Contact Us

Use the form on the right to contact us.

You can edit the text in this area, and change where the contact form on the right submits to, by entering edit mode using the modes on the bottom right. 


123 Street Avenue, City Town, 99999

(123) 555-6789


You can set your address, phone number, email and site description in the settings tab.
Link to read me page with more information.



Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum


Film Screening and Conversation III: Film About a Woman Who… (1974, 105min)

Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

Speakers: Simon Leung, Fei Yanxia, Luan Zhichao

Curated by: Su Wei

In English, with Chinese translation

Partner / Venue: CACHE Space, No.11 Liaogezi, Qixing East Road, 798 Art District, No.4 Jiuxianqiao Road, Beijing


Opening Day ! Dance Only Exists When It Is Performed

Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

Yvonne Rainer and Wen Hui: Dance Only Exists When It Is Performed  will open tomorrow! Welcome to our opening events!

Yvonne Rainer and Wen Hui: Dance Only Exists When It Is Performed will open tomorrow! Welcome to our opening events!



Opening Conversation

Talking, Dancing, Daily Life: A Conversation on the Work of Yvonne Rainer and Wen Hui

In English, with Chinese Translation

Speakers: Wen Hui, Simon Leung, Emmanuele Phuon

Moderated by Carol Yinghua Lu and Su Wei

Venue: Second Floor, Inside-Out Art Museum

Opening Performance: A Staging of Yvonne Rainer’s Trio A and Chair/Pillow

Venue: Second Floor, Inside-Out Art Museum

Yvonne Rainer and Wen Hui: 

Dance Only Exists When It Is Performed

Dates: August 24 – November 24 

Artistic Director: Carol Yinghua Lu

Introduction to Yvonne Rainer / Beijing

A project by Simon Leung

Wen Hui: Living Dance

Curated by Su Wei

Conceived by Carol Yinghua Lu, Yvonne Rainer and Wen Hui: Dance Only Exists When It’s Performed surveys the practices of two seminal figures in choreography and contemporary art. Both Yvonne Rainer, based in New York and Wen Hui, based in Beijing, are dancers, choreographers and filmmakers. Primarily trained in dance, both artists have participated in and interacted with creative practitioners in the field of visual art through the courses of their careers.

Yvonne Rainer is a singular artist whose impact on the history of dance, film, and art is profound. Born in San Francisco in 1934, Rainer moved to New York in 1956, and was immersed in downtown art circles when she developed an interest in dance. Pursuing dance in earnest in the late Fifties, Rainer studied at the Martha Graham School; with Merce Cunningham and Anna Halprin; and created her first dance work in a workshop taught by Robert Dunn. As one of the founders of Judson Dance Theater in 1962, Rainer quickly gained recognition as an avant-garde choreographer and a primary theorist of what became known as postmodern dance. Throughout the next decade, Rainer presented rigorous, ground-breaking dance performances, often incorporating quotidian movement, text, and film projection in both theatrical and art venues.

After making several short films in the late Sixties, Rainer turned her attention to film in the Seventies, and became a prominent filmmaker who indexed the political, cultural, and psychological landscapes of her time. Noted for a deep engagement with avant-garde formal strategies, feminist consciousness, and challenges to conventional film narratives, Rainer’s films of this decade are landmarks for their complex (self-) interrogations of a range of topics and issues, including melodrama, feminine subjectivity, the legacy of anarchism, political violence and psychoanalysis; while picturing the fertile, but changing art context of her home in downtown Manhattan.

Presented as a project by artist Simon Leung, Introduction to Yvonne Rainer / Beijing is the first comprehensive look at the first two decades of Yvonne Rainer’s dance and film work from 1961-1980 in China. Designed as a series of events, including dance performances, public conversations, and screenings, and with the proposition that the work of Rainer remains as resonant and relevant today as they did in a bygone era, this project intends to commence a discussion of Rainer’s work within a contemporary Chinese context with hopes of many more engagements to come.

Born in 1960, Wen Hui graduated from Beijing Dance Academy in 1989, and went to New York for further studies in modern dance in the 1990s. In 1994, she established the Living Dance Studio in Beijing with documentary film director Wu Wenguang. The Living Dance Studio was committed to exploring the artistic process in an open arena, working with artists from all media and all disciplines, and creating performances that integrated dance, theatre, and all forms of audio/visual art, with a strong focus on individual memories, histories and social experiences.

