to watch/receive. Many viewers found that the online format limited their perspective. Since there is often more than one thing happening on the stage/performance area, the presence of actors in different places, together with staging techniques, gives rise to a whole yet multifaceted picture. However, the camera is in control when watching recorded footage/livestreams online. It might give you a panoramic view at a particular moment in time, or it might give you a close-up of an actor, or even a certain body part of an actor. This could be the director and cameraman’s personal choice based on aesthetic or technical considerations, but it completely limits the viewing angle for the “at-home” audience on the other side of the broadband connection.

As for the differences between the in-venue and online formats, many people have noticed the two following points:

The first is related to the boundary between theatre and film. Traditionally, “mise-en-scène” is thought to be the biggest difference between the two. This term originated in theatre, but later became widely used in film. It refers to how a creator (mostly the director) arranges various elements in a work. As a matter of fact, the two disciplines share many similarities, from content (story, plot, dialogue, actors, etc.) to method (the use of scenes, lighting, sound, etc.). Nevertheless, “mise-en-scène” fundamentally distinguishes one from the other: the mise-en-scène in theatre takes place on the stage/in the auditorium, while that in film occurs within the screen. This also extends to the temporal difference observed in the two formats, i.e., stage productions consist of a continuous string of events taking place onsite, while there is a sense of temporal disconnection in cinematic works due to the editing involved.

Online theatre is a means to cinematise stage productions. National Theatre Live, with which Hong Kong audiences are relatively familiar, does exactly this: it films theatre performances using cinematic mise-en-scène techniques for presentation on the silver screen. Yet, the online versions of Hong Kong theatre productions amid the pandemic generally failed to achieve this visual quality, with costs being one key issue and production experience another. More importantly, however, this approach requires creators to have this awareness of “theatre filmization”, so as to be able to offer spectators a “cinematic” experience rather than a “theatrical” one. Nevertheless, many of these Hong Kong stage productions which were broadcast online lacked this creative awareness, and instead further magnified the differences between the two disciplines, thus interfering with the audience’s viewing experience.

The second has to do with the nature of theatre itself. It seems appropriate to quote Peter Brook’s famous words once again here: “I can take any empty space and call it a bare stage. A man walks across this empty space whilst someone else is watching him, and this is all that is needed for an act of theatre to be engaged.” This statement has become a reference point where reflection on online theatre is concerned. Undoubtedly, the concept of “defining theatre as ‘empty space’” has always been a constant in Hong Kong theatre. The key elements of “empty space” are as follows: space, viewing, being viewed, and a live setting. The Internet, meanwhile, is a platform which removes the contexts of “space” and “live settings”, making the “empty space” notion difficult to practise.

Similarly, the online format also destroys the “viewing” relationship between audiences and performers. The “empty space” concept requires the viewer and the viewed to be in the same setting for an act of theatre to be engaged. According to this definition, online theatre is not “theatre” at all. And as long as creators and spectators continue to embrace this theory, so-called “online theatre” can only be an expedient and temporary presentation strategy – people will eventually demand to “return to the theatre” so that the “norm” of the “empty space” can be restored.

Nevertheless, protracted pandemic and quarantine measures have not only caused people to lose patience, but also changed their perception of theatre on a fundamental basis. It can be said that theatre in the post-COVID era is undergoing a contemporary paradigm shift: “empty space” is no longer so essential, and the differences between theatre and film have blurred. More importantly, the cyber migration of social interactions resulting from living in isolation became the catalyst for revolutionising our imaginings of theatre. Creators began to ponder one question: If we must continue to create online theatre (not as an expedient or temporary strategy), how should we handle the tensions between the “online experience” and the “theatre experience”?

As a result, theatre has not only been freed from the confines of the stage once more (the first time was possibly when Bertolt Brecht broke the fourth wall of realist theatre), but also brought into people’s contemporary online experience for the first time: we once believed that there were certain physical interactions, such as the theatre experience, that could not take place online, but as the pandemic of the century continued to spread, even theatregoing began to be included in the list of activities that could be done virtually. Once people accept this idea, a whole new problematic in Hong Kong theatre presents itself. And even if the epidemic eases and performance venues reopen, this problematic will not go away: How do we incorporate the online experience into theatre creation?

In fact, this problematic is nothing new: immersive theatre, which has become popular around the world in recent years and also deeply influenced Hong Kong theatre, is the exact same deal. Immersive theatre breaks the traditional theatre framework, putting emphasis on how stage works construct the overall audience experience beyond simply “watching”. Consequently, immersive theatre makes extensive use of Brecht’s “epic theatre” techniques, as well as methods from movements such as environmental theatre and Happening, to directly introduce the audience into real-life social experiences. When Hong Kong theatre creators are attempting to handle the interactions between the Internet and the theatre, they must first figure out how to turn their personal online experiences into a form of theatre – for instance, the use of social media platforms, streaming technology, and video conferencing software, or even the interactive functions of online games, video channels, and message boards.

Let me cite a few examples. Reframe Theatre’s How to present the love life of Hong Kong people to Aliens in the time of pandemic was adapted from an old work by director Yan Pat-to, with the original “lecture theatre” format, which took place in the physical theatre, changed to one resembling an online class. Additionally, the creator enabled the messaging function of the online communication software, allowing the audience to send instant messages. The creator’s intentions are very clear: to simulate the online class experience in real life, i.e., to try to organically integrate the online experience into the work, so as to rewrite the relationship between performers and audiences. Theatre critic Jeffery Lin pointed out that, on the one hand, the viewers’ instant messages bring “a sense of realism” to the narrative of the play, but on the other, they “distract” other audience members, thus highlighting the various shortcomings of the script. The narrative of the work and the “narrative” instantly woven by the audience might complement each other, but they might also compete with each other, vying for the viewers’ attention and “taking the play in another direction”.[1]

Lin also compared two other works which were presented via video conferencing software. In the mini auto-ethnotheatre production, See You Zoom, the four actors shared how they lived under the pandemic using the titular software, and then opened the virtual floor to discussion. However, Lin believes that the creators overcontrolled the way in which viewers could respond to the content. For example, audience members were asked to give scores and only allowed to answer specific questions, which prevented them from expressing their opinions in depth.[2] As for Riceball Association’s Table for Two, creator Jennifer Lam held 100 online performances over the course of four months, each time inviting one viewer for a chat in her virtual restaurant. Lin thinks that the work was only designed to have a frame and a set of procedures, while the content was formed through the real-time conversation between the actor and audience member. To him, this kind of chance encounter in virtual space may be “the beginnings of a new type of theatre”.[3]

Lin’s comparison underscores how the online migration of theatre can rewrite the relationship between performers and audiences. Firstly, although the sense of liveness has vanished, the real-time interaction has, on the contrary, proven to be more vigorous and effective than live theatre. However, whether this kind of interaction can produce a form of theatre close to that of Augusto Boal’s style, in which the audience is heavily involved in the narrative of a work, depends very much on how the creator uses the tool that is “cyberspace”. As per Lin’s analysis, See You Zoom had an excessive grip on interaction, How to present the love life of Hong Kong people to Aliens in the time of pandemic was too loosely structured, while Table for Two had to rely on the ability of participating viewers – in the role of amateur actors – to handle the content and mode of interaction (this also requires a form of “acting skill”), in order to generate effective exchanges.

In addition, Lin also critiqued a work modelled after online games: R. U. Human? by Inspire Workshop. The production simulates an online game using virtual office software, and allows viewers to freely explore the spaces and events in the system. Lin believes that the biggest difference between this type of online theatre and interactive film is that the former requires all audience members to be simultaneously present in the time-limited gaming space. This “co-presence” not only affects the rhythm of the work, but its collective nature also directly determines the direction of the narrative, differentiating this format from interactive film, wherein choices are made by the individual. However, Lin also pointed out that figuring out how to create live theatre’s sense of collective ritual and intimacy in cyberspace is also an issue that requires further exploration.[4]

Since the advent of the Internet, online experiences have been integrated into contemporary life at speeds both swift and slow. Swift because Internet technology has developed rapidly and its rate of popularisation has increased exponentially; slow because contemporary society has always been wary of Internet technology – on the one hand, we remain vigilant about the decline of face-to-face communication caused by the Internet, and on the other, we worry about being subjected to surveillance in our daily lives and fear the arrival of the “Digital Leviathan”. Nonetheless, a global pandemic has greatly accelerated the internetisation and virtualisation of contemporary life. People were forced to give up most in-person meetings and cast aside their cyberspace fears, so as to stay in touch with others and not end up in a state of ontological loneliness. Meanwhile, Internet technology has also reshaped the way we exist as individuals as well as our sense of togetherness as a collective.

All these have become factors that theatre creators cannot avoid and must intervene with cautiously when producing online works. Meanwhile, critics have to continually question the effectiveness of these efforts and update our understanding of contemporary theatre. Yan Pat-to, who is both a theatre director and critic, is optimistic that the online format is a step “towards decentred performance modes” in theatre. He even drew on Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction theory, pointing out that the cyber migration of theatre, or even theatre-generated mediums (he cited several online theatre works that incorporated elements of audio dramas and online videos as examples), have departed from the centre that is the “traditional definition of theatre”.[5] What Yan did not clarify was what the “traditional definition of theatre” was – he was most likely referring to Brook’s classic definition of “(in-person) theatre”, which indeed seems to be a form of “theatre-centrism”. Because of apandemic, we may have found a path to “decentralisation” through the Internet.

However, this optimism cannot mask people’s apprehension about the future of theatre. While we believe in the possibilities of the discipline’s future, we also have grave fears for its demise. The three following aspects precisely represent how people imagine the future of theatre will be under the pandemic:

The first is liveness. The call for “returning to the theatre” has never ceased, with most creators still insisting on the live experience of the “empty space”. However, many people also believe that as long as we broaden our understanding of “liveness”, we will find that online experiences can also offer a kind of “(virtual) liveness”. It must be noted that “virtual” is not synonymous with “fictitious”. It is just another (or the “most contemporary”) experience which, especially in an era of pandemics, has permeated everyone’s daily life, changing people’s perception of “life” at a fundamental level. A more conciliatory way of putting it would be that “physical” and “virtual” are not mutually exclusive. The online platform will not destroy theatre, but only serve to expand its definition.

The second is publicness. Discourse on the “publicness of theatre” has always existed and, in addition to works of “political theatre”, is also a plea for new modes of theatre, i.e., how to manifest the publicness of social or political issues through theatre formats or aesthetics. The most direct observation is that, due to its liveness, theatre can become a space in which performers and audiences interact, hence making it conducive to the formation of public opinion. Works that belong to Augusto Boal’s school of theatre are the most representative where this is concerned. In Hong Kong, meanwhile, the practices of Playback Theatre are also quite on-trend.

Nevertheless, the Internet’s function as a contemporary performance space that embodies publicness is old news. In particular, from the social movement in Hong Kong which spanned several years, people have already recognised the Internet’s power to shape public opinion and even mobilise social movements. Consequently, a number of people (like Yan) are convinced that, just like various other political and cultural domains, the Internet can be used as a means of “decentralisation” in theatre: in cyberspace, audiences can have a deeper involvement in a performance than in the conventional theatre, and even engage in immersive participation more easily, through the use of social media platforms, message boards, or messaging software. But on the other hand, we can also hold the completely opposite opinion and see this kind of “decentralisation” via the Internet as a form of “atomisation”: it isolates audience members from one another, and also separates them from the performers. The spectators’ “participation” in the public exchange of the theatre is actually just virtual and imaginary in nature, rendering it even more detrimental to real public dialogue. This is evident in Lin’s analysis.

