關於 cultural fair at school ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

Another great response to Shrey Bhargava's self righteous pity party. Every minority is invited to join! Come, let's blame the majority race for everything that's wrong in our lives, it is never our fault, it is because we are oppressed! Wow, so convenient!

Shrey has written another post boohooing about how racism (yawn), how minorities don't get roles easily in singapore, and how the Chinese are blind because we have privileged.

Cut your crap. If a Chinese director wants to make a movie about Chinese NS men, that's his fucking prerogative. If it features Indians or Malays as token characters, that's also his freedom and right. Why? You think every local movie needs to have an Indian main character then it's not considered racist is it?

In that case I ask... why are Bollywood movies full of only Indians? Why aren't one of the leads in 3 Idiots any race other than Indian?!!! Such an atrocity and blatant racism. Sure, Bollywood shows are in Tamil, but hey I don't care, this is as racist as The Voice asking for Chinese speakers! I don't care, include a Chinese mute character please, and he must not be a token role! Otherwise the director is racist! 🙄

Obviously like Donovan said there are privileges to being a majority race, a majority anything. That much is undeniable. While the Chinese in singapore should be mindful of consideration for all the other ethnic groups and always be respectful, but the automatic assumption that jobs be not only handed to you, but CREATED FOR you purely for the sake of your race isn't one of them.

Singapore is built on meritocracy.

Keep up your self victimizing charade and keep blaming society for your failures in life - you will find that soon nobody respects you.

And unlike the white liberals who have been indoctrinated with white guilt since their school days and think they have to pay for their ancestors' crime, you will find Singaporeans way less susceptible to your guilt tripping. Asians, including Indians and Chinese alike, don't subscribe to victim-playing. We work hard and succeed despite the odds - I suggest you get on with the program. Nobody owes you or your race a level playing field. Your whining rings hollow, since you exist in one of the most racially harmonious countries in the world, where the govt has taken careful steps to ensure equality for all the 4 main races.

Dear Shrey Bhargava,

As far as I can tell from your post, there was nothing racist about your Ah Boys to Men audition and I'll be kind enough to tell you and the 3000-odd people whom have shared your post why.

You were tasked to perform the role of a 'full blown Indian' and you have interpreted that as having to 'portray a caricature of my race' and being 'reduced to my accent'.

The casters were not racist and the element of racism here is non-existent because that was the role that is being demanded of you here, whether it was that of a Singaporean Indian, North Indian, British Indian or Red Indian.

Suppose Samuel L. Jackson had tried to audition for the role of Jack Dawson in Titanic, a part that really went to Leonardo DiCaprio. It is obvious that he would have been turned down because he was black. Now, is this not a clear-cut case of racial discrimination? Surely no one (maybe except that crazy Sangeetha) would be absurd enough to claim that the directors or scriptwriters of Titanic were racist and had "reduced" Jackson down to his skin colour?

That is because the role of Jack Dawson (may he rest in peace at the bottom of the Atlantic) is one of a white man.

Why is it somehow more 'wrong' for you to portray the role of a stereotypical Indian from India, than for Wang Wei Liang to portray the stereotypical Chinese gangster, or for Maxi Lim to portray the role of a stereotypical bootlicking yes-man recruit, or for Tosh Zhang to portray a stereotypical authoritative army Sergeant?

If Wang Wei Liang were to drop out of the Lobang King role right now and I be in line to audition for the role, I'd be similarly asked by the casting director to play the role of a 'full blown ah beng'.

That would mean me summoning out to the best of my abilities the most vicious, stereotypical characteristics of a Chinese 'ah beng'. I'd have to speak in subpar broken English, exercise a liberal use of dialect profanities and demonstrate an aptitude for violence in the face of problems.

I have no doubt in my mind that a lot of the ones whom are throwing support behind you right now would not similarly rally and call to arms in the same righteous manner for me because I had to depict a caricature of the stereotypical Chinese hooligan.

Yet what is the difference? Certainly not all Chinese 'ah bengs' are characterised with the same rebellious, malingering characteristics like that of Wang Wei Liang's character. I have done my National Service alongside some of them (in a god-forsaken rifleman unit no less), and most of them in fact are some of the most patriotic men I have ever seen.

Why is a racial stereotype anymore of a grievous injustice than the stereotype of an occupation, a cultural identity or any other form of stereotype? It is not.

