Mar 9
《寄居蟹1号》“首届草场地摄影季”荔空间展

开幕:2010年3月13日(星期六)15: 00 - 18: 00
展地:北京朝阳区草场地红一号F座荔空间
展期:2010年3月13日至2010年4月25日
开放时间:星期二至星期日10: 30 - 18: 00
主办:北京荔空间文化艺术交流中心

艺术家:陈嘉强、陈维、陈洲+张晓静、邓大非、高峰、金石、刘波+李郁、马永峰、毛宇、OUR MAPS、彭韫、沈怡、石玩玩、王思顺、吴达新、赵华森、张乐华、张辽源
策展人:任大棣、邓大非
艺术总监:顾振清、杨荔
公共推广:姜天娇、郑玲妃
联络:jiangtianjiao2009@gmail.com; +86-10-51273272

点击在新窗口中浏览此图片

SOLDIER CRABⅠ
AN EXHIBITION OF THE FIRST ANNUAL CAOCHANGDI PHOTOSPRING
OPENING: SATURDAY, MAR. 13, 2010  15: 00 - 18: 00
VENUE: LI-SPACE, RED NO.1 - F BUILDING, CAOCHANGDI, CHAOYANG DISTRICT, 100015 BEIJING, CHINA.
DATES: MAR. 13, 2010 - APR. 25, 2010
GALLERY OPENING HOURS: TUESDAY - SUNDAY 10:30 - 18: 00
PRESENTED BY: BEIJING LI-SPACE CULTURE & ART CENTER

ARTISTS: CHEN KAKEONG, CHEN WEI, CHEN ZHOU+ZHANG XIAOJING, DENG DAFEI, GAO FENG, JIN SHI, LIU BO+LI YU, MA YONGFENG, MAO YU, OUR MAPS,  PENG YUN, SHEN YI, SHI WANWAN, WANG SISHUN, WU DAXIN, ZHAO HUASEN, ZHANG LEHUA, ZHANG LIAOYUAN
CURATOR: REN DADI, DENG DAFEI
ARTISTIC DIRECTOR: GU ZHENQING, YANG LI
PUBLIC PROMOTION: JIANG TIANJIAO, ZHENG LINGFEI
CONTACT US: jiangtianjiao2009@gmail.com; +86-10-51273272

《寄居蟹2号》当代摄影展
开幕:2010年3月13日(星期六)16: 30 - 18: 00
展地:北京市朝阳区酒仙桥路4号798艺术区视空间(常青画廊对面)
展期:2010年3月13日至2010年3月28日
开放时间:星期二至星期日10: 30 - 18: 00
主办:北京荔空间文化艺术交流中心

艺术家:荒木经惟、崔岫闻、何云昌、林天苗、刘铮、缪晓春、翁奋、王宁德、郑国谷
策展人:任大棣
艺术总监:顾振清、杨荔
公共推广:万舒
工程总监:陈豹
联络:jiangtianjiao2009@gmail.com; +86-10-59789542

点击在新窗口中浏览此图片

SOLDIER CRAB Ⅱ
AN EXHIBITION OF CONTEMPORARY PHOTOGRAPHY
OPENING: SATURDAY, MAR. 13, 2010  16: 30 - 18: 00
VENUE: VISUAL SPACE, 798 ART ZONE, NO.4 JIUXIANQIAO ROAD, CHAOYANG DISTRICT, 100015 BEIJING, CHINA (opposite to Galleriacotinua)
DATES: MAR. 13, 2010 - MAR. 28, 2010
GALLERY OPENING HOURS: TUESDAY - SUNDAY 10: 30 – 18: 00
PRESENTED BY: BEIJING LI-SPACE CULTURE & ART CENTER