The third is cultural democracy: it is undeniable that “decentralisation” is a key concept of the online format. Especially with the rise of blockchain technology in recent years, people cannot help but think about the possibilities of “de-institutionalisation” in theatre creation: for example, troupes may no longer have to rely on government funding or be subjected to market logic. The use of the Internet or other technologies not only helps reduce costs, but also eliminates the absolute constraints of scheduling and venue space, facilitating more flexibility in both “troupe creation” and “audience viewing”, as well as reflecting a form of cultural democracy to a greater degree. Felix Chan, who is both a drama critic and theatre producer, has proven that online theatre offers various possibilities for theatre companies and creators with his own production experience amid the pandemic. The format can free them from complete reliance on government and market resources, enable them to create more flexibly and freely, as well as further facilitate fairer collaborations between creators with different backgrounds and abilities, and from different regions, thereby bringing about universalisation in cultural production.[6]

However, this subjective desire may only be an ideal that has yet to take shape. The theatre system has never been easy to revolutionise. The pandemic has only created a “suspended moment” for society, forcing people to think about the possibilities of change. But when COVID-19 subsides or becomes an “everyday norm”, this collective experience of suspension will gradually wane, and the conservative voices of those who wish to return to the “old normal” and rebuild the “system” will re-emerge. This struggle is mandatory, and exactly the same as that associated with any form of social change.

(Translated by Johnny Ko)

[1] Jeffery Lin. “The Metaphors of Online Production: Anxieties About the Value of Theatre and the Future”. Artism Online, October Issue, 2021.

https://artismonline.hk/issues/2021-10/489

[2] Jeffery Lin. “Online Theatre Under the Pandemic: The Cultural Politics of Media and the Emergence of New Genres”. IATC (Hong Kong) website, uploaded on July 15, 2020 (in Chinese).

https://www.iatc.com.hk/doc/106376

[3] Jeffery Lin. “Online Theatre Under the Pandemic: The Cultural Politics of Media and the Emergence of New Genres”. IATC (Hong Kong) website, uploaded on July 15, 2020 (in Chinese).

https://www.iatc.com.hk/doc/106376

[4] Jeffery Lin. “Theatre in the Cloud: The Boundaries Between Gaming, Interactive Film, and Theatre”. IATC (Hong Kong) website, uploaded on July 21, 2021 (in Chinese).

https://www.iatc.com.hk/doc/106583

[5] Yan Pat-to. “An Accidental Practice of Decentring – An Overview of Online Performances in 2020”. In Chan, K.W., Chu, K.O., and Wong, K.M. (eds). Hong Kong Drama Overview 2019 & 2020. IATC (Hong Kong), 2022.

[6] Felix Chan. “A Contemplation on Whether Hong Kong Can Develop Cultural Democracy Through Online Performance”. IATC (Hong Kong) website, uploaded on February 23, 2021 (in Chinese).

https://www.iatc.com.hk/doc/106521

At the beginning of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out and ravaged the world. Although the various anti-epidemic policies adopted by governments around the globe have helped reduce the number of deaths caused by the virus, almost all industries had to shut down, severely impacting people’s lives. Hong Kong, an international city where trade and cultural exchanges frequently take place, was obviously no exception. As endless restrictions became the norm, many sectors gradually began to develop various coping strategies to weather the storm as best they could while the pandemic persisted. To prevent anti-epidemic measures from excessively affecting economic activity, the Hong Kong government provided exemptions for people who must work in congregate settings amid social distancing restrictions.

Unfortunately, such exemptions did not apply to theatre workers. Although performances were allowed to resume to a limited extent when the epidemic eased, for Hong Kong theatre practitioners, the fluctuating situation did not bring about a so-called “new normal” to which they could adapt, but a perpetual limbo between the complete suspension and partial resumption of performances – the end of one coronavirus wave only meant that a production had to be completed as quickly as possible and presented at the theatre before the next wave struck, leading to much chaos. Learning about the emotional roller coaster that theatre practitioners have been experiencing since the outbreak of the pandemic is probably the only way for us to truly understand the severe impact that multiple performance suspensions has had on the performing arts sector, as well as the yearning of industry members to escape the fate of having their productions cancelled and their efforts going to waste as they warily went about creating in the face of uncertainty.

It is also only in this context that we can come to comprehend that online theatre, which emerged in 2020, is far from a fad. On the contrary, it serves as a means to document survival during difficult times. Through this platform, we are not only able to catch a glimpse of theatre practitioners’ struggles between ideals and disillusionment, but also fully appreciate the incredible adaptability they demonstrate in the creative process and the tenacious spirit with which they practise their craft.

In two in-depth interviews, representatives from four Hong Kong performing arts production units shared their experiences in creating online theatre during the pandemic. The resources and aesthetic strategies of each organisation are different, thus giving rise to diverse forms of “online theatre”. The sharing of these invaluable experiences should help us better understand how the Hong Kong theatre industry ought to face the difficulties posed by reality and search for possible ways forward while navigating uncharted territory.

Forced Emergence and Independence: The Production and Creation of Online Theatre Under the Pandemic/Adversity

Despite also bearing the “online theatre” label, the handful of experimental and vague works prior to the pandemic are incomparable to the performances that became prevalent after the COVID-19 outbreak and gradually gave shape to the genre through intensive practice. As mentioned earlier, the main driver behind this particular online theatre boom was more of a forced reaction to reality rather than the result of proactive exploration. Nonetheless, the misfortunes and helplessness that exist in reality are manifold in nature, and to find the right direction, it is necessary to understand how the “alternative plan” of online theatre can become a creative outlet for different theatre companies given the circumstances. The sharing by the theatre practitioners in the interviews will likely enable us to gain a deeper understanding of the point of departure of their respective teams in making online theatre, thereby leading to a better grasp of the aesthetic concepts they have each developed.

When it comes to commissioned works, the final decision does not lie with theatre practitioners. Consequently, this type of production unit can be considered the most passive among all. For example, Chan Tai-yin, the director of The Plague (Cantonese version) which was commissioned by the Hong Kong Arts Festival, said that he always prefers performances in a physical setting. Upon learning that the organiser decided to switch to the online format due to the fourth COVID-19 wave during the rehearsal phase, he still fought hard for a live performance in the theatre. Unfortunately, he did not succeed and had to film the production for online viewing as requested by the commissioning party.

Hong Kong Arts Festival - The Plague (Cantonese version)

A more common situation was that after learning its work could not be staged in the theatre during the production process, the team would have no choice but to choose to go online, simply because the alternative of outright cancellation meant that their creative efforts would be in vain. Desmond Tang, the director of We Draman Group’sThe Days of the Commune, recalled finding out in mid-2020 that the work could not be performed live due to anti-epidemic restrictions. However, the troupe was three-quarters of the way through rehearsals at the time, and therefore did not want to waste the creativity they had already put in or miss the opportunity to discuss Bertolt Brecht’s theatre aesthetics. Ultimately, a decision was made to film the performance and present it to the audience as a broadcast. Meanwhile, Janice Poon, the director of PORNOGRAPHY, produced by The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts (HKAPA), said that the performance of this work constituted the coursework of the graduating class at the HKAPA. It was originally scheduled to be staged at the academy’s theatre, but students were required to stay home after the pandemic broke out. After consulting the students’ opinions, she learned that everyone still wanted to continue their studies, and so decided to switch to the live online performance format. The presentation came to a successful close at the end of May 2020.

In contrast, the creative background and experience of the Hong Kong Repertory Theatre’s 2020 re-run of Principleare slightly different. The show was originally scheduled to take place from the end of September to October that year but, unfortunately, the third coronavirus wave hit Hong Kong in July. Although the epidemic had slowed down by late August and various restrictions had been relaxed gradually, it was not until October that the authorities reopened theatres to allow the resumption of live performances at half capacity. After being forced to cancel its late-September shows, the troupe was finally able to perform live in early October. At the same time, it decided to launch a livestream version to offer audiences another way to appreciate the work. Sunnie Lai, Senior Manager (Production) of the Hong Kong Repertory Theatre, explained that the company hoped that more viewers could have access to this production, hence the decision to include the livestream option, facilitating the simultaneous presentation of the performance in both the offline and online setting. Nonetheless, the play’s director Fong Chun-kit admitted that his first priority was to take care of the audience in the theatre, which shows that the majority of theatre practitioners still favour the physical environment.

Regardless of the reason for the decision to create online theatre, the persistent epidemic had left all theatre practitioners at a loss. It seemed that everyone was mostly going about their work with a “take things as they come” attitude, thus they were generally inclined to regard online theatre as a stopgap measure. It was also because of this that there was a desire to create productions in a way that would restore the liveness of stage performance. Indeed, the long-term brewing of thoughts and practice took place behind the experimentation, as it is something that cannot be accomplished overnight. Instead of unrealistically expecting the epidemic to instantly provide myriad creative opportunities for online theatre, it would be better to actively learn from the experience of an inevitably rushed first attempt in anticipation of the next production.

However, we all know that familiarity with one’s tools is a basic requirement of creating art, and when it comes to restoration, technical experimentation and practices are bound to be involved. It is precisely because of this that each team spent time exploring numerous shooting techniques during the creative process. During the interviews, the theatre practitioners shared with us their respective approaches to exploring various techniques in unfamiliar territory.

For example, Tang stated that when filming certain scenes with fewer actors in The Days of the Commune, he did not limit himself to the conventional three-camera setup, but wanted to put more thought into camera positioning. The Film Director of Principle, siUbo hO, also pointed out that he especially designed two unique camera angles for the livestream version of the work: one camera was placed directly above the stage, and the other in the audience seating area facing the middle of the stage, so as to highlight some details in the play that even the live audience might not have noticed. Similarly, Apple Ng, the Video Director of The Plague, explained that she intentionally chose an aspect ratio wider than the 16:9 standard for most films when shooting its performance, so that a better sense of the theatrical activity taking place at the venue could be captured.

For production teams with relatively tight resources but low creative pressure, such time-consuming explorative processes are often difficult, but may also bring surprises. PORNOGRAPHY serves as a reference-worthy example in this regard. Poon mentioned that although the HKAPA approved the switch to the online format and also provided sufficient support in terms of publicity and other related matters, the entire production was put together by those involved in the play. The performance took place at the home of one of the student actors, thereby practically making it a “zero-cost” production. She added that the students put a lot of effort into figuring out how to carry out scene changes with the online platform, and even incorporated technological elements such as visual effects. Fortunately, they were able to master the characteristics of the platform after multiple trials and succeeded in delivering the desired viewer experience.

It is encouraging to see these technology-related gains resulting from the production of online theatre. Nevertheless, as stated above, the use of the virtual environment to temporarily replace the physical one is an extreme measure in extreme times. Consequently, it was unavoidable that theatre practitioners had to adopt a “DIY” spirit in order to flexibly respond to the various constraints that came with the real working environment. If one of the challenges in the production of PORNOGRAPHY was that the actors had to rely on resources in their immediate environment, then the difficulty in the filming of We Draman Group’s The Days of the Commune lay solely in the capturing of moving images in the theatre. Tang expressed that because it was decided that the performance would be shot in the troupe’s rehearsal studio with live sound recording, the air-conditioning had to be turned off. However, it was the middle of summer at the time, so one can imagine the ordeal that the actors had to endure during the filming. Moreover, the studio is situated in an industrial area, so shooting could only commence when the surroundings quietened down after working hours. As a result, performances and filming often continued into the night. The location of the theatre also posed an obstacle to the recording of The Plague. As Chan recalled, they were not made aware that filming had been arranged to take place at Cattle Depot Theatre until the late stages of rehearsal. Subsequently, they had to figure out a way to integrate the in-situ steel pillars into the set design within a short timeframe. Ng added that due to the insufficient depth of the stage, it was necessary to avoid the use of long shots.

