top of page


Guardian interview:

BBC interview:

CNN interview:

Nikkei interview:

scmp Interview:

Asia Free interview:

​WangJu interview





我们将富强、民主、文明、和谐 ,自由、平等、公正、法治,爱国、敬业、诚信、友善共24个字12个词,带着对人类命运的美好祝愿。以涂鸦的旗号,工整挺拔的印刻在了叶子与垃圾齐飞,街摊与涂鸦一色的东伦敦涂鸦街。





East London Socialist Core Values


This is an art action initiated by me, funded and supported by three Chinese friends in the UK, with the direct and indirect help and participation of more than 20 friends, which started in the evening of August 4, 2023, London time.


We will be rich and strong, democracy, civilization, harmony, freedom, equality, justice, the rule of law, patriotism, dedication, honesty, friendliness, a total of 24 words 12 words, with the best wishes for the fate of mankind. With the banner of graffiti, neatly and uprightly engraved in the leaves and garbage fly together, street stalls and graffiti a color of East London Graffiti Street.


When the first rays of sunlight shone into the streets of East London on August 5, the 24 red letters on a white background were absurd and majestic, and the magical journey of all this light had just begun for me .......



The beginning of the story.




one side:



another side










Financial Times:

Nikkei interview:

BBC interview:


"East London Socialist Core Values — The Dynamism of Opposition"

For me, this artwork holds no political bias. With just 24 words, it encompasses shared human values, broadly falling within the boundaries of free speech and the law. Such an approach has occurred multiple times in the history of graffiti. It doesn't serve any political form but acts as an outer garment to raise questions, discussing the essence of various environments. It reflects introspection and revelation of issues on both sides. Without dialectical thinking, one cannot grasp the meaning of the work.

"Freedom" is a term that requires thought to comprehend. The more you understand freedom, the more you should understand how freedom as consciousness can colonize people. In London, in the realm of freedom, we see the Rodhesian Centerism, utilizing freedom to exercise true cultural output and commercialization under the guise of "decolonization". Using the name of liberal democracy, it highlights the Western cultural center — the freedom of Western culture.

In reality, this kind of freedom constructs Western Orientalism, hiding within it immense cultural inequality and exploitation. Employing a socialist mode of construction while simultaneously embracing the spirit of free speech in graffiti, it opposes colonization and tests Western liberal democracy. Let's see what this clash will yield. Regrettably, it obscures the works of many artists; perhaps this is the cost of freedom. Let me be the "villain" who magnifies this cost.

The adage "The dynamism of opposition" implies that the situation on the other side requires no further elaboration.

Unforeseeably, my computer, hard drive, and those of a partner, along with a camera belonging to a photography friend, were all stolen in East London. This was completely unexpected for me, yet it became the most fitting real-life material echoing the artwork. Perhaps this is still the cost of freedom, haha.

Feel free to visit here often in the coming days, observing how the core values of socialism can bring about differences and impacts to Brick Lane's already symbolic and commercialized freedom. Also, I anticipate how artists will continue to create atop these socialist core values.





对我来说这件作品没有政治倾向, 24个字作为人类的共同价值,大面积覆盖处于言论自由和法律的边界内,这样的方式在涂鸦历史上也多次发生。不服务于任何政治形态,只是作为外衣提出问题,讨论不同环境本身。它会呈现出对双方问题的反思和揭露。如果没有辩证的思维能力,是无法体会作品的意义的。



所谓反者道之动 ,那么另一边的局面无需多说了。


未来的几天可以常来这里看看,看看社会主义的核心价值能给Bricklane 那早已被符号化和商业化的自由带来点什么样的不同和冲击,和什么样全新的商业打卡方式。以及我更期待的是之后的艺术家该如何在这被社会主义核心价值观上继续创作


Creative process and documentation



follow up





当然也必须承认西方媒体的平衡报道,但是更要非常感谢的是在8月月9日7晚 ,也正是我在经历最激烈网暴黑暗的时候,来自一位匿名直接发往各大媒体和皇家艺术学院校长和人文学院院长的文章名为“砖巷涂鸦现代猎巫师行动,英国艺术自由言论反思的紧急呼吁”,署名为Canvassius Freeborn先生/女士,对整个事件的哲学,艺术和政治学分析,因为这直接质疑和关系到了西方所倡导的法制和民主精神,也佐证为何这个事件应被看作是讨论艺术的核心内容之一,既创作自由。




无可辩驳的是,所有的这一切都远超我的想象,却无疑汇集在一起成为了作品的一部分,引用尊敬的Canvassius Freeborn先生/女士在文章中提到的尼采的话“与龙斗争太久,人也会变成龙”。反极权团体利用集权主义的方式对我非法的迫害值得世界惊醒和让世界看到网络暴力的可怕之处。而同时也是其对西方世界的所倡导的民主法治在威权之下的质疑,与对艺术创作言论自由的反思,对艺术环境“寒蝉效应”的揭示。

I have always believed that good art is not about how complicated the structure is, how obscure the symbols are, or how expensive the cost is.Rather, it is the simplest and most direct way to insert into people's minds, stirring and forming reflections.It is the artist's true experience of the social environment and life in each pore, followed by our martyr-like courageous actions.