If your objection is with being pigeonholed into a simplified, hackneyed image of a particular person, then you must similarly condemn all forms of stereotypes in film - not just stereotypes that are played along racial lines. And it is unnecessary for me to point out that stereotypes in the arts are ubiquitous in any and all forms.

In your follow-up post, you ramp up your distinct brand of illogic. You claim that it is wrong for the minority character to be of insignificance because this is a film that is a "SINGAPOREAN story".

But this begs the question. What defines being 'Singaporean'? Given that 40% of our population are comprised of foreigners and non-residents, isn't it just as wrong that these Filipinos, Indonesians, Japanese and Koreans are utterly unrepresented in Ah Boys to Men? Is it fair to stick to the 'Chinese, Malay, Indian' categorisation that in the first place, is a categorisation formulated on arbitrary standards by our government?

Is there any reason why your standard of what is 'Singaporean' should take priority over mine, or over the casting director's?

Yes, actors need jobs and it is certainly true that a racial minority would not enjoy the luxury of roles to pick from in comparison to one in the racial majority. But it is not clear WHY this is unfair, which is what you seem to me implying by "Minority actors do not have the privilege to pick and choose what to audition for".

Of course majorities benefit. The same can be said for people whom are right-handed, whom are tall, whom are lucky enough to be born with our five senses. When you lament that "Minority actors do not have the privilege to pick and choose what to audition for", you are no longer making an argument against racism, rather, you are making an argument against reality i.e., the racial proportion of our population.

I have observed this for some time among the young Singaporeans who are most active on social media. One of the most troubling cultural trends as of late is this idiotic penchant to leap at every slightest opportunity they get to call out racism, from the Toggle blackface issue and the Kiss92 incident to a Smartlocal video from last year.

Of course racism exists in Singapore (or anywhere else in the world for that matter), but reducing any and all issues down to race is not very helpful. There are far more productive ways to tackle discrimination. And that begins with changing the institutional framework of our society, such as the freedom of our press and media, so racial minorities are empowered to best represent their own unique cultures. Nit-picking on little details in the media is not one of them.

Like the Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman said: “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” I commend your well-intentioned attempt to speak out against what you have perceived is 'racism', but your analysis is incorrect and your methods are in fact entirely retrogressive.

P.S. It was quite interesting to see how that Vimeo video on your wall provided a most comical caricature of Arabs being equated with bombs/terrorism. It appears that it is just your own racial identity that is most fragile, and that the rest of us must tread precariously around. I wonder if it was only I who cringed so hard?

ϟϟ SHOUT ϟϟ特輯除了收錄16位創作者作品，這次我們跨國連線從台灣、日本、韓國到中國，由張世倫、松本知己、宋修庭與任悅分別書寫攝影的現況觀察，反思「新」攝影的概念、發展與困境，ϟϟ SHOUT ϟϟ也是一份2015年的當代攝影紀錄報告。

☄ 台灣 /
張世倫，1975年生於台北，國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士，曾任博物館員、雜誌記者等職。譯有《另一種影像敘事》與《這就是當代攝影》二書，現為自由撰稿者暨藝評人，同時是英國倫敦大學金匠學院文化研究中心博士候選人。

☄ 日本 /
松本知己，T&M Projects創辦人兼執行長，T&M Projects是一間位在東京的出版社與代理商。松本不僅經營出版與代理項目，同時也進行寫作、策劃活動與展覽等等，並為香港攝影書展（HK Photobook Fair）的活動協辦者之一。2015年，T&M Projects將會前往紐約、巴黎參加書展。

☄ 韓國 /
宋修庭，常駐首爾的獨立策展人，Seoul Lunar Photo Fest共同創辦者，曾任吳哥窟攝影節（Angkor Photo Festival）和大邱攝影雙年展（Daegu Photo Biennale）顧問。她曾策劃許多展覽，包括2012年Mario Giacomelli在首爾攝影博物館的展出，以及2014年於荷蘭Noorderlicht Gallery的「Seoul and Five Views from Korea」。此外，宋修庭亦曾擔任世界新聞攝影比賽和POYi等國際攝影獎項之評審、西班牙攝影雜誌《OjodePez》客座攝影編輯、《GEO-Korea》主編，現為韓國《京鄉新聞》攝影專欄撰寫人。

☄ 中國 /
任悅，策展人、攝影評論人、攝影教育工作者。其博客「1416教室」從2006年撰寫至今，是專注攝影文化批評的個人媒體。她曾是紐約大學的訪問學者（2008-2009），現任職於中國人民大學新聞與傳播學院。

關於ϟϟ SHOUT ϟϟ :
www.vopmagazine.com/shout/

SHOUT is a special issue series published by Voices of Photography with no stylistic limitations. In this very first issue we introduce 16 young artists from Taiwan, Japan, Korea and China, and invited photo critics Shih-Lun Chang, Tomoki Matsumoto, Sujong Song and Yue Ren to give their observations on contemporary photography.

