Jul 21

关于传递形式的讨论

mayongfeng , 13:23 , essay | 品味 , 评论(0) , 引用(0) , 阅读(2596) , Via 本站原创
许盛

黑屏,是画面传输的中断,或者失败,总之不会是完结。这次展出,并不是为了中断传递,而是可以把黑屏作为开始或者终极的状态,来讨论不同的传递的可能性。

何云昌先生在2000年为《不合作方式》所作的艺术家声明中,有这样一段话:“关注弱势群体,关注生命意志与现实持久而无畏的对峙和诗意化的表达方式,是我近年努力的方向”(注1)。这句认真的言语却令人想到一个幽默的场景:一个人,采访正在菩提树下冥想的释迦牟尼,问他“你为何坐在这里?”,释迦牟尼则用上面那句同样的话回答了他。

人们也许不愿意听到这句话从释迦牟尼的口中说出,因为这打破了人们的某种宗教观念;却很高兴能听到这句话从何云昌口中说出,因为这句话满足了人们保持某种艺术观念的需要。那时的何云昌也许还没有明确自己的道路,他的“不合作方式”,也只是在英文翻译中才成为充满力量的“Fuck off”。而六年后,当“石头英国漫游记”结束时,人们问他,为什么拿着一块石头绕着英国走了一圈,他回答说:“就是为了把它放回原来的地方”(注2)。这句回答,比起任何对采访的回绝,或者缄默,都更能够让作者对它自己的作品保持沉默。“Fuck off”终于以另一种方式回归了。

这句对“解释”的冒犯,揭示了一个常常被忽视的基础,即所谓艺术“观念”,只有在作为分析的“途经”时,才具有启发性和操作性;可是,对评论工具的使用方式本身,却往往被误当做评论的目的。写作,这个甚至可以“对自身意义的不存在发表评论” (来自乔治.巴塔耶)的表达方式,促使人们不断用文学的分析法领悟作者,领悟荒谬,领悟“自我”,领悟四海皆准的真理。然而,在这个“分析精神”变得自然而然的过程中,作品自身的能量和内容已经被掩埋在地下,并且踏平了。

在“天山外”(2002)的时候,何云昌与强烈的爆炸对峙,还只是在感受身体对另一侧的能量的承受;在“铸”(2004)的时候,他把自己封闭起来,没有预留任何传递的出口,他的创作不再以沟通和被接受为目的,而成为自身的修行和体验;在“石头英国漫游记”(2006)的时候,他不再用封闭,而是用行走来体验自我——作者体验了些什么,我们也许永远不得而知,只知道“中间有一段时间情绪很烦躁” (注3)。可以肯定的一点是:在何云昌的作品中,行为传递给艺术家自身的体验和经历,比任何对作品的诠释或者想象,都重要得多,这种传递的方向是行为内部的,处在作者自身封闭的能量循环中,无法通过行为以外的,对观念和意图的诠释来接收。就像身体的痛苦,是无法分享的。

“只有破坏的天性,才会让我们与某个东西建立真正的联系,不论这东西是什么。”(注4)。在何云昌的一些作品中,“这东西”是他自己,作者与自己的关系是共处在一个封闭的体系中,这个体系与外界的联系是完全不存在的,被消灭了的,甚至连体系的界限都是不被承认的。除了作者,唯一的“异类”就是他自己。观众,是不被考虑在其中的。

而在马永峰本次展出的作品中,“这东西”是金鱼(作品“漩涡”)。在“漩涡”中,作者制造了一个不需要理由的,自主的机械运动,并让鲜活的生命运动受其破坏。作者与金鱼的关系,不再是共处于一个排外的封闭体系,而是处于一个庞大的,自动的背景当中(洗衣机)。在作品中,生命被机械残忍地排斥,而机械代表了人造的必然性(或者“一种机械化的,被驯服的自然秩序” ——注5)。于是,通过这个作品,生命被人造的必然性所排斥——于是,生命与人类建立了互相排斥的关系——于是,人类被赋予了异端的色彩(这里,也可以认为是生命被赋予了异端的色彩,但这样的论述将令人毛骨悚然)。作者通过与金鱼(生命)建立的破坏性联系,发现了自身排斥生命的部分,也就是死亡的部分,如同在半夜长时间地照镜子,便能感觉到自己身上有异于自己的存在……在这个作品中,作者与观众的关系,就像是作者与自身异端的关系。作者在破坏自己与观众的联系——所以作品也在带给观众感官和心理的不适——迫不及待地要摆脱,却永远摆脱不了。