We Draman Group - The Days of the Commune by Bertolt Brecht (Source: We Draman Group Facebook Page)

Relatively speaking, although Principle was performed live in a traditional brick-and-mortar theatre with its online version seeming to be merely an added option, the team faced other challenges on the livestreaming front. As hO explained, while filming equipment is fairly affordable nowadays, due to the presence of an audience, he could not move the gear during the performance. Therefore, he had to “plant” multiple cameras in different locations throughout the venue beforehand. Lai also said that to ensure the smooth viewing of the livestream, it was necessary to contact the network provider in advance to obtain sufficient bandwidth. In addition, she revealed that many copyright issues must be dealt with when it comes to online theatre, going on to elucidate that one of the main reasons behind the Hong Kong Repertory Theatre’s decision to livestream Principle instead of the translated version of the play Le Père, which was forced to close due to the COVID-19 outbreak at the time, was that there was a film adaptation of the latter, rendering it almost impossible to obtain the rights to livestream the play. Similarly, she explained that it was also necessary to obtain the online broadcasting rights to the music featured in the play. Thus, if they were to convert a play that was soundtracked by a lot of popular music into an online performance, the potentially hefty costs involved would rack up a substantial production bill.

Intertwined Fates: A Dialogue and Mutual Interrogation on “Liveness” Between Online and Offline Viewing Culture 

Although theatre and film both fall under the performing arts umbrella, the two are nothing alike. It is difficult to compare their conventional viewing modes, and the audiences that they attract are also different. For creators, mastering the above-mentioned techniques related to filming equipment or video conferencing is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to a format change. They must conduct an in-depth investigation into the similarities and differences of the two artforms to establish their own positioning.

Similarly, it would be wishful thinking to simply attach the “online” label and assume that audiences will automatically transition from one form of traditional spectatorship to another viewing/screening mode that even the creators themselves are still figuring out. Several interviewees shared with us how they dealt with the challenges in bridging with contemporary viewing culture in the process of making online theatre, including how to rethink the unique viewing mode of theatre to embed an indelible sense of nostalgia and longing for “liveness” in video footage.

To create a work with aesthetic continuity, the members within a team must obviously first come to a fundamental consensus. The theatre director and their film or video counterpart must also agree on the positioning of the performance medium. For troupes whose sole performance medium or “product” is online theatre, this is even more self-evident.

If one wants the footage to document the theatre as accurately as possible, then as Tang said, there needs to be more communication between the stage and video directors to ensure that theatricality is preserved while keeping the differences between the stage performance and video recording to a minimum. Ng also pointed out that directors must communicate with each other, and went on to express that she understood her role was “auxiliary” in nature, that is, to use the language of the lens to accurately capture the production as a whole. However, under time constraints, it is easier said than done for a theatre director and their film or video counterpart to get on the same page within a brief period, especially given that the latter was a scarce entity in theatre production until recent times.

Likewise, actors also need time to adapt to the new medium of online theatre and adjust their method and mindset. Indeed, it is virtually impossible for stage actors, who are accustomed to the live setting, to continue performing in front of the camera as if nothing has happened. They will always be prone to doubt as there is no way of envisaging how their performance will be presented on the screen. For actors and producers to overcome this psychological barrier, theatre practitioners must communicate and cooperate with each other more closely – as Ng said, everyone should watch and discuss the footage together, and then consider which approach is more appropriate. Of course, as Poon remarked, professional actors are always capable of adapting to the difference in rhythm between stage and video, and making the corresponding adjustments.

While theatre practitioners can still jointly explore the possibilities arising from the intersecting of the two artforms through communication and exchange during the rehearsal and post-production stages, they cannot control how audiences will process the performance footage – this is something they can only attempt to grasp through their own understanding of contemporary media culture. Media theorist Philip Auslander believes that the so-called “live performances” of today have been fully mediatised, and that theatre audiences can only perceive liveness through media. We need not fully agree with his somewhat subjective viewpoint, but we must also recognise the influence that ubiquitous media have on us. In this era of media replete with audio-visual information, audiences are only able to classify their perceptions into familiar contexts, be it consciously or unconsciously, based on their experiences with existing consumption media.

For example, the attention span of viewers when watching a performance in front of the screen has become a crucial consideration in the production of online theatre. As Fong mentioned, when an audience watches a live performance at the theatre, they tend to be more capable of waiting quietly during the blackouts between scene transitions. But when it comes to the video version, they initially have a hard time getting used to them and seem to always want the next scene to start as soon as the stage goes dark. He concluded that theatregoers and moviegoers are ultimately different, with the former being more actively engaged than the latter. Similarly, Ng used the way she dealt with scene transitions in the filming of The Plague as an example to illustrate the differences in audience expectations between stage plays and movies. She explained that although viewers are clearly aware that they are watching a theatrical performance presented in a video format, they often unconsciously switch to the typical movie or TV viewing mode in an instant, causing their patience to become very limited. This factor also caused a dilemma during the shooting process, and she had to mull over whether to cut straight to each scene like it is usually done in film or to preserve every moment on the stage to the fullest extent possible.

The various approaches taken by theatre practitioners in dealing with this medium “displacement” and redefining or confirming their target audience perhaps best highlight the fundamental differences in their attitudes toward online theatre. For instance, the production team of Principle tended to view the livestream and the recorded version, the latter of which was later screened in cinemas, as one of the ways for the troupe to expand its audience. As Fong remarked, he believes that the online version of Principle was not intended as a replacement for the performance, but a means to attract more audiences to watch it live at the theatre in the future. Therefore, to him, the main purpose of the livestream was to supplement the stage performance – a publicity tool above all else. He further admitted that it was not his team’s goal to produce a self-sufficient film version of Principle in the first place. Lai also pointed out that many people who have watched the play live reported that they were able to see the actors’ detailed expressions and emotional reactions in the film version. Thus, through this additional version, theatregoers found fulfilment in picking up on the details they missed in the live setting, thereby making the video version a kind of “extension” built on live performance.

This online theatre production practice with “restoration” as its primary goal is naturally one possibility in dealing with how stage works are viewed in cyberspace. Indeed, many of the interviewees repeatedly referred to their focus on or pursuit of “liveness” (Tang and Ng), “the theatrical touch” (Fong), or “theatricality” (hO). The original intent of these practitioners to make online theatre was to restore the physical theatre space through moving images, so for them, the most urgent task was to explore how to preserve theatricality amid data transmission, so as to present the characteristics of live performance as fully as possible in the imperfect medium of video while striving to retain key theatre qualities such as “liveness”, “transience”, and “viewer-performer interactivity”.

Specifically, they mainly took a targeted approach in the shooting and post-production phases to deliberately retain theatre customs during the transmission or recording of images, so as to preserve the live experience. For example, Tang set a limited viewing period for the uploaded recording of The Days of the Commune, explaining that this is similar to how audiences must abide by certain rules when seeing a show, thus reflecting an aspect of theatre culture. In addition to invoking apperception among the audience through rituals unique to theatre, the recorded version of the work itself also differed from conventional films: there were no opening or closing credits, marking a deliberate distancing from the typical cinematic presentation format. Likewise, footage of the audience swarming into the theatre before the opening was also intentionally filmed for the livestream version of Principle. In addition to showing viewers the pandemic-specific phenomena in the auditorium, we can also interpret it as an act of bringing the online audience into the theatre, an attempt at synchronising their experience to that of the live audience.

Towards the Logical Yet Chaotic Future: The Unfinished Aesthetic Exploration of (Online) Theatre

Art is precious in its diversity. Of course, audiences and creators who cherish live theatre alike are looking forward with great anticipation to the day when venues will see a full house again once the pandemic is over. However, amid this precarious landscape – an exceptional state for the entertainment industry – we have also seen many traditional theatre practitioners swim with the current. Taking advantage of this anomalous online theatre boom, they scoured the realm of mass media and unveiled a host of online works that made full use of media as the main creative element.

Since the rise of mass media at the beginning of the 20th century, its many forms have long become inextricably intertwined with the daily lives of most people, thus media-based performances are indeed worthy of further exploration. “The medium is the message”, a statement that could not ring truer yet is all too often reduced to a buzz phrase, precisely illustrates how various media have gradually been integrated into our lives, dictating our perceptions in an all-encompassing presence. Faced with this onslaught, theatre practitioners have gone against the grain, transforming their works into performances that drift in the domain of popular media, lying in wait for an opportunity to reconstruct virtual and real spacetime amid the flurry of activity. Such productions are proof of the theatre industry’s exploration of the possibilities of media in the performing arts, and also reflect the open spirit with which theatre practitioners create.

Everything in artistic creation is interconnected, and new technologies are never just additions to the creative arsenal, but also forces that compel creators to embrace chaos all over again. Theatre practitioners must carefully reorganise every piece of information which has undergone the transmission-reception process and think about the overall form and aesthetic orientation of their work. The consideration they give to such matters goes far beyond the shallow notion of elevating art with technology. As a matter of fact, in the transition from silent films to talkies alone, we do not only witness the magical appearance of the voices of actors in movies that originally comprised just motion and facial expressions, but also how the performing arts landscape can be upturned with the slightest nudge: the emergence of sound film prompted producers to abandon the creative strategies that have worked well in the past, forcing them to rethink the role that narrative and acting should play in this new form of media.

Therefore, when creating, we must completely discard all of our preconceptions about media types and consider each medium’s unique narrative space, as well as its tension with actor performance, from the most contextualised perspective. As Chan said in her sharing of the shooting of The Plague, when he encountered situations involving incongruities between drama and film, such as whether the actors should look at the camera, he would inevitably make judgements from the overall perspective of dramaturgy, and not just create an alternate reality or simply consider the technical issues implicated.

Likewise, in her sharing of the production process of PORNOGRAPHY, Poon said that we must pay attention to the perspective from which the audience actually views the performance, as she believes that the online platform must be regarded as being self-sufficient. Hence, it is necessary to gain a thorough understanding of its aesthetics, including how the performer-viewer connection is established in this format. It is precisely because of this that she took the general public’s habit of watching Netflix at home during the pandemic as a reference and divided the performance into seven episodes, transforming the work into a series that aired for seven consecutive nights. She went on to point out that each artform has its own characteristics, so nothing is being replaced by anything, nor is there a need to consider how to adapt to the language of film. Rather, one should think more about how to make full use of the attributes of the platform or media in question when creating.

The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts - PORNOGRAPHY by Simon Stephens

While traditional theatre seems to be the main focus of production teams that want to preserve “theatricality”, this does not necessarily reflect a conservative attitude towards artistic creation. In his sharing of the production process of The Days of the Commune, for instance, Tang recalled contemplating the real meaning of “liveness” on multiple occasions. He believes that the decision to retain or discard elements that constitute traditional theatre, such as the blackouts between scenes, really depends on how the director wishes to interpret the script on stage. He gave an example by saying that those 30 to 60 seconds of darkness may be an opportunity for the audience to process their thoughts, and also remarked that if we consider it from this perspective, it becomes all the more important to include this brief moment of silence, thus it would not be a decision rooted in traditionalism.

Drawing inferences from Tang’s stance, we can go so far as to regard the video presentation of these traditional theatre practices, which seem out of place on the screen, as an attempt to actively shape the way stage works are viewed. Although viewers who are used to the tight editing of contemporary film may find this approach odd, from another perspective, it is but a form of “implanting”, and also an attempt to actively shape the diversity of viewing culture. Therefore, it should of course be regarded as another level of experimentation and artistic practice.