Taiwan /
CHANG Shih­ Lun was born in 1975 in Taipei City and graduated from the National Cheng­-Chi University of Taiwan with an MA degree in Journalism. His past experience includes staff researcher in a public museum and magazine journalist. He is currently a freelance art critic and a PhD candidate at the Centre for Cultural Studies in Goldsmiths College, University of London.

Japan /
MATSUMOTO Tomoki, founder & director at T&M Projects, publishing house and distributor, based in Tokyo. Not only organizing publishing and distribution projects, Matsumoto writes for media, produces events, coordinating exhibitions, etc. And he is a co-organizer of HK Photobook Fair, the first photobook fair in Hong Kong. In 2015, T&M Projects will participate in book fairs in NY and Paris.

Korea /
SONG Sujong is a Seoul-based independent curator and also co-founder of Seoul Lunar Photo Fest. Song served on the committees for the Angkor Photo Festival and Daegu Photo Biennale. She has organized many exhibitions including the 2012 Mario Giacomelli exhibition at the Museum of Photography, Seoul and Five Views from Korea at the Noorderlicht Gallery in 2014. She was on the judging panels for World Press Photo, POYi, and for numerous photography awards. Sujong currently writes a column on photography for the daily Kyunghyang Shinmun, was a guest photo editor for the Madrid-based OjodePez, and was formerly the editor-in-chief of GEO-Korea.

China /
REN Yue, Curator, critic, photography educator. Her ongoing blog “1416 Classroom” started in 2006, and focuses on photography and culture critique. She was a visiting scholar at New York University from 2008-2009, and currently holds a job in the School of Journalism and Communication in Renmin University of China.

Grab your copy now!!

謝謝大家！

---
Voices of Photography 攝影之聲
www.vopmagazine.com

DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam presented Budget 2013 this afternoon. His theme was “A better Singapore: Quality growth, An Inclusive Society”.

Our immediate priority is to solve the housing and transport issues. At the same time, we must upgrade our economy through productivity and innovation. Budget 2013 will help our businesses cope with much lower foreign worker growth over the next few years. It also contains schemes to enable every Singaporean to benefit from growth. For example, the Wage Credit Scheme will incentivise employers to raise salaries of their lower-income workers, as the Govt will pay 40% of these salary increases for three years. We will also focus on promoting social mobility, especially through education, so that children from less privileged backgrounds are not disadvantaged in our society.

The Parliament will discuss Budget 2013 in the upcoming weeks. You can visit www.singaporebudget.gov.sg for more details about the Budget. - LHL

We had the Budget today. We are transforming our economy so that we can have quality growth – growth that all Singaporeans will benefit from, and which will allow a better quality of life. And we are taking further steps towards a more inclusive society – starting with the kids, helping lower-income workers, and providing greater economic security for our retirees, including those in the middle-income group.

Here's an extract from the Budget Speech that sets out the main directions our policies are taking. The specifics are in the full speech linked below.

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget…/budget_speech.html

BETTER SINGAPORE: QUALITY GROWTH, AN INCLUSIVE SOCIETY

Many Singaporeans, through Our Singapore Conversation platforms, have been sharing their hopes for Singapore – the kind of home we want to build for our families and our children. There has been a rich diversity of views. But a common set of aspirations is emerging, a common vision of the future that Singaporeans want:
• A home with a strong Singaporean identity and sense of belonging
• A Singapore with a robust and vibrant economy, and with good jobs that enable a more fulfilling pace of life
• A home with strong families, and where our seniors can age with dignity
• A society that takes care of the disadvantaged
• A Singapore with affordable living
• A society with greater sense of togetherness, and where the Government and the people have a more collaborative relationship

This is the Singapore that we want to build together.

The Government is making major moves to support this endeavour. Since 2010, we have embarked on major steps to transform our economy so as to create better jobs and allow for a better pace and quality of life. We are also making important shifts in social policies, as announced in last year’s Budget, to foster a fair and more inclusive society.

We will need to make further moves. So that by the end of the decade, we will have a better Singapore, a better future for all Singaporeans.

