2009年09月11日 14:04:11 来源：东方早报 记者 梁佳
艺术的风向标到底指向何方？从艺术博览会、拍卖会上就可闻得一二，这些艺术二级市场，如同时装发布会一般引领着最新的潮流。昨天，第三届上海艺术博览会和“上海当代”同时开幕。这厢，艺博会大打中国牌，并推荐青年艺术家；那厢，“上海当代”方向也足够明确——“发现当代”、“亚太地区项目”。不论是在哪边，主攻方向是什么，寻找新的藏家、开发新的潜力股是共同的。投资者的眼光扫视全场，谁都希望能买到一只绩效良好的原始股。
ShContemporary09的主展场——雄伟壮丽的上海展览中心。
前两届的“ 上海当代”可谓热闹非凡，相比之下，昨天在上海展览中心开幕的本届“上海当代”倒是低调了不少。但是展会内的雕塑和装置仍然以先锋的造型吸引着人们的视线——用纽扣镶嵌而成的巨大舌头、草间弥生的大南瓜、用丝线垂吊起的木炭楼梯，还有在上海双年展中装饰美术馆外墙的蚂蚁，作为新媒体艺术的电子屏幕随处闪烁……所有的前沿作品都在试图讲述，“看！这就是当代艺术！”
“上海当代”及上海艺术博览会昨天开幕第三届上海艺术博览会国际当代艺术展（2009ShContemporary,简称“上海当代”）昨晚在上海展览中心开幕，在为期5天的展会内，将有近百家画廊参与其中。
和上海艺术博览会不同，“上海当代”撇去了综合性艺术展会的全面特点，而专攻“当代”，这与前几年暴热的中国当代艺术不无关联，而它针对的收藏群体也与一般展览不同，“我们的目标更明确，发展亚太地区的收藏家。”展会总监秦思源在接受早报记者采访时表示。
ShContemporary09的展会总监，年仅38岁的中英混血儿秦思源在开幕式上。
主题论坛：当代艺术到底是什么？
Liam Gillick精心设计的论坛间。
对于什么是艺术品，迄今没有人能回答这个看似简单的问题，而对于什么是“当代艺术 ”，也一直处于不确定的状态，一幅20世纪的抽象画是艺术品，一个签有杜尚名字的小便池是艺术品，一群人用身体摆成@字样也可以称之为一次行为艺术。当各类概念艺术、身体艺术、装置艺术、偶发艺术等新的艺术形式出现之后，对现代主义的颠覆之余，当代艺术的概念也变得模糊不清。
在这次 ShContemporary上，“当代艺术到底是什么？”将被放到为期4天的论坛中深入讨论，并设有主题展览，邀请了24位艺术家以及多家国内外画廊参与，策展人之一是驻纽约与柏林的艺术家Anton Vidokle。去年夏天，Vidokle想在网上当代艺术批评杂志《e－flux》上做一个关于当代艺术的维基百科，但却发现很难以一个菜单结构的方式为读者提供档案文件，因为没有办法按照“派别”来编排，“我发现，在过去的20年来，基本上没有任何明显的艺术派别出现，艺术家对派别也无多大兴趣，他们更倾向于用不同的媒介来创作。”Vidokle说，此次来沪，他将与另外两位艺术家Mami Kataoka、汪建伟共同策划论坛“发现：发现当代”，试图帮助收藏家更好地解读“当代”的复杂性。他们认为，艺术市场对艺术创作如何定义其自身起着核心的作用，收藏家则在这个发现过程中有着至关重要的作用。
秦思源（左）和Anton Vidokle（右）在准备论坛。
一些私人艺术收藏与经济法则发生关联之后，也有批评家对此表示不安，澳大利亚批评家罗伯特·休斯就曾说：“当看到一幅凡·高的风景画，作为艺术家被不平等和社会不公折磨得发疯的痛苦见证，正挂在一位百万富翁的客厅里，很难做到凝视默想而不感到难受。”不过，在一个纯粹的当代艺术市场里，这样的担忧似乎显得有些过时和酸楚。
挖掘新藏家：亚太区潜力巨大
在过去几年中，亚洲中上水平富有人群有所增长，艺术品投资也向亚洲当代艺术转向，拍卖公司也在中国、日本、印度等国寻找、发展新的市场。自2007年开始举办的“上海当代”（ShContemporary）就是希望将中国以及亚洲当代艺术的国际性市场进行整合。与同期举行的上海艺术博览会相比，它对于时尚和市场趋势感应度更敏锐，并且在数量上有一定的限制，比如来自亚太地区的画廊在 50%～60%，来自于欧洲及美洲的画廊在40%～50%。
实际上，由于对中国市场的不了解，许多欧美画廊是抱着试一试的心态来参加2007年的首届“上海当代”的，在银行次贷危机开始前后，博览会的气氛已经有所冷淡，日本的一些顶级画廊就没有参加去年的“上海当代”，而从今年的比例来看亚洲画廊数占了近80%，欧美画廊略有减少。因此，发展藏家显得尤为重要。
来自北京的国内顶级画廊——长征空间。
情况相类似的是，本月1日，台北国际艺术博览会刚刚结束，并传出招商困难的信息，据消息称，本次共有78家国内外画廊前往参展，除常规展览项目以外，今年台湾艺博会新增的“国际邀请——东南亚特区”和“艺术开门”两个项目其中的“ 艺术开门”就是希望通过低价格来吸引和拓展亚洲地区年轻藏家，国内外新生代艺术家作品的价格一般在新台币1万元起至6万元之间（2000美元以内）。
有专家认为，国内的定价系统存在一定的问题，而当代艺术作品的虚高价格也比较普遍，这是造成藏家较少的原因。另外，对于藏家的培养，除了美术馆之外，教育普及工作显得相当薄弱，有的中国藏家到了国外的艺博会上，甚至连请柬也看不明白。一位来自韩国的画廊负责人告诉早报记者，韩国的艺博会有很多，观众层次很丰富，而在中国，通常只有商人才会购买艺术品。
对于“亚太区藏家发展项目”，展会总监秦思源表示：“展会的资源不仅仅来源于独立画廊或独立顾问，也不只局限于展会的这几天，我们将在全年运作这些资源，搭建当代艺术的平台。”
记者观察：收藏家的“跑马场”
早有评论家说买卖中国当代艺术就像玩“击鼓传花”，什么时候传并不重要，传几次也不重要，但绝不能在鼓点停止的时候让“花”落在自己的手中。说当代艺术遭遇金融危机并不能解释其价格已经跌到了1/10的个中原因，几乎每一个藏家都知道这是一个关乎“炒作”的投资概念，既然楼市可以虚高，银行可以冒着崩盘的风险放贷，艺术品投资又未尝不可呢？
但短期投资可能才是最明智的，就像在股票市场低迷的时候，除非有绝好的耐心和足够的周转资金，短线操作来钱更快。
当岳敏君、方力钧等当代艺术F4的笑脸在迈阿密博览会上依旧露出可悲的笑容之后，这些频频出现于各种拍卖市场的符号化作品一次次地告诉着投资者：它正在以最快的速度增长着，货源不断，可以随时满足那些喜好奢侈品和有着强烈购物欲望的人们。但同时，它也预示着货物量过大所要带来的恶劣结果——商品贬值。作品超产的艺术家不在少数，只是在埋头复制之余，中国艺术家没有学习达明·赫斯特用钻石镶嵌成头骨艺术品来进行保值，也没有像达利那样雇用画匠或在空白的纸上签上自己的大名，而像台湾某富二代那样的，因为光头能让他“好开心”而购买岳敏君、方力钧的作品的纯玩家并不多见。更重要的是，艺术商品的操盘手来自国外，在明星画家被榨干油水之后，它们的傻笑不再是被吹捧的“中国式泼皮”，而是“ 中国式尴尬”，就像被煎过的猪油，流淌着香味，但已老得掉渣。
至于艺术的风向标指向何方，从艺术博览会、拍卖会上就可闻得一二，而这些艺术二级市场，如同米兰时装发布会一般引领着最新的潮流。人们可以像购买时尚杂志般订阅到每一期的最新内容，今年的“上海当代”方向也足够明确——“发现当代 ”、“亚太地区项目”，寻找新的藏家、开发新的潜力股，投资者的眼光扫视全场，谁都希望能买到一只绩效良好的原始股。“上海当代”在2007年举行了第一届展会，其中的展览部分项目名为“惊喜的发现”，由艺术总监皮埃尔·胡伯策划，其目的就是为刚刚崭露头角的亚太地区艺术家提供展示其作品的机会，并将他们推向全球当代艺术体系，而结果是否“惊喜”大概只有那些曾经押宝的藏家才能切实体会到。
保罗（左）和前任展会总监洛伦佐-鲁道夫夫妇（右）在ShContemporary09的开幕式上寒暄。
相关新闻
上海艺博会：商业领路，各推新人
9月9日－13日，2009（第十三届）上海艺术博览会在世贸商城举行，来自美国、法国、德国、韩国、日本等10多个国家的120多家画廊机构将参展此次艺博会，与几年前不同的是，今年上海艺博会大打“中华牌”，中国本土画廊就占据 96家，首次达到76％，有关人士认为，这与金融危机导致海外画廊减少赴外参展不无关系。与同期举行的“上海当代”相比，上海艺博会更讲求综合性，但艺博会所具有的商业性则是它们的共同特点。
艺博会之商业性