Perhaps we should strategically develop some new vocabulary that can more accurately address the relevant artistic concerns when theatre practitioners and audiences discuss the creation of online theatre. As Chan pointed out, The Plague was only a very preliminary attempt at understanding the relationship between film and theatre. He believes that film has always had a very specific language, and probably should not even be considered a language in the conventional sense. Similarly, notions such as “mixed media” and replacing “film language” with “camera language”, proposed by hO and Poon respectively, transcend the either-or relationship between theatre and cinema and attempt to explore the various possibilities of media art.

On the other hand, regardless of whether a creator prefers to restore the theatre via media or wishes to explore how media can reconstruct performance, the script – as the backbone of a stage work – remains a fundamental creative element in the mediatised format of online performance. With the myriad themes and narrative strategies that exist in contemporary theatre, the skilful fusion of the medium and the script also requires acumen and judgment on the part of theatre practitioners.

Fong took Principle as an example, pointing out that the script written by Ivan Kwok was not a real-time drama that only narrated a single spacetime, but also involved the passage of time. Consequently, it was necessary to adopt a broader perspective in the creative process to generate a sense of “theatricality”. When asked which scripts are more suited to the online platform, he believes that works with a lot of scene transitions, blackouts, and frequent set changes are less apt for filming. Tang, meanwhile, said that due to the relatively complicated visual and narrative changes in The Days of the Commune, he especially requested the use of three visual elements that particularly highlighted the characteristics of Brechtian theatre. As for Poon, she remarked that the language used in PORNOGRAPHY is very intense and even borders on being poetic. With the characters’ fiery emotions and each scene featuring just one or two actors, the slightest mishandling would lead to impediments in conveying the characters’ respective circumstances. Thus, it was also necessary to choose the right camera shot for each situation.

When it comes to the characteristics of aesthetic practice in this round of online theatre, we most certainly cannot overlook the likes of “immersive theatre” and “interactive theatre” – trendy labels favoured by many theatre practitioners that sometimes even determine the main interpretative and creative direction of online theatre. However, as the development of online theatre continues, instead of jumping on the bandwagon and producing works that overemphasise a single concept, it seems more appropriate for us to return to the fundamental question of “what is theatre?” As mentioned above, the pursuit of theatricality and the exploration of the qualities of various media can be regarded as an attempt to examine the essence of theatre, rather than a decision to cater to the market due to a moment of creative anxiety.

Chan observed that the switch to the online format seemed to have forced many theatre practitioners to step out of their creative comfort zone and cross paths with audiences who have never seen their works. He also pointed out that a number of creators still appear a little anxious, seemingly hoping for a panacea that would see audience numbers return to the thousands, akin to that of live theatre. He maintained that, as a creator of art, shaping a pattern in aesthetic practice and providing viewers with artistic gains are what matter most to him.

Conclusion: Does the Present Guarantee the Future? The Post-Pandemic Outlook for Online Theatre

Considering the recent online theatre boom was just a stopgap measure that was developed in the absence of options, what does the future hold for online theatre after the pandemic? The interviewees’ answers to this question once again reflect their respective mindsets and creative concerns. For instance, Tang said that there is a lot of room for the development of online theatre. Nonetheless, he admitted that, as a creator, his biggest wish is to continue making art in the physical environment. Meanwhile, Poon believes that online theatre should not only be a solution to creative obstacles during the pandemic, but a platform that can facilitate creation for the long term. She feels that as long as the format and content are interrelated, different types of works can be presented in the form of online theatre. Ng also thinks that many people are putting the cart before the horse. It is as if they only dipped their toes into online theatre because they could not produce stage works during the pandemic, instead of creating from the perspective of media integration from the get-go.

Nonetheless, no matter their attitude towards creation, they all believe that online theatre still has its unique value. During the interviews, many of the theatre practitioners offered suggestions on how to make full use of the format’s trans-temporal characteristics to help works reach audiences all over the world, or to give past performances a second life through the function of archiving.

Lai pointed out that 20 to 30 percent of the audience for Principle were from overseas, which goes to show that many people abroad are interested in watching Hong Kong theatre performances. She went on to state that, in the future, she will review the Hong Kong Repertory Theatre’s archive and select some works to present online. Fong also believes that Hong Kong audiences are coming to terms with having to pay for certain online programmes, and hopes that fellow industry members can jointly build an online platform in the future where they can upload their own troupe’s works and create an archive for Hong Kong theatre performances. Expanding further on this topic, theatre is not only a part of our collective cultural memory, but also helps us build a new type of cross-regional theatre culture. As Chan said, more and more people are living in different parts of the world, thus online theatre, which is not bound by geographical constraints, can prompt us to think about how theatre can reach these people.

However, no matter how many possibilities the virtual space can offer, they are still inevitably restricted by material conditions. The production of online theatre is often expensive, and therefore requires sufficient financial support to be able to develop smoothly into the future. As Fong candidly stated, from the balance sheet standpoint, making online theatre is definitely not cost-effective at this moment in time. He overtly added that it is only a matter of making a big or small loss. Chan also mentioned that livestreaming calls for various equipment and personnel, which will naturally cause expenses to skyrocket. This was also the reason that he had already ruled out this option at the beginning of the production phase.

(Translated by Johnny Ko)

Introduction

World-renowned literary theorist and music critic Edward Said once criticised the rigidity of the classical music performances of his time in the article “Extreme Occasions (on Celibidache)”:

The two-hour classical concert performance has solidified into an unchangeable commodity… So all-encompassing is the performance regime – it covers dress, program, physical deportment, style of playing, audience behavior, ticket prices, type of performance, identity of performer... The least interesting work is almost always provided by musicians who passively accept the unnatural confines of the two-hour performance, and operate within them uncomplainingly.[1]

Said probably never imagined that it would take the global COVID-19 pandemic 33 years later to prompt ensembles around the world to consider other possibilities for music performances. With its lead-in and title, this essay aims to convey the message that although the global pandemic has brought Hong Kong’s musical arts industry to its knees, the perseverance of local practitioners and their passion for their craft have enabled them to endure every wave of the epidemic. The wisdom of this can-do attitude becomes even more evident in how they have dealt with each coronavirus wave.

COVID-19 has remained persistent since its outbreak in 2020. Due to the lingering epidemic and the restrictions under the Hong Kong government’s Prevention and Control of Disease (Requirements and Directions) (Business and Premises) Regulation (Cap. 599F), public entertainment venues can only operate at 85% of their full capacity for the time being. In addition, the Hong Kong arts industry was hit by four consecutive waves of COVID-19 in 2020, which corresponds to an average of one wave per quarter. Each bout led to the closure of performance venues within one to three weeks, which not only dealt a devastating blow to the sector, but also greatly impacted the livelihoods of its members. While the government has provided direct subsidies to support freelance arts practitioners, the highest amount issued among all the rounds of aid was only HK$10,000. Although it provided many with assistance in their hour of need, if we were to use the 2019/2020 average monthly household expenditure of HK$30,230[2] compiled by the Census and Statistics Department as an indicator, it really is only a drop in the bucket. Meanwhile, the Hong Kong Theatre Arts Practitioners Union conducted a questionnaire survey on “The Impacts of COVID-19 and the Effectiveness of Anti-Epidemic Support” on about 400 members in July 2020. “The results showed that nearly 40% of respondents did not receive any government subsidies.”[3] Without question, there is still a lot of room for improvement in the government’s balancing of public health and the well-being of various industries.

While the pandemic has brought upon the global art world a catastrophe more destructive than the financial crisis, it has also created opportunities for online performances. Despite the constraints of the general environment, many Hong Kong arts practitioners still adhered to the “Lion Rock Spirit”, exploring facets such as the digitisation of performance formats, the possibilities of arts technology, audience expansion, as well as payment models, with limited resources. Despite the mixed results, it was at least an important opportunity for the entire industry to make some progress in the area of digitisation.

The Hong Kong Online Performing Arts Archive and Research Project (OPA) is an extension of the online Yearbook Series by the International Association of Theatre Critics (Hong Kong). It was initiated in the hopes of documenting the online performance difficulties encountered by the Hong Kong arts sector during the pandemic and their corresponding solutions. It is believed that these records can serve as a reference for Hong Kong arts groups in the future development of digital performances and assets. It is worth noting that among the various COVID-19 waves, the fifth wave saw the implementation of the most stringent measures that led to the closure of performance venues. In a Legislative Council meeting, Mr Kenneth Fok also reported to the Chief Executive that the arts and culture sector had “no venues for practice or video recording.”[4] From this, one can see that the strict quarantine measures were severely hampering online performances in Hong Kong. Nonetheless, as the fifth wave is beyond the scope of this piece, it will not be discussed here. This article mainly serves as an analysis of the development of online performances in Hong Kong’s cultural scene from the first to fourth COVID-19 wave between 2020 and 2021, including but not limited to aspects such as performance format, digital technology, publication platform, and repertoire selection. However, before proceeding with the analysis, we must first discuss the existing online concert models around the world and examine their pros and cons, so as to establish a theoretical basis for the analysis of each coronavirus wave below.

The Post-Millennial Development of Online Concerts in Hong Kong and Around the World 

Online concerts were already in development before the pandemic, but they had not yet become mainstream. In fact, Apple launched the Apple Music Festival as early as 2007, which Apple Music and iTunes users can view for free as a live broadcast or later via streaming.

Meanwhile, the Berliner Philharmoniker launched the Digital Concert Hall in 2008 and went on to livestream its first concert in high definition (HD) in January the following year. Deutsche Bank served as the series’ main sponsor from 2008 to 2016. In preparation for this project, the Berliner Philharmoniker transformed the concert hall into a professional recording studio, installing six HD cameras and a control room to allow technicians to instantly cut to different angles while broadcasting live. During the pandemic, they even upgraded all their equipment to support 4K and HDR output. The Digital Concert Hall adopts a hybrid charging model, whereby audiences can choose between a weekly, monthly, or annual subscription according to their budget.

In January 2009, YouTube launched the YouTube Symphony Orchestra (YTSO), encouraging classical musicians around the world to submit audition videos for a chance to perform at Carnegie Hall in the US. More interestingly, YouTube users were able to vote for their favourite musician as part of the selection process, a feat that live concerts cannot accomplish. A mashup video of auditionees playing Tan Dun’s Internet Symphony No. 1 - “Eroica”was also released on YouTube. In 2011, the YTSO held another concert at the Sydney Opera House, Australia, which was livestreamed for free. This time, each musician was asked to improvise a section of music. This edition of the showcase was sponsored by Hyundai Motors, and was viewed by 33 million people worldwide within five days of the live performance.[5]

From this, it can be seen that the development of online concerts began more than a decade ago. Various charging and free-to-view mechanisms have also arisen due to different production goals. Regardless of the payment model, however, they all need the support of sponsors. Furthermore, it is believed that such relationships are only sustainable if the universal language of music can bring these brands global exposure. Some of the abovementioned mechanisms have taken other forms during the pandemic.

