展覽論述 | About the Exhibition

十八世紀英國工業革命以後，城市化及隨之而來的環境污染激起了人們對於自然田野的嚮往與懷念，蒐集鳥蛋等自然物賦予了擁有者一份重建與自然聯繫的浪漫情懷，隨著收集行為的規模化，一種以鳥蛋與鳥巢為主的學門被確立為鳥卵學(Oology)，當時的鳥卵學即使偶爾會在鳥類學(Ornithology)脈絡底下被零星的研究，但始終欠缺明確的科學價值，多被大眾視為一種賞心悅目的自然戰利品。爾後隨著收藏族群的擴大，鳥蛋與鳥巢近一步被視為極具交易與社交價值的收藏品項。

來到十九世紀，在國家榮譽的影響之下原本作為私人嗜好的自然史蒐藏，成為了公立博物館的必爭項目。大量的自然之物被搜羅進入博物館／私人收藏。二十世紀中期起，野生動物保護法逐步禁止私人擁有鳥卵學收藏，眾多私人藏品不得不轉向博物館，龐大的收藏一方面間接促成了日後意想不到的跨學科研究，但也導致鳥卵學逐漸離開公眾視野，成為一門幾乎被遺忘的收藏／學門。

從鄉野玩意到科學館藏，鳥卵學的曖昧和難定位，使得其可討論的面向非常的分散。蛋的完美卻脆弱，巢的平凡而偉大本自引人入勝，但背後驅動的慾望歸根不過就是“人，想要收藏／據有來自自然的漂亮東西”，簡單素樸，如此而已。

「複巢」雖與「馴國」(2019)與「代窯」(2025)同起源於收藏物件，不同於後兩者脫胎自個人持有的收藏，「複巢」沒有想呈現鳥卵學收藏的實體，而更像是在探究一段曾經狂熱的“收藏事件”。鳥卵學讓我好奇與著迷之處也不完全在於鳥蛋與鳥巢本身，而是其認真而任性，讓人困惑到發笑的同時，也因為其作為一門不夠嚴肅的學術，處在遺忘和重生的疊加態而獨具魅力。鳥卵學很好的懸置在美學與科學、感性與理性，可以落地到日常、歷史、民俗、造型與審美的同時也能上綱至生殖、生態、物候、結構與材料。如果殼跟巢作為一種物理容器，鳥卵學就是一種意識與情感容器，包容／圍繞著或近或遠的其他。

After the Industrial Revolution in eighteenth-century Britain, urbanization and the environmental pollution that followed stirred a longing and nostalgia for the natural countryside. Collecting bird eggs and other natural objects bestowed on their owners a romantic sense of reconnecting with nature. As collecting scaled up, a field centered on bird eggs and nests was established as oology. Even though oology was occasionally examined within the framework of ornithology, it long lacked clear scientific value and was largely regarded by the public as a pleasing "natural trophy." As the community of collectors expanded, bird eggs and nests were further regarded as collectible items of considerable transactional and social value.

By the 19th century, under the sway of national honor, what had begun as a private passion for natural history collecting became a priority for public museums. Vast quantities of natural specimens were gathered into museums and private collections. From the mid‑twentieth century onward, wildlife protection laws gradually prohibited private ownership of oological collections, forcing many private holdings into museums. On the one hand, these large collections indirectly enabled unexpected interdisciplinary research in later years; on the other, they pushed oology out of public view, turning it into an almost forgotten discipline and category of collecting.

From rustic pastime to scientific collection, oology's ambiguity and difficulty of definition have scattered its discursive possibilities. The perfection yet fragility of the egg and the ordinariness yet grandeur of the nest are inherently compelling. But the desire that drives it all ultimately comes down to something simple: humans want to collect/possess beautiful things from nature, plain and unadorned.

While Oology and Others shares its origin in collected objects with No Country for Canine (2019) and Derived Pottery (2025), unlike those two projects, which grew out of personally held collections, Oology and Others Matters does not aim to present an actual oological collection. It is closer to an inquiry into a once fevered "collecting event." What fascinates me about oology is not only the eggs and nests themselves, but also their mix of seriousness and caprice, so puzzling it can be laugh-inducing. As a field that was never quite "serious" enough academically, it sits in an overlapping state of being forgotten and being reborn, and that gives it a unique allure. Oology is held in suspension between aesthetics and science, sentiment and reason. It can touch down in the everyday, in history, folklore, form, and taste, while also scaling up to questions of reproduction, ecology, phenology, structure, and materials. If the shell and the nest are physical vessels, then oology is a vessel for consciousness and sentiment, encompassing/surrounding other matters, both near and far.