Of course, we must also recognize the balanced coverage of the Western media, but more than that, we must be very grateful that on the evening of August 9, 7, precisely when I was experiencing the most intense net storm darkness, from an anonymous direct to the major media and the Royal College of Art Principal and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, an article titled "Brick Lane Graffiti Modern Witch Hunt, an urgent call for reflection on the UK's art and free speech! ", signed by Mr./Ms. Canvassius Freeborn, a philosophical, artistic and political analysis of the whole event, as it directly questions and relates to the spirit of law and democracy as promoted in the West, and why this event should be seen as one of the core elements of the discussion of art, both creative freedom.

I didn't see this article until the 11th because of the overload of malicious messages in my inbox, yet his article was like a bright light in the dark night, directly illuminating a darkness in front of my eyes and confirming my unremitting persistence for so many days.

According to statistics, my personal platform account has received more than 8,000 people, tens of thousands of net storm information. Among them, there is no lack of death threats with home addresses listed. Other platforms and other people on the team have received far more than this, and there is very little civilized discussion compared to this number. Meanwhile the UK police and embassies are struggling to provide effective help. I have repeatedly emphasized in the media that this was a triggering act of two-way resistance and exposure, and that the work itself as a generator is in the realm of artistic freedom of expression and takes no position.


It is irrefutable that all of this is far beyond my imagination, but it has certainly come together as part of the work, to quote Nietzsche's words in the article by the esteemed Mr./Ms. Canvassius Freeborn, "Fight the dragon too long, and the man becomes the dragon". The unlawful persecution of me by anti-totalitarian groups using totalitarian methods deserves to wake up the world and show it the horrors of cyber-violence. At the same time, it also questions the democracy and rule of law advocated by the Western world under authoritarianism, reflects on the freedom of expression in art creation, and reveals the "chilling effect" of the art environment.

截屏2023-09-19 02.27.53.png
截屏2023-09-19 02.28.15.png
截屏2023-09-19 02.35.41.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.39.21.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.40.44.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.43.03.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.43.14.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.44.12.png
截屏2023-10-02 23.43.40.png
截屏2023-09-19 12.07.04.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.11.55.png
Screenshot 2023-08-14 at 19.39.16.png

​Here is the entire article by the esteemed Mr. Canvasius freeborn.

Esteemed Dr. Paul Thompson, Professor Ken Neil and Yique,


I am writing to you in response to a recent news article published on your platform, which can be found at the following link:


I wish to begin by expressing gratitude to the media for their balanced coverage of the Brick Lane graffiti incident. Writing under the pseudonym Canvassius Freeborn, an observer of the cultural interplay between China and the West, I find myself compelled to write on this matter. However, the weight of this incident demands that I maintain anonymity.


The core issue at hand is more profound than it appears. The persecution of artists for their freedom of speech and creativity is not a new narrative. Historically and currently, such witch hunts have been rampant in totalitarian China. Today, the West witnesses a similar pattern, albeit with overseas Chinese groups at the helm. Nietzsche aptly captures the essence of this situation: "He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself." Rather than a discussion on art, this incident has evolved into a platform for online violence, extremism, and threats to personal safety. These acts of cyber violence and advocacy of crime cannot be tolerated in any civilized country. Although many critics emanate from overseas Chinese groups, it's essential to recognize that their grievances are rooted not in the artist's work but in the overarching shadow of totalitarianism. Echoing the words of renowned Chinese writer Lu Xun, "When a brave man is angry, he draws his sword on someone stronger, while an angry coward draws his sword on someone weaker."


Graffiti is a collective act, and the artist's companions who went with him to graffiti, whether they are other Chinese or British classmates or friends, seem to be ignored by the bullying, and he is the only one who bears the attacks at homeland and abroad. This selective targeting raises troubling questions about the underlying motivations of the attackers. Just imagine, what if an Englishman did the same graffiti? Is being Chinese itself an original sin? This disparity in reaction cannot be overlooked, for it reveals a disturbing bias that transcends the artwork itself and implicates broader social and cultural dynamics. I am very saddened by this situation, and it's unjust for the artist to bear the weight of such widespread grievances, especially when the real battle is against a system, not an individual.