In the past two decades, Wen Hui has always been integrating her observations, experiences and analysis of Chinese social and historical realities into over 20 works through recounting the stories of individuals on stage. She works with non-trained dancers in all of her choreographed works and considers their real life experiences important and valuable components of their expressions and performance on stage. Curated by Su Wei, Wen Hui: Living Dance covers all aspects of her practice with countless archival materials, videos, and photographs, forming a chronological narrative. They are presented in a structure consisting of rehearsal, stage, backstage, and workshops, resembling the full process of Wen Hui’s practice.

Both presentations will be joined in the second floor of the museum, which is transformed completely into a stage, where re-enactments of signature works choreographed by Yvonne Rainer in the 1960s and Wen Hui in the 1990s will be presented.

About The Artists


Born in 1934 in San Francisco, Yvonne Rainer is an American avant-garde choreographer, filmmaker and writer who has been profoundly influential in the fields of dance, film, and art. Beginning in the late 1950s, Rainer studied dance with Martha Graham, Merce Cunningham, Anna Halprin, and Robert Dunn, and after being turned down for the annual Young Choreographer Concert in New York in 1962, she, along with Ruth Emerson and Steve Paxton, approached Al Carmines, the Protestant minister of Judson Memorial Church to use it to present performances. Soon after, Judson Dance Theater gathered choreographers, dancers, artists and composers, and staged works that redefined performance and dance. Rainer was noted for an approach to dance that treated the body more as the source and site of a variety of everyday movements than as the purveyor of emotion or drama. Many of the elements she employed in her work—quotidian gestures, the combination of movement with dialogue, etc.—have since became standard features of postmodern dance. Her early canonical choreographic works include: Three Satie Spoons (1961), We Shall Run (1963) and Trio A (1966). Beginning in the late 1960s, Rainer sometimes included filmed sequences in her dances, and in 1972 she began to turn her attention to filmmaking. Her early films, including Lives of Performers (1972), Film about a Woman Who… (1974), Kristina Talking Pictures (1976), and Journeys from Berlin/1971 (1980), juxtaposed fiction and reality in addressing the intersection of art, private life, and feminine subjectivity within social and political contexts. Continuing with feature-filmmaking until 1996, Rainer returned to dance and choreography in 2000 and has since presented a substantial body of new dance works in the 21st Century. Recent museum exhibitions on the work of Rainer include: Judson Dance Theatre: The Work is Never Done (MoMA, 2018), and Yvonne Rainer: Space, Body, Language (Museum Ludwig, 2012).  


A choreographer, dancer, Wen Hui also makes documentary films and installations. She is one of the pioneers of Chinese contemporary dance theatre. She graduated from Beijing Dance Academy in 1989 with a degree in Choreography. In 1994, she studied modern dance in New York. From 1997 to 1998, she received a scholarship from Asian Cultural Council to further her study of modern dance and theatre making in New York. From 1999 to 2000, Wen Hui joined the famous American contemporary choreographer Ralph Lemon’s dance company, and performed the "Geography Trilogy: Tree" at Brooklyn Academy of Music's Next Wave Festival in New York and around the United States.

In 1994, she founded Living Dance Studio with friends in Beijing. In 2005, Wen Hui and Wu Wenguang established Caochangdi Workstation and co-curated the “Crossing” International Dance Festival in Beijing. In the same year, they initiated European Artists Exchange Project and Young Choreographers Project. In 2015, Wen Hui organized and participated in the “ReActor” project at Power Station of Art in Shanghai.

For twenty-five years, Wen Hui has been using theatre as a means of social intervention. Since 2008, she began to research on the body as a form of personal social documentation and to experiment how bodily memory catalyzes collision between history and reality. Wen Hui’s work has received international attention. She and the Living Dance Studio have been invited to the most probing stages and festivals internationally. In 2009, French magazine Télescope describes Wen Hui as “a pioneer of dance…a miracle.” In 2015, she participated in the Chinese Pavilion at the Venice Biennale. Her work Report on Body won the “ZKB Patronage Prize” in Zürcher Theater Spektakel (2004).

About The Curators


Carol Yinghua Lu is an art critic and curator. She is currently PhD scholar, the University of Melbourne and is director of the Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum. She is a contributing editor at Frieze. Lu was on the jury for the Golden Lion Award at the 2011 Venice Biennale and on the jury for the Filipino National Pavilion of 2018 Venice Biennale of Architecture. She was the co-artistic director of the 2012 Gwangju Biennale and co-curator of the 7th Shenzhen Sculpture Biennale in 2012. From 2012 to 2015, she was the artistic director and chief curator of OCAT Shenzhen. She was the first visiting fellow in the Asia-Pacific Fellowship program at the Tate Research Centre in 2013. She is one of the first four ARIAH (Association of Research Institute in Art History) East Asia Fellows 2017 at Bard Graduate Center.