金色与银色的三米大狗蹲在世贸商城的两边，如同守卫在银行门口的神兽，这是法国雕塑家奥瑞·李可创作的作品，名为《这就是爱》。9月9日－13日，2009（第十三届）上海艺术博览会在世贸商城举行，与同期举行的“上海当代”相比，上海艺博会更讲求综合性，但艺博会所具有的商业性则是它们的共同特点。作为艺术品交易盛会，商业价值成为重要指标。就如同金银狗狗，除却雕塑胸口的一个小小的爱心，多数人会联想起俗气的“旺财”。
昂贵的艺术作品总能成为大众瞩目的焦点，在上海浦东证大广场上的《大拇指》为恺撒雕塑名作，它在2002年上海艺博会上以260万元人民币的身价被收购；罗丹著名雕塑《思想者》在2000年由法国沙耶格画廊携来参展上海艺博会之后，永久地落户在了上海，成为我国国内艺博会上最大的一笔境外作品交易。艺博会给人们带来了美好的艺术，也一次次激发着收藏者的购买欲望。
目前，世界各国举办的艺博会总数不下50家，其中最为著名的，除德国科隆国际艺博会外，还有瑞士巴塞尔国际艺博会、西班牙马德里现代艺博会、美国芝加哥国际艺博会和法国巴黎国际现代艺博会，号称“世界五大艺博会”。中国的艺博会起步较晚，自20世纪90年代起，改革开放之后，先后出现了不少艺博会，其中最具规模的，当数广州国际艺博会（1993年）、北京中国艺博会（1995年）和上海艺博会（1997年），此外还有北京首都艺博会、杭州西湖艺博会、大连国际艺博会、烟台艺博会等。但发展到今日，中国的艺术博览会与国外相比并不成熟。
参加2009“上海当代”的意大利顶级画廊——常青画廊。
国外成熟的艺术博览会对参展商有严格的审查和甄选标准，比如巴塞尔国际艺术博览会通常只有超过3年开办历史的画廊才有申请参展的资格。而在中国只有少数几个对参展实体的身份和参展条件有较为明确和严格的限制。有业内人士认为，这与中国的画廊体制的不规范有关，很多画廊没有学术性的展览以及画家资源，只靠“卖画”为生，有的画家与购画者直接交易，造成艺术市场局部混乱。而艺博会能否在众多竞争对手中突围而出，画廊作为一级市场就显得尤为重要。
来自上海的罗浮紫画廊带来的中国艺术家的装置。
国内目前的大型艺博会有二三十个，但水平参差不齐。一些组织者对艺博会没有明确的定位，仅仅把目光放在如何盈利的问题上，关心的是摊位费或交易提成。
艺博会之展览推新
而每个艺术博览会的摊位价格也并不低，比如2009北京国际艺术博览会的国内标准展位（3m×3m）为人民币9800元/展期，光地展位1000元/平方米（36平方米起租），东京国际艺术博览会2006中国展厅A类展位费用为25000元/（3m×3m）展位。在2007年的巴塞尔艺术博览会上，上海美术馆首次亮相，9平方米的展位需要缴纳一万欧元，而像巴塞尔这样的艺术博览会并不是缴钱就能进入的，每年都有来自世界各地的专业人士组成评委会进行严格的把关，当时上海美术馆执行馆长李磊在接受媒体采访时就表示，没有把巴塞尔艺术博览会看作是简单的商业销售，希望通过这个国际化的重要舞台与世界各地的策展人、收藏家、美术馆博物馆的负责人进行交流和对话。而“品牌”的建立对于参加艺术博览会的各个机构来说也相当重要，或者说“推荐新人”成为重头戏之一。
1999年第30届巴塞尔艺博会上，香港精艺轩画廊、法国法兰西画廊、西班牙波利葛瓦夫画廊等都推出了中国现当代艺术家的作品，其中有邱世华、王晋、张晓刚、严培明、朱嘉、庄辉、蔡国强、陈箴、张培力等。作为一种“文化推手”的作用来看，亮相艺博会的确能带来更多的声誉。
因此，近年来的上海艺术博览会开始举行青年艺术家的推介展，除了以评选活动增加学术性之外，也与高校合作，直接将年轻艺术家推上展示的舞台。这也是在市场的驱动力下的一次预先投资。
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Reopened Museum Tells Chinese-American Stories
Talisman Brolin for The New York Times
Museum of Chinese in America: Faces past and present greet visitors at the museum. More Photos >
Sign in to RecommendTwitter Sign In to E-Mail Print Single Page ShareClose
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy EDWARD ROTHSTEIN
Published: September 21, 2009
“Iron Chink” proclaims the raised words on a cast-iron sign, once mounted on a fish-processing machine. In the early 1900s in Seattle the machine had been invented to replace Chinese laborers, who presumably were constructed of weaker mettle.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Slide Show
The Museum of Chinese in America
Related
New Home for Chinese Experience in America (July 9, 2009)
Blog
ArtsBeat
The latest on the arts, coverage of live events, critical reviews, multimedia extravaganzas and much more. Join the discussion.
More Arts News
Enlarge This Image
Talisman Brolin for The New York Times
Documents and artifacts in the museum’s main exhibition, “With a Single Step: Stories in the Making of America.” More Photos »
Now, of course, its casual slur inspires some shock. It is a companion piece to another object, a cap-gun toy from the 1880s, when the “Chinese Question” (as objections to Chinese immigration was called) turned violent: pull the trigger, and a suited gentleman kicks a braided Chinese man in the rear, setting off the miniature explosion.
As you walk through the Museum of Chinese in America, which is reopening in Chinatown on Tuesday in a warm and inviting new space designed by Maya Lin, you can’t see these objects and not be aware of the kinds of challenges these immigrants once faced. Such artifacts also reflect the expanded ambitions of the museum itself: it began as a community institution almost 30 years ago, dedicated to preserving and commemorating the history of Chinatown, but with this $8.1 million transformation it now has a 14,000-square-foot space and national ambitions.
