Consequently, I asked Hsieh what she expected the audience to understand from her art. She first claimed her target audience to be video producers and people who are accustomed to using social media. She also emphasized her intention to present prose on mental virus, instead of producing a serious political propaganda film. This constructs the reason for the work to be divided into three channels: to express each part concisely. In terms of her expectation of the general audience, she purely hopes the meaning can be synthesized from their viewing of the short proses. In her words, “The three-channel video is like three short proses. Despite the massive amount of elements involved in each film, every film can be concentrated into one sentence. I hope the general public can grasp the main concepts. To go further for deeper interpretation or not, it’s totally up to them.”

​

Hsieh then mentioned some of her observations and reflections after the works were presented in the museum. First, she noticed how audiences outside the art circle get drawn to the flamboyant and loud format in the first place, and this triggers their interest in further exploration of the piece. Secondly, she reassured that, as she knew already, the audiences rely heavily on words. Words become an essential basis for understanding since they cannot relate to many meanings through visual expression. This echoes Tsou’s initial encounter with the work. 

​

In addition, Hsieh reflected that she felt the expression in her art was still a bit too complicated; however, she also found that the audience had different feelings about it. Surprisingly, as she chatted with some viewers onsite, she discovered, “The audience does not get tired with the visual with a lot of things going on. Instead, they catch the comprehensive information of it. They do not focus on complicated feelings but enjoy the complex state. In other words, they can usually grasp how symbolic construction affects our values from my work, but they usually will not go deeper into this point. While I still hope my future works can be approved, the finding of how they connect the three channels into an overall cognition of the work is still fascinating to me.”

​

Based on her recognition of the media, Tsou thus demonstrated a gesture of not fully satisfied with the perspective conveyed in Paradise of Chaos II: Virus Creation. “Hsieh’s work did not classify the media, but it denied the entire thing. Every kind of media is crossed out under Hsieh’s recognition. It did not consider self-media as a form that applies expertise and is devoted to informing news to the public. Therefore, as I get the cynical of her toward media, her perspective does not really affect my overall view of the media. Nonetheless, I thought her effort to convey her perspective to be successful.”

​

In fact, I believe Hsieh’s work is aimed at opposing against traditional media forms. It does not directly deny self-media. However, it is notable that Tsou’s opinions are responsive to Hsieh’s statement, "never treat the audience as an idiot.” It is best to keep space for the viewers and the artwork to spark chemicals and create meaning. I think the interview with Tsou just ended at an appropriate point.