Simon Leung was born in Hong Kong and lives in New York and Los Angeles. He is Professor and Chair of Graduate Studies in the Department of Art at the University of California, Irvine. His work has been presented at the Gwangju Biennale (2018), the Venice Biennale (2003), the Guangzhou Triennial (2008), the Generali Foundation (Vienna), Ujazdowski Castle Centre for Contemporary Art (Warsaw), NGBK (Berlin), Sala Mendoza (Caracas), 1a Space (Hong Kong), the Whitney Biennial (1993), the Museum of Modern Art, the Museum of Contemporary Art (Los Angeles), and the Hammer Museum. Leung’s projects include an opera set in Griffith Park; a live/video performance addressing AIDS in the figure of the glory hole; a trilogy on “the residual space of the Vietnam War”; an extended proposal of Duchamp’s oeuvre as a discourse in ethics; a meditation on the site/non-site dialectic by way of Edgar Allan Poe; context-specific works centering on the squatting body; “art workers’ theater” addressing the intersection of art and labor; and a twenty-plus year collaboration with the late Warren Niesuchowski.


Su Wei is a curator and art critic based in Beijing. He is the Senior Curator of Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum. He participated in the 2012 Curatorial Intensive at Independent Curators International (ICI) in New York. In 2014, he was awarded first place at the first International Awards for Art Criticism (IAAC). His curatorial projects include: 7th Shenzhen Sculpture Biennale (OCAT Shenzhen, 2012) No References. A Revisit of Hong Kong Media and Video Art from 1985 (Videotage HK, 2016, Permanent Abstraction: Epiphanies of a Modern Form in Escaped Totalities (Red Brick Museum Beijing, 2016), Crescent: Retrospectives of Zhao Wenliang and Yang Yushu (Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum,2017), The Lonely Spirit  (Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum,2018) etc. In 2015, he participated in the symposium Dislocations: Remapping Art Histories at Tate Modern, London. His recent work focuses on thick-description of China’s contemporary art history, excavating its legitimate origins and rupturing nature.

EZFM Salon x Inside-Out Art Museum (I) Poetry Workshop

Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

EZFM Salon x Inside-Out Art Museum (I) Poetry Workshop

'A war of Our Very Own': Transcontinental Witnesses to the Chinese War

Poetry Reading in Chinese and English, close reading of W. H. Auden's war sonnets and Bian Zhilin's wartime poems

Moderated by: Shen Ting (Host of Radio EZFM), Xu Xiaofan (lecturer in English, Beijing Foreign Studies University)

Time:14:30-16:30, 2019.7.27

Venue: Conference Room, Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum 

Read More

Guided Tours by Special Guests: Yang Yang (Writer \ Editor) |Panel discussion: The Low Ground and High Land--A Discussion about the Erronesous Zone in Art Critique (Issue 1 of the 7)

Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

Guided Tours by Special Guests

Yang Yang (Writer \ Editor)

Time: 13:30 Meet at the front desk of IOAM

Panel discussion: The Low Ground and High Land--A Discussion about the Erronesous Zone in Art Critique (Issue 1 of the 7)

Event co-founders : Stefanie Yuen King Chow and Avita Jinhong Guo

Invited guests: Bian Ka, Song Yi, Su Wei

Read More

Research and Curatorial Practice: Symposium on May 17, 2019

Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

Date: 17 May 2019

Time: 10am – 4pm

Location: The Whitworth, Manchester, UK


Marianne Brouwer, art historian, curator & writer

Qu Chang, associate curator, Para Site, Hong Kong 

Cosmin Costinas, executive director and curator of Para Site, Hong Kong 

Tessa Maria Guazon, Assistant Professor, University of Philippines Diliman, curator of Philippine Pavilion, Venice Arts Biennale 2019

Liu Ding, independent curator, artist, Beijing 

Marcella Lista, chief curator of the New Media Collection at the National Museum of Modern Art – Centre Pompidou, Paris

Read More


Beijing Inside-Out Art Museum

Our latest exhibition Happy People All People All Women All Men All WomenAll Men All People First Man Second Man First Woman Second Woman Third Man All People Fourth Man Some People Other People All People Third Woman Fourth Woman Fifth Woman Fifth Woman All Other People Fifth Man All Other People All People Fifth Woman All Other People Fifth Woman All Other People Fifth Woman All People opened yesterday, April 18. We have also invited Associate Professor Luo Xiaoming from the Department of Cultural Studies at the Shanghai University to write an article in parallel with the exhibition, Inference-World/Instructions, which will be published in the exhibition catalogue.

