Abstract

DKING.W’s Mirror.Mirror series centers on mirror-polished stainless steel panels bearing the physical traces of gunfire. Bringing reflection, destruction, spectatorship, and time into a single material structure, the works do not represent violence through imagery. Instead, actual physical impact is introduced directly into a metal surface originally designed to reflect the surrounding world, making trauma an inseparable part of the material itself.

Since the series was presented at the International Peace Artists’ Exhibition, held at the European Parliament in Brussels on March 31, 2015, it has been shown under a range of exhibition and environmental conditions. From the institutional and cultural-exchange context of Brussels, to public space in Los Angeles, and subsequently to the natural environment of Upstate New York, the works’ reflected imagery, relationships with viewers, and temporal dimensions have continued to evolve.

This study examines Mirror.Mirror through five interconnected aspects: material facts, visual structure, the position of the viewer, changes of site, and historical documentation. It considers how the series continues to reflect an ever-changing world while retaining the physical traces of damage.

The study argues that the significance of the series lies not simply in the marks left by gunfire or in the visual effects of mirrored surfaces, but in the coexistence of two seemingly contradictory conditions on the same material surface: the enduring traces of human action and the constantly changing images reflected from the surrounding world.

Keywords: mirror-polished stainless steel; bullet marks; reflection; spectatorship; site-based practice; time; public art; artwork archives.

I. The Point of Departure: Reflective Surfaces and Physical Damage

In contemporary art, mirrors have long been used to explore perception, identity, space, and the relationship between the viewer and the artwork. A mirror is both a material and a particular visual mechanism. Rather than presenting a completely fixed image, it continually produces new visual content in response to the viewer’s position, the surrounding environment, and changes in light.

The approach taken by Mirror.Mirror differs from practices that primarily use reflective surfaces to create spatial illusions or extend the perception of space.

The works are made from mirror-polished stainless steel panels. Bullet holes, indentations, deformations, and fractured marks left by gunfire directly alter what was originally an intact reflective surface.

One material fact is particularly important: mirror-polished stainless steel has been the defining material of the series from its inception. It was never subsequently transformed from ordinary glass mirrors into stainless steel.

The gunfire did not completely eliminate the surface’s reflective capacity. On the contrary, damage and reflection continue to coexist on the same surface. The metal retains physical evidence of impact while remaining capable of reflecting surrounding buildings, skies, trees, light, and people.

The works therefore establish a distinctive visual relationship:

The mirror records damage that has already occurred, while continuing to reflect a reality that is still unfolding.

This relationship is not simply a symbolic depiction of destruction. The bullet holes are actual physical traces, while reflection is an ongoing visual act. Together, they form the fundamental structure of the works.

Destruction is thus not treated as an event that has simply ended. Its traces remain present within the continuing experience of viewing the work.

II. Brussels, 2015: The First Major Public Presentation

On March 31, 2015, Mirror.Mirror was presented at an international exhibition of artists’ works held at the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium.

The exhibition was titled:

Who Can Give Us Peace?

According to the official record, the exhibition was jointly organized by the European Parliament and other institutions.

The exhibition brought together artists from several countries, diplomats, and members of the European Parliament. Ambassador Yang Yanyi and Member of the European Parliament Béla Kovács presented certificates to participating artists.[1]

This historical context is significant in two respects.

First, the work entered an institutional setting shaped by international public and cultural exchange.

The exhibition was organized around the theme of peace, bringing together artistic perspectives on the history of war and shared human circumstances. For Mirror.Mirror, this context provided a particular historical and cultural framework. Its artistic significance, however, must still be understood through its material structure, visual mechanisms, and the experience of the viewer.

Within this context, Mirror.Mirror did not adopt the narrative conventions of traditional war painting. Nor did it communicate through the depiction of figures, battlefields, or specific historical events.

Instead, it retained the actual marks of gunfire on a metal surface that continued to reflect its surroundings.

This approach distinguishes the work from conventional forms of pictorial representation. The viewer does not encounter an image depicting trauma, but an actual material object that has undergone physical impact and nevertheless continues to reflect the world.

Second, the mirror incorporates the viewer into the visual structure of the work.

When standing in front of the panels, viewers see their own images and the surrounding environment reflected on the surface. Bullet holes, deformed metal, human reflections, and images of the environment exist simultaneously.