Immediate Challenges: Housing and Transport

First, we have pressing challenges in housing and transport. The Government will spare no effort in resolving these problems.
We want to reduce the cost of housing relative to the income of young Singaporeans. Prices in the HDB resale market and private market have risen too rapidly in the cycle that began as we recovered from the 2009 economic crisis. We have taken major steps to cool the housing market. We have also ramped up the supply of HDB flats which will help first-time buyers book their flats faster as well as ease prices in the resale market. And we have increased supply of private housing through Government Land Sales. The Minister for National Development will speak more in COS about these immediate challenges as well as how we can ensure affordable, quality housing for Singaporeans over the longer term.

We have to make many improvements in public transport. Congestion and waiting times are a daily problem for Singaporeans. We are ramping up bus capacity, especially feeder services, to improve frequency and add new routes. We are accelerating the rollout of the additional 800 buses that we made provisions for last year. In addition, the Land Transport Authority will be tendering out routes to private operators.

Our rail network will expand by more than 50% by 2021. That is still eight years away. But in the meantime, we will see improvements that will help relieve congestion. Parts of the Downtown Line will start operating from the end of this year, and new trains will be added to existing lines from next year. We will also introduce other measures to reduce crowding, including significantly enhanced incentives for commuters who travel during the “shoulder” periods before and after the morning peak hour. The Minister for Transport will talk about these measures in the COS.

An Economy and Society in Transition

While we fix these immediate problems in housing and transport, we have to press on with our priorities to help Singaporeans have a better quality of life over the medium to long term.

We have to shift gears for an economy and society that is in transition.

We are no longer a developing economy, but we have not achieved the level of productivity and income of an advanced economy. At the same time, our own workforce is growing more slowly, and is gradually getting older.

We must make every effort to achieve quality growth: growth that is achieved mainly through innovation and higher productivity, and growth that will benefit all Singaporeans – our children, working families, our elderly and disabled.

Our strategies for achieving quality growth and an inclusive society are in fact tied inextricably together. Raising productivity is not just our most important economic priority, but enables us to build a better society. Higher productivity is the only sustainable way to raise incomes for ordinary Singaporeans, and provide jobs that give people a sense of responsibility and empowerment. Higher productivity is also necessary for us to shorten working hours over time and allow Singaporeans to enjoy a better work-life balance.

Our society is also facing the pressures of widening income disparities. This is happening in cities globally and in Asia, but it matters more to us because Singapore is not just a city but also a nation. We must take further steps to temper inequality. We also want to do more to enable our seniors to have a sense of economic security and fulfilment in their retirement years.

On both economy and society, therefore, we need to shift our thinking.
In government: where we are reshaping policies and driving new initiatives, especially to sustain social mobility and strengthen support for older Singaporeans.
In the business community: which has to innovate and adjust to the permanent reality of a tight labour market.
In our society at large: where we have to accord ordinary workers not just better pay but greater respect.
In the community: with non-profits and other voluntary groups pursuing the causes we all believe in, and working with an active partner in the government.
And for all of us individuals, to do our best to improve and to contribute to our country in our own ways.

Transforming Our Economy for Better Jobs
We are restructuring our economy. We began this in earnest in 2010, by:
• Tightening foreign worker inflows;
• Supporting enterprises in their efforts to upgrade operations and improve productivity; and
• Investing in our workers by heavily subsidising their training, in every skill.

We need to intensify this economic restructuring and skills upgrading so as to achieve quality growth. Although wages are going up in a tight labour market, productivity has lagged. If we do not do better in raising productivity, we will be caught in a situation where businesses lose competitiveness, and wages eventually stagnate. Both workers and businesses will be worse off.

We must help our SME sector revitalise itself. There are however wide divergences in efficiency amongst SMEs even in the same industries. Restructuring will unfortunately lead to some businesses being winnowed out, but the end result must be a vibrant and sustainable local SME sector. Every support must be provided to help the businesses which bring in more efficient techniques and service models, so they can grow in a tight labour market, and where possible make their mark internationally.

There are already many examples of SMEs transforming themselves, in every sector. For example in furniture manufacturing, local firms are training multi-skilled employees, relocating manpower-intensive activities, developing unique brands and carving a niche for themselves in overseas markets.