In light of this incident, I am deeply cognizant of the potential threat it poses to the foundational values of the West, notably the freedom of speech and artistic expression. Being deeply embedded in this field, I grasp the weighty implications it presents. Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere emphasizes the significance of unhindered participation in public discourse. Therefore, even if I don't always concur with every artist's viewpoint, I passionately advocate for their right to express themselves. However, the 'Chilling Effect' instigated by this digital witch-hunt compels me to adopt anonymity, even when discussing events in the UK, a place historically revered for its commitment to free speech. This irony is stark, compelling us to ponder the alarming parallels between online mob behavior and tactics employed by totalitarian regimes. This situation raises a pivotal question: How does the online vilification of artists distinguish itself from the harsh suppression of dissent in countries like China? Observing hints of such oppressive tendencies in the UK, eerily similar to those in more stringent societies, is deeply disconcerting.


I wish to underscore that the heart of this incident serves as an examination of the United Kingdom's stance on freedom of speech, a principle that has long been foundational to Western democracies. As a nation, the UK has traditionally positioned itself as a steadfast defender of this fundamental right. The current situation, however, raises serious questions regarding the UK's willingness to uphold this commitment. If the nation appears to evade or diminish its responsibility in protecting freedom of speech, particularly within the context of its student population, it could lead to widespread skepticism concerning the sincerity of its devotion to these principles. Such a failure could have far-reaching ramifications, undermining the very fabric of societal structures that have been constructed upon the bedrock of free expression. The potential consequences are not merely alarming but could be seen as a betrayal of Western values, signifying a surrender of freedom and rational discourse to the forces of violence and authoritarianism. This outcome, undoubtedly undesirable, prompts us to question when Britain's resolve began to waver, and why it might appear to some as increasingly timid or disenchanted with its own ideals. It is imperative to recognize that this incident is not an isolated occurrence but may be indicative of a broader crisis in the preservation of free speech within the UK. It serves as a litmus test, gauging whether British society is prepared to confront such challenges with integrity or whether it may succumb to compromise. This is a complex and urgent matter that necessitates thoughtful reflection from all those invested in the principles that guide our democratic societies.


In fact, Qique's performance art, marked by the graffiti on the wall, serves merely as an entry point to a broader realm of artistic expression. Its relative simplicity, perhaps even unintentional, belies its profound impact. Such a piece stands as a testament to the transformative power of art and could very well find its place in performance art textbooks. The sweeping public response it garnered not only reiterates Britain's unwavering commitment to freedom of speech but also magnifies the nation's readiness to engage with art, irrespective of personal alignment with the values it represents.


Although I approach this as a 'spectator', my expertise in art criticism and insights into the East-West art dynamics drive me to analyze this incident deeply. I urge prudence and rationality in its interpretation. Hence, I've penned the subsequent article in this letter titled 'The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech.' Recognizing that the letter and article are complementary in nature, I recommend that they be published together to offer a more comprehensive perspective on this critical issue. I welcome publications, comments, and discussions on the content, but I kindly request that my original text remain intact, preserving the essence and integrity of my analysis. I deeply appreciate your trust and the pivotal role of media and educators in shaping public discourse.


To some readers, particularly those who may not have undergone systematic political science training, there's a possibility my endorsement of Yique's right to free speech could be misconstrued as support for totalitarianism. I wish to clarify: My advocacy centers on the fundamental principle of freedom of speech. It does not necessarily align with or endorse the specific content Yique—or any other artist—chooses to express. Crucially, this letter emanates from my deep-seated opposition to totalitarianism. We must recognize, as Hannah Arendt insightfully elucidated in 'The Origins of Totalitarianism,' that countering dictatorship with dictatorial methods risks inadvertently entrenching the very systems we oppose. Arendt's exploration of totalitarian regimes emphasizes how resistance movements, when adopting the tactics of the oppressors, can inadvertently pave the way for a new form of tyranny. It's not merely about overthrowing a regime; it's about ensuring the foundational principles upon which a new order is built do not mirror the oppressive methods of the old. For example, when the Bolsheviks sought to overthrow their oppressors, the tactics they employed—like secret police and purges—became entrenched hallmarks of the subsequent regime, illustrating the dangerous trajectory of mimicking oppressive methods.


Lastly, I earnestly hope the Royal College of Art continues to uphold its tradition of fairness and transparency in addressing Yique's case. Adherence to academic guidelines, free from external influences—especially from intense online sentiment—should remain paramount.


