廣義的生物科技(如醫學美容、基因工程、合成生物學等)快速的發展，人類因此得以更全面的修改甚至創造一具自己更滿意的身體，身體成為個人的彰顯、自我表現的載具。人類看似從造物主的手中奪回了身體的自主權而得以解放，但其實卻不然，在造物主之後、科學領域中，對大多數人而言不存在的經驗與透過想像習得的科學知識，成為新世代的造物主。藏身於推陳出新的科技，在你我的身體上設下一道道看不見的邊界。
真正的邊界往往是不可見的，只有在被無知者誤觸時會短暫的被顯露出來，當然，偶爾也是會有意識清晰的游牧者向邊界提出挑戰。在圍繞著「造物主」提出「誰決定你我的身體邊界」與「如何奪回身體的自主(治)權」的過程裡，各種生物科技將不斷以無害的協助者一般的角色現身其中，讓人以為在這個世代，身體與科技的關係一再證明的是你我都早已是自己身體的擁有者與創造者，而忽略了「科技─身體」的關係之上，還有「科學─科技─身體」這組更大的結構存在，而科學知識正是真正左右科技如何作用於人類身體的藏鏡人。觀察時下經過醫美整形、藥物治療、手術治療等等所「美化」、「正常化」或者「去疾病化」的身體，正是窺見這些躲藏在技術與科技後的知識框架與意識形態，如何形塑人們認知(或者想像)身體的最佳視角。
自十六世紀中葉起，歐洲學院裡對人體解剖的風氣才漸漸興盛，知識分子(醫師)從純粹從事思考活動的人，成為動手操作與經驗的人。醫學科學的知識生產者自此比從前更精確的掌握人體，更有系統地建立起關於身體的知識，尤其在《論人體構造》一書問世後，如同該書的作者安瑞亞斯‧華薩流思(Andreas Vesalius)所言：「它提供了一種分辨正常與異常的方法。」也就是說透過解剖的實際經驗與歸納，以經驗主義的合法性作為基礎，醫學成為一種科學，並逐漸生產出一套能夠將人體標準化的知識系統，這套標準發展延續至今，成為大多數人認知身體的主要途徑。
然而對大多數的人而言並沒有所謂的觀察與經驗作為知識的基礎，只能夠透過想像去建構不存在的經驗而使學習成為可能，這些人的經驗被知識的生產者「代理」而成為被動的、單向的知識接收者。本次參覽的藝術家選擇滲透各種看不見的薄膜間，穿梭在「知識─科技─身體」三者間的各種空隙，成為更靈活且更具能動性的知識生產主體。在來回滲透的摩擦之際使透明的邊界成為可見，並以反身性的批判姿態，建立更具有主體性與身體感的身體知識，又巧妙的將現存於科學知識中的意識形態與權力位階展露了出來，一反過往依循科學知識來使用科技的邏輯，實踐出雙向而具辯證空間的知識生產途徑。
Due to the rapid development of the general bio-techs such as the aesthetic medicine, genetic engineering, synthetic biology and etc, human beings have aware of ways to better revise or to create a body that contents us more. Bodies have become self-identities, mediums to present ourselves. We seem to seize back the body autonomy from the Creator and release it, but the fact that lies behind the Creator is the scientific disciplines which are often ignored by most of us. Working though the scientific experiences and the knowledge acquiring through the imagination on science to stand out as the new Creator of the next generation. Tthere is one invisible boundary hidden behind the latest technology.
The real boundary stays invisible. It reveals itself only when the innocent accidentally touch it. And no doubt once in a while, some clever decoy would throw down their challenges to it. Haunted in the dilemma of “who determine our body boundaries” by “the Creator” and “how to seize back the autonomy”, different types of bio-techs plays the role of the harmless supporters. People believe that the relation of body and technology has again and again proved that we are the real owners and the Creators of our bodies, so they ignore that upper the “tech-body” relation, there is a greater “science-technology-body” relation, and that scientific knowledge has always been the mastermind that truly control the progress of technology. With the observation of the “embellishing”, “normalized”or “discriminative” bodies, we are able to detect the knowledge frame and the ideology on how to present the perfect bodies we acknowledge (or imagine) behind the techniques.
Anthropotomy began to flourish in the European schools since the mid sixteenth century. The intelligentsia, including doctors, weren’t only those who think, but they turned into the manipulators. Knowledge producers in medicine sciences have mastered in human bodies ever since and so on systematically developed further information about it especially when On the Fabric of the Human Body was published in 1543. As Andreas Vesalius, the author of the book, goes, “The book provides a way to distinguish normality from abnormality.” Through the actual experiences of the anatomy and its inductions so to speak, medicine has officially become a type of science, under the bases of the legality of empiricism. Medicine science has gradually developed a knowledge system which standardizes human figures. The standard lasts till now and eventually becomes a common process to acquire the body.
However, most of the people never have a chance to observe and experience the body functions and make them the groundworks of the scientific knowledge. They can only imagine those nonexistent experiences to make the acquisition possible. Knowledge producers become their “agents”; they’re the passive, simplex knowledge receivers. The exhibited artists this time decide to permeate all the invisible thin films, sauntering across the tripartite, “knowledge- technology- body”. Furthermore standing as reflexive critics, they develop a body knowledge that’s subjective and more related to the senses of the body; at the same time reveal the ideologies and power classes in scientific knowledge. Differ from the precious technology using logic on the bases of scientific knowledge, this time the exhibition has made two -ways, dialectical knowledge production into actual practices.