ARTISTS: ARAKI NOBUYOSHI, CUI XIUWEN, HE YUNCHANG, LIN TIANMIAO, LIU ZHENG, MIAO XIAOCHUN, WENG FEN, WANG NINGDE, ZHENG GUOGU
CURATOR: REN DADI
ARTISTIC DIRECTOR: GU ZHENQING, YANG LI
PUBLIC PROMOTION: WAN SHU
CONSTRUCTION: CHEN BAO
CONTACT US: jiangtianjiao2009@gmail.com; +86-10-59789542

摄影的寄居蟹

顾振清

寄居蟹,甲壳纲,十足目,外形介于虾和蟹之间,属于甲壳类中异尾类的节肢动物。为了避难与自我保护,它寄居在空螺壳或一些中空的物体内。对寄居蟹而言,寄居其实是一种另类的蜗居行为,甚至是一种隐居态度。

寄居蟹的鼎鼎大名来自一些霸道的摸样,它挥舞大螯、小螯,似乎会吃掉海螺等软体动物的肉,再把人家的外壳占为己有而得来。其实,寄居蟹只是个具有环保概念的资源回收者,住的是贝类死后所遗留下的空壳。贝壳是海洋贝类生物与生俱来的硬基质良好的“经济适用房”。贝类死后,贝壳就成了遗弃之物。寄居蟹见到空壳,只是清扫一番便废物利用,把贝壳当作形影不离、难以割舍的家园。它从此背负着这个家园到处谋生。

寄居蟹是一种符号。对摄影而言,它具有比附的寓义。

摄影术原本是工业革命兴起之后发明家们兑现其发明激情的一个遗留之物、一个空壳,但是早期摄影师和一些艺术家心无芥蒂地寄居到里面。他们借助一种新兴的技术,催生了一门新兴的摄影艺术。相机和摄影术,虽然不是人们与生俱来的外壳。但是不少人一旦邂逅了相机和摄影术,就当作形影不离、难以割舍的精神家园。这莫非是一种寄居蟹式的社会文化行为?

对很多当代艺术家而言,他们玩摄影,主要是出于一种进取心,而不是为了避难与自我保护。艺术家住进了摄影这个“蜗居”,也就多了一个工具,磨砺自我的洞察力和想象力;同时也多了一件盾牌,捍卫自我在艺术边界上突破和超越的权利。有的人进得去,出得来。有的人进去了,出不来。摄影也就是一个外壳,可以成就一种生活方式。其实,它是一个极具包容性的躯壳,可以寄托和孕育艺术家的私人情感和主观思想。艺术家加载摄影这一媒介,就得接受或挑战摄影的游戏规则,其情感和思想就得或多或少地“寄居”在摄影图片所呈现的事物、符号和观念之中。艺术家可以就此加封为摄影家,背负上相机、摄影术及后期加工成像术所构成的坚硬的、并不轻松的外壳。

定格时间和空间形成了艺术家对摄影纪实本质的一种理解。但是,摄影术一旦深入到他们的价值系统、成为实现理想诉求的手段,摄影观念也就真的变身为他们一种外壳、一种家园。摄影作为一种被侵占的领域,被艺术家和政治艺术家极端的生活方式所附体,或是另存为另一个版本的时候,它呈现的可能性还有哪些?

当今的拍客一族无疑是艺术家、摄影家身份的一种稀释和泛化。他们把相机像手机那样常年揣在衣袋里,与自我身体捆绑。他们走到哪里,兴之所至就掏出来摁动快门。影像泛滥、读图时代等概念,在一定程度上,来自拍客一族在网上、纸本上不揣简陋地暴晒自己摄影经验,继而引发全球围观、传阅的社会文化行为。盲目的看与被看,这种潜藏在相机和摄影术之中的人类的集体无意识,就是一种根深蒂固的人性。

摄影成就的图像,其实早就“寄居”在机械复制和图像篡改技术的外壳之中,构成种种视觉欺骗。摄影构成了与现实、现实主体平行存在的一个虚拟世界。有时,现实流逝了,现实主体消亡了,其影像却留下来,成为后人怀旧并雕刻时光的素材。


Soldier Crab of Photography

by Gu Zhenqing

Soldier crab, a crustacean of the order Decapoda, in a shape midway between shrimp and crab, is categorized as arthropod of anomura. In order to seek asylum and protect itself, soldier crabs make a living in empty shells or hollow objects. To them, living in shells of others’ could be referred to as humble living in pigeonholes and could even be endowed with an attitude of seclusion.