Its goal is to explore the experience of Chinese immigration and the evolution of Chinese communities in the United States, to account for a people’s struggles and triumphs and honor their artistic achievements. One of its galleries is now showing works of four Chinese-American artists.
With these ambitions the institution is joining an ever-lengthening roster of American museums of identity. All of them — whether they deal with Latino-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Nordic-Americans, Asian-Americans, Arab-Americans or African-Americans — are celebrations of hyphenated existence.
And the strange thing is how similar the arcs of their stories are: they recount how after a long period of suffering, prejudice and hatred, a group has carved a distinctive place in the history of the United States, its once scorned identity now a source of strength. Many of these museums also serve as anchors for the community and as educational centers, recounting political morality tales and honoring a shared history. That is certainly the case here as well.
Ms. Lin designed the institution’s main exhibition space to surround a bare-bricked, sky-lighted central area between the two connected buildings that constitute the museum. The central atrium, with a staircase leading down to a floor of offices and classrooms, invokes both a traditional Chinese courtyard and a rough-edged shared urban habitat that recalls yards or alleys over which neighbors shared stories, sometimes leaning out of windows.
The main gallery rooms even have windows looking out over the bricked space, only here each window also functions as a screen on which videos and photographs are projected as autobiographical histories are recounted. The galleries (with exhibition design by Matter Architectural Practice and mgmt. design) are intimate and make it seem as if you were passing through the rooms of a modest home. They lead chronologically from the 19th-century history of China’s encounters with the West to lives of contemporary Chinese-Americans told on a wall of video screens.
This core exhibition, “With a Single Step: Stories in the Making of America,” was created by the historian John Kuo Wei Tchen, a co-founder of the museum, along with Cynthia Ai-fen Lee. It depends less on artifacts like the cap gun or the display of irons used by once-familiar Chinese laundry establishments than on the arc of the narrative.
One side of some galleries tells of struggle and hardship, showing images of the riots that led to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, for example, in which unskilled Chinese immigrants were barred. Also on display are the crib sheets an aspiring immigrant once studied to convince officials at Angel Island (the San Francisco counterpart to Ellis Island) that he was more than a “paper son” whose false documents affirmed a connection to someone already in America.
The most fascinating galleries are compressed displays of how the image of Chinese-Americans was shaped into stereotypes in early 20th-century culture, ranging from Fu Manchu’s villainy to chop suey’s homogenized exoticism. The position of Chinese-Americans became still more complicated when China was an ally during World War II, a Communist enemy in the 1950s and a warily watched trading partner and political rival in the 1980s and ’90s.
The other side of the main galleries contains illuminated panels with brief biographies of individuals who transcended all these obstacles. There is Dr. Faith Sai So Leong (born 1880), for example, who became the first female Chinese dentist in America; Du Lee (born 1879), who organized the Chinese American Citizens Alliance in 1915 “to combat anti-Chinese sentiments”; and Yan Phou Lee (born 1861), who became the first Chinese student elected to Phi Beta Kappa and gave the commencement address when he graduated from Yale in 1887. And, of course, more contemporary Chinese-Americans are here as well, including Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, the architect I. M. Pei and the cellist Yo-Yo Ma.
But despite the museum’s considerable achievement it also harbors a tension that reveals some of the problems with the identity archetype. Like some other identity museums celebrating ethnic groups and communities, this one can too easily slip into the “we,” making it seem as if it were an internal account rather than a public statement. Each gallery includes a poem by Mr. Tchen and a narrative highlighting identity issues.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Slide Show
The Museum of Chinese in America
Related
New Home for Chinese Experience in America (July 9, 2009)
Blog
ArtsBeat
The latest on the arts, coverage of live events, critical reviews, multimedia extravaganzas and much more. Join the discussion.
More Arts News“Years of floods and droughts push our sons and fathers to leave ancient homes,” we are told of the 19th-century emigrations. “We find work and opportunity, but we also find many enslaved and dispossessed,” we read. “Writers like Jack London call us ‘heathens’ and say we can never become real Americans,” another display says.
And as a kind of haunting theme there is the question: “So are ‘we’ to be included in their sacred ‘We the People’? Or not?”
This approach tends to accent the hardened formula of the identity narrative (and overshadows the museum’s ability to explore more fully the nature of Chinese culture and immigration). Typically, in this account, triumph is reserved for the very end, with the 1960s as a turning point: the civil-rights movement is hailed for weakening the hold of prejudice and loosening the fetters of xenophobia. It is as if identity itself becomes the source of salvation. It may have begun as the instigation for oppression but it ends as a force for liberation. One gallery here contains posters and publications from that era that emphasizes these themes.
There is no question that the ’60s political movements had an effect on the status of all minorities; the identity narrative itself was shaped in that era. But aspects of this exhibition, particularly autobiographical statements that can be read, listened to or watched, reveal that model’s limits.
While the actual texts of some of these accounts are constructed from historical information by contemporary Chinese-American writers, including David Henry Hwang, Maxine Hong Kingston, Gish Jen and Ha Jin, the nuances they introduce are important. A 19th-century laborer, Ah Quin, speaks of working in Alaska as a cook for miners, sending home $30 every few months. Another 19th-century figure, Wong Chin Foo, makes it clear just how old certain political movements are: “When the Chinese Exclusion Act was renewed in 1892 with even more restrictions on the Chinese here, I helped form ‘The Chinese Equal Rights League.’ Through our efforts, we managed to persuade some congressmen to consider our proposals to grant us the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.”
And later in the exhibition there are brief written accounts by more recent immigrants, like Sam Wong, whose wandering first took him to Vietnam and Cambodia before “the U.S. welcomed me.”
In these voices, and others, we can hear the mixture of prospects and obstacles that Chinese immigrants encountered. This must have been true even in the worst of times: Chinese laborers sought to come here even after it was clear that nothing like paradise was in store. Many must have recognized degrees of restriction and opportunity and risked their lives to minimize one and maximize the other.
This is an aspect of the history that was once emphasized in older stories of American immigration, demonstrating how opportunities trumped hardships and possibility triumphed over prejudice. There is no point in returning to that model’s glossy idealism, which too easily elided over injustices and failings.
But the first-person stories here suggest that the dominant identity model has its own form of exaggeration, heightening trauma and minimizing promise. The hope is that over time this will be amended (and not just in this museum) with a fuller understanding of both sides of a hyphenated identity.
Talisman Brolin for The New York Times
Museum of Chinese in America: Faces past and present greet visitors at the museum. More Photos >
Sign in to RecommendTwitter Sign In to E-Mail Print Single Page ShareClose
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy EDWARD ROTHSTEIN
Published: September 21, 2009
“Iron Chink” proclaims the raised words on a cast-iron sign, once mounted on a fish-processing machine. In the early 1900s in Seattle the machine had been invented to replace Chinese laborers, who presumably were constructed of weaker mettle.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Slide Show
The Museum of Chinese in America
Related
New Home for Chinese Experience in America (July 9, 2009)
Blog
ArtsBeat
The latest on the arts, coverage of live events, critical reviews, multimedia extravaganzas and much more. Join the discussion.
More Arts News
Enlarge This Image
Talisman Brolin for The New York Times
Documents and artifacts in the museum’s main exhibition, “With a Single Step: Stories in the Making of America.” More Photos »
Now, of course, its casual slur inspires some shock. It is a companion piece to another object, a cap-gun toy from the 1880s, when the “Chinese Question” (as objections to Chinese immigration was called) turned violent: pull the trigger, and a suited gentleman kicks a braided Chinese man in the rear, setting off the miniature explosion.