I wish to highlight that this correspondence is an open letter, shared with esteemed media outlets including The Guardian, BBC, Bloomberg, and CNN. My intent is to foster a comprehensive dialogue on this crucial matter, ensuring that diverse perspectives are both aware of and contributing to this discourse.



Canvassius Freeborn




尊敬的Paul Thompson博士、Ken Neil教授和Yique先生/女士,


首先,我要对媒体对Brick Lane涂鸦事件的平衡报道表示感谢。作为一个以Canvassius Freeborn为笔名的观察者,我被文化在中西之间的相互影响所吸引,因此我感到有必要就此事件发表一些看法。然而,这个事件的重要性要求我保持匿名。






尽管我以“旁观者”的身份来看待这个问题,但我在艺术批评方面的专业知识和对中西艺术动态的深刻了解驱使我对此事件进行深入分析。我敦促在解释时谨慎和理性。因此,我在此信件中为这篇文章撰写了后续部分,标题为“Brick Lane涂鸦事件:对海外华人艺术家的猎巫行为及英国在维护言论自由方面的危机”。考虑到这封信和文章在性质上是互补的,我建议将它们一同发布,以便更全面地展示这一重要问题的观点。我欢迎出版、评论和对内容的讨论,但我恳请保留我的原始文本,以保持分析的精髓和完整性。我非常感谢您的信任以及媒体和教育工作者在塑造公共话语方面所扮演的关键角色。





Canvassius Freeborn




"The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech"


Canvassius Freeborn





The vibrant art scene of London's Brick Lane recently became the epicenter of a complex controversy that offers a sobering look at the challenges of political art in our hyperconnected world. A group of artists, including Chinese artist Yique, painted a Chinese government slogan promoting the country's "socialist core values" on a public wall. The artwork, intended as a reflection on diverse environments and attitudes, rapidly evolved into a palimpsest of political dissent. However, the online reaction to the artwork took a troubling turn, with the artists becoming targets of personal attacks, threats, and invasions of privacy.



Disturbing Instances of Online Aggression


The offensive remarks and threats directed at the artists present a stark picture of the disturbing extent of online aggression. For instance, comments like, 'Can I donate to the Hong Kong group (that wants to buy your skull)  哪个香港组织啊 我能捐款吗?' (___meplz and 'I'll pay ten thousand 😍, DM me quickly 我出一万😍快速dm我' (tamako1312 are not just cruel taunts but borderline criminal threats, utterly unacceptable in any civilized society. Unfortunately, similar intimidation and threats appear to be all too common on social media platforms, including Twitter, Reddit, and Instagram. This represents merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the pervasive issue of online aggression and violence, raising urgent questions about the role and responsibility of these platforms in moderating and preventing such behavior.


Even more disconcerting is that these threats were not isolated but seemed to be part of a larger, more concerted effort to intimidate and harass the artist and his team, extending even to their families. These instances crossed the line from critique or disagreement over the artwork into the realm of personal attacks and threats, illustrating a darker side of online discourse.


This disturbing response reveals a paradox. While the critics, like the artists, might share the same intent to critique the Chinese government's policies, their misdirected aggression ironically turned the artists into targets. This misplaced criticism, far removed from a reasoned and respectful discourse, has profound implications. It not only highlights the darker side of digital discourse, but also potentially creates a chilling effect on artists, particularly Chinese artists living abroad, who might fear similar backlash for their politically themed works—even when they intend to express their critique ironically.


It should be noted that, this paradox can be further illuminated by Roland Barthes' concept of 'the death of the author.' According to Barthes, the interpretation of a work should be divorced from the author's intentions or background. Therefore, regardless of whether the artist intended to support or critique the Communist Party, the artwork itself, as perceived by the audience, carried a satirical effect.


The severity of this backlash, as evidenced by the offensive and even threatening remarks launched at the artists, underscores the need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression. It calls for a nuanced understanding of art that recognizes the distinction between the work itself and the author's intent, as proposed by Barthes.



Artistic Freedom and Expression in the UK


In the United Kingdom, freedom of speech and artistic expression are held in high regard and enshrined in law under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." While this Article allows for certain restrictions "as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society," it fundamentally ensures that artists can express a broad range of ideas and critique various aspects of society, including politics. This artistic freedom contributes to open discussion, challenges assumptions, and promotes empathy and understanding, all of which are crucial elements of a healthy democratic society.


Artistic freedom is a cornerstone of democratic societies. It encapsulates the right of artists to express themselves freely, without fear of censorship or punishment. This freedom is pivotal for the creation of politically-charged art, which often plays a crucial role in challenging prevailing narratives, provoking discussion, and stimulating societal change.