Soldier crab’s life habit makes it a tenant who pays no rent. This great reputation comes from its arbitrary look, with big claws waving around clamoring for swallowing the meat of mollusks and occupying the shells to themselves. Actually, soldier crab is merely an environment-friendly resource recovery worker who lives in the empty shells abandoned by dead Mollusks. Shells are good-quality “economical housing” inherent to shellfish and after their death, the shells become relics. When soldier crabs found the empty shells, they would simply tidy them up, then make good use of these wastes and turn them into their inseparable home to be carried wherever they go.

Soldier crab is a symbol and when referred to photography, it delivers a message of analogue.

Photography used to be one abandoned shell for scientists and inventors after the Industrial Revolution. However, it was found by some early photographers and artists who came live in these shells just like what soldier crabs do. These people have actually boosted up a burgeoning new art form of photography in virtue of a new technology. Cameras and photography, although not inherent to human beings, but once encountered, becomes an inseparable spiritual home to many.

To many contemporary artists, photography is considered as a zero-rent housing. It was out of enterprise that they choose photography as the art medium but not out of seeking self-protection. Once artists move in this pigeonhole, they are blessed with a tool to sharpen their insight and to broaden their imagination and at the same time, they get for themselves a shield, a shield that defends the rights of breaking through and surpassing the boundary of art. Some people go in and go out with ease while some go in but never get out. Photography is merely a shell, but it changes one’s life style. An inclusive shell it actually is, which breeds private emotions of artists and their subjective thinking. When chose photography as the art medium, artists have to play by its rule and their emotions and thinking will be more or less expressed by the images and symbols that appeared in photos. By doing this, artists could be entitled photographers, and from now on they put on their shoulders a tough solid shell that is constituted by cameras, techniques and many professional procedures of making a photo that in all, made this shell not that easy to carry.

To stop time and to fix space became one way of approaching the essence of on-the-spot photography. However, when this chosen art medium really gets in the value system of artists and becomes their tool of reaching out for the ideal, the concept of photography turns for real to be the shell or rather home for artists. Photography, being an invaded domain by artists and possessed by their extreme life style, does it still have other possible way of presentation?

The new generation of shutterbugs nowadays is no doubt the diluted presence of artist and photographer. Camera to them is like cell phone to most of us, which is carried wherever they go whatever they do. Whenever the interest is aroused, they would simply pull out the camera and click. The came of the age of graphical information and the floods of images we see everyday everywhere are partly due to the socially cultural activity of these shutterbugs who enjoy exposing their works over all social media and arousing public interest. To see and be seen blindly, this collective unconsciousness hidden in the camera and photography reflects certain deep-rooted human nature.

The image produced by the medium of photography has long been sheltered in the shell of mechanic duplication and image perfection technology which could easily perpetrate visual cheating. Photography constitutes an artificial world that exists in parallel with reality and reality subject. Sometimes when reality goes by and reality subject dies away, the image of which stays along and becomes the elements that call up and sculpt old times.

Mar 8
中国采用了我们的资本主义模式——我们将采用它的专制统治吗?

斯拉沃热·齐泽克

The explosion of capitalism in China has many Westerners asking when political democracy -- as the "natural" accompaniment of capitalism -- will emerge. But a closer look quickly dispels any such hope.