As you walk through the Museum of Chinese in America, which is reopening in Chinatown on Tuesday in a warm and inviting new space designed by Maya Lin, you can’t see these objects and not be aware of the kinds of challenges these immigrants once faced. Such artifacts also reflect the expanded ambitions of the museum itself: it began as a community institution almost 30 years ago, dedicated to preserving and commemorating the history of Chinatown, but with this $8.1 million transformation it now has a 14,000-square-foot space and national ambitions.
Its goal is to explore the experience of Chinese immigration and the evolution of Chinese communities in the United States, to account for a people’s struggles and triumphs and honor their artistic achievements. One of its galleries is now showing works of four Chinese-American artists.
With these ambitions the institution is joining an ever-lengthening roster of American museums of identity. All of them — whether they deal with Latino-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Nordic-Americans, Asian-Americans, Arab-Americans or African-Americans — are celebrations of hyphenated existence.
And the strange thing is how similar the arcs of their stories are: they recount how after a long period of suffering, prejudice and hatred, a group has carved a distinctive place in the history of the United States, its once scorned identity now a source of strength. Many of these museums also serve as anchors for the community and as educational centers, recounting political morality tales and honoring a shared history. That is certainly the case here as well.
Ms. Lin designed the institution’s main exhibition space to surround a bare-bricked, sky-lighted central area between the two connected buildings that constitute the museum. The central atrium, with a staircase leading down to a floor of offices and classrooms, invokes both a traditional Chinese courtyard and a rough-edged shared urban habitat that recalls yards or alleys over which neighbors shared stories, sometimes leaning out of windows.
The main gallery rooms even have windows looking out over the bricked space, only here each window also functions as a screen on which videos and photographs are projected as autobiographical histories are recounted. The galleries (with exhibition design by Matter Architectural Practice and mgmt. design) are intimate and make it seem as if you were passing through the rooms of a modest home. They lead chronologically from the 19th-century history of China’s encounters with the West to lives of contemporary Chinese-Americans told on a wall of video screens.
This core exhibition, “With a Single Step: Stories in the Making of America,” was created by the historian John Kuo Wei Tchen, a co-founder of the museum, along with Cynthia Ai-fen Lee. It depends less on artifacts like the cap gun or the display of irons used by once-familiar Chinese laundry establishments than on the arc of the narrative.
One side of some galleries tells of struggle and hardship, showing images of the riots that led to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, for example, in which unskilled Chinese immigrants were barred. Also on display are the crib sheets an aspiring immigrant once studied to convince officials at Angel Island (the San Francisco counterpart to Ellis Island) that he was more than a “paper son” whose false documents affirmed a connection to someone already in America.
The most fascinating galleries are compressed displays of how the image of Chinese-Americans was shaped into stereotypes in early 20th-century culture, ranging from Fu Manchu’s villainy to chop suey’s homogenized exoticism. The position of Chinese-Americans became still more complicated when China was an ally during World War II, a Communist enemy in the 1950s and a warily watched trading partner and political rival in the 1980s and ’90s.
The other side of the main galleries contains illuminated panels with brief biographies of individuals who transcended all these obstacles. There is Dr. Faith Sai So Leong (born 1880), for example, who became the first female Chinese dentist in America; Du Lee (born 1879), who organized the Chinese American Citizens Alliance in 1915 “to combat anti-Chinese sentiments”; and Yan Phou Lee (born 1861), who became the first Chinese student elected to Phi Beta Kappa and gave the commencement address when he graduated from Yale in 1887. And, of course, more contemporary Chinese-Americans are here as well, including Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, the architect I. M. Pei and the cellist Yo-Yo Ma.
But despite the museum’s considerable achievement it also harbors a tension that reveals some of the problems with the identity archetype. Like some other identity museums celebrating ethnic groups and communities, this one can too easily slip into the “we,” making it seem as if it were an internal account rather than a public statement. Each gallery includes a poem by Mr. Tchen and a narrative highlighting identity issues.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Slide Show
The Museum of Chinese in America
Related
New Home for Chinese Experience in America (July 9, 2009)
Blog
ArtsBeat
The latest on the arts, coverage of live events, critical reviews, multimedia extravaganzas and much more. Join the discussion.
More Arts News“Years of floods and droughts push our sons and fathers to leave ancient homes,” we are told of the 19th-century emigrations. “We find work and opportunity, but we also find many enslaved and dispossessed,” we read. “Writers like Jack London call us ‘heathens’ and say we can never become real Americans,” another display says.
And as a kind of haunting theme there is the question: “So are ‘we’ to be included in their sacred ‘We the People’? Or not?”
This approach tends to accent the hardened formula of the identity narrative (and overshadows the museum’s ability to explore more fully the nature of Chinese culture and immigration). Typically, in this account, triumph is reserved for the very end, with the 1960s as a turning point: the civil-rights movement is hailed for weakening the hold of prejudice and loosening the fetters of xenophobia. It is as if identity itself becomes the source of salvation. It may have begun as the instigation for oppression but it ends as a force for liberation. One gallery here contains posters and publications from that era that emphasizes these themes.
There is no question that the ’60s political movements had an effect on the status of all minorities; the identity narrative itself was shaped in that era. But aspects of this exhibition, particularly autobiographical statements that can be read, listened to or watched, reveal that model’s limits.
While the actual texts of some of these accounts are constructed from historical information by contemporary Chinese-American writers, including David Henry Hwang, Maxine Hong Kingston, Gish Jen and Ha Jin, the nuances they introduce are important. A 19th-century laborer, Ah Quin, speaks of working in Alaska as a cook for miners, sending home $30 every few months. Another 19th-century figure, Wong Chin Foo, makes it clear just how old certain political movements are: “When the Chinese Exclusion Act was renewed in 1892 with even more restrictions on the Chinese here, I helped form ‘The Chinese Equal Rights League.’ Through our efforts, we managed to persuade some congressmen to consider our proposals to grant us the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.”
And later in the exhibition there are brief written accounts by more recent immigrants, like Sam Wong, whose wandering first took him to Vietnam and Cambodia before “the U.S. welcomed me.”
In these voices, and others, we can hear the mixture of prospects and obstacles that Chinese immigrants encountered. This must have been true even in the worst of times: Chinese laborers sought to come here even after it was clear that nothing like paradise was in store. Many must have recognized degrees of restriction and opportunity and risked their lives to minimize one and maximize the other.
This is an aspect of the history that was once emphasized in older stories of American immigration, demonstrating how opportunities trumped hardships and possibility triumphed over prejudice. There is no point in returning to that model’s glossy idealism, which too easily elided over injustices and failings.
But the first-person stories here suggest that the dominant identity model has its own form of exaggeration, heightening trauma and minimizing promise. The hope is that over time this will be amended (and not just in this museum) with a fuller understanding of both sides of a hyphenated identity.
What to Do if You Have the Flu
Steps will protect yourself, others.
Related
Sign Up for Weekly Swine Flu Updates
Swine Flu Vaccine Coming in October
Little kids to need 2 shots for swine flu
Topics
Coughing
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Pain
See more topics »
XFatigue
Stuffy Nose
Asthma
Chills
Symptoms
Pneumonia
Fever
Los Angeles Times
Vomiting
Muscle
Sepsis
Flu
Immune System
Pharmaceuticals
People
Health Organizations
Diseases
Viral Diseases and Infections
Hospitals and Clinics
Throat
Illnesses Shari Roan
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 22, 2009
E-mail Print Share Text Size
The flu tends to come on suddenly -- you're fine in the morning and aching and shivering that night -- while a cold usually develops gradually over the course of two or three days. Flu usually causes a fever and aches; a cold usually doesn't. Other symptoms of the flu include headache, fatigue, cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, body aches, chills and, usually in children, vomiting or diarrhea.
How do I know if it's the novel H1N1 strain?
