FOLIO ----
OF FOLIAGE
----------
/PROJECT STUDIES /PEOPLE /CV /WRITINGS
To address one point directly, the featured mural was neither my first mural nor my first experience handling a project. This was something I had clarified during the filming process. While I understand that editorial choices are part of storytelling, Rather than the concern of reputation, I was mostly disappointed that certain contexts surrounding my practice and experience were not fully carried through in the final presentation.
I have always preferred to let my work speak quietly for itself, but when omissions or framing begin to shape misunderstandings about my practice, I believe some clarification becomes necessary.
I would also like to make clear that Eunice remains my friend, and I do not believe there was any harmful intention on her part. We had spoken about this some time ago, and neither of us had any oversight on how the feature would ultimately be framed or edited.
Following the release, I also reached out to CNA for clarification after an accompanying article was published. I was informed that certain editorial decisions were made to preserve the emotional narrative of the story. While they were willing to soften parts of the article, the overall framing remained largely unchanged.
I understand that some have asked why I did not respond more strongly earlier. Realistically, once a feature has been released, there is often limited room to meaningfully alter its direction. Media storytelling inevitably involves interpretation, and at times, narrative priorities may differ from lived experience.
To those who said I should just be grateful - gratitude and discomfort can exist at the same time. I remain grateful for the opportunity to be featured, while also recognising that being featured and being accurately represented are not always the same thing - I did feel the gap in this case. To a broader audience, the story may appear straightforward, but for those familiar with the fuller context, certain differences are understandably more apparent.
One point I believe which led to this situation is that during the filming, I was consistently asked if Eunice was my mentor, to which I repeatedly shared that she is my friend. The line about introducing her as a “shifu” came from a much longer thought - that before anything, I saw her as a friend - everyone I meet, regardless of age or role, has taught me something in life. In that sense, everyone I meet is a “shifu” to me even if they are younger and that I would normally introduce everyone as one in their respective field. That nuance didn’t make it into the final cut, and the meaning shifted from what I originally intended which ultimately shaped the framing of the show.
I would also like to briefly clarify aspects relating to the Changkat mural segment, particularly in relation to timelines and circumstances. There are parts I chose not to share publicly, as I don’t think it is necessary to put anyone in a difficult position. However, there are 2 things I can share:
Firstly, I had informed my friend in advance that I would briefly step away to attend a long-planned farewell dinner for a friend who was leaving the country. Additionally, compared to the media version which mentioned that I left in the evening and returned at midnight, my message timestamps indicate that I was away for less than three hours (approximately 8.15-10.15pm)
Secondly, prior to leaving, I had advised my friend to head home as I anticipated returning later, though she chose to remain. There is additional context to this situation which I do not feel is necessary or constructive to discuss publicly.
Ultimately, I will just take this as a learning experience in navigating media representation. I appreciate the concern expressed by those who reached out, and I hope this offers some clarity and closure. I will just continue to do my work earnestly and allow that to speak for itself.