So, what efforts did Hong Kong music ensembles put into developing the online concert format before the pandemic? This article aims to examine how local groups have responded to each coronavirus wave, beginning with a discussion of whether they had sufficient resources, talent, and technology to develop and manage digital assets prior to the pandemic. For the purposes of this essay, “digital assets” refer to any digital productions that music ensembles have made available to audiences, regardless of format and online publishing platform. The Hong Kong musical arts industry had already begun to develop online concerts or pre-concert talks before the COVID-19 outbreak, most of which were free of charge. Some of them are as follows:

Therefore, it is clear that Hong Kong’s musical arts industry was already attempting to organise free online concerts prior to the pandemic, although not much effort had been put into the development of charging models. Nonetheless, even before COVID-19 struck, if local music ensembles wished to explore the realm of online concerts, they would still face problems related to the five following aspects: venue facilities, recording equipment and talent, cost and revenue, publication platform, and audience expansion. The biggest challenge I faced when arranging the livestream of a classical music concert in 2019 was that the venue was not equipped with broadband cabling. Setting up a temporary network was a possible solution, but that would have cost a fortune. Moreover, many venues are designed to have poor reception. Add acoustic considerations to the mix, and one will find that there are actually very few concert halls suitable for livestreaming. In 2019, if one wanted to organise a performance within one month at a venue which ensured stable livestreaming, the Concert Hall at Hong Kong City Hall would definitely be the first choice. However, we were only able to stream the concert using mobile data via a portable 4G LTE Wi-Fi hotspot, which meant that any instabilities in the telecommunications provider’s network would affect the quality of the broadcast. In addition, an environment that facilitated the charging of online programmes had not yet formed in Hong Kong before the pandemic, and the hiring of camera crews and equipment was not a cost that ordinary arts groups could regularly afford. Consequently, the only choice was to broadcast presentations for free as a means of audience expansion. The development of the online concert format was, therefore, not a priority of local music ensembles. Hardware-related issues such as venue facilities and recording equipment can perhaps be solved with funds, but when it comes to ensuring the stability of the network and the seamless synchronisation of visual transitions with live music, arts administrators must possess knowledge about streaming, editing, and music to minimise the risk of the audio and video falling out of sync during a livestream. Furthermore, dealing with the copyright issues of the performers and platforms involved before the performance is another matter worth noting.

In Marketing 5.0, Philip Kotler points out that both companies and customers must have digital capabilities to drive digital transformation. He even goes so far as to say, “The crisis [i.e., the pandemic] indeed exposed the readiness – or rather the unreadiness – of specific market segments and industry players to go digital.” Hong Kong music ensembles and practitioners, as well as their audiences, are precisely the unprepared entities that Kotler refers to. Prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, Hong Kong music audiences mainly enjoyed free online concerts and had not acquired the habit of paying for them. On the other hand, music ensembles lacked the resources to vigorously develop online concerts or digitisation in terms of venue equipment and talent. Thus, be it the “nine major performing arts groups (MPAGs)”[6], small and medium-sized local music ensembles, or their respective audiences, none were sufficiently prepared to cope with such a sudden digital shift at the pre-pandemic stage. Given this situation, the development of digital assets was simply out of the question.

There is perhaps a lesson that we can learn from the pop music industry, which has vigorously developed online concerts due to the coronavirus outbreak. The likes of Singaporean singer-songwriter JJ Lin, Korean boyband Super Junior, and American singer-songwriter Billie Eilish also incorporated XR elements into their performances to give fans a one-of-a-kind experience.[7] Eugenia Lin, Ticketing and Virtual Venue Manager of KKTIX, said during an interview, “After the pandemic broke out last year, overseas artists had to cancel their fan meetings and concerts. We began discussing the possibility of switching to the online platform. In particular, the touring schedules of overseas artists are fixed, so cancellations would impact their exposure. Therefore, we had to think of all possible ways to hold events, and the online option was the best compromise.” Meanwhile, at the time of writing, the Hong Kong popular music industry was also trying to develop a system whereby concerts could be viewed in both the online and offline settings.

From the development of online concerts in the domain of popular music, we also notice that this continual digital shift can provide audiences with experiences that live concerts cannot. This is a potential future direction for Hong Kong music ensembles, but whether there are adequate venues, resources, and audiences to support its overall implementation remains unknown.

Thus, the following section will first outline the impact of each wave of the pandemic on Hong Kong music ensembles, and go on to cite some global online concerts as examples. It will also discuss the opportunities presented by the restrictions of each wave and digital assets, as well as how the industry managed to raise its game time after time.

First Wave (January 23 to March 20, 2020): Connecting with Audiences in the Absence of Live Performances

Following the confirmation of the first COVID-19 case on January 23, 2020, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) announced the closure of its performance venues on January 29. The concerts of local music ensembles, and even the Hong Kong Arts Festival, were cancelled. With uncertainty looming on the horizon, various performing arts groups in Hong Kong adopted different strategies to connect with their audience. A closer look at them will also give us insight into how the resources of each group have affected their response to the pandemic. Amid the first wave, be it the nine MPAGs or small and medium-sized arts groups, none adopted a charging mechanism, enabling the public to enjoy their performances for free. The following is a brief description of the main online concert modes during the first wave:

Social Media Livestreams

As anti-epidemic restrictions did not yet apply to performances at non-LCSD venues at the time, Lau Bak Livehouse, which is located next to Freespace in West Kowloon Cultural District, could still organise free livestreamed concerts. This eventually led to the launch of the #LivehouseAtHome series, which brought live performances by jazz, alternative, classical, and indie musicians to online audiences every Friday to Sunday. “The #LivehouseAtHome livestream attracted more than 110,000 viewers worldwide over the course of six weeks.”[8] At the time of writing, each performance of the series had an average of nearly 1,000 views, with the most-watched video generating 4,400 views.

Home Performance Videos 

Home performances by professional musicians were also a common online phenomenon during the first wave, and it was a pleasure to see musicians sharing how they lived during the pandemic and using their music to encourage the public to be united in the fight against COVID-19 in different ways. As far as publication platforms are concerned, in addition to Facebook, some also opted for other free streaming platforms such as YouTube. During this period, the Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra (HK Phil) began posting one video clip every three to four days from February 20, while the Hong Kong Chinese Orchestra (HKCO) did so daily starting March 12. Apart from being well received by audiences, the videos also showed a side to various musicians that viewers would rarely see in the concert hall. For example, the principal viola of the HK Phil played the theme song of Castle in the Sky on the piano, while Wei Shen-fu, the sheng player of the HKCO, showed his playful side by incorporating footage of himself being hit on the head while wearing a helmet in his rendition of The Legend of the Condor Heroes.

However, only the HK Phil and HKCO were able to create such video series during the first wave. Other local music ensembles, especially those without resident musicians, did not connect with their audiences through this approach.

SingFest launched its third choral micro-movie, Double Lives, in the midst of the first coronavirus wave. As this project was granted funding by the HKSAR Government’s Arts Capacity Development Funding Scheme all the way back in 2017, it is hard to say that it was a direct product of the pandemic. However, it is worthy of mention as the micro-movie format is clearly superior to other forms of online music performances in terms of the visual experience. Nonetheless, it had generated just under 500 views at the time of writing, which is a real shame.

During the first wave, local musicians and arts groups were still exploring various possibilities for online performances, experimenting with different formats, repertoires, and platforms. Among the three abovementioned formats, the micro-movie is far superior to the other options be it in terms of overall artistic value or picture quality. Moreover, the music and moving images featuring dance are very coherent, facilitating the prospect of showing the work on large screens in the future. However, it should be noted that SingFest had been preparing for this subsidised project since 2017, thus its response to the outbreak was not as immediate as the other two methods. On the other hand, the realism evoked by livestreaming and home performance recordings generates a sense of “hyperreality” as suggested by Jean Baudrillard in Simulacra and Simulation. The quality of these videos varies. For instance, livestreams are filmed using only one camera without any editing. Moreover, personal devices or the most basic professional recording equipment is used in the majority of cases. Nevertheless, the authenticity of these videos trumps any reality show. In addition to the common message of fighting the pandemic with music, more importantly, most of these videos were taken in non-public venues (Lau Bak Livehouse belongs to this category) or private places (such as the homes of musicians). This sense of realism is actually comforting to Hongkongers, who first experienced this kind of large-scale quarantine during SARS – it at least made people feel that they were not the only ones unable to work and live as usual due to the pandemic. In contrast, SingFest’s Double Lives was soundtracked by Claudio Monteverdi’s madrigals Cruda Amarilli and O Mirtillo, Mirtillo anima mia, performed by SingFest Choral Academy. This micro-movie comprising images of the body and nature can only be said to be untimely born – it really is no match for the other formats from the authenticity standpoint. However, these high-quality video productions remained highly popular throughout the rest of the pandemic. This not only confirms Baudrillard’s theory, but more importantly, illustrates that taking the digital route does not necessarily require new technology. Under the right set of circumstances, videos shot with amateur equipment can also generate positive online responses.

Second Wave (March 20 to July 8, 2020): Facing the Challenges Brought by Global Music Performances and Developing Digital Assets and Commercial Collaboration

The second wave actually began just as the first ended. The LCSD announced on March 21 that performance venues would continue to be closed. It later made another statement on May 26 that they would reopen on June 1. Meanwhile, the Berliner Philharmoniker offered “vouchers” to audiences around the world in early March to enable them to watch special programmes from the Digital Concert Hall archive for free online. Similarly, the Metropolitan Opera launched Nightly Met Opera Streams on March 20, a free series in which programmes that have been recorded over the past 14 years were presented daily. This stage of the pandemic highlighted the advantages of digital assets – not only can they help music ensembles expand their audience under such severe conditions, but more importantly, enable them to showcase their high-calibre works to the world.

As performance venues reopened over this period, various music ensembles ceased the production of their “at-home” series. However, they partnered with different commercial organisations and groups to conduct online screenings. The publication of online video content by local music ensembles was not as frequent as during the first wave either. Instead, they went in the direction of television programming and explored other avenues. The collaboration between small and medium-sized groups Music Lab and Live House Wontonmeen is also worth mentioning here. In addition to co-organising a paid livestream concert entitled Show Must Go On-Line, they also released a music video filmed in the form of micro-movie on the Zoom platform. In relative terms, Music Lab can be considered a pioneer in advocating paid livestream concerts during the pandemic. Below is a brief description of the different modes of collaboration observed over the course of the second wave:

Collaborations with Commercial Organisations

The HK Phil and HKCO are the absolute exemplars in this category during this period. They each worked with 3 Hong Kong to hold a livestream concert. With the support of the telecommunications company and other organisations, the former successfully held its first-ever livestream concert, while the latter presented Hong Kong’s first 5G outdoor 4K livestreaming charity concert. This format did not only satisfy the spectators’ desire for realism, but more importantly, let the global audience know that Hong Kong’s flagship orchestras are capable of putting on high-calibre livestream concerts just like their international counterparts.

Collaborations with Television Stations and Cinemas

Hong Kong Sinfonietta, meanwhile, collaborated with ViuTV and the MOViE MOViE cinema chain to deliver a live performance programme titled Back On Stage. In addition to bringing music into local households, the project placed emphasis on the audio and video recording process to ensure that it reached cinematic standards. Compared with their contemporaries, Hong Kong Sinfonietta focused its resources on achieving first-rate sound and picture quality.

On June 5, the HK Phil also released its performance of Astor Piazzolla’s Libertango, recorded by RTHK 31 for the programme Arts On Air．Music Banquet. In addition to being a television production, it also featured music with which the public is familiar. Hence, at the time of writing, the recording had already generated over 186,000 views, making it the most-watched programme in the Phil Your Life with Music series.

Collaborations with Arts Groups or Venues

The majority of local small and medium-sized arts groups held free online concerts through this mode of collaboration: entities the likes of the LCSD, Tai Kwun Performing Arts Department, and Asian Cultural Council Hong Kong are such examples. Hong Kong String Orchestra’s “Share the Joy” Community Concerts Series under the Jockey Club Power of Music Programme and Toolbox Percussion Platform #2’s La Primavera online concert were among the projects which provided music ensembles with livestream support or performance venues.