在邵译农-慕辰本次参展的“大礼堂”系列图片中,观众席与其中的舞台有一种看与被看的关系;观众席同样被作品的观众所观看;而作品的观众,似乎因为镜子原理,也有种要被放上舞台的感觉。在这些看与被看的循环中,作者力求保持作品中每一个符号的中立性,也就常常否认自己与作品的联系。可是,否认联系也是一种联系,它和消灭联系是完全不同的。于是,作者与作品也成为看与被看的关系,作者与观众便建立了一种身份的带入。在寻找那些存在于所有人的记忆集合之中的符号时,作者企图把自己变成容纳各种记忆的平台。但是,这始终只是一种企图,因为每个人的个人记忆都是无可传递的。不过,这种试图消灭传递隔阂的过程,究竟是单纯的来自生活经验,还是可以来自更多的创造或者冥想?在“天上人间系列”的创作中,这也是个有趣的问题。

这种无法消灭的,根本性的隔阂,在王庆松的作品中被忽略不计了,因为他的很多作品都在放大那些记忆中一目了然的东西,比如可口可乐和大字报。他的作品也确实像一场庆典,从人数上看,至少是个中型的生日聚会。这些真人“材料”和影像的使用,让作者营造出真实的,被无限放大的,完全受控于自己的自我空间。在本次参展的“大摆战场”和“盲流梦”中也是如此。创造出一个临时空间,然后用全景影像客观地记录下来——比起观众,作者似乎更在乎自己对这个自我空间的创造欲和控制欲。王庆松曾说:“艺术作品有时到了一定程度不一定非要说真话,谎话有时候也要去说,但同时就是说真话的时候,你自己最清楚。”(注6)。也许,对王庆松来说,作品就是简单的对话。空间本身,本来是无法传递的,至少目前的人类智力还达不到,但变成了影像之后,这个空间就变成了一个语言符号,以被发送和被接收为目的。在观众对他作品的欣赏中,这个自我空间也完成了传递的过程。所以观众是必不可少的接受者,也是这个空间在思想中存在的基石。

说到空间,空间已经在吴成典的作品中被撕得粉碎(本次展出的“鸟巢”和“水立方”),因为这个空间不是他创造或者传递的,而是他要针对的。碎片又被他黏贴在一起,成为一个平面。在这两幅作品中,画面似乎只是作为阐述作者观念的介质而存在的。但是,如果在电脑显示器上打开其中一幅的电子版,并用全屏观看,让画面充满显示器,显示器便呈现一种电脑死机的效果。“死机了”,便是这幅作品在电脑前传递给观众的内容。这种时候,就只能“黑屏”,然后“重启”了。于是,这篇文章,也找到了一个结束的最好借口。

注1:摘自安德鲁.布华顿的引用,《存在的尺度——何云昌作品》,华艺莎艺术中心,162页
注2:摘自江铭的引用,《存在的尺度——何云昌作品》,华艺莎艺术中心,35页
注3:摘自何云昌与江铭的对话,《存在的尺度——何云昌作品》,华艺莎艺术中心,122页
注4:拉康,《讲座 第八本》,Seuil出版社1980年版,406页
注5:Maya Kovskaya,“将自然放在它所属之处”,翻译自赵欢提供的该文的电子文稿。
注6:摘自“王庆松栗宪庭对谈录”,《血色艳丽》,环碧堂画廊,2007年印刷,17页

A Discussion on Transmissions

Xu Sheng

“Black screen” signifies the interruption or failure of image transmission, but not its end. This exhibition is not to put an end on the transmission, but can discuss the various possibilities of transmissions, with black screen in the beginning, or in the end.
In 2000, Mr He Yunchang declared for the “Fuck off” as the following: “My concerns in recent years are about powerless groups and will of life. I seek enduring and fearless confrontation with reality and a poetic expression for this.”[1]This serious expression can even present a imaginary scene of humour: A person interviews Sakyamuni musing under the tree of Buddha and asks “Why are you sitting here?” -- Sakyamuni gives answer with the sentence cited above.

People may not like to hear this answer from Sakyamuni, because it can break a certain conception of religion. People may like to hear this from He Yunchang, because it satisfies their attention to protect some of their notion on art. At that time, maybe He Yunchang wasn’t determined enough of his path, his “Fuck off” was only a translation from a powerless Chinese expression “way of no cooperation”. And six years later, when the “The Rock Touring around Great Britain” was finished, he was asked “why” and his answer was “just to put the stone where it used to be.”[2] This answer has been more silent that any refuse or silence before the public. “Fuck off” has finally returned.

This offence against “explanation” shows a basic which is usually ignored: the so called “notion” of art, can only be heuristic and operational when it is used as the “Way” of analyse. The usage of all the tools of critique, is usually regarded as the goal of critique. Writing, this expression that even “comment on the absence of meaning on itself” (from the idea of George.Bataille), pushes critiques to approach the artist, approach the absurdity, the “ego” and all the truth. However, in this process where “critique spirit” becomes natural, the energy and matter carried by the work have been buried into earth and stepped on.