当资本主义在中国蓬勃发展的时候,很多西方的观察者都会问,政治上的民主(作为资本主义“自然伴随物”)何时才会到来。然而,当我们仔细看清中国的现状时,基本上很快就会打消这种希望。

Modern-day China is not an oriental-despotic distortion of capitalism, but rather the repetition of capitalism's development in Europe itself. In the early modern era, most European states were far from democratic. And if they were democratic (as was the case of the Netherlands during the 17th century), it was only a democracy of the propertied liberal elite, not of the workers. Conditions for capitalism were created and sustained by a brutal state dictatorship, very much like today's China. The state legalized violent expropriations of the common people, which turned them proletarian. The state then disciplined them, teaching them to conform to their new ancilliary role.

现代中国,并不是一个资本主义的东方专制的扭曲版本,而是一个欧洲资本主义自身发展的翻版。在近代早期,大部分的欧洲国家离民主还有一段距离。而且那时候,如果它们是民主国家的话(如17世纪荷兰的),也只不过是有财产的自由主义精英的民主,而不是工人的民主,而发展资本主义所需要的条件当时就是由野蛮粗暴的国家专断权力创造,并维持下去的。这一点,与今天的中国非常相似。过去,中国合法化了各种剥夺老百姓财产权的野蛮暴力,使普通老百姓成为了无产阶级,然后,国家再对其进行规训,教育他们去适应新的辅助型角色。

The features we identify today with liberal democracy and freedom (trade unions, universal vote, freedom of the press, etc.) are far from natural fruits of capitalism. The lower classes won them by waging long, difficult struggles throughout the 19th century. Recall the list of demands that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made in the conclusion of The Communist Manifesto. With the exception of the abolition of private property, most of them -- such as a progressive income tax, free public education and abolishing child labor -- are today widely accepted in "bourgeois" democracies, and all were gained as the result of popular struggles.

那些今天我们所熟知自由民主的特征(工会,普选,出版自由等)其实都远非是资本主义的自然结果。中下阶层在19世纪当中,通过发动长期而又艰苦的斗争才争取到这些权利。我们不妨回忆一下马克思和恩格斯在《共产党宣言》当中提出的那一系列的要求,除了要废除私有产权以外,大部分的这些要求——如累进所得税,免费的公共教育,禁止使用童工等——这些在今日的“资产阶级”民主当中经已被广泛采纳和接受的权利,实际上全都是普通老百姓一直以来斗争的结果。

So there is nothing exotic in today's China: It is merely repeating our own forgotten past. But what about the afterthought of some Western liberal critics who ask how much faster China's development would have been had the country grown within the context of a political democracy? The German-British philosopher Ralf Dahrendorf has linked the increasing distrust in democracy to the fact that, after every revolutionary change, the road to new prosperity leads through a "valley of tears." In other words, after the breakdown of state socialism, a country cannot immediately become a successful market economy. The limited -- but real -- socialist welfare and security have to be dismantled, and these first steps are necessary and painful. For Dahrendorf, this passage through the "valley of tears" lasts longer than the average period between democratic elections. As a result, the temptation is great for leaders of a democratic country to postpone difficult changes for short-term electoral gains.

所以,在今天中国也不例外:它只是在重复我们早已忘却的过去。然而,一些西方自由主义的批评者曾经提出疑问说假如中国进入到政治民主的状态时它的发展会可能会有多快,后来他们又是怎么想的呢?哲学家达伦多夫曾经把民主当中日益增长的不信任与以下的这个现实联系在一起:在每一次革命以后,通往新的繁荣之路都必须要经过一个“眼泪谷”。也就是说,在国家社会主义崩溃以后,一个国家是很难迅速地成为一个良好运作的市场经济体。那些有限的却又真实存在的社会福利以及保障将被迫先要清除,这些往前迈出第一步的行动都是必需的,同时也是痛苦的。达伦多夫说,穿越“眼泪谷”的这段旅程所花的时间往往比两次民主选举间的平均周期要长。因此,对于那些民主国家的领导人来说,就会受到某种诱惑,令他们推迟重大的改革,而谋求短期的选举收益。

In Western Europe, the move from welfare state to the new global economy has involved painful renunciations, less security and less guaranteed social care. In post-Communist nations, the economic results of this new democratic order have disappointed a large strata of the population, who, in the glorious days of 1989, equated democracy with the abundance of the Western consumerist societies. And now, 20 years later, when the abundance is still missing, they blame democracy itself.