The viewer is therefore no longer simply looking at an external image concerned with violence, but enters a visual relationship that includes their own presence.

The world reflected by the mirror does not exclude the viewer. The viewer is part of that world.

In this way, the work moves beyond the observation of damage toward an examination of one’s own relationship with reality.

It is worth noting that a report published by China Daily on April 3, 2015, described the material of the work as “ordinary mirrors.” This description does not correspond to the actual use of mirror-polished stainless steel.[2]

The report serves as evidence of the work’s public exhibition and media coverage at the time, but it should not be treated as an authoritative source for identifying its material.

Based on the artist’s original production records, Ark Art Foundation clarifies that the series has used mirror-polished stainless steel panels from its inception, including the version exhibited in Brussels in 2015.

This correction concerns not only the name of the material, but also the work’s physical properties and the accuracy of its future art historical documentation.

III. From Institutional Setting to Public Space: The Los Angeles Presentation, 2017

Following its presentation in Brussels, Mirror.Mirror entered public space in the United States.

In 2017, the work was presented outdoors in a public area near Los Angeles City Hall. Panels from the series were further presented in the form of oversized full-length mirrors.

This change introduced new spatial conditions into the work’s viewing mechanism.

In an indoor exhibition, viewers generally encounter an object with relatively defined boundaries. Once placed outdoors, the mirrored surface begins to receive and reflect information from the surrounding space continuously.

Buildings, skies, trees, pedestrians, sunlight, and changing natural light all become part of the reflected image.

The work no longer presents only its own material condition; it also incorporates the surrounding environment into its visual structure.

The oversized full-length mirror format further intensifies the relationship between the work and its viewers.

A full-length mirror is ordinarily associated with personal appearance, self-observation, and everyday life. When placed in public space and marked by actual gunfire, its familiar function comes into tension with its material damage.

Viewers see not only a mirror that has been shot, but also their own reflections within it.

The significance of this encounter lies not merely in whether the work offers a form of interaction. Even without actively participating, viewers cannot entirely remove themselves from the world reflected by the work.

The mirror connects public space with individual acts of looking.

In this way, Mirror.Mirror develops from an installation with clearly defined physical boundaries into a public-space practice that maintains an ongoing relationship with its surrounding reality.

IV. Natural Environment and Time: From Fixed Traces to Continuous Change

In 2023-2024, the work entered the natural environment of an estate in Upstate New York.

This stage further expanded the temporal dimension of Mirror.Mirror.

In a natural setting, the mirrors no longer reflect only buildings and crowds. Forests, rivers, skies, seasonal changes, rain, snow, and shifting angles of sunlight all become part of the work’s visual experience.

In contrast to these constantly changing environmental conditions, the physical marks left by gunfire possess a different temporal character.

They record actions that have already taken place and remain on the metal surface in a relatively fixed form.

Two distinct temporal conditions therefore coexist within the work:

One is a reality that is continuously changing.

The other consists of physical traces of past events that have not disappeared with time.

The natural environment continually alters the images presented by the mirror, while the marks left by gunfire remain embedded within these changes.

Time is no longer merely an external condition that follows the completion of the work.

It becomes part of the work’s viewing mechanism.

Through the ongoing influence of the natural environment, the metal surface and its reflective qualities continue to change, while the structural marks left by gunfire remain. The relationship between the work and its surroundings also continues to evolve through this process.

This distinguishes the work from an object that simply documents the marks of gunfire.

If attention is directed exclusively toward the bullet holes, the work can easily be understood as a static record of an act of violence. Yet when it remains within a natural environment, the viewer encounters more than the traces of a past act of destruction. The work brings the relationship between an ever-changing world and the marks of history into view.

Time has not erased the wounds.

Reality has not stopped changing.

Together, these conditions sustain the continued existence of the work.

V. Mirror and Spectatorship: From Reflection to Self-Confrontation

The central visual mechanism of Mirror.Mirror rests on a seemingly simple fact that carries deeper implications:

Even when damaged, the mirror continues to reflect the world.

An ordinary mirror primarily serves to present images. In Mirror.Mirror, however, the mirrored surface performs two interrelated functions:

On the one hand, it reflects reality.

On the other, it retains the traces of destruction caused by human action.