In “Beyond TianShan”, He Yuanchang stood against a violent explosion to recept the energy from the other side. In “Casting”, he closed himself without any exit for transmission. His creation was then not for communication and reception, but for self torture and cultivation. In “The Rock Touring around Great Britain”, he didn’t close himself any more, but experienced himself through walking. We may never know what he has experienced, only that he “felt boring and irritable in the middle” [3]. What’s certain is that in the works of He Yunchang, the experience transmitted from the action to the artist, is much more important than any interpretation or imagination out of the work. The transmission is directed towards the inner of the action, in a closed energy circle inside the artist. It can’t be received through the explanation of notion or interpretation of the work. It’s not for sharing, just like the pain of the body.

“It’s only by the instinct of destruction that we comes really in contact with some object whatever it is” [4]. In some works of He Yunchang, the “object” is himself. The relation between he and himself is coexistence in a close realm. The contact between the realm and the outer world has been perished and exists no more. Even the border is not admitted. Beside him, the only alien is himself. The audience is not in the opinion at all.

In Ma Yongfeng’s work for this exhibition, the “object” is goldfish (“The Swirl”). In this work, the artist has created a no-reason, automatic and mechanical exercise, inside which the exercise of life has been destroyed. The relation between the artist and goldfish is no longer in a close realm, but in a huge automatic background (the washing machine). In this work, the life is cruelly denied by the mechanism, while the mechanism represents the artificial (man made) inevitability (or “an order of mechanized, domesticated nature.” – [5] ). Then, through this work, the life is denied by the artificial inevitability – thus, the human being becomes heretic in front of the life. Through the connection by destruction between the artist and goldfish (life), the artist found the denying-life-part (alien) on himself, that’s the part of death. Just like when looking into the mirror in the middle night, the alien part on oneself can be felt… In this work, the relation between the artist and the audience is like the relation between the artist and the alien on himself. The artist destroys the relation between him and the audience – that’s the reason that audience feels uncomfortable before the work – he wants to escape from this relationship, but he can’t.

In the image series “The Assembly Hall” by Shao Yinong & Mu Chen in this exhibition, the relationship of “looking and being looked” exists between the stage and the auditorium. The auditorium is also being watched by the audience of this work. Probably due to the “mirror theory”, the audience can feel like on the stage. In this circle of look, the artist tries to keep every sign of the work neutral, and try to make them automatically find connection with the audience. In the process of creation, the relationship between the artist and the work has usually been denied, but denying the relation is a kind of relation, which is totally different from the destruction of relation. The artist then becomes and identifies himself with an audience who can only look at the work.。In the search for the common memories, the artist intends to turn himself into a container of all memories. This can only be intent, as the memory of every individual can’t be transmitted. However, this intent of going beyond the limit of transmission, does it only come from personal experience, or can it come from creation or musement? In the creation of “Between sky and earth”, this topic is also interesting.

This limit of transmission has been ignored in the work of Wang Qingsong, because lot of his work concentrates only on the common and huge image in the memories, for example Coca-Cola and Mcdonald. By using real people and big material in the creation of scenes, the artist has created a real, magnified space totally under his control, which is also the case in “Competition” and “Dream of Migrants” in this exhibition. Recording a temporal space by photography after creating it, the artist seems to pay more attention to his own will of creation and control than to his audience. The space itself can’t be transmitted, at least for human beings today, but it can be transmitted after turning into image, or, in his work, into the sign of language, as Wang Qingsong regards his creation as talking [6]. This sign need transmission, which is secured by the recieption of audience. The audience assures the existence of the space -- in their opinions.

Talking about space, the space has been tore apart in Wu Chengdian’s work in this exhibition (“Nest” and “Water Cube”). The space is not to be created or transmitted, but to be dealt with by the artist. In these two works, the image seems to be only a medium for the explanation of the artist’s notion. However, if the electronical version of the image is presented on the computer’s screen, and displayed by full screen, the visual effect on the screen will suggest that the computer is in a “system is busy” situation. And this is the transmission of the work while presented by a computer. In this moment, we can only chose to turn black the screen, and restart it. And this discussion has found a best excuse to conclude itself.

[1] Cited from Andrew Brewerton, “The Ability to Exist – He Yunchang Art Works”, Vanessa Art Link, P. 162.
[2] Cited from Jiang Ming, “The Ability to Exist – He Yunchang Art Works”, Vanessa Art Link, P. 35
[3] Cite from the conversation between He Yunchang and Jiang Ming, “The Ability to Exist – He Yunchang Art Works”, Vanessa Art Link, P. 122
[4] Jacques Lacan, translation from “Ce n’est que par l’instinct de destruction que nous venons vraiment au contact de quelque objet que ce soit”, “Le Seminaire, Livre VIII: Le Transfert”, Seuil, Champ freudien, 1980, P. 406.
[5] Maya Kovskaya, Putting Nature in its Place: Ma Yongfeng's Video Art and Photography, electronical version provided by Zhao Huan.
[6] “Sanguine Splendour, A talk between Li Xianting and Wang Qingsong”, Chinablue, 2007, P.17.
Tags: , ,
发表评论

昵称

网址

电邮

您也可用OpenID登入:
打开HTML 打开UBB 打开表情 隐藏 记住我 [登入] [注册]