The negotiations for many of the abovementioned collaborations began during the first wave, with recording or production taking place when venues were reopened amid the second wave. In addition to demonstrating that they were capable of creating an array of digital productions, each ensemble was also starting to expand the possibilities for releasing, and even selling, their performances on different platforms. The HKCO even launched the HKCO Net Festival which invited submissions from local professional and amateur ensembles to be posted online, making itsomewhat an online music festival pioneer during the pandemic. However, it should be noted that although Hong Kong audiences have begun to accept the online viewing of performances, this format has not yet become mainstream. More importantly, Hong Kong’s various ensembles have not published any videos of their past programmes on a time-limited basis like the Berliner Philharmoniker or Metropolitan Opera. Apart from the possibility that the archived videos cannot be shown, the copyright issues related to online viewing are also believed to be a potential reason for this.

Third Wave (July 7 to November 21, 2020): Facilitating the Co-existence of Online and Offline Concerts Digital Asset Development for Small and Medium-sized Music Ensembles

Venues were closed for 76 days during this stage of the pandemic, which meant that arts groups were unable to perform for more than half of third wave. During this period, local music ensembles mainly returned to the live performance format, with the HKCO being the only one capable of creating and publishing digital videos simultaneously. Most of the online music performances and programmes in the third wave were produced by the LCSD.

However, these digital video productions did not only consist of concerts, but began to take on the form of television programmes. The HKCO’s Chinese Music MV, Moon Chaser, and the LCSD’s Jazz Un-cancelled series are prime examples. The former is modelled after pop music videos, while the latter incorporated the insight of musicians into jazz performances, boosting the programme’s overall appeal.

The majority of small and medium-sized ensembles also returned to the stage. Those that continued to develop their digital assets, such as Bel Canto Singers and Windpipe Chinese Music Ensemble, collaborated with the LCSD on various online programmes. Bel Canto Singers also began making its works available for viewing in the mainland and other regions through intermediaries. Although the LCSD’s New Vision Arts Festival was cancelled, the online performing arts platform ReNew Vision was launched to facilitate the presentation of programmes both online and offline. In terms of musical works, Aria was the one with the most digital and live elements. Theatre of Voices (Denmark) “shared the stage” with Hong Kong Children’s Choir at Hong Kong Park through ethereal holographic projections, shattering the boundaries imposed by geography and the pandemic. In addition to live performances, there was also an online version that enabled audiences who could not attend in person to experience the seamless integration of technology and nature.

Fourth Wave (November 21, 2020 to December 31, 2021): The Growth of Hong Kong’s Musical Arts Industry After the Pandemic

Performance venues were only closed for about 20% of the duration of the fourth wave. However, there were several events that marked major developments in the digital presentation of arts programmes in Hong Kong, including the livestream of Haw Par Music’s HxM Music Festival ON AIR!, the collaboration between the LCSD’s Cultural Presentations Section, Facebook, and YouTube titled Click for Arts, the online and offline presentations of the Hong Kong Arts Festival, and the Arts Go Digital programmes funded by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council (HKADC), the first of which opened on December 30, 2020. I would like to give special mention to Haw Par Music’s online music festival here, as it was the first livestreamed music event to be held at a revitalised historic site. Had the venue operators not had previous experience in putting on a livestreamed pop concert, they would have had quite a tough time hosting a classical music concert at a site that was not designed for such performances. In addition, the opening performance of the 49th Hong Kong Arts Festival in 2021, the HKCO’s Music About China, was presented online and offline simultaneously. Although this is nothing new, it did mark the first occasion that a large-scale arts festival in Hong Kong has adopted this practice.

The following section mainly uses Arts Go Digital to analyse the benefits that local small and medium-sized music ensembles and practitioners have reaped in the post-COVID era. In particular, the majority of those who received funding from the initiative have already had other opportunities to perform online after the pandemic, including Hong Kong Composers’ Guild, The Gong Strikes One, Windpipe Chinese Music Ensemble, and Bel Canto Singers.

The concepts behind most of the music programmes of Arts Go Digital are interesting, and the platform has helped many local artists release new musical works, albeit in very different forms. Each funded project required digital knowledge and experience in the production of digital programmes on the part of artists. As each group or artist was only granted between HK$300,000 and HK$500,000 to create their digital works, collaborating with others would put a considerable dent in the budget. For instance, The Gong Strikes One published over 100 new mini-music pieces on their website. Judging from the volume of works, the resources they could put into digital presentation were limited, as most of the funds would have gone towards royalty payments. The group then went on to launch a 12-episode YouTube programme to promote the project. Regardless of the number of views, it is reasonable to assume that they had used up all the funding by this point. With this being the case, how can we even begin to discuss the digital aesthetics of this presentation? Moreover, the artists’ digital knowledge also significantly affected the aesthetic presentation of their creations. A comparison between the websites of Charles Kwong and GayBird serves as a case in point. While both projects had a solid musical concept and narrative, the design of their websites greatly affected the audience’s appetite to explore the respective musical works. The former is like the work of a high school student who has just learned to create a website, and it would be far-fetched to associate the visuals with the iconic digital rain featured in The Matrix. The latter, meanwhile, automatically starts the playback of music and animation upon being loaded, clearly indicating that visitors can explore the various rooms displayed on the screen. With so many programmes available for viewing in the online world, it is inevitable that netizens will not have the same patience as live audiences to explore websites that are visually or informationally unappealing. When a page is unengaging, visitors simply are not interested in clicking any links. If a website does not play music automatically, the lack of visual appeal will basically direct visitors to other more attractive pages or programmes. Nonetheless, an interview with GayBird revealed that “despite being granted a subsidy of HK$500,000, he still said, jokingly, ‘I kind of fell flat on my face. I went too big. Everyone made a loss.’”[9] If even a musician with ample digital knowledge feels that HK$500,000 is insufficient to create a website that has both interactive elements and aesthetic merit, one can conclude that it is even more backbreaking for other musicians who lack the knowhow to create something of the same quality. Therefore, when funding digital works, the HKADC should also consider whether artists have sufficient digital knowledge to ensure that their works can be presented online with the appropriate aesthetics. Of course, music makers should only have to focus on their craft, but the pandemic has highlighted how their digital knowledge can impact the presentation of their work in the online environment.

Charles Kwong - AfterLive

GayBird – Building Hyperlink

The digital video production experience gained during the pandemic has also affected the works of various ensembles in Arts Go Digital to a considerable extent. In my opinion, among the initiative’s many works that feature both music and video, Bel Canto Singer’s Winterreise on Ice hit the mark in both aspects. The visual depiction of the story of Winterreise on the ice rink, together with David Quah’s energetic performance and the direction of Oliver Shing and David Liu, not only culminated in an exceptional overall online viewing experience, but also evoked the bone-chilling helplessness at the heart of the tale. At the same time, one can observe that Bel Canto Singers have gained a lot of video production experience in their collaborations with the LCSD and other groups, enabling them to elevate traditional musical works to a new level through professional videography.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 outbreak has underscored the need for Hong Kong music ensembles and practitioners to go digital. It not only shed light on the lack of venue and equipment support in the industry, but more importantly, revealed that the majority of local ensembles and practitioners did not have adequate ability to produce professional-quality online or film programmes, so as to ensure their works can be presented in their optimal state on different platforms, before the pandemic. While the government is helping various industry members sustain their livelihoods, should it also consider how to improve their digital knowledge to cope with the fierce global competition in the online world?

Nevertheless, these professional-quality digital programmes require long-term, substantial funding, and time will be needed to yield results. Instead, what music ensembles and practitioners should think about is whether their works are suitable for integration with arts technology or digitisation. If they wish to go in this direction, should they publish their musical works directly on a platform, or make format changes that cater to the audience of a platform to ensure that they are given a comprehensive music experience? If they have no intention of pursuing this trend, then they should not “digitise” for the sake of obtaining funding – while this will undoubtedly ensure their livelihoods, it is a waste of community resources.

(Translated by Johnny Ko)

[1] Said, Edward. “Extreme Occasions (on Celibidache)”. Music at the Limits. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008, p. 82.

[2] Census and Statistics Department, The Government of the HKSAR. 2019/20 Household Expenditure Survey.

https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/en/scode290.html

[3] U-Beat Magazine. “Breaking Out in the Outbreak: Artists Demonstrate Flexibility as They Temporarily Bid Farewell to Ideals Amidthe COVID-19 Pandemic”. HK01, December 20, 2020 (in Chinese).

https://www.hk01.com/sns/article/562567?utm_source=01articlecopy&utm_medium=referral

[4] Legislative Council. Official Record of Proceedings, March 23, 2022 (in Chinese).

https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/chinese/counmtg/floor/cm20220323a-confirm-ec.pdf

[5] Lesnie, Melissa. “YouTube Symphony attracts 33 million views worldwide”. Limelight, March 25, 2011.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110411054027/http://www.limelightmagazine.com.au/Article/252414,youtube-symphony-attracts-33-million-views-worldwide.aspx

[6] The nine MPAGs include Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra, Hong Kong Chinese Orchestra, Hong Kong Sinfonietta, Hong Kong Dance Company, The Hong Kong Ballet, City Contemporary Dance Company, Hong Kong Repertory Theatre, Chung Ying Theatre Company, and Zuni Icosahedron.

[7] Ma, Ruixuan. “Why Can Online Concert Tickets Sell for NT$4,000? The Cool Technology Behind Decryption”. Business Today, July 14, 2021 (in Chinese).

https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/183015/post/202107140027/

[8] Legislative Council. Update on the progress of the Promotion and Venue Operations of Performing Arts in the West Kowloon Cultural District, March 1, 2021.

https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr20-21/chinese/panels/wkcdp/papers/wkcdp20210301cb1-635-1-ec.pdf

[9] Ming Pao. “The Internet Age: Creating Websites and Making Videos Hyperlinking the Arts”. Ming Pao website, April 11, 2021 (in Chinese).

https://ol.mingpao.com/ldy/cultureleisure/culture/20210411/1618080594766/%E7%A7%91%E7%B6%B2%E4%B8%96%E4%BB%A3-%E6%8F%BC%E7%B6%B2%E9%A0%81%E6%8B%8D%E7%89%87-%E8%97%9D%E8%A1%93%E3%80%8C%E8%B6%85%E9%80%A3%E7%B5%90%E3%80%8D

2022年5月18日 班貝格交響樂團在德國為香港藝術節作第一場的演出（文：傅瑰琦）

2022年4月29日 Stop Producing, Start Preserving: On the Politics of Preserving Performance（文：Toni Sant）

2022年4月20日 Notes on Preserving Performance Arts in the Digital Age（文：Toni Sant）

2022年4月8日 由凡入聖——評《希臘受難曲》（文：洪思行）

2022年3月16日 既要看下去，就好好的看──談科技之於觀看（文：李海燕）

2022年3月10日 虛實間的《死城》（文：洪思行）

2022年2月23日 網絡時代裡的樂評人（文：洪思行）

2022年2月14日 2021年香港古典樂界回顧（文：洪思行）

2022年1月25日 《搭枱：時．間．流》：我們一直游到海水變藍（文：喻汀芷）

2021年12月23日 Performance and Performing Arts Collections in the Time of COVID-19（文：Alan Jones ）