Yuan Yunsheng,  Lookingat the Blank Stele,  2014, Oil painting, 300 × 400cm

Yuan Yunsheng, Lookingat the Blank Stele, 2014, Oil painting, 300 × 400cm


Luo Xiaoming

Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, Shanghai University


This is a world desperate for re-definition and re-inference, since everything has become a flood. Money, body, data, heart, and the legendary AI that is already here. Underneath such torrents, truth and axioms are increasingly confusing terms.

At such historic moment, the inference novel in its traditional sense, its social function, unsurprisingly, has undergone a significant shift. Its goal is no longer to let people hide behind the shade, spy upon the street of danger, imagine the evil inside prosperity, and then add to one’s sense of security and peace of mind. In contrast, after the Bildungsroman entered into aphasia, the baton was handed off to the inference novel, which, not so far as teaching how to commit crime, demonstrates how to grow up gingerly in a world where the truth is messy.

At the same time, such world of inference has become a point of nostalgia for the contemporaries. The detectives, as well as the novelists who worked so hard to create them, would never have thought that today we would be confronted with such messiness, disorder and collapse. So much so that, from where we stand today, all the well-planned murders and plots of the past become unintentional evidence of a past world of order.


When it comes to inference and its literary world, two figures that ordinary people are the most familiar with are Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie. This is largely because the figures they created, Sherlock Holmes and Paul, exist, with different transfigurations, in popular literature and television drama.

However, such an inference world has a totally different meaning for people today. This may be because, when the pipe-smoking Holmes and the slow-moving Paul with his exceptionally active grey cells were created, the influence of the British Empire was still there. The celebrated detectives, and even the novelists hiding behind them, sitting within the historical framework of the Empire and with a high sensitivity of the modern/order, strategically handled/exorcised the evils returning or invading British society from distant “areas of darkness”.

Therefore, in Britain, whether it was in the prosperous city or the pleasant countryside, there was always a smartest figure gifted of exceptional understanding and insight of the order of the modern world, even if she was just an old lady lying in the sun and knitting sweaters all day long – our Miss Marple, who revealed plots, pursued truths, helped a world that made mistakes to restore its orders.

Today, the influence of the Empire has long gone. Even its echoes have disappeared with few traces. Thus, from today’s point of view, such inference and investigation that do not give in until reaching its purpose, is no longer a battle for justice, but a confession similar to “white-hair’d courtesans talking of Emperor Xuanzong”. The nostalgia for the early modern period pervades in the new world that behooves inference and explanation.


The world of inference, however, does not disappear with the Empire. It continues as the new Bildungsroman.

Nevertheless, without the order of the Empire, without justice being promised, and living in such a world of nothing but ruins, how can one infer, explain and demarcate anything? The write who was dedicated to answering this question was Seichō Matsumoto, the Japanese master of “social school” (shakai ha) detective fiction.

In 1950s, Japan was buried in ruins. What became debris was not only the army or the streets, but the heart. Starting to create his inference novels at that time, Seichō Matsumoto, though with a fame parallel to the aforementioned two figures, faced a very different set of problems to deal with.

Comparing Seichō Matsumoto to Conan Doyles who soaked in the sunset of the Empire, one would find: in the inference world built by Seichō Matsumoto, extraordinarily smart professional detectives that worked to undo the problems did not exist. Rather, it was composed of ordinary folks who did not even have a clear name.

In this way, Seichō Matsumoto’s inference world faithfully marks and responds to the turning point of his era: as the two world wars ended and the old order of the Empire came to a complete collapse, what power would this new round of modern world depend on? To provide an accurate outline of the new world through inference was the ambition of Seichō Matsumoto. The ordinary folks he created provided completely different bricks and behavioral guides for this new world.


For these ordinary people, Seichō Matsumoto wrote quite a number of short stories.