To make this economic transition, we must also harness the value of older Singaporeans and design jobs suited for them, as well as for other potential employees who are unable to work regular, full-time schedules. Flexible work practices must become more common, enabling employees to structure their work so that they have time for their families or for personal development like part-time courses. We should also make it possible for more employees to have the option of telecommuting from home or working from “smart work centres” near their homes, like what they have in Amsterdam and Seoul. The Government will work closely with businesses in these efforts.

Building a Fair and Inclusive Society

We are also taking major steps to ensure a fair and more inclusive society.

• First, to sustain social mobility. Meritocracy alone will not assure us of this. We therefore want to do more, starting from early in our children’s lives, to give the best leg up to those who start with a disadvantage. We cannot change the fact that children have different family backgrounds that bring very different advantages and disadvantages. But we want to find every way, at the pre-school and primary school levels, to help our children from poorer or less stable families to develop confidence and the self-belief that gives them aspirations of their own, and to help them catch up when they fall behind. And we will provide pathways to develop every skill and ability, so that every child can discover his strengths as he grows up, and can do well.

• Second, we must do more to mitigate inequality. We are making our fiscal system more progressive, by tilting our taxes and benefits in favour of the lower- and middle-income groups.

Currently:

i. A lower-income older worker receives a significant top-up of his income through Workfare each year.

ii. A middle-income family with a child in child care gets subsidies of $4,800 per year. If the child is in university, he can receive more than $8,500 in bursaries over the course of his studies, and get a subsidised government loan to pay off the remaining fees and cover study expenses. Children from lower-income families receive far more.

iii. Singaporeans with disabilities now receive substantially greater support. Both when young through early intervention under EIPIC, and as adults, where we provide a substantial incentive through the Special Employment Credit (SEC) for firms to employ them so that they can contribute and lead more independent lives.

iv. An older Singaporean in need of long term care can receive subsidies of $870 per month for home-based care or $1,200 per month if he is in a nursing home, following the changes we introduced last year. Those who need more help will get it through Medifund.

We will take further, significant steps in this Budget towards strengthening social mobility and increasing the progressivity and fairness of our system. In particular, with enhancements to Workfare, a low-wage worker who is 60 years old would receive a top-up of his pay of about 30%. This is in addition to what his employer can receive through the SEC, and the new Wage Credit Scheme, to be introduced in this year’s Budget, which will encourage his employer to up his pay.

While raising incomes is the best way to help lower- and middle- income Singaporeans cope with rising costs, this Budget will also include measures to help them more immediately. The most significant support will go to older Singaporeans, to help them with medical costs.

Taking all our measures together, including those which will be announced in this Budget, we are providing substantial benefits to lower- and middle-income Singaporeans. The full picture can be seen if we look at benefits over a lifetime, starting from a couple’s needs when they first have children, to the time they get old and need other types of help, especially with healthcare costs.

In total, over a lifetime, a young low-income couple with two children can expect to receive more than $600,000 in benefits in real terms (2013 dollars). (This comes from subsidies and other means-tested benefits for their children’s education, housing, healthcare, Workfare, the GST Voucher, and other schemes.)

This is much more than we used to provide in the past. In the last decade alone, we have more than doubled the lifetime benefits in real terms for such families.

When we take into account all the taxes that such low-income families will pay (mainly GST), they will get back far more in benefits. In fact, they will get more than five dollars in benefits for every dollar in taxes paid.

However, today’s generation of older Singaporeans will not benefit as much as younger Singaporeans from the enhancements in Workfare and CPF and other schemes. We want to do more for this senior generation of Singaporeans, who worked over the years, often with low pay, to build a better future for their children. They made today’s Singapore possible. We will do more for them. The Government is reviewing the system of healthcare financing and some other schemes to help them in their retirement years.

Finally, the Budget will make significant investments to nurture the sports and arts, which play a growing role in enriching life in Singapore. Over the next five years, we will invest 30% more in sports programmes, and more than double our investments to develop regional- and community-level sports facilities. The Government will also create a new Cultural Donation Matching Fund, to provide dollar-for-dollar matching for donations to the arts and culture.

In short, we are building a better Singapore: a more inclusive and caring society, with an innovative and dynamic economy, so that Singaporeans can have better opportunities and more fulfilling lives.

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget…/budget_speech.html

Computer Music Ensemble: for Black metal vocal, Prepared piano, Real time sound processing.