2021年10月 ARTiSM 10月號——隱喻

2021年8月23日 尋無此人的集體扮「親」之旅（文：千山）

2021年8月9日 非常的日常：《半空的笑》與自我內心的大驅離（文：雷浩文）

2021年7月12日 雲端上的劇場：遊戲、互動式電影與劇場的邊界（文：凌志豪）

2021年7月12日 沉浸式劇場和日常生活的分別（文：夏如芸）

2021年6月29日 好奇探索之旅《尋親啓示：探訪由此路進》（文：朱映霖）

2021年6月28日 上網跟契訶夫玩兩玩：《沒有希望的廢青在看海鷗》和《chekhovOS /an experimental game/》（文：賴勇衡）

2021年6月9日 大時代下的新作（文：洪思行）

2021年4月30日 《一劍蜀山》：從武俠情懷到劇場電影（文：鄭政恆）

2021年4月23日 茫然地看被看的茫然（文：俞若玫）

2021年4月9日 聽得到的忘記（文：雙燕）

2021年3月17日 寂寥長守夜燈孤：觀一條褲製作《長夜守燈》（文：辛黛林）

2021年3月10日 被消失的球賽 —— 評多空間舞蹈劇場《球賽》（文：黃寶儀）

2021年2月23日 從網上演出思考香港能否發展文化民主（文：肥力）

2021年1月11日 二十多年來首次不在星光下．「港樂．星夜．交響曲」2020（文：傅瑰琦）

2020年12月30日 Festival Reparations and the Evolving Now（文：Keren Zaiontz）

2020年12月 ARTiSM 12月號——可能不想回憶但不能忘記：回顧2020年香港表演藝術

2020年11月16日 舞蹈VS武道：香港舞蹈團　舞╳武劇場《凝》之我思（文：莫嵐蘭）

2020年11月16日 在離散與變幻間相伴相守——評《雙雙》（文：黃寶儀）

2020年10月29日 《原則》比戲劇更離奇的現實中，我們能如何思考與堅守原則（文：江祈穎 ）

2020年10月23日 為誰辛苦為誰甜——疫情下的線上表演活動與評論寫作（文：李梓成）

2020年10月13日 舞在大海與城市空間——簡評「本地一手播」四個作品（文：陳冠而）

2020年10月11日 疫後藝文界發展新方向？——看完香港中樂團〈追月〉MV後有感（文：董芷菁）

2020年9月23日 思念是一種很玄的東西（文：白斐嵐）

2020年9月11日 重回「零」觀眾舞台——看演員，看劇場空間（文：千山）

2020年9月 ARTiSM 9月號——未來藝術異變的評論變異

2020年8月20日 《說唱張愛玲》：華麗後的荒涼（文：惟得）

2020年8月13日 疫情下的傅承與創新：日本傳統歌舞伎的新出路（文：潘文慧）

2020年7月27日 嘻哈音樂劇（文：洪思行）

2020年7月20日 病毒會否殺死英國劇場？（文：賴勇衡）

2020年7月15日 疫情之下的網路劇場：關於媒體的文化政治及新類型的萌芽（文：凌志豪）

2020年7月10日 如何呈現（大時代下的）小時代：線上直播表演《禁色》的劇場實驗（下）（文：雷浩文）

2020年7月6日 如何呈現（大時代下的）小時代：線上直播表演《禁色》的劇場實驗（上）（文：雷浩文）

2020年6月 ARTiSM 6月號——活在「後新冠」時代 : 病毒教曉我的事

2020年5月11日 中斷一切有可能帶來新的局面（文：馮程程）

2020年5月4日 瘟疫下香港人如何專心欣賞如幻似真的網上劇場（文：千山）

2020年4月28日 在場不在場，會是問題嗎？（文：白斐嵐）

2020年4月16日 阻隔與跨越．必要與非必要——致現場藝術陷入頓挫的這一年冬天（文：白斐嵐）

2020年2月18日 藝術何價？疫症下消失的藝文界（文：李俊亮）

本會得捷克藝術與劇場研究中心的協助，合辦「劇場／不／停／封：「演上線」計劃專題講座系列（一）」，系列包括：

1. 停了停不了：表演藝術在疫境中的線上變陣
2. 數碼大步走：表演和藝術家的學習時代
3. 疫境逢生：線上表演藝術的探索與疫後發展

歡迎大家在下方選單中重溫！

主辦：國際演藝評論家協會（香港分會）

協辦：捷克藝術與劇場研究中心

The Show Must Go On(line): Online Performance Archive Thematic Talk Series 1:

1. The Show Must Go ON/OFFline
2. Digital Leap in Performing Arts 
3. The Performing Arts Online in the Covid and Post-Covid Era

Presented by International Association of Theatre Critics (Hong Kong)

In collaboration with Arts and Theatre Institute (ATI)

捷克藝術與劇場研究中心在疫情後推出了多個網上討論和對談系列，探討當地表演藝術如何迎向充滿不同挑戰的時代，包括科技的介入怎樣改變了表演。講者來自捷克的資深劇場編劇與劇場構作David Košťák和Tereza Dobiášová，主持Martina Pecková Černá是藝術與劇場研究中心的國際合作部門的主館，同時亦是資深的劇場研究者和文化管理者。同場邀請香港導演陳泰然擔任回應者。

日期：2022.6.22（三）

時間：8 – 9:30pm

語言：英語（以上片段為普通話即時傳譯版本）

講者：David Košťák、Tereza Dobiášová

主持：Martina Pecková Černá

回應者：陳泰然

Talk 1/ The Show Must Go ON/OFFline

The Show Must Go ON/OFFline online discussion series and The ShowOff podcast series address the performing arts’ sensitivity and responsiveness to contemporary social, political and human civilization issues. The series are produced by the PerformCzech team at the Arts and Theatre Institute and in collaboration with international partners such as the European project Create to Connect -> Create to Impact project and the Performing Arts Central Europe (PACE.V4) network. The series are produced with support from the International Visegrad Fund, Creative Europe program and the Ministry of Culture Czech Republic. With selected guests from this series we will discuss special theatre projects integrating artificial intelligence and digital technologies.

Date: 2022.6.22 (Wed)

Time: 8 - 9:30pm

Language: English

Speaker: David Košťák

Košťák David is a playwright and a dramaturge of Svanda Theatre. He was born in 1991 in Prague. He graduated in Theory and criticism of theatre at Prague’s DAMU (Academy of Performing Arts in Prague). His own plays were performed in multiple European theatres and were well accepted. David also writes poems and translates theatre plays. He has experience with international co-production workshops for students ( DAMU & Georgetown University in Washington DC, USA; DAMU & The New School of Drama in New York, USA).

Speaker: Tereza Dobiášová

Studied dramaturgy and directing at Theatre Faculty of Academy of Musical Arts in Prague. After short engagement as dramaturge, she founded a theatre group integrating foreigners into society, the Children of Colour. She was leading it since 2008 till 2012 artistically, as well as organisationally, and was experimenting with art as a tool of building up social cohesion and engagement. In these years she also encountered the concept of children museums. 2012 she became a director of local gallery dedicated to children book illustration, Sladovna Pisek. In next five years she transformed it with success into the major Czech children museum, loved by families in the whole country, recognised also internationally. 2017 founded an UUUL Institute in with the goal to open up a children museum in Prague.

2019 - 2021 she lead development of a quality label and brand of museums educating children for the future for Hands On! International Associational of Children in Museums. 

Recently she writes novels (2022 awarded with Czech national literary award “Magnesia Litera” as a debut of the year), theatre and exposition librettos with intensive audience participation (on-line interactive performances of “Free like a Bird, realised by National Theatre in Prague 2020 - 2021, conception and libretto of House of Karel Klostermann, Srní, realised 2022 - 2023, etc.), accompanies and consultants newly appearing hybrid museums in Czech Republic.

Moderator: Martina Pecková Černá

Theatre researcher, translator, cultural manager. Her sphere of interest covers contemporary drama, primarily written in German and Spanish, contemporary Czech theatre, and cultural policy of Central Europe. She is the secretary of the Czech Centre of the ITI (International Theatre Institute) as well as the member of the ATI commission for short-term mobility. She occasionally publishes in Czech and international journals specializing in theatre and culture. 

Respondent: Chan Tai-yin

Tai is a theatre-maker interested in the development of Hong Kong contemporary theatre. After training as an actor in the UK, he worked with Hong Kong Arts Festival and Tai-Kwun on newly commissioned projects and transferred international works. Many of his works investigate audience-performer relationships, and new ways of storytelling. His recent project, Waste Youth Watching Seagull explored storytelling on social media.

在這個無法不邁向科技發展的年代，表演和藝術家怎樣透過思考不同技術的應用和運用，進一步探索美學的種種可能? 「數碼大步走」是一個針對這方面發展的一個國際培訓計劃，曾經參與過計劃的講者包括舞者等，將會分享他們的經驗和得著。主持Martina Pecková Černá是藝術與劇場研究中心的國際合作部門的主館，同時亦是資深的劇場研究者和文化管理者。同場邀請香港藝評人陳瑋鑫擔任回應者。

日期：2022.6.27（一）

時間：8 – 9:30pm

語言：英語（以上片段為普通話即時傳譯版本）

講者：Eva Urbanová、Paloma Gonzalez、Milda Keršulyté

主持：Martina Pecková Černá

回應者：陳瑋鑫

Talk 2/ Digital Leap in Performing Arts

Under the coordination of Dance Info Finland and together with partners from France, Lithuania, Norway, Spain and Sweden, the PerformCzech team developed an international training program Digital Leap funded from the Erasmus+ program. Digital Leap offers contemporary circus and dance artists learning opportunities for deepening their understanding of different digital tools and virtual platforms. The Digital Leap learning modules are a series of a 5-day events consisting of theory and hands-on training in digital platforms from different perspectives. The modules offer you an opportunity to develop different skills in digitalization. Topics range from promoting and presenting performances by using digital tools, creating new artistic works in digital and virtual environments, and learning how to employ them in a way that best suits your own artistic practice. Experts of different disciplines will act as teachers, mentors and facilitators. With three participants from the two training modules organized so far in Prague and Vilnius we will share their experiences and insights.

Date: 2022.6.27 (Mon)

Time: 8 - 9:30pm

Language: English

Speaker: Eva Urbanová

Eva Urbanová is a dedicated emerging choreographer and dancer who has worked internationally with dance groups of various sizes, cultural backgrounds, and professional experiences. Eva’s choreographies have been performed in Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Portugal, and Germany. Her solo "The Essence" won the 2nd Choreographic Award and Public Award at the Solo Tanz Theater Stuttgart International Competition 2021. Eva’s works examine and criticize mechanisms of the social system, focus on empowering women, and demonstrate the concept of dualism. She focuses on developing her own specific dance style and following her own movement signature.  

Speaker: Paloma Gonzalez

Paloma González is from Puerto Rico and has a degree in foreign languages: French and Portuguese and is currently finishing her Master's degree in Cultural Project Management at the University of Bourgogne Franche-Comté. The past summer, she worked as Volunteer Coordinator and festival information centre manager at the Hommo Novus International Festival of Contemporary Theatre in Riga, Latvia. Currently working at ARTCENA/Circostrada as European Projects Assistant.  

Speaker: Milda Keršulyté

A project coordinator at Lithuanian Dance Information Centre which is a nongovernmental organization dedicated to contemporary dance/circus and supports the artistic and cultural development of dance/circus art in Lithuania. Additionally, she is a street dancer and have been dancing for about 13 years now. Currently studying Bachelor of Creative Industries. One of the dancers of Creative Europe's international large scale four-year dance and theatre project "People Power Partnership" with 14 partners from 11 European countries.

Moderator: Martina Pecková Černá

Theatre researcher, translator, cultural manager. Her sphere of interest covers contemporary drama, primarily written in German and Spanish, contemporary Czech theatre, and cultural policy of Central Europe. She is the secretary of the Czech Centre of the ITI (International Theatre Institute) as well as the member of the ATI commission for short-term mobility. She occasionally publishes in Czech and international journals specializing in theatre and culture.