Unless your doctor orders a test, you won't. That test, which involves a swab of nasal secretions, isn't routinely conducted. Most likely, if your doctor thinks you have the flu, you will be sent home with advice on care.
In some cases, however, doctors will want a more precise diagnosis, which helps inform public health officials about outbreaks. A flu test is also sometimes given to people at risk of becoming very sick, such as hospitalized patients, infants and those with underlying health conditions. Healthcare workers may also receive a flu test.
In general, it's not necessary for you to know whether your flu is H1N1 or a seasonal strain. They are treated similarly and have similar effects, though this H1N1 strain seems to be transmitted especially easily among children and young adults.
How should I take care of myself?
Stay home and rest. You don't want to tax your body when it needs its strength to fight a virus.
Drink plenty of liquids to avoid dehydration.
Don't drink alcohol because it can increase the risk of dehydration and it weakens the immune system's response.
Don't smoke; that can worsen respiratory symptoms.
Do take over-the-counter pain relievers (but don't give aspirin to children or teens) for head and muscle aches.
To avoid infecting others, stay in a separate room in the household and try to use a separate bathroom. Wear a mask, if tolerable, when around other people, even loved ones.
When should I go to the doctor?
In most cases, a trip to the doctor isn't necessary because healthy people will recover on their own in about five days. However, if you have just become ill, you may want to call the doctor to obtain a prescription for an antiviral medication. Taking an antiviral, such as Tamiflu or Relenza, can shorten the course of the illness by a day or two if the medication is given within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms.
Doctors vary in their willingness to prescribe antiviral medications. In a recent update from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, doctors were advised to prescribe antiviral drugs only in certain cases -- to treat or prevent illness in people who are severely ill or hospitalized or at higher risk of having serious complications from flu, such as babies and those with underlying illnesses. Antivirals are not recommended for prevention or treatment of otherwise healthy people. These guidelines were issued to alleviate concerns over a potential shortage of anti-viral medications.
Consider seeing your doctor if you are at high risk for complications, such as developing pneumonia, sepsis or having a severe asthma attack. This includes people ages 65 and older, those with chronic medical conditions, pregnant women and young children.
Should an ill person go to the hospital?
Normally, no. But the virus can lead to other illnesses, such as bronchitis, pneumonia, sepsis and asthma flare-ups.
Here are some emergency signs in children:
Fast or labored breathing, indicating pneumonia or sepsis.
Bluish skin color, indicating the child may not be getting enough oxygen.
Not drinking enough fluids, which puts the child at risk for dehydration.
Not waking up or interacting, which can indicate a more severe case.
Being so irritable that the child doesn't want to be held, which can also indicate more severe illness.
A return of flu symptoms after the child appeared to be getting better, which could indicate that the child has developed a secondary illness or was misdiagnosed with the flu.
Fever with a rash, which can indicate an illness other than the flu.
And in adults:
Difficult breathing or shortness of breath, which could indicate pneumonia or sepsis.
Pain or pressure in the chest or abdomen, which could indicate a more serious case or that flu is not the right diagnosis.
Sudden dizziness, which can mean the person is not getting enough oxygen.
Confusion, which can mean the person is not getting enough oxygen.
Severe or persistent vomiting, which can lead to dehydration.
How long should I stay home?
That depends. Your primary goal should be to avoid infecting others. Always stay home if you have a fever or think you may be coming down with the flu. Adults can spread the flu to others for up to five days after getting sick, so stay home until you feel better and for 24 hours after the fever is gone (without use of fever-lowering medications). You may have lingering symptoms, such as nasal congestion, cough or fatigue. That is normal. But if your cough or congestion or any symptom hasn't abated much from its peak, you could still be infectious. Sources: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Dr. Aaron Getty, spokesperson for the Infectious Diseases Society of America; L.A. County Department of Health Services.
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
E-mail Print Digg Twitter Facebook StumbleUpon
http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/sns-health-swine-flu-what-to-do,0,3129989.story
Steps will protect yourself, others.
Related
Sign Up for Weekly Swine Flu Updates
Swine Flu Vaccine Coming in October
Little kids to need 2 shots for swine flu
Topics
Coughing
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Pain
See more topics »
XFatigue
Stuffy Nose
Asthma
Chills
Symptoms
Pneumonia
Fever
Los Angeles Times
Vomiting
Muscle
Sepsis
Flu
Immune System
Pharmaceuticals
People
Health Organizations
Diseases
Viral Diseases and Infections
Hospitals and Clinics
Throat
Illnesses Shari Roan
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 22, 2009
E-mail Print Share Text Size
The flu tends to come on suddenly -- you're fine in the morning and aching and shivering that night -- while a cold usually develops gradually over the course of two or three days. Flu usually causes a fever and aches; a cold usually doesn't. Other symptoms of the flu include headache, fatigue, cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, body aches, chills and, usually in children, vomiting or diarrhea.
How do I know if it's the novel H1N1 strain?
Unless your doctor orders a test, you won't. That test, which involves a swab of nasal secretions, isn't routinely conducted. Most likely, if your doctor thinks you have the flu, you will be sent home with advice on care.
In some cases, however, doctors will want a more precise diagnosis, which helps inform public health officials about outbreaks. A flu test is also sometimes given to people at risk of becoming very sick, such as hospitalized patients, infants and those with underlying health conditions. Healthcare workers may also receive a flu test.
In general, it's not necessary for you to know whether your flu is H1N1 or a seasonal strain. They are treated similarly and have similar effects, though this H1N1 strain seems to be transmitted especially easily among children and young adults.
How should I take care of myself?
Stay home and rest. You don't want to tax your body when it needs its strength to fight a virus.
Drink plenty of liquids to avoid dehydration.
Don't drink alcohol because it can increase the risk of dehydration and it weakens the immune system's response.
Don't smoke; that can worsen respiratory symptoms.
Do take over-the-counter pain relievers (but don't give aspirin to children or teens) for head and muscle aches.
To avoid infecting others, stay in a separate room in the household and try to use a separate bathroom. Wear a mask, if tolerable, when around other people, even loved ones.
When should I go to the doctor?
In most cases, a trip to the doctor isn't necessary because healthy people will recover on their own in about five days. However, if you have just become ill, you may want to call the doctor to obtain a prescription for an antiviral medication. Taking an antiviral, such as Tamiflu or Relenza, can shorten the course of the illness by a day or two if the medication is given within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms.
Doctors vary in their willingness to prescribe antiviral medications. In a recent update from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, doctors were advised to prescribe antiviral drugs only in certain cases -- to treat or prevent illness in people who are severely ill or hospitalized or at higher risk of having serious complications from flu, such as babies and those with underlying illnesses. Antivirals are not recommended for prevention or treatment of otherwise healthy people. These guidelines were issued to alleviate concerns over a potential shortage of anti-viral medications.
Consider seeing your doctor if you are at high risk for complications, such as developing pneumonia, sepsis or having a severe asthma attack. This includes people ages 65 and older, those with chronic medical conditions, pregnant women and young children.
Should an ill person go to the hospital?
Normally, no. But the virus can lead to other illnesses, such as bronchitis, pneumonia, sepsis and asthma flare-ups.
Here are some emergency signs in children:
Fast or labored breathing, indicating pneumonia or sepsis.
Bluish skin color, indicating the child may not be getting enough oxygen.
Not drinking enough fluids, which puts the child at risk for dehydration.
Not waking up or interacting, which can indicate a more severe case.
Being so irritable that the child doesn't want to be held, which can also indicate more severe illness.
A return of flu symptoms after the child appeared to be getting better, which could indicate that the child has developed a secondary illness or was misdiagnosed with the flu.
Fever with a rash, which can indicate an illness other than the flu.
And in adults:
Difficult breathing or shortness of breath, which could indicate pneumonia or sepsis.