When viewers face the work, these two forms of information cannot be entirely separated.

A viewer may first notice the bullet holes, or may initially see the sky, trees, or their own reflection. Whichever visual element draws their attention first, the others remain present on the same surface.

This gives the viewing experience an inherent tension.

The viewer is not looking at an object that has been damaged to the point of losing its reflective function, but at a surface that continues to reflect reality despite having been damaged.

Destruction is therefore not presented as the endpoint of visual experience.

Instead, damage and reality continue to coexist.

The viewer’s reflection further complicates this relationship.

When a person appears in the mirror, the boundary between the viewer and the world being viewed is no longer entirely separate. The world that the viewer encounters includes the viewer themselves.

The mirror thus shifts from being a simple reflective medium to a medium of revelation.

The work does not tell viewers what conclusions they should reach, nor does it require everyone to respond with the same emotions.

Rather, it establishes a concrete viewing situation: when people face a mirror damaged by human action, they are also confronted with themselves and the world in which they live.

VI. From Destruction to Care: The Work’s Intellectual Direction

To understand Mirror.Mirror solely as a work about violence is insufficient to account for the full scope of its intellectual direction.

The marks of gunfire are undoubtedly an important visual foundation of the series, but the work does not remain confined to the display of destruction.

Its deeper concern lies in the relationship between human actions and the world, and in whether people can recognize the consequences of their own actions.

The marks of gunfire on the mirror are not abstract visual symbols. They are actual traces left by human behavior in the material world.

Yet the mirror does not stop reflecting.

It continues to present the sky, trees, buildings, and people.

The work therefore brings together an examination of human actions and an ongoing attentiveness to the world.

The sense of care contained in the work is not expressed simply through text or emotional declarations. Rather, it is embodied in the fact that the mirror continues to face the world even after being damaged.

It does not abandon reflection because of trauma.

Nor does it conceal its wounds in an attempt to restore the appearance of an intact surface.

It is through this relationship that the work opens up a field of thought extending beyond a straightforward narrative of destruction.

The work does not simply condemn humanity, nor does it use the marks of damage to create a tragic aesthetic effect.

Instead, it allows viewers to recognize that the destruction caused by human beings and the world in which human beings continue to live are not two separate realities.

The world reflected by the mirror is the very world inhabited by humanity.

Ultimately, the work’s concerns return to the human condition itself.

VII. The Position of Mirror.Mirror within DKING.W’s Artistic Practice

Mirror.Mirror does not represent the entirety of DKING.W’s artistic practice. Rather, it constitutes an important strand within a long-term, cross-disciplinary body of work.

The artist’s practice encompasses painting, ink art, photography, sculpture, installation, public art, and other forms of cross-media exploration. These media are not isolated professional directions, but different modes of expression that have gradually developed through decades of artistic practice.

Mirror.Mirror demonstrates that, in the artist’s work, material is not merely a means of producing visual effects.

The physical properties of materials, their historical traces, and their relationships with the surrounding world can all become integral components of an artwork’s conceptual structure.

In Mirror.Mirror, mirror-polished stainless steel is both a physical object and a medium for reflecting reality; gunfire is both a physical force and a concrete trace of human action; and the environment is both the site of the work and a continuous source of visual content.

The meaning of the work therefore does not depend entirely on a symbolic system predetermined by the artist.

It is also formed through the actual condition of the material, the viewer’s act of looking, and the relationships generated by the continuous changes of the environment.

For these reasons, Mirror.Mirror holds independent research value within the artist’s broader practice.

The questions it raises extend beyond mirrored materials and the marks of gunfire. They concern how an artwork can establish an ongoing relationship between material existence and lived experience.

VIII. Archives, Documentation, and the Necessity of Art Historical Research

The art historical position of an artwork cannot be established solely through its visual characteristics or the artist’s personal statements.

It also requires the mutual support of evidence from the creative process, material records, exhibition documentation, installation images, media coverage, and subsequent developments.

This is particularly important in the study of Mirror.Mirror.

The 2015 Brussels exhibition is supported by official historical records. Media reports preserve information about the work’s public circulation at the time. The artist’s own archive provides additional documentation concerning its materials, physical form, and exhibition history.

These sources, however, do not all serve the same evidentiary purpose.