In one of such stories, the narrator was a clerk whose job was to answer phoned-in reports about building violations. One day, he received a call from a zealous citizen who reported an unlicensed construction project and asked them to demolish it. It was a period of Japan when everything was about to rise from the ruins and unlicensed buildings were everywhere. Although the government set rules, they were hard to follow in practice. From ordinary people to governmental departments of all levels, everyone turned a blind eye to such phenomenon and rarely implement the policy strictly. Thus, this over-zealous report did not let “him” feel his job being supported by people, or becoming easier. On the contrary, “he” found this zealous report suspicious, “what exactly is going on?” Therefore, he tracked all the way to the bottom and eventually found that it was actually the criminal who built the unlicensed building on purpose, committed murder there and, through the zealous report, wanted to destroy the criminal evidence for good, through the hand of the government.

It was not because the writing was too short for the writer to insert an incredibly smart detective or an intelligent, decisive and good policeman. Rather, in Seichō Matsumoto’s inference world, there was no need for such figure that stands outside and is always right. What existed were ordinary individuals who led a scrupulous, serious life and who cared because of their own dignity.

For example, in “The Woman Who Wrote Haiku”, because the fans of the haiku magazine did not hear back from the author, they were deeply concerned and wanted to know exactly why the author did not reply. As it turned out, they discovered a murder. The lonely haiku author, whose murder was known to none, thanks to these enthusiastic readers, obtained the chance to be concerned about after death and get vindicated eventually.

For instance, the writer in “The Woman Who Took the Local Paper” did not have a successful career and could only publish low-brow serials in the local newspaper. Thus, when he learned that the woman subscribed to the paper for his serials, his inner professional dignity was stimulated and satisfied a little. It was also because of this that the woman’s seemingly unreasonable unsubscription puzzled him. His writing did not have substantial improvement, but neither did it get worse. Why would she unsubscribe? To be responsible for his professional dignity, the writer began his investigation. Finally, he found that the woman’s subscription and unsubscription had nothing to do with his writing. She was just concerned about whether her murder had been found out in the local newspaper.

When your job got “zealous” cooperation, you did not feel grateful or relaxed, but suspicious; when you did not get reply from others, you did not blame them, but became deeply concerned and spared no effort to inquire about the whereabouts; when the undeserved appreciation of your works was suddenly gone, you did not spend time feeling sorry for yourself but investigated and eventually discovered a crime from the traces left.

From today’s perspective, these ordinary people led an extremely scrupulous life. Every one of them was comparable to the legendary “people of Chaoyang District”. They were never the so-called important people. Nor could they afford to be self-righteous. Yet in their world, they were exceptionally rigorous. It seemed that their motivation to live was never to make themselves easier, but to give themselves more dignity.


From the perspective of today, people would envy such scrupulous and structured new world. Yet we should not overlook the context in which such world was from.

After all, the debris was the result of the failed imperial conquest of Japan, who was inserted in a particular swift way into an already-defined modern moment by the United States and its allies, who represented justice at that time. The turbulence of the old order of the world was over, and a new order named “Modern-America-Democracy” was prepared for Japan that was ready to rise from the ruins.

So far, what loomed over these ordinary people was the vast, strict and rigidly hierarchical post-war Japanese society that was being modernized meticulously. It was like a machine, rumbling away and determining everyone’s fate. Criminals wanted to locate a gap inside this machine to place their desires. Those ordinary citizens, who seek dignity in life and thus revealed the truth inadvertently, automatically became the vibrissa of the social machine, making it impossible for any crevice to exist. In this way, every piece of Seichō Matsumoto seems to tell the readers that the justice system would not leave anyone outside. Every ordinary person who lived scrupulously could be the one holding the sword of justice. It was these ordinary, scrupulous people, who were neither gifted detectives nor part of the omnipotent government, whose ups and downs and whose meticulousness, constructed a new world.


Whether such creation had its instructive effect in the Japanese society at that time, we did not know.

Across time and space, when we retrospect such an inference world where crimes were carefully committed and citizens were all scrupulous detectives, firstly we felt strange: in the contrast of such an extremely scrupulous world, we live in a real world of looseness and careless. After all, as the Chinese reader pointed out long ago, classic cases of inference like Points and Lines were only possible in Japan, where trains are accurate to the exact second. Anywhere else, whether it is a late-running train or an unreasonable passenger, such designs would sound absurd and flawed.

It is actually far more than the matter of the train schedule in a different space and time.

Behind the loose, careless world of today, it was another failure of the modern world order, represented by the United States. For the politicians, financial oligarchs and historians who seek for lessons from history, the signs of the collapsing order of the world may come from the fall of the Berlin Wall, the triumph of the free market, or the rise of the “world factory”. For those who grew up reading inference novels, nevertheless, this collapse meant the shift from Seichō Matsumoto to Higashino Keigo.