在西欧,从福利国家迈向崭新的全球化经济时代的过程中,包含着痛苦的放弃,被减少的安全措施以及难以保证的社会保障。在那些后共产主义国家里面,新的民主秩序下的经济成果让社会当中的大多数阶层失望,这些阶层在1989年左右曾有某些辉煌岁月,当时,他们把民主与西方富饶的消费主义社会混为一谈。但如今,20年过去,被预期会出现的经济富庶却一直没有出现,于是这些阶层就转过头来去责怪民主。

Dahrendorf, however, fails to note the opposite temptation: The belief that, if the majority of a population resists structural changes in the economy, an enlightened elite should take power, even by non-democratic means, to lay the foundations for a truly stable democracy. Along these lines, Newsweek columnist Fareed Zakaria points out how democracy can only "catch on" in economically developed countries. He says that if developing countries are "prematurely democratized," then economic catastrophe and political despotism will soon follow. It's no wonder, then, that today's most economically successful developing countries (Taiwan, South Korea, Chile) have embraced full democracy only after a period of authoritarian rule.

然而,达伦多夫没有注意到另一种相反的诱惑:这种观点就是,假如大多数的民众拒绝经济上的结构性转型的话,那么那些较早觉悟的精英就应该去掌握公权力,即使是通过一种非民主的手段,从而为真正意义上稳定的民主打下基础。按照这种观点,新闻周刊专栏专家Fareed Zakaria为我们指出,民主是如何只在经济上的发展中国家里面得到理解的。他说,如果一个发展中国家处于“早熟的民主状态”,那么经济上的灾难和政治上的专断就会随之而来。所以,毫无疑问,今天经济上最成功的一些发展中国家和地区(台北省,南韩,智利),它们都在经历了一段威权主义统治以后,才获得充分发展的民主制度。

Isn't this line of reasoning the best argument for the Chinese way to capitalism as opposed to the Russian way? In Russia, after the collapse of Communism, the government adopted "shock therapy" and threw itself directly into democracy and the fast track to capitalism -- with economic bankruptcy as the result. (There are good reasons to be modestly paranoid here: Were the Western economic advisers to President Boris Yeltsin who proposed this approach really as innocent as they appeared? Or were they serving U.S. strategic interests by weakening Russia economically?)

这种说法,是否就是对于为何中国会采纳一条有别于俄罗斯模式的资本主义道路最好的回答呢?在俄罗斯,在共产主义崩溃以后,它们采取了“休克疗法”而直接进入民主制度以及通向资本主义的快速通道——当然,也伴随着经济上的破产。(在这里,我们有很好的理由去成为一个温和的偏执狂:那些向俄罗斯前总统叶利钦建言让其采纳“休克疗法”的西方经济学家是否就真的是如他们看起来的那样纯真呢?又或者说,他们是否服务于美国的利益而有心削弱俄罗斯的经济呢?)

China, on the other hand, has followed the path of Chile and South Korea in its passage to capitalism, using unencumbered authoritarian state power to control the social costs and thus avoid chaos. The weird combination of capitalism and Communist rule proved to be a blessing (not even) in disguise for China.

在另一方面,中国则采纳了之前智利和南韩的资本主义道路,使用毫无监管和约束的威权主义国家权力控制社会成本,从而避免社会骚乱。这种资本主义和共产主义离奇的结合对于中国来说,被证明是个伪装的幸福,甚至还不能算是个幸福。

The country has developed fast, not in spite of authoritarian rule, but because of it. With Stalinist-sounding paranoia, we are left to wonder, "Maybe those who worry about China's lack of democracy are actually worried that its fast development could make it the next global superpower, thereby threatening Western primacy."