In this context, we must recognize that even if an artwork includes a message from the Chinese Communist Party, the artists have the right to express this as part of their creative and political commentary. Famous examples like Ai Weiwei's 'Sunflower Seeds,' a critique of mass production and conformity within Chinese society, and Badiucao's politically charged cartoons that often challenge the Chinese government's policies, highlight the importance of artistic freedom in political commentary. The controversy surrounding the Brick Lane artwork brings into sharp focus the value of these freedoms and the need to safeguard them. It underscores the importance of maintaining a space where artists can express diverse views, even when those views might provoke disagreement or controversy.


However, while these freedoms are cherished, they should not be used to justify aggression or harassment against individuals or to stifle creative freedom through fear and intimidation. The offensive and threatening remarks directed at the artists involved in the Brick Lane incident cross this line and represent a clear violation of the artists' rights. They serve as a stark reminder of the need to balance the principle of freedom of expression with the imperative to protect individuals from harm.


Politically-charged art, by its nature, can be controversial, often sparking strong reactions from different quarters of society. These reactions can lead to vibrant, meaningful discourse, fostering a greater understanding of complex issues. However, they can also result in negative outcomes, as we've seen in the Brick Lane incident, where artists faced personal attacks and threats as a consequence of their work.


In an ideal world, controversial art would lead to nuanced and respectful debates, with disagreements focusing on the art itself rather than on personal attacks against the artist. Such debates would examine the artwork's aesthetics, symbolism, intention, and social context, fostering intellectual discourse that enriches our understanding of both the art and the issues it explores. However, the reality, as evidenced by the incident in Brick Lane, is often far from this ideal. Instead of constructive dialogue, controversial art can trigger emotional reactions that overshadow thoughtful engagement. Personal biases, political allegiances, or preconceived notions may drive these reactions, leading to ad hominem attacks against the artist rather than a considered examination of the artwork. This shift from artistic critique to personal assault not only stifles meaningful discussion but also creates a hostile environment that can deter artists from taking risks or exploring challenging themes. The Brick Lane incident serves as a poignant reminder of the need for a more balanced and respectful approach to controversial art, one that honors the complexity of both the artwork and the debates it may inspire.


The backlash faced by the artists underscores a key challenge for artistic freedom in the digital age: the ease with which online platforms can be used to amplify negative reactions and transform them into harmful personal attacks. This trend, if left unchecked, threatens to undermine artistic freedom, creating a chilling effect that could dissuade artists from engaging with politically sensitive topics.


In democratic societies like the UK, where freedom of speech and artistic expression are protected by law, it is important to ensure that these freedoms are not undermined by online aggression. As the incident in Brick Lane shows, there is a pressing need to foster a digital culture that respects these freedoms while discouraging harmful behavior.


In balancing these considerations, it is important to remember the value of politically-charged art and its role in fostering societal critique and political progress. Despite the potential for controversy, such art can be a powerful tool for challenging assumptions, stimulating discussion, and promoting understanding. Its importance underscores the need to protect artistic freedom and ensure that artists can continue to express their views without fear of personal attacks or threats.



The Dangers of Rigidity: Understanding the Fluidity of Artistic Expression


The incident at Brick Lane provides a profound reflection on the myriad ways art is perceived, interpreted, and critiqued. At its core, the controversy reveals an unsettling tendency among certain observers to categorically dismiss what they don't immediately understand or what doesn't conform to their preconceived notions of what art "should" be.


This narrow-mindedness — the act of force-fitting contemporary art into classical or traditional molds — is not just an oversight; it's a significant disservice to the artist and the broader art community. In doing so, these individuals deny themselves the opportunity to engage with the artwork on a deeper, more meaningful level. They miss out on the nuances, the underlying messages, the socio-political commentary, and the broader narratives often embedded within contemporary art forms.


Such a restrictive perspective is reminiscent of an authoritarian approach to art interpretation, where only one 'correct' view or interpretation is permitted, and all others are delegitimized or outright dismissed. This is not merely a matter of aesthetic preference; it becomes a curtailing of the very essence of art – its capacity to challenge, to provoke, to inspire, and to defy categorization.


Furthermore, art, by its very nature, is evolutionary. It reflects the zeitgeist of its time, capturing the ethos, dilemmas, and aspirations of the society in which it is birthed. To confine it within rigid boundaries is to stifle its potential and to mute the voices of those who seek to express, critique, and comment on the world around them through their creations.


It is disheartening to witness such ignorance and authoritarianism in art interpretation. However, it also underscores the critical importance of art education, open dialogue, and fostering a culture of appreciation that looks beyond the surface and delves into the deeper layers of artistic expression. Only then can we truly appreciate the multifaceted gem that is contemporary art, in all its complexity, diversity, and beauty.