Higashino Keigo, a bestseller in both Japan and China, has held Seichō Matsumoto in high esteem. Yet in his inference stories, the scrupulous Japanese society that had been confident of the order was gone. The whole society has a totally different understanding of “what crime is”, the position of evil in society, and even the ways in which ordinary people could support justice. Take Higashino Keigo’s most well-known novel, The Devotion of Suspect X, as an example. In the novel, the murder of an anonymous homeless was used to cover another murder, in the hope to realize the mutual protection and help between ordinary people. Such understanding and design of “crime” obviously has gone beyond the imagination of the society where Seichō Matsumoto was embedded.

For people today, it was not a surprising shift. It was inevitable for the modern order to fall again, which signified the loss of confidence in truth, justice and even the external world which should be maintained by truth and justice. If it is true that every modern society would grow a desire for truth and a basic view of good and evil that match its contemporary history, then the popular inference novels, and of course movies and television dramas, are simply recording the attitude towards truth, good and evil at that time. If we put together the inference worlds constructed for one society in the past few decades, play, watch and yearn, what they present would inevitably be the shift of the times, no matter how frustrating or dismal such shift has been.


Such shift also took place in China. The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, what sense of order does it bring? The truth of it, cannot be found in lengthy government reports, nor the overwhelming live streaming, but in detective novels piling up in the bookstores, as well as the castrated, ambivalent Chinese inference dramas.

At such moment, there have always been people eager to jump at the Chinese inference works for their lack of creativity. They would say, for example, that Zijin Chen’s The Long Night Before the Light, is no more than a parody of Higashino Keigo. Such exclamation may have its point, but it neglects that the function of inference in this era is no longer innovation or imagination. Rather, it is the exact instructions of the world, printed, distributed, publicly displayed, while privately discussed.

In this sense, The Long Night Before the Light undoubtedly belongs to a particular type of the inference world. It is hard to know whether such novels exist in other countries of late development or socialism. If not, then the problem that this particular type of inference deals with would be of striking Chinese characteristics: In a world where criticism is not allowed, how could evil be outlined and narrated? And in a world where evil cannot be articulated, how could good be defined?

From the very beginning, the novel sets out for a complete disruption of the fights between good and evil, and justice and viciousness in the existing world. A corpse was founded in the suitcase carried by a refined gentleman when he tried to pass the security checkpoint of the subway. The incident naturally ignited wide discussion in the community and turned into a national sensation. When the police were going to collect evidence so as to convict the crime of the man who had been carrying around the body in the suitcase, however, they found he had perfect alibi when the victim was murdered. Confronted by the series of evidence that gradually surfaced in the course of investigation, it was not the “criminal”, but the justice department involved in the investigation and conviction of the case, that was cornered and stranded.

Obviously, the situation Zilin Chen has to face is more complicated than that of Seichō Matsumoto, and subtler compared to his contemporary Higashino Keigo. The reason lies in that the ordinary people in the era of Seichō Matsumoto, though living in ruins, have a modernizing timetable which looked extraordinarily accurate at that time. Most people relied on this timetable to maintain the sense of rigor and self-esteem in their life. As a result, even in the world of Higashino Keigo where the modern order has collapsed, the ordinary people in his writings, though helping each other out by replacing one sin with another, are full of hesitation, perplexity and guilt.

In the inference world of Zijin Chen, ordinary people behave in a completely different way. Compared to the hesitate and anxious process of committing a crime, they focus more on how to “commit the crime” in public. For only with the best use of wisdom and a sensational “crime”, would another real crime be unveiled, rather than being concealed and swallowed by the darkness again and again. This desperate gamble for social justice is where lies the novelty of the Chinese inference world’s contribution to the current order of the world.


"Will the world be all right?

In the turbulent times, Liang Shuming’s father, before committing suicide, asked his son.

During the prosperous times, few parents would throw such big question to their children and confront them with such shocking fear for no reason. Consequently, although kids may love the exciting or frustrating inference world, they have completely forgot that inference was the social instructions to answer such heavy question.

Thus, no matter how many times Seichō Matsumoto and Higashino Keigo were re-read, for them, a world where axioms exist is as far as the exotic lands.

So, we waited.

After all, the inference world since then must be written by a generation(s) of people who do not truly believe the existence of axioms or justice.

There is, of course, another possibility. If we feed all the inference texts to artificial intelligence, they would soon learn to automatically write out the order that the world should have and supervise human beings to complete their world project by following the epitomizing instructions.

The part of the discussion that was reserved for us was simply, which inference world could be the better version?