中国之所以发展得如此地快,不是因为其脱离了威权主义的统治,相反,而是由于这种威权主义统治所带来的。假如我们用斯大林式貌似合理的偏执想法来思考的话,那么的确还有很多值得我们思考的问题,“那些担心中国缺乏民主的人,可能实际上是在担心中国的高速发展,从而形成一个新的全球超级力量,最终威胁到西方的利益。”

Today, the tragedy of the Great Leap Forward is repeating itself as a comedy. It has become the rapid capitalist Great Leap Forward into modernization, with the old slogan "iron foundry into every village" re-emerging as "a skyscraper into every street." The supreme irony of history is that Mao Zedong himself created the ideological conditions for rapid capitalist development. What was his call to the people, especially the young ones, in the Cultural Revolution? Don't wait for someone else to tell you what to do, you have the right to rebel! So think and act for yourselves, destroy cultural relics, denounce and attack not only your elders, but also government and party officials! Swipe away the repressive state mechanisms and organize yourself in communes!

今天,在中国,昔日“大跃进运动”的悲剧以一种喜剧的形式重新上演。它变成了一场高速地奔向现代化的资本主义大跃进运动,当年“大跃进运动”当中的口号“每个乡村都要有一个炼钢厂”如今变成了“每条街道上都要有一座摩天大楼”。但该段历史最大的讽刺却是毛泽东为资本主义的迅猛发展创造了意识形态上的条件。还记得毛泽东在“文化大革命”中说了什么,尤其是对青年人说了什么吗?不要等其他人告诉你你要去做什么,你有反抗的权利!所以,为自己去打算和行动吧,破坏文化遗迹,不仅要去谴责和攻击你的长辈,还包括政府和政党的领导人!推翻这种压迫人的体制吧,到在人民公社当中实现自我管理吧!

And Mao's call was heard. What followed was such an explosion of unrestrained passion to delegitimize all forms of authority that, at the end, Mao had to call in the army to restore order. The paradox is that the key battle during the Cultural Revolution was not between the Communist Party apparatus and the denounced traditionalist enemies, but between the Communist Party and the forces that Mao himself called into being.

很多人响应了毛泽东的号召。于是接下来就是一场无法压制的热情爆发,他们把所有形式的权力机构通通认为是不合法的,到了文化大革命的后期,毛泽东不得不召来军队恢复了社会秩序。这里面有一个重要的悖论,这不是一场发生在共产党机构和被谴责的传统主义敌人之间的重大战争,而是一场发生在共产党和被毛泽东所鼓动的那股力量之间的重大战争。

A similar dynamic is discernible in today's China. The Party resuscitates big ideological traditions in order to contain the disintegrative consequences of the capitalist explosion that the Party itself created. It is with this in mind that one should read the recent campaign in China to revive Marxism as an efficient state ideology. (Literally hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars are spent on this venture.)

而在今日中国,我们通过能够清晰地发现到仍旧存在着某种相似的力量。共产党重新激活了大型的意识形态传统,用它们来抑制共产党自己创造的资本主义高速发展所带来的分裂恶果。我们心中必须以下这一点:即最近中国开始了一场重新把马克思主义作为有效率的国家意识形态的运动。(从官方文件上,我们知道有数十亿美元将会用于这个计划上面。)

Those who see this as a threat to capitalist liberalization totally miss the point. Strange as it may sound, this return of Marxism is the sign of the ultimate triumph of capitalism, the sign of its full institutionalization. For example, China has taken recent legal measures to guarantee private property, a move that the West has hailed as a crucial step toward legal stability.