Echoes of the Past: Persecutions and Witch-Hunts in Contemporary Art?


History is replete with instances where artists, as the vanguard of societal critique and change, have been persecuted for their creative endeavors. The inked strokes of their artistry, intended to stimulate thought, instead become the very chains that bind them, making them vulnerable to misinterpretations and subsequent witch hunts. The contemporary digital age, with its virality and echo chambers, exacerbates this phenomenon, often turning nuanced artistic expressions into combustible flashpoints of division.


A chilling historical reference is the "Degenerate Art Exhibition" of 1937, organized by the Nazi regime in Munich. Intended to deride and marginalize modernist, abstract, and avant-garde art, this event led to the confiscation and destruction of thousands of artworks. Artists, in the wake of this exhibition, found themselves marginalized, dismissed from teaching positions, and some even faced arrest. Similarly, during Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution in China from 1966 to 1976, artists influenced by Western styles or those perceived as not adhering to Communist ideology were publicly humiliated, persecuted, or sent to re-education camps. The campaign, driven by the objective to purge capitalist and traditional Chinese cultural elements, led to the destruction of countless historical artifacts, books, and artworks.


The Brick Lane incident is emblematic of this peril. Yique’s graffiti, a satirical play on China's "socialist core values", was not merely content to be confined within the boundaries of its painted brick canvas. Instead, it spilled over, triggering impassioned debates, fervent supports, and, unfortunately, vitriolic persecutions fueled by anonymous online mobs. Such reactions, while indicative of art's enduring power to provoke, also underscore the treacherous terrains artists often find themselves navigating, especially in our hyperconnected world.


Artistic misinterpretation, particularly when combined with the potent mix of political sentiments, can lead to repercussions that are both swift and severe. For artists, especially those like Yique who grapple with politically charged themes, the personal costs can be staggering. They find themselves at the eye of storms that swirl with misdirected anger, often becoming the victims of character assassinations, online harassments, and even threats to their physical safety.


It's a sobering paradox. Artists, by their very nature, challenge conventions, question societal norms, and spark dialogues. However, in an era where rapid digital reactions often override reflective responses, their art can be stripped of its nuances, reduced to simplistic binaries, and weaponized against them. The ensuing witch hunts, fueled by misinterpretations and amplified by online mobs, can be relentless and ruthless.


Such persecutions carry ominous implications for free speech and artistic expression. At its core, art is a dialogue—a conversation between the artist and society. When artists are persecuted, this dialogue is stifled, replaced by monologues of mistrust and fear. The cacophony of threats and harassments drowns out the symphonies of critique and introspection, impoverishing the very fabric of our cultural discourse.


For societies that pride themselves on democratic values, it's imperative to recognize and counteract these witch hunts. It necessitates a collective introspection to understand why and how artistic expressions, intended as mirrors to society, are instead weaponized as mallets of persecution.


Moreover, as advocates of art and its transformative potential, we bear the onus to rally around persecuted artists, providing them with the support and platforms they need to continue their invaluable work. The challenge is not just to defend their right to express but to ensure that their expressions are engaged with depth, respect, and understanding. We cannot, and must not, allow the tragedies of history to repeat themselves in our digital era.



The Chilling Effect and Misdirected Criticism


Such incidents, coupled with the violent and personal nature of the attacks, risk creating a chilling effect on artists, particularly those of Chinese descent living abroad. They may become hesitant to express their views, especially if their work touches on politically sensitive subjects or critiques powerful entities like the Chinese government.


A case in point is an artist in Bristol, identified here as 'S,' who wanted to satirize the Chinese government through their work but was deterred by the fear of similar backlash. This chilling effect could stifle artistic innovation and reduce the diversity of voices in the public discourse. As a result, it could undermine the vital role of art as a medium for societal critique and political progress.


The irony of this situation is hard to overlook: critics, who ostensibly share the artists' intent of critiquing the Chinese government's policies, instead turn their aggression towards the artists themselves. This misdirected criticism not only detracts from the substance of the critique, but also creates a hostile environment that may deter artists from expressing their views.


This disconcerting scenario underlines the pressing need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression. While freedom of speech is a cherished democratic principle, it should not extend to threatening or harassing individuals or stifling creative freedom through fear and intimidation. The severity of this backlash, as evidenced by the offensive and even threatening remarks launched at the artists, underscores the need for a serious examination of the climate surrounding artistic freedom and expression.


The incident in Brick Lane raises critical questions about the dynamics of artistic freedom, online discourse, and the role of art in political critique. How can artists navigate the fine line between expressing dissent and provoking unintended hostility? How can we foster a digital culture that encourages meaningful critique and debate instead of aggression and bullying? And crucially, how can we ensure that the chilling effect of online violence does not stifle artistic innovation and its role in societal progress? These are some of the pressing issues that this incident urges us to reflect upon.