Pain or pressure in the chest or abdomen, which could indicate a more serious case or that flu is not the right diagnosis.
Sudden dizziness, which can mean the person is not getting enough oxygen.
Confusion, which can mean the person is not getting enough oxygen.
Severe or persistent vomiting, which can lead to dehydration.
How long should I stay home?
That depends. Your primary goal should be to avoid infecting others. Always stay home if you have a fever or think you may be coming down with the flu. Adults can spread the flu to others for up to five days after getting sick, so stay home until you feel better and for 24 hours after the fever is gone (without use of fever-lowering medications). You may have lingering symptoms, such as nasal congestion, cough or fatigue. That is normal. But if your cough or congestion or any symptom hasn't abated much from its peak, you could still be infectious. Sources: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Dr. Aaron Getty, spokesperson for the Infectious Diseases Society of America; L.A. County Department of Health Services.
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
E-mail Print Digg Twitter Facebook StumbleUpon
http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/sns-health-swine-flu-what-to-do,0,3129989.story
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Doubling Down on the Art Market
Phillips plans an aggressive round of auctions, despite soft sales of contemporary workArticle Slideshow Comments more in Life & Style »Email Printer
Friendly Share: facebook ↓ More
StumbleUpon
Digg
Twitter
Yahoo! Buzz
Fark
Reddit
LinkedIn
del.icio.us
MySpace
Save This ↓ More
Text
By KELLY CROW
As the world’s chief auction houses scale back in a grim art market, one auctioneer is taking the opposite tack.
Phillips de Pury & Co. is adding 18 new sales of contemporary art to its calendar over the next year and a half. At a time when Christie's has trimmed sales and Sotheby's has shrunk some once-hefty catalogs nearly to the size of CD cases, Phillips, the third-largest auction house for contemporary art, is enlarging its catalogs and tripling their print runs. Prices for contemporary art have plunged as collectors turned to tried-and-true Old Master paintings and Asian vases, but Phillips is placing some of its biggest bets yet on the volatile category. On Sept. 26, it will hold a London auction called "Now," featuring many artists who have never sold at auction before.
View Slideshow
Phillips de Pury
‘For the Laugh of God’
The plan is being steered by Bernd Runge, the auction house's new chief executive. A former Conde Nast executive, Mr. Runge was tapped early this year by Phillips's new owner, Mercury Group, a Russian retailing giant that acquired a majority stake in the privately held auction house last October. The new series of art auctions will roll out roughly once a month between London and New York, packaged with themes like "Sex," "Film" and "Black/White."
Mr. Runge, in his first interview since taking the post, said the monthly auctions will target local audiences in New York and London who haven't bought art before. He said that he is handling the logistics of the sales, along with the company's other business affairs, but said that the art will be chosen by the company's art specialist and its chairman, Simon de Pury.
"I'm almost an art virgin," Mr. Runge said. He said he is trying to catch up by attending art fairs and biennials.
Critics say that moving more untested artworks into the marketplace now could backfire if collectors hold on to their wallets, potentially rattling confidence in the overall art market. Others say the novelty of the plan—a disc jockey will play during a music-themed sale in October—could also inject life into a scene that's weary of feeling weary.
The art market has taken a battering this year, struggling even as other financial markets have taken small steps toward recovery. In the first half of 2009, Sotheby's sales were down 87% and Christie's sales were down 49% from the same period a year ago. Prices for new art have stopped plummeting, but the volume of contemporary art sales this summer was down 80% compared with last summer, according to ArtTactic, a London-based research firm that tracks global art sales.
Phillips is particularly vulnerable to art-market mood swings because of its tighter focus on contemporary art, photography, jewelry and design. Its auction sales total for the year currently hovers at around $60 million, well off pace from last year's $292 million total. At its last major sale in London this June, only one work sold for over $1 million, and the $8.4 million sales total fell just under its low estimate.
Mr. Runge has been tasked with turning the decline around. On a recent afternoon in London, he sat in a conference room flipping through the catalog galley for "Now," grinning as he pointed out magazine-style additions to the catalog format, including an interview with artist Keith Tyson . Before joining Phillips in March, he spent a dozen years as a Condé Nast International vice president, helping to launch 30 magazines including successful editions of Vogue and GQ in Russian and less successful editions like Vanity Fair in German, which recently closed.
"Now" is a 291-piece mix of prints, photographs, furniture and paintings made since 2000. Some pieces are brand new. Anton Skorubsky Kandinsky's 2009 self-portrait, "I Don't Want to be a Russian Artist, I Want to be a Chinese Artist," came off the wall of the Art Next Gallery in New York last month; its low estimate is $16,450. Other highlights include Mario Minale's 2007 chair made of plastic building blocks, "Red Blue Lego Chair," priced to sell for at least $32,800. Peter Fuss's 2007 sculpture, "For the Laugh of God," is a skull covered in imitation diamonds, priced to sell for at least $9,860. Two years ago, at the height of the contemporary market, artist Damien Hirst sold "For the Love of God," a skull covered in real gems, to a group of investors; Mr. Hirst said the price was $100 million.
Phillips was founded in 1796 by Harry Phillips, formerly the senior clerk of Christie's founder James Christie. In its early years, the house held sales for Marie Antoinette and Napoleon, and later made its reputation in English furniture and silver. It made its first major foray into contemporary art when Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy bought the company in 1999 . In 2002, LVMH sold the company to its managing directors at the time, Simon de Pury and Daniella Luxembourg. Ms. Luxembourg sold her shares five years ago, and Mr. de Pury has run the company since then.
Today, Phillips' sales are closely followed by the art market. The house is known for taking early bets on artists who can eventually become major auction standbys, like Mr. Hirst. Phillips has nurtured a reputation for being more trendy and offbeat than its competitors. It once set up a ping-pong table during a cocktail reception, and it has hired bands like George Clinton & Parliament Funkadelic to play at its after-parties.
"Phillips is the bridesmaid of the auction world," said Richard Polsky, a private dealer in Sausalito, Calif. "It always wants to be seen as lively, nimble and fun—but now it also needs to be profitable."
The new themed sales will double the workload for the house's 150-member staff, which must continue to win business for its established sales while stocking works for the new ones. (Mr. Runge says he's planning to hire some part-time curators to help out.) Michael McGinnis, Phillips' worldwide head of contemporary art, said he initially wondered whether his team could cull enough pieces for the extra sales. Collectors don't like to sell in lean times unless they have to.
"I'm a pretty conservative guy, so of course I have reservations," Mr. McGinnis said, "but I'm learning there is enough material out there if the venue is there and the prices are fair. We'll just have to see what the market will absorb."
When Mercury Group's chief executive, Leonid Friedland, first expressed interest in buying a stake in Phillips in the summer of 2007, the auction house was performing at its peak and had just acquired a new European headquarters in London. That June, it set the record for a work of contemporary Russian art by selling Ilya Kabakov's "La chambre de luxe," for $4 million.
Mr. de Pury said he began discussions with Mercury that summer, but the deal crystallized the following summer—just as art sales were beginning to sour. Mercury acquired a majority control of the company on Oct. 6, 2008, for a reported $60 million. Mr. Runge and Mr. de Pury declined to comment on the price. A spokeswoman for Mercury also declined to comment.
Among the new owner's mandates: severely limiting the practice of paying guarantees for consigned works. With a guarantee, an auction house essentially pledges to pay a seller for an artwork whether or not it sells.
Two weeks later, Phillips held an evening sale of contemporary art in London at which 32 of the 70 works failed to sell, including Takashi Murakami's "Tongari-kun," which had been priced for sell for at least £3.5 million.