那些把这场复兴马克思主义的运动视为是一种对资本主义自由化威胁的人基本上是看错了。可能听起来会有点奇怪,实际上,这次马克思主义的回归的确是资本主义的最后胜利,是资本主义完全制度化的标志。举个例说,中国最近已经采取立法手段来保障私有产权,这一举动被西方国家赞其是迈向法律稳定性上的重要一步。

But what kind of Marxism is as appropriate for today's China? First, let's look at the difference between Marxism and Leftism. Leftism is a term that refers to any talk of workers' liberation -- from free trade unions to overcoming capitalism. But the Marxist thesis says that developing the forces of production is the key to social progress, and it is this type of Marxist development that fosters the conditions for the continuing fast "modernization."

但哪一类型的马克思主义最适合今天的中国呢?第一,先让我们来看一下马克思主义和左派之间的差别,左派指的是关于工人解放的一切言论——从自由组建工会到推翻资本主义。但马克思主义却认为发展生产力才是社会进步的关键,而正是这种类型的马克思主义的发展才能为持续而快速的“现代化”进程培养土壤。

In today's China, only the Communist Party's leading role can sustain rapid modernization. The official (Confucian) term is that China should become a "harmonious society."

在今天的中国,只有共产党的领导地位才能维持快速的现代化进程。而官方(儒家)的主题则是中国应该变成一个“和谐社会”。

To put it in old Maoist terms, the main enemy may appear to be the "bourgeois" threat. But, in the eyes of the ruling elite, the main enemies are instead the "principal contradiction" between unfettered capitalist development that the Communist Party rulers profit from and the threat of revolt by the workers and peasants.

把这一点放进旧的毛泽东主义里面去看,主要的敌人可能会是“资产阶级”的威胁。然而,在统治精英的眼中,主要的敌人已经发生了改变,其“主要矛盾”已经变成了“共产党领导人想要利用的不受约束的资本主义发展”与“工人和农民企图革命的威胁”这两者之间的矛盾。

Last year, the Chinese government strengthened some of its oppressive apparatuses -- including forming special units of riot police to crush popular unrest. These police are the actual social expression of what, in ideology, appears as a revival of Marxism. In 1905, Trotsky characterized tsarist Russia as "the vicious combination of the Asian knout [whip] and the European stock market." Doesn't this characterization still hold for modern-day China?

去年,中国政府加强了它某些具有压制性功能的机构的力量——包括成立特种防暴警察来压制民众的骚动。这些防暴警察的设置其实在意识形态上马克思主义的复兴落实到现实社会层面的一种表达。在1905年,托洛茨基就指出沙皇统治下俄罗斯的几个特征,包括“亚洲皮鞭与欧洲股票市场的残暴混合”。这一点,是否也能够概括今天中国的特征呢?

But what if the promised democratic second act that follows the authoritarian valley of tears never arrives? That is what is so unsettling about today's China: Its authoritarian capitalism may not be merely a remainder of our past but a portent of our future.

但是,假如在眼泪谷之后,威权主义国家没有迎来民主的第二波运动的话, 那怎么办呢?这就是为什么大家对于今天中国会感到如此不安的地方:它的威权资本主义不单单是我们过去的某个剩余物,还可能是我们未来的预兆。

Slavoj Žižek, a philosopher and psychoanalyst, is a senior researcher at the Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities, in Essen, Germany. He is the author of, among many other books, The Fragile Absolute and Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?

斯拉沃热·齐泽克,哲学家和精神分析师,德国埃森高级人文研究所的高级研究员。著有大量书籍,其中包括《易碎的绝对》以及《有没有人说过集权主义?》
Mar 6
点击在新窗口中浏览此图片

Ma Yongfeng, Volcano, C-type Print (2007)

HAMPSHIRE, UK.- ArtSway will feature Ma Yongfeng: The Cretaceous Period, on view 28 July - 16 September 2007. The Cretaceous Period is the first UK solo exhibition of art work by Ma Yongfeng. Ma Yongfeng is a Beijing-based artist who has received international recognition for his photographic and video pieces examining the ways that humans position themselves in relation to the natural world. The artist describes his photographic work and video installations as “relating to aspects of animal culture, man-made environments and topographic modelling”. Hosted at the Chinese Art Centre in Manchester for three months and subsequently in residence at ArtSway, Ma Yongfeng has spent a total of five months researching and developing his work.

