I meant to write this piece some time ago, but as usual, I became occupied with different things. Now feels like the moment.
The middle space is perhaps the quietest one, but for me, it is also the most interesting.
If we believe in an ideal democratic scenario, where innovation and creativity are born after rounds of push-hands between multiple forces, then somewhere in between is our centre. The journey of searching for that space, however, is ultimately every individual’s responsibility.
Yes, UK-China Film Collab is an umbrella organisation, but our voices are not, and should never be, entirely unified. What we can provide is a space where our members can encounter different perspectives, experiment with ideas and, through their experiences with us, begin searching for their own middle space.
What does this mean when it comes to film?
In my vision, UK-China Film Collab has always been about the “-” and the “Collab”.
If we focus too heavily on the nationhood on either side, things can very quickly become complicated in the current climate (though by having such name, we are already peceived as problematic by some). The “-” and the “Collab” are where our R&D really lies. It was this possibility that first triggered my imagination as an academic and researcher: the unknown space in between.
It was driven by intellectual and creative curiosity, rather than an ambition to define something territorially. Territorial definitions are not ours to make, nor are they our mission.
It is the middle space that fascinates me.
What could become possible there, on a cinema screen, through the making of a film, or through commentary and debate? When an absence of discourse appears, could that absence itself become a space for new imagination?
If we do have to continue the discussion territorially, then for me, one possible answer to the “-” and “Collab” is Hong Kong: a Special Administrative Region that was once under the British rule and is now part of China. In a geographical and historical sense, it physically embodies an encounter between different worlds.
But that is a territorial answer. It is not necessarily an answer to innovation and creativity.
The more interesting question is: what else can we create within the “-”?
How can we maximise its function as a place of encounter, while preserving the flexibility that makes a middle space possible in the first place?
My own search for a middle space has been quite a journey—around twenty years, perhaps longer.
I have come to understand that the middle space is not a fixed point. It is a constantly moving line: somewhere one feels at ease, but also charged by inspiration; somewhere from which one can create something that might, in turn, inspire another person to begin searching for their own.
The middle space is not an antagonistic position, even when one encounters disagreement.
Nor does being in the middle mean having no position.
For me, it means finding a position from which disagreement can be turned into questions, problems into possibilities, and tension into something that can be examined and crafted through whatever practice we embody—in film, through film, or around film.
This is not an easy task. In fact, it may be one of the hardest journeys for an individual to undertake.
Ultimately, nobody else can locate your middle space for you. An individual has to recognise the need for it and begin the journey themselves.
From my own experience, watching films helps.
The more films we watch, the more lives we encounter that are not our own. We experience different histories, cultures, desires, mistakes, contradictions and perspectives. Perhaps, little by little, this makes us more capable of holding more than one perspective at the same time.
And perhaps that is where the middle space begins. The middle march that one takes one may be the least populated space. It may also be the loneliest.
But perhaps that is precisely why it remains the most interesting place to be.