Artistic Innovation and Political Progress Under the Chilling Effect


Artistic innovation thrives on the freedom to experiment, to push boundaries, and to explore a wide range of themes, including those that are politically sensitive. When artists face threats and online aggression for their politically-charged works, it can stifle this innovation. The chilling effect created by such a hostile climate can lead artists, especially those dealing with contentious issues, to self-censor or to avoid certain topics altogether. This not only limits the artists' creative potential, but also impoverishes the cultural and political discourse that their works could have stimulated.


A vibrant and diverse art scene acts as a mirror to society, reflecting its complexities, challenging its assumptions, and sometimes provoking uncomfortable conversations that are nonetheless essential for progress. The fear of backlash, as exemplified by the incident in Brick Lane, can dull this mirror, reducing the art scene's vibrancy and its potential to contribute to social critique and political discourse.


Moreover, art serves as a catalyst for societal critique and political discourse. Through their works, artists can highlight injustices, question prevailing narratives, and offer new perspectives on complex issues. When artists are deterred from dealing with political themes, we lose an essential avenue for such critique and discourse.


Ultimately, the potential chilling effect of online aggression on artistic innovation doesn't just harm the artists involved, it deprives society as a whole of valuable insights and perspectives. It underscores the pressing need for a robust defence of artistic freedom and a concerted effort to create a more respectful and inclusive digital culture.


The incident in Brick Lane serves as a potent reminder of the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the safety and dignity of individuals. It invites us to reflect on the role each of us can play in fostering a climate that respects both these essential principles. This includes policymakers who can shape the legal and regulatory framework, social media platforms that can moderate online behavior, and individuals who can contribute to a respectful and constructive discourse.


In the final analysis, ensuring that artists can continue to innovate and contribute to societal critique and political progress requires a collective commitment to protecting artistic freedom, promoting respectful discourse, and curbing online aggression. This commitment is essential to maintaining a vibrant art scene and a healthy democratic society.



Conclusion: The Crisis of Free Speech in the UK and The Perilous Odyssey of a Chinese Artist's Creative Endeavour


The intensity of the backlash over a seemingly minor incident—a few students painting a wall—reveals deep-seated tensions rooted in the high pressure of China's totalitarianism. The core of people's opposition lies in totalitarian policy, not the artist, who has become an inadvertent scapegoat. This misplaced blame raises disconcerting questions: How does this behavior differ from totalitarianism itself? The absurdity of this situation, unfolding even in the UK, exposes a troubling lack of social conscience and empathy.


This incident is a stark reminder of the fragile state of free speech in the UK, especially when it comes to politically charged art. The artist's plight—whether intentional or not—serves as a tragic testament to the potential perils of artistic expression. The fallout may cast a shadow over the Chinese diaspora art community, leading to self-censorship and the stifling of artistic voices, further impoverishing the diversity of global artistic discourse.


Friedrich Nietzsche's words resonate here: “He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself; and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you.” The peril of becoming what one condemns reflects a crisis in understanding, not just of contemporary art but of the values underpinning free expression. 


Moreover, the incident exposes a crisis in the UK's commitment to free speech. The UK, traditionally a bastion of this fundamental right, seems to waver in the face of a complex intersection of art, politics, and identity. The challenges faced by the artist, the reactions of the public, and the broader societal implications reveal a disconcerting erosion of the principles that have long defined British democracy.


These shortcomings underline the urgent need for initiatives fostering understanding and appreciation of contemporary art and the principles of free speech. Public education, art criticism, and open dialogues can create a more informed environment for artists, promoting a richer, more inclusive artistic discourse, and fortifying the UK's commitment to freedom of expression.


Canvassius Freeborn







值得注意的是,罗兰·巴特(Roland Barthes)的“作者之死”概念可以进一步阐明这种悖论。根据巴特的观点,作品的解释应与作者的意图或背景分离。因此,无论艺术家是否打算支持或批评中国共产党,作品本身,从观众的角度来看,都带有讽刺效果。


























Dear Yique,


I trust this email finds you in good spirits, despite the tempestuous circumstances that surround you. Writing under my pseudonym, Canvassius Freeborn, I am compelled to respond to your earnest communication.

The predicament you face, both artistically and personally, has indeed resonated with me. It is a situation most grave, one that transcends the art itself and delves into the very essence of freedom and expression.