The Mercury Group soon tapped Mr. Runge to step in. "The potential for Phillips is enormous and exciting, but it's also just undergone a tremendous growth, an expansion into London and now, the new shareholders," Mr. Runge said. "It all has to be swallowed."
Mr. Runge is known for his expertise in magazines and luxury goods, but he has also attracted attention for widely publicized past Stasi connections. During the 1980s, he worked as a paid informer for communist East Germany's spy agency while he was a student and later a reporter for a news agency in Hungary, according to Stasi files released by the German government. Code-named "Olden," he kept tabs on fellow students, anti-communist dissidents and Western reporters. Mr. Runge declined to comment on the matter.
The news caused a brief stir in Germany five years ago, but Condé Nast vouched for him and so has Phillips. When Mr. Runge was hired, Mr. de Pury praised his global experience and said he "attached no importance … to some activities in the distant past."
Mr. de Pury s aid he has been working to make Mercury feel welcome . When he told Mercury that he had a summer tradition of taking a few of his top specialists on a weekend retreat, the new owners took the gesture one step further: They booked a weekend at a London resort for 30 of Phillips' leaders, old and new. "It was great," Mr. de Pury said. "We played croquet."
—David Crawford in Berlin contributed to this article.
Write to Kelly Crow at kelly.crow@wsj.com
Phillips plans an aggressive round of auctions, despite soft sales of contemporary workArticle Slideshow Comments more in Life & Style »Email Printer
Friendly Share: facebook ↓ More
StumbleUpon
Digg
Yahoo! Buzz
Fark
del.icio.us
MySpace
Save This ↓ More
Text
By KELLY CROW
As the world’s chief auction houses scale back in a grim art market, one auctioneer is taking the opposite tack.
Phillips de Pury & Co. is adding 18 new sales of contemporary art to its calendar over the next year and a half. At a time when Christie's has trimmed sales and Sotheby's has shrunk some once-hefty catalogs nearly to the size of CD cases, Phillips, the third-largest auction house for contemporary art, is enlarging its catalogs and tripling their print runs. Prices for contemporary art have plunged as collectors turned to tried-and-true Old Master paintings and Asian vases, but Phillips is placing some of its biggest bets yet on the volatile category. On Sept. 26, it will hold a London auction called "Now," featuring many artists who have never sold at auction before.
View Slideshow
Phillips de Pury
‘For the Laugh of God’
The plan is being steered by Bernd Runge, the auction house's new chief executive. A former Conde Nast executive, Mr. Runge was tapped early this year by Phillips's new owner, Mercury Group, a Russian retailing giant that acquired a majority stake in the privately held auction house last October. The new series of art auctions will roll out roughly once a month between London and New York, packaged with themes like "Sex," "Film" and "Black/White."
Mr. Runge, in his first interview since taking the post, said the monthly auctions will target local audiences in New York and London who haven't bought art before. He said that he is handling the logistics of the sales, along with the company's other business affairs, but said that the art will be chosen by the company's art specialist and its chairman, Simon de Pury.
"I'm almost an art virgin," Mr. Runge said. He said he is trying to catch up by attending art fairs and biennials.
Critics say that moving more untested artworks into the marketplace now could backfire if collectors hold on to their wallets, potentially rattling confidence in the overall art market. Others say the novelty of the plan—a disc jockey will play during a music-themed sale in October—could also inject life into a scene that's weary of feeling weary.
The art market has taken a battering this year, struggling even as other financial markets have taken small steps toward recovery. In the first half of 2009, Sotheby's sales were down 87% and Christie's sales were down 49% from the same period a year ago. Prices for new art have stopped plummeting, but the volume of contemporary art sales this summer was down 80% compared with last summer, according to ArtTactic, a London-based research firm that tracks global art sales.
Phillips is particularly vulnerable to art-market mood swings because of its tighter focus on contemporary art, photography, jewelry and design. Its auction sales total for the year currently hovers at around $60 million, well off pace from last year's $292 million total. At its last major sale in London this June, only one work sold for over $1 million, and the $8.4 million sales total fell just under its low estimate.
Mr. Runge has been tasked with turning the decline around. On a recent afternoon in London, he sat in a conference room flipping through the catalog galley for "Now," grinning as he pointed out magazine-style additions to the catalog format, including an interview with artist Keith Tyson . Before joining Phillips in March, he spent a dozen years as a Condé Nast International vice president, helping to launch 30 magazines including successful editions of Vogue and GQ in Russian and less successful editions like Vanity Fair in German, which recently closed.
"Now" is a 291-piece mix of prints, photographs, furniture and paintings made since 2000. Some pieces are brand new. Anton Skorubsky Kandinsky's 2009 self-portrait, "I Don't Want to be a Russian Artist, I Want to be a Chinese Artist," came off the wall of the Art Next Gallery in New York last month; its low estimate is $16,450. Other highlights include Mario Minale's 2007 chair made of plastic building blocks, "Red Blue Lego Chair," priced to sell for at least $32,800. Peter Fuss's 2007 sculpture, "For the Laugh of God," is a skull covered in imitation diamonds, priced to sell for at least $9,860. Two years ago, at the height of the contemporary market, artist Damien Hirst sold "For the Love of God," a skull covered in real gems, to a group of investors; Mr. Hirst said the price was $100 million.
Phillips was founded in 1796 by Harry Phillips, formerly the senior clerk of Christie's founder James Christie. In its early years, the house held sales for Marie Antoinette and Napoleon, and later made its reputation in English furniture and silver. It made its first major foray into contemporary art when Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy bought the company in 1999 . In 2002, LVMH sold the company to its managing directors at the time, Simon de Pury and Daniella Luxembourg. Ms. Luxembourg sold her shares five years ago, and Mr. de Pury has run the company since then.
Today, Phillips' sales are closely followed by the art market. The house is known for taking early bets on artists who can eventually become major auction standbys, like Mr. Hirst. Phillips has nurtured a reputation for being more trendy and offbeat than its competitors. It once set up a ping-pong table during a cocktail reception, and it has hired bands like George Clinton & Parliament Funkadelic to play at its after-parties.
"Phillips is the bridesmaid of the auction world," said Richard Polsky, a private dealer in Sausalito, Calif. "It always wants to be seen as lively, nimble and fun—but now it also needs to be profitable."
The new themed sales will double the workload for the house's 150-member staff, which must continue to win business for its established sales while stocking works for the new ones. (Mr. Runge says he's planning to hire some part-time curators to help out.) Michael McGinnis, Phillips' worldwide head of contemporary art, said he initially wondered whether his team could cull enough pieces for the extra sales. Collectors don't like to sell in lean times unless they have to.
"I'm a pretty conservative guy, so of course I have reservations," Mr. McGinnis said, "but I'm learning there is enough material out there if the venue is there and the prices are fair. We'll just have to see what the market will absorb."
When Mercury Group's chief executive, Leonid Friedland, first expressed interest in buying a stake in Phillips in the summer of 2007, the auction house was performing at its peak and had just acquired a new European headquarters in London. That June, it set the record for a work of contemporary Russian art by selling Ilya Kabakov's "La chambre de luxe," for $4 million.
Mr. de Pury said he began discussions with Mercury that summer, but the deal crystallized the following summer—just as art sales were beginning to sour. Mercury acquired a majority control of the company on Oct. 6, 2008, for a reported $60 million. Mr. Runge and Mr. de Pury declined to comment on the price. A spokeswoman for Mercury also declined to comment.
Among the new owner's mandates: severely limiting the practice of paying guarantees for consigned works. With a guarantee, an auction house essentially pledges to pay a seller for an artwork whether or not it sells.
Two weeks later, Phillips held an evening sale of contemporary art in London at which 32 of the 70 works failed to sell, including Takashi Murakami's "Tongari-kun," which had been priced for sell for at least £3.5 million.