Official institutional records can establish the date, location, and organizational context of an exhibition, but they do not automatically verify every material detail of an artwork.

Media reports can document how a work was presented and circulated publicly, but their descriptions of materials may contain inaccuracies.

The artist’s archive can provide information about the creative process and the work itself. However, claims concerning exhibition history should, wherever possible, be corroborated by installation photographs, invitations, certificates, and institutional records.

For this reason, Ark Art Foundation’s archival work on Mirror.Mirror should preserve both original documents and subsequent corrections, rather than simply replacing earlier inaccurate information with revised text.

This work is not only an act of preserving documentation for an individual artwork. It also establishes an essential foundation for future art historical research.

Conclusion: The Wounds Remain, and the World Continues to Be Reflected

Mirror.Mirror begins with a mirror-polished stainless steel surface marked by gunfire, but it does not remain confined to the presentation of the shooting itself.

It brings actual physical traces and an ever-changing world into simultaneous existence on a reflective surface.

From the international peace-themed exhibition in Brussels, to public space in Los Angeles, and then to the natural environment of Upstate New York, the conditions of presentation have continued to change. Yet the work has maintained an underlying continuity in its fundamental structure:

The marks left by gunfire have not disappeared.

The mirror continues to reflect the world.

The viewer continues to appear within the mirror.

Together, these three facts constitute the fundamental conceptual relationship of Mirror.Mirror.

The work offers neither a simple promise that destruction will inevitably lead to restoration, nor an understanding of time as a force that automatically erases trauma.

Instead, it allows actions that have already taken place and realities that are still unfolding to remain within the same visual space.

When viewers face the mirror, they see more than a damaged object or a changing environment. They encounter a world that includes themselves.

The mirror is therefore no longer merely an instrument for observing external appearances.

It brings people back to a confrontation with their own relationship to the world.

The wounds belong to the past, yet remain present; the world continues to change, yet cannot move beyond the traces that have already been left behind.

This may be what makes Mirror.Mirror particularly worthy of continued study.

Archival References

I. Basic Artwork Information

• Artist: DKING.W (Wang Dalong / 王大龙)
• Title: Mirror.Mirror
• Type: Mirror-polished stainless steel installation / public-space art practice
• Primary Material: Mirror-polished stainless steel panels bearing marks of gunfire
• Period of Creation and Development: From 2014 onward
• Archival Institution: Ark Art Foundation

II. Historical Timeline

Date

Historical Milestone

2014

Conceptual development and commencement of the work (according to the artist’s archive)

March 31, 2015

International Peace Artists’ Exhibition at the European Parliament, Brussels

2017

Outdoor presentation in public space in Los Angeles and oversized full-length mirror installation

2023

Site-based presentation in a natural estate environment in Upstate New York

III. Key References

[1] Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the European Union. “Ambassador Yang Yanyi Attends the International Peace Artists’ Exhibition Commemorating the 70th Anniversary of the Victory in the World Anti-Fascist War at the European Parliament.” April 1, 2015.

Original Chinese title: 《驻欧盟使团杨燕怡大使出席欧洲议会和平艺术家绘画作品展》.

[2] China Daily. “International Peace Art Exhibition Commemorating the 70th Anniversary of the Victory in World War II Held at the European Parliament.” Republished by Sina News, April 3, 2015.

IV. Related Ark Art Foundation Archives

• Mirror.Mirror — Official Artwork Page
• DKING.W — Artist Profile
• Related Critical Essay: Mirror or Revelation? — A Critical Reading of Mirror.Mirror

V. Archival Reference Number

AAF-ARCHIVE-2015-EU-MM01

Archive Type: Integrated archive of artwork history and exhibition documentation.

This archive should be continuously updated with original exhibition photographs, material records, exhibition invitations, certificates, media reports, and images documenting subsequent site-based presentations.

Research Institution: Ark Art Foundation
Document Version: Research Edition 1.0
Research Themes: Material / Reflection / Spectatorship / Time / Site

© 2026 Ark Art Foundation. All rights reserved.

Published for scholarly research, archival documentation, and educational purposes.

Recommended Citation

Ark Art Foundation. “The Fractured Reflection and the Measure of Time: Material, Spectatorship, Site, and Archival History in DKING.W’s Mirror.Mirror.” Research Edition 1.0, 2026.

Get PDF