Allow me to outline my thoughts:

1. Engaging the Media: Our present discourse and the complexities it unveils must transcend the bounds of private correspondence and reach a broader audience. Therefore, as an open letter, I propose you endeavor to have both the original letter and the subsequent article titled "The Brick Lane Graffiti Case: Witch Hunts Against Chinese Overseas Artists and Britain's Looming Crisis in Upholding Free Speech" sent on Wednesday published through esteemed professional media outlets, initially, including but not limited to The Guardian, BBC, Bloomberg, CNN, and The New York Times. Presenting these materials in both English and an accurate Chinese translation will illuminate the intricate facets of this issue, casting a spotlight on the paramount importance of free artistic creation. This effort is not merely a response to a singular event, it is a manifestation of our unyielding commitment to the fundamental values that define our society.


2. A Considered Perspective: I believe that discerning readers, citizens with a conscience, those well-versed in the arts, and political and moral philosophers will appreciate the complexity of this issue upon reflection. This incident transcends mere graffiti, it serves as a mirror reflecting our societal stance on freedom of speech, the impact of cyber hostility, and the need for respectful disagreement.


3. The Essence of Art: Your artwork, Yique, has stirred more than mere controversy, it has ignited a dialogue and prompted reflection. This is, at its core, the very purpose of art—to provoke thought, inspire discourse, and challenge prevailing norms. It acts as a catalyst, encouraging us to question our assumptions and engage with complex ideas, sometimes even forcing us to confront uncomfortable truths. By transcending the superficial and delving into the substantive, your artistic expression has not merely echoed a sentiment but sparked a conversation that resonates far beyond the confines of a gallery wall. Remarkably, it may even attract citizens who have never cared about art, compelling them to reflect on the intricate relationship between art and real life, and perhaps inspiring a newfound appreciation for the transformative power of creative expression.


In the meantime, Yique, do keep your chin up and remain resilient. The challenge before you is not merely a personal ordeal but a complex interplay of artistic expression, political critique, and societal reflection. It reaches into the very core of what art represents and how it resonates within the fabric of our culture. This is no small feat, and the path ahead may be fraught with uncertainty and opposition. Yet, it is a challenge that merits our full attention and effort, for it speaks to the broader questions of artistic freedom, intellectual integrity, and the power of art to inspire change. Your voice, your vision, your art—they matter, and they have set in motion a conversation that extends far beyond the confines of this moment. Stand firm, for your contribution to this dialogue is both valuable and vital.


Yours sincerely,

Canvassius Freeborn



我诚挚地希望这封邮件能在你身处风雨飘摇的环境中找到你,希望你依然保持良好的精神状态。我以笔名Canvassius Freeborn的身份,不禁要回应你真诚的联络。



  • 吸引媒体关注:我们当前的对话以及它所揭示的复杂性必须超越私人通信的界限,传达给更广泛的受众。因此,作为一封公开信,我建议你努力使原信和随后的文章题为“Brick Lane涂鸦事件:针对海外华人艺术家的巫猎和英国在维护言论自由方面潜在的危机”在周三通过备受尊敬的专业媒体发布,起初包括但不限于The Guardian、BBC、Bloomberg、CNN和The New York Times等。以英文和准确的中文翻译呈现这些材料,将阐明这个问题的复杂方面,将聚焦于自由艺术创作的极端重要性。这个努力不仅仅是对一个特定事件的回应,更是对我们社会基本价值观的不懈承诺的体现。

  • 深思熟虑的观点:我相信,有眼光的读者、有良知的公民、精通艺术的人以及政治和道德哲学家在反思之后会欣赏到这个问题的复杂性。这个事件超越了简单的涂鸦,它是一面镜子,反映了我们社会对言论自由的立场,网络敌意的影响以及对尊重性异议的需求。

  • 艺术的本质:一鹊,你的艺术作品不仅仅引发了争议,更是引发了对话和反思。这在本质上就是艺术的目的——引发思考,激发对话,挑战现有的规范。它充当了一个催化剂,鼓励我们质疑我们的假设,与复杂的观念互动,有时甚至迫使我们面对不舒服的真相。通过超越表面,深入实质,你的艺术表达不仅仅是回应了一种情感,更是引发了一场超越画廊墙壁范围的对话。令人惊讶的是,它甚至可能吸引从未关心过艺术的市民,促使他们反思艺术与现实生活之间错综复杂的关系,并可能激发对创造性表达的变革力量的新发现欣赏。



截屏2023-10-02 23.51.21.png
cyber violence
截屏2023-10-03 00.14.34.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.14.42.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.14.51.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.14.59.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.15.13.png
One month later        4 September
截屏2023-10-03 00.01.37.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.02.23.png
截屏2023-10-03 00.02.46.png
bottom of page