The Mercury Group soon tapped Mr. Runge to step in. "The potential for Phillips is enormous and exciting, but it's also just undergone a tremendous growth, an expansion into London and now, the new shareholders," Mr. Runge said. "It all has to be swallowed."
Mr. Runge is known for his expertise in magazines and luxury goods, but he has also attracted attention for widely publicized past Stasi connections. During the 1980s, he worked as a paid informer for communist East Germany's spy agency while he was a student and later a reporter for a news agency in Hungary, according to Stasi files released by the German government. Code-named "Olden," he kept tabs on fellow students, anti-communist dissidents and Western reporters. Mr. Runge declined to comment on the matter.
The news caused a brief stir in Germany five years ago, but Condé Nast vouched for him and so has Phillips. When Mr. Runge was hired, Mr. de Pury praised his global experience and said he "attached no importance … to some activities in the distant past."
Mr. de Pury s aid he has been working to make Mercury feel welcome . When he told Mercury that he had a summer tradition of taking a few of his top specialists on a weekend retreat, the new owners took the gesture one step further: They booked a weekend at a London resort for 30 of Phillips' leaders, old and new. "It was great," Mr. de Pury said. "We played croquet."
—David Crawford in Berlin contributed to this article.
Write to Kelly Crow at kelly.crow@wsj.com
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Closely Watched Buffett Recalculating His Bets
by Graham Bowley
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
provided by
Warren E. Buffett has two cardinal rules of investing. Rule No. 1: Never lose money. Rule No. 2: Never forget Rule No. 1.
Well, a lot of old rules got trashed when the financial crisis struck -- even for the Oracle of Omaha.
More from NYTimes.com:
• Merger Will Create U.K. Mobile Giant
• Rebuff by Cadbury Doesn't Deter Kraft
• Auto-Tune Isn't Dead. It's Coming to Your iPhone
At 79, Mr. Buffett is coming off the worst year of his long, storied career. On paper, he personally lost an estimated $25 billion in the financial panic of 2008, enough to cost him his title as the world's richest man. (His friend and sometime bridge partner, Bill Gates, now holds that honor, according to Forbes.)
And yet few people on or off Wall Street have capitalized on this crisis as deftly as Mr. Buffett. After counseling Washington to rescue the nation's financial industry and publicly urging Americans to buy stocks as the markets reeled, in he swooped. Mr. Buffett positioned himself to profit from the market mayhem -- as well as all those taxpayer-financed bailouts -- and thus secure his legacy as one of the greatest investors of all time.
When so many others were running scared last autumn, Mr. Buffett invested billions in Goldman Sachs -- and got a far better deal than Washington. He then staked billions more on General Electric. While taxpayers never bailed out Mr. Buffett, they did bail out some of his stock picks. Goldman, American Express, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp -- all of them got public bailouts that ultimately benefited private shareholders like Mr. Buffett.
If Mr. Buffett picked well -- and, so far, it looks as if he did -- his payoff could be enormous. But now, only a year after the crisis struck, he seems to be worrying that the broader stock market might falter again. After boldly buying when so many were selling assets, his conglomerate, Berkshire Hathaway, is pulling back, buying fewer stocks while investing in corporate and government debt. And Mr. Buffett is warning that the economy, though on the mend, remains deeply troubled.
"We are not out of problems yet," Mr. Buffett said last week in an interview, in which he reflected on the lessons of the last 12 months. "We have got to get the sputtering economy back so it is functioning as it should be."
Still, Mr. Buffett hardly sounded shellshocked in the wake of what he once called the financial equivalent of Pearl Harbor. (An estimated net worth of $37 billion would be a balm to anyone's psyche.)
"It has been an incredibly interesting period in the last year and a half. Just the drama," Mr. Buffett said. "Watching the movie has been fun, and occasionally participating has been fun too, though not in what it has done to people's lives."
Investors big and small hang on Mr. Buffett's pronouncements, and with good reason: if you had invested $1,000 in the stock of Berkshire in 1965, you would have amassed millions of dollars by 2007.
Despite that formidable record, the financial crisis dealt him a stinging blow. While he has not changed his value-oriented approach to investing -- he says he likes to buy quality merchandise, whether socks or stocks, at bargain prices -- Buffettologists wonder what will define the final chapters of his celebrated career.
In doubt, too, is the future of a post-Buffett Berkshire. The sprawling company, whose primary business is insurance, lost about a fifth of its market value during the last year, roughly as much as the broader stock market. While Berkshire remains a corporate bastion, it lost $1.53 billion during the first quarter, then its top-flight credit rating. It returned to profit during the second quarter.
Time is short. While he has no immediate plans to retire, Mr. Buffett is believed to be grooming several possible successors, notably David L. Sokol, chairman of MidAmerican Energy Holdings at Berkshire and also chairman of NetJets, the private jet company owned by Berkshire.
After searching in vain for good investments during the bull market years, Mr. Buffett used last year's rout to make investments that could sow the seeds of future profits.
Justin Fuller, author of the blog Buffettologist and a partner at Midway Capital Research and Management, said the events of the last year, while painful for many, provided Mr. Buffett with the opportunity he had been waiting for.
"He put a ton of capital to work," Mr. Fuller said. "The crisis gave him the ability to put one last and lasting impression on Berkshire Hathaway."
For the moment, however, Mr. Buffett seems to be retrenching a bit. Like so many people, he was blindsided by the blowup in the housing market and the recession that followed, which hammered his holdings of financial and consumer-related companies. He readily concedes he made his share of mistakes. Among his blunders: investing in an energy company around the time oil prices peaked, and in two Irish banks even as that country's financial system trembled.
Mr. Buffett declined to predict the short-run course of the stock market. But corporate data from Berkshire shows his company was selling more stocks than it was buying by the end of the second quarter, according to Bloomberg News. Its spending on stocks fell to the lowest level in more than five years, although the company is still deftly picking up shares in some companies and buying corporate and government debt.
Among the stocks Mr. Buffett has been selling lately is Moody's, the granddaddy of the much-maligned credit ratings industry. Berkshire, Moody's largest shareholder, said last week that it had reduced its stake by 2 percent.
The shift in Berkshire's investments suggests Mr. Buffett is starting to worry, said Alice Schroeder, the author of "The Snowball," a biography of Mr. Buffett.
But Ms. Schroeder said Mr. Buffett was also growing anxious about how he would be remembered. He wants to remain relevant in the twilight of his career, she said, and is taking a more prominent role on the public stage. That shift means ordinary investors are getting a chance to hear more of his sage advice, but it also carries some risk.
"Before, he always made sure to dole out the wisdom with an eyedropper," Ms. Schroeder said. In the past, Mr. Buffett "said it was a mistake to believe that if you are an expert in one area that people will listen to you in others," she said.
Whatever his recent missteps, many people, from President Obama down, listen to what Mr. Buffett has to say. He is important in his own right as a billionaire businessman but also because millions of ordinary investors follow his homespun aphorisms, copy his investing strategies and await his pronouncements on the markets.
Mr. Buffett refused to be drawn out on where stocks are headed, but he warned about the dangers of investing with borrowed money, or leverage, which proved disastrous when the crisis hit.
As for regrets, he has a few. His timing was bad, he concedes. He should have sold stocks sooner, before the markets tumbled. Then he served up a Buffettism that any investor might heed:
Asked if anything was keeping him awake at night, he said there was not. "If it's going to keep me awake at night," Mr. Buffett said, "I am not going to go there."
by Graham Bowley
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
provided by
Warren E. Buffett has two cardinal rules of investing. Rule No. 1: Never lose money. Rule No. 2: Never forget Rule No. 1.
Well, a lot of old rules got trashed when the financial crisis struck