Composer: Ivan Voinov, Sandra Li, Cvo Yang, Bruce Wang
Sound engineer: Cvo Yang, Bruce Wang
Metal Vocal: Chi Yue
Prepared Piano: Sandra Li

Premiere Production: Body Phase Studio, Guling Avant-Garde theatre, Taipei, TAIWAN, 2014.4.26

About the work:

Dirge is a prepared piano piece that is processed through electronics and fused with a harsh vocal speaking the poem "Dirge" by Shakespeare. "Dirge" is written about death from the perspective of the dying. The meditative, dark sound interlaced with complex piano melodies and rhythms creates a perfect, romantic atmosphere around the aspect of death. The harsh vocal can be interpreted as the cries of a crow, traditionally a messenger of death.


Dirge (134)
William Shakespeare

COME away, come away, death,
And in sad cypres let me be laid;
Fly away, fly away, breath;
I am slain by a fair cruel maid.
My shroud of white, stuck all with yew,
O prepare it!

My part of death, no one so true
Did share it.
Not a flower, not a flower sweet,
On my black coffin let there be strown;
Not a friend, not a friend greet
My poor corse, where my bones shall be thrown:
A thousand thousand sighs to save,
Lay me, O, where
Sad true lover never find my grave
To weep there!


About the composers:

Ivan Voinov is a first generation Russian living in America, where he has grown up, maintaining strong cultural ties back to his ethnic Russian roots, which can easily be heard in his music. During the later years if his high school career, he became successful as an ensemble composer, having several of his pieces performed across his home state, Vermont, and appeared on the radio for interviews on two occasions. Ivan is now studying computer music and recording rats major at Peabody conservatory, studying under Dr. Geoffrey Wright, where he is exploring the rich depths of sounds and capabilities and control pertaining to the field of electronic music.

Sandra Li, of the Siraya people, is a former keyboardist of the classical ensemble "Indulge" and the well-know metal band "Chthonic". Her musical works crossover between classical and fine art, film and documentaries. She is the composer for the TV documentary "Unknown Taiwan" produced by the Discovery Channel. Also, she was the artistic director of the musical "Dark Baroque”. Ms. Li earned the Master of Music degree in Computer Music from the Peabody Conservatory of the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A., where she studied Computer Music with Dr. Geoffrey Wright.


輓歌

威廉莎士比亞

無常爾來矣﹐置我於柩床。一息已云絕﹐殺我乃姣娘。

麻絰及紫杉﹐速備慎毋忘。無人愛我深﹐乃肯殉我亡。

竟無一好花﹐撒余靈柩旁。竟無一良朋﹐弔余埋骨場。

不須為余泣﹐葬余在遐荒。親友無覓處﹐免其徒哀傷。


《輓歌》是為預先設置的鋼琴，現場即時聲響效果控制，與金屬黑死腔演場所創作的作品。人聲的部分所吟唱的是莎士比亞的詩作 "輓歌"。這首詩所描寫的角度，是從一個渴望垂死的靈魂，面對生命中無法抗拒的凋落。企圖利用鋼琴複雜的旋律與節奏營造出一種完美浪漫的死亡氛圍，暴烈的人聲比喻為烏鴉的哭聲，代表死亡的傳統使者。

Ivan Voinov 來自俄羅斯，成長過程中大部分居住在美國。在他的作品中，充分展現了俄羅斯的民族意識與風格。就讀高中時，已經展露在室內樂作品的創作能量，樂曲曾發表於 俄羅斯，佛蒙特州，與電台相關專訪。目前就讀於約翰霍普金斯琵琶地音樂院電腦音樂系，主修作曲，雙修錄音藝術。師從 Dr. Geoffrey Wright。創作特色專注於聲音的探索以及有關電子音樂現場控制的深入研究。

汪戊全，來自台灣台北，2013年畢業於臺北科技大學互動媒體設計研究所，目前嘗試以手作的細膩態度融入互動媒體設計的謹慎思考，共同創造出述說新形態故事溫暖人心的價值。

楊政，來自臺灣，畢業於實踐大學服裝設計系，在組樂團的過程中受到身邊不同藝術形式的人啟發試著追求無法明確定義的表演形式。曾經重新定義縫紉機的聲音的意義，在各地做過演出，同時於2013年在牯嶺街小劇場手作工作坊演出。

李婉菁 Sandra Tavali，西拉雅人，前indulge , 閃靈樂團鍵盤手； Discovery Channel 「謎樣台灣」配樂，音樂劇「黑暗巴洛克」音樂總監。作品常為跨界藝術、電影、紀錄片配樂等。約翰霍普金斯琵琶地音樂院電腦音樂研究所畢業，師從 Dr. Geoffrey Wright。