Respondent: William Chan

William is a performing arts critic and researcher base in Hong Kong. He has been writing reviews and feature articles on visual arts, dance and theatre productions since 1998 for media in Hong Kong and Macau. He has worked as a Project Manager for International Association for Theatre Critics (Hong Kong) during 2015-2017 and the Editor for dance journal/hk published by Hong Kong Dance Alliance in 2020 and 2021. Currently working as a lecturer in a tertiary institute, William is also a jury member of Hong Kong Dance Awards, Hong Kong Theatre Libre and IATC(HK) Critics Awards, as well as Arts Advisor in Arts Criticism and Examiner in Dance, Drama and Arts Criticism at the Hong Kong Arts Development Council.

疫情期間表演藝術的線上發展在世界各地的實踐也不盡相同，講座除了回顧線上展演的不同方式和劇場構作的要點，亦討論在疫情過後這些經驗如何累積，讓藝術家繼續拓展線上的表演空間。講者包括National Theatre Drama的劇場構作，專長後戲劇創作的Marta Ljubková，和布拉格表演藝術學院Studio FAMU主管Ondřej Šejnoha。主持Martina Pecková Černá是藝術與劇場研究中心的國際合作部門的主館，同時亦是資深的劇場研究者和文化管理者。同場邀請香港藝評人凌志豪擔任回應者。

日期：2022.6.29（三）

時間：8 – 9:30pm

語言：英語（以上片段為普通話即時傳譯版本）

講者：Marta Ljubková、Ondřej Šejnoha

主持：Martina Pecková Černá

回應者：凌志豪

Talk 3/ The Performing Arts Online in the Covid and Post-Covid Era

The series of online meetings “The very Basics of Performing Arts Online” was organized by PerformCzech / Arts and Theatre Institute in 2020, when the SARS-CoV-19 pandemic broke out. The series focused on the issue of recording theatre performances for archiving, subsequent study and presentation for the professional public, as well as on the issue of making theatre and dance production accessible to the general public through digital platforms. In the individual parts, we dealt with the basic issues related to the following topics: methodology of complete recording of theatrical performances, copyright component of recording of theatrical performances, editing of recording of theatrical performances, dramaturgy of recording of theatrical performances. We will return to these topics with selected representatives of the Czech professional community in a discussion that will look at them from the perspective of the post-Covid era. 

Date: 2022.6.29 (Wed)

Time: 8 - 9:30pm

Language: English

Speaker: Marta Ljubková

Graduated from the Faculty of Liberal Arts of Charles University and the Academy of Performing Arts, where she currently lectures. Her main teaching interests are dramaturgy, history of scenography, and literary work. She has worked as a publishing editor, a freelance dramaturg, a reviewer, and an editor. She specializes in contemporary prose and drama, as well as in post-dramatic writing. She has served as the Head Dramaturgist of the National Theatre Drama since 2015, and she is a Program Director of the international theatre festival Prague Crossroads.

Speaker: Ondřej Šejnoha

Ondřej Šejnoha is currently working (since February 2010) as a Director of the Studio FAMU, the official production house of Film and TV School of the Academy of Performing Arts in Prague (FAMU). Close cooperation between FAMU and Ondřej started in 2006.From 2006 until his election for the position in the Studio FAMU, he was working as a Head of Production for FAMU International Department as well.
Under Ondrej’s leadership at the Studio FAMU significant number of the FAMU projects have been nominated & awarded by prestigious events including 92nd Oscar® Finalist Short Film (animated) Dcera/Daughter; 89th Oscar® shortlisted animated film (short) Happy End; Sundance 2016 Best direction short film Peacock; as well as Student Academy Award and Cinéfondation nominations and domestic Cena Magnesia - Czech Lion awards for the best student movie.

Respondent: Jeffery Lin

He gained his MA South East and Pacific Asian Studies from SOAS after graduated from University of Hong Kong Comparative Literature and Fine Arts Department. He is the member of University of Hong Kong Cultural Leadership Youth Academy, International Association of Theatre Critics [Hong Kong]. He was also co-founder and Marketing Director of Culture Lab Plus (Hong Kong Independent literature publishing house). Winner of 15th Hong Kong Arts Development Awards for Young Artist (Arts Criticism), Hong Kong Youth Literary Awards (Poetry), Li Shenghua's Modern Poetry Youth Award 2015, etc. He works across on literature, criticism, translation, curation. Recent publication include feature essay in Hong Kong Visual Arts Yearbook 2019. 

Moderator: Martina Pecková Černá

Theatre researcher, translator, cultural manager. Her sphere of interest covers contemporary drama, primarily written in German and Spanish, contemporary Czech theatre, and cultural policy of Central Europe. She is the secretary of the Czech Centre of the ITI (International Theatre Institute) as well as the member of the ATI commission for short-term mobility. She occasionally publishes in Czech and international journals specializing in theatre and culture.

是次講座系列由本地四個網上演出的製作團隊，分享大家在疫情下創作網上作品時，就美學、技術、行政等層面的不同思考，講座系列包括：

1. 在疫境下探索劇場美學和觀眾拓展的新空間：《原則》與《巴黎公社的日子》
2. 網上展演的劇場構作與表演語彙的轉化：《鼠疫》（粵語版）與《禁色》——西門．史提芬斯

兩節講座以粵語主講，可以在下方選單中重溫！

主持：陳國慧、雷浩文

主辦：國際演藝評論家協會（香港分會）

特別鳴謝：同流、香港話劇團、香港演藝學院、香港藝術節

The Show Must Go On(line): Online Performance Archive Thematic Talk Series 2:

1. Searching for New Theatre Aesthetics and Audiences during the Pandemic: Principle and The Days of the Commune by Bertolt Brecht
2. Exploring the Dramaturgy of and the Transformation of Performing Language in Online Performances: The Plague (Cantonese version) and PORNOGRAPHY by Simon Stephens

Conducted in Cantonese.

Moderators: Bernice Chan, Felix Loi

Presented by International Association of Theatre Critics (Hong Kong)

Special Thanks: We Drama Group, Hong Kong Repertory Theatre, The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts, Hong Kong Arts Festival

是次講座邀請了《巴黎公社的日子》的導演、翻譯及改編鄧偉傑，與《原則》的製作團隊，包括導演方俊杰、拍攝導演何小寶和監製黎栩昕，分享他們在疫情下製作這兩個演出時所面對的情況。

《巴黎公社的日子》因場地關閉，由現場演出改作網上播放，鄧偉傑講述了拍攝當時所面對的挑戰和當中的美學取向；《原則》上演時則容許一半觀眾入場，劇團決定實體演出和網上直播雙線進行，創作團隊分享了舞台導演和拍攝導演在演出時如何協調，拓展觀眾的成效，及對未來網上演出的期望。

日期：2022.7.11（一）

時間：8 - 9:45pm

語言：粵語

講者：鄧偉傑（《巴黎公社的日子》導演、翻譯及改編）、方俊杰（《原則》導演）、何小寶（《原則》拍攝導演）、黎栩昕（《原則》監製）

主持：陳國慧、雷浩文

特別鳴謝：同流、香港話劇團

Searching for New Theatre Aesthetics and Audiences during the Pandemic: Principle and The Days of the Commune by Bertolt Brecht

Date: 2022.7.11 (Mon)

Time: 8 - 9:45pm

Language: Cantonese

Speakers: Desmond Tang (Director, Translator and Adaptation of The Days of the Commune by Bertolt Brecht), Fong Chun Kit (Director of Principle), siUbo hO (Film Director of Principle), Sunnie Lai (Producer of Principle)

Moderators: Bernice Chan, Felix Loi

Special Thanks: We Drama Group, Hong Kong Repertory Theatre

是次講座邀請了《禁色》導演潘詩韻，與《鼠疫》錄像導演吳卓昕、導演陳泰然，跟大家分享兩個截然不同的網上作品。

2020年第一波疫情爆發後表演場地及學校關閉，原定在香港演藝學院內演出的作品《禁色》需移師到網上進行。導演潘詩韻選擇在視訊交流平台作一連七日的直播演出，講述了在有限資源下，跟學生一同探索演出方法的過程及劇場構作的不同取向。

2021年香港藝術節的其中一個作品，《鼠疫》的創作團隊在排練途中得悉須以網上錄播形式演出，分享在媒介轉變後，畫面在不同場景和舞台調度下所作的取捨，以及如何利用鏡頭語言協助觀眾欣賞作品。最後，大家亦討論到大眾一直以來的觀演心態，在演出轉到網上呈現後所延伸的思考。

日期：2022.7.18（一）

時間：8 - 10pm

語言：粵語

講者：吳卓昕（《鼠疫》（粵語版）錄像導演）、陳泰然（《鼠疫》（粵語版）導演及翻譯）、潘詩韻（《禁色》——西門．史提芬斯－導演、翻譯及改編）

主持：陳國慧、雷浩文

主辦：國際演藝評論家協會（香港分會）

特別鳴謝：香港演藝學院、香港藝術節

Exploring the Dramaturgy of and the Transformation of Performing Language in Online Performances: The Plague (Cantonese version) and PORNOGRAPHY by Simon Stephens

Date: 2022.7.18 (Mon)

Time: 8 - 10pm

Language: Cantonese

Speakers: Apple Ng (Video Director of The Plague (Cantonese version)), Chan Tai Yin (Director and Translator (Cantonese script) of The Plague (Cantonese version)), Janice Poon (Director, Translator and Adaptation of PORNOGRAPHY by Simon Stephens)

Moderators: Bernice Chan, Felix Loi

Special Thanks: The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts, Hong Kong Arts Festival

大館線上節目「大館舞台」首度與香港演藝學院合作，於七月份先後推出四個由戲劇學院學生創作的實時網上節目。

本會繼早前舉辦「劇場／不／停／封」講座系列後，特別邀請了四個製作的創作及演出團隊現身說法，講述如何實踐創作概念，分享探索非傳統舞台表演過程時所面對的挑戰，以及怎樣把經驗轉化成未來創作的養份等。

日期：2022.08.22（一）

時間：7:30 – 9:30pm

平台：Zoom

主辦：國際演藝評論家協會（香港分會）

特別鳴謝：大館、香港演藝學院

主持：陳國慧

講者*：劉嘉盈、程曉敏、杜艷珊、鍾奕俊、莫珏邦、葉雯麗、曾泳鑫、錢穎嘉

《把酒談 Zoom》

聯合創作：劉嘉盈

聯合創作及音樂：程曉敏

《Zoom近啲東瀛．遊學團》

監製及演員：杜艷珊

技術支援及演員：鍾奕俊

《一路．順風》

創作及製作團隊：莫珏邦、葉雯麗

《隔離XX有可疑》

企劃總監及演員：曾泳鑫

演員：錢穎嘉

*承蒙香港演藝學院允准參與是次製作

2021年2月3日 「疫情下的中國音樂活動」網上直播圓桌會議

2021年2月3日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 場地篇

2021年2月1日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 藝術節篇

2021年1月27日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 網演篇【二】

2021年1月25日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 求存篇【二】

2021年1月20日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 網演篇【一】

2021年1月18日 疫向未來：在疫情期間思考香港表演藝術的危與機 求存篇【一】

2020年5月13日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 如何在網絡世界進行實體創作

2020年4月20日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第三部分：網絡世界和劇場創作實體的相聯性

2020年3月27日 世界劇場日：全球通話

2020年3月31日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第二部分：表演藝術的創業精神

2020年3月30日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第二部分：文化藝術品牌推廣及倡議

2020年3月27日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第一部分：3) 舞蹈教育的多樣性及主流教學中的位置

2020年3月26日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第一部分：2) 香港舞蹈生態概談

2020年3月25日 舞蹈業界抗疫對策網上研討會 第一部分：1) 影像呈現舞蹈的可能性