Ma Yongfeng came to international prominence with his notorious work, Swirl (2003), exhibited at MOCA in Los Angeles, and PS1 in New York in which six coy carp were subjected to a fifteen minute wash cycle in the drum of a washing machine. The work raised a debate about the human treatment of animals both within and outside an artistic context. The artist has continued to explore the relationship between humans and their nature displays, photographing empty dioramas and “natural habitat” enclosures in zoos and museums, and revealing the centrality of humans and their own narratives in these spaces.

During his residency in Manchester, Ma Yongfeng visited numerous zoos and museums and conducted exhaustive research relating to all aspects of Natural History. For his subsequent residency and exhibition at ArtSway the artist has chosen to focus on a significant period in Earth’s history, The Cretaceous Period, after which he has named the exhibition of video works and large-scale photographs. These images examine the cretaceous period in relation to the artist’s continuing research into natural history, animal culture and fossil archaeology alongside his interest in archaeological simulations, geographical models and displays in natural history museums. Ma Yongfeng’s new work has developed from the photography of animal enclosures and man-made environments to the documentation and recreation of these sites as ‘sets’ in his own studio, as in the work of German photographer Thomas Demand. Ma’s images, however, create what he terms an “installation after an installation”, referencing and refashioning earlier media such as television, stage-production, film set building and installation. Hibernation (2007) depicts a bright chocolate box snow-scene in which one imagines a hiding animal, and the photographic work Volcano (2007) depicts a miniature volcano, complete with authentic looking lava that the artist constructed in his studio in Beijing. This working volcano is also featured in one of two video works in The Cretaceous Period, and comments upon the relationship between artificial environments, natural habitats and aesthetics.

Ma Yongfeng was born in Shanxi, China in 1971 and is a media artist currently based in Beijing. He has exhibited widely across Europe, the United States and China – most recently in Chinese Video Now at the John Hansard Gallery, The Fragmented Gaze: Video Art from the PRC at Deborah Colten Gallery, Houston TX, and Becoming Landscape, Platform China Contemporary Art Institute, Beijing. He was selected for a residency by ArtSway and the Chinese Art Centre Manchester from an exceptional shortlist of artists nominated by Chinese curators and professionals.

http://www.artdaily.com/indexv5.asp?int_sec=11&int_new=20842
Feb 15


Storm Model
5min  color  sound  2005
Single channel video installation, projected
One DVD player, one projector

In Storm Model (2005), Ma Yongfeng inverts his strategy to address a related set of issues. The 5-minute video impersonally records the destruction of a model village by "forces of nature." While the turgid water tossing the helpless fish about in The Swirl is obviously part of a humanly made design and a mechanized expression of routinized abuse, the water depicted in Storm Model is supposed to be torrential rainfall and flooding-a simulated retribution to humanity for its iniquities, perhaps, like the biblical floods meant to cleanse the earth. Here, however, here there is no Noah, no ark, and there are no animals to fulfill promises of regeneration. There is only destruction as simulated "nature" reclaims the earth, sending us back to our origins.

Maya Kóvskaya


In preparing this video work Ma Yongfeng spent several weeks working on a large model of a Chinese mountain village that is struck by a severe storm, complete with torrential rains, floods, and combining sound, and light effects.After the video was produced, Ma Yongfeng proceeded to destroy the installation. This work sets out to challenge the relationship between digital video, installation, and the common practice of model building,particularly by natural history museums. These man-made constructions represent mock-up residues of the real world, where people and animals are transported into the simulacra of the origin of species.

Thomas J. Berghuis  

http://www.cinemambiente.it/film_ambiente/3985_Storm_Model.html
Tags: ,
Feb 13
Tags:
分页: 13/27 第一页 上页 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 下页 最后页 [ 显示模式: 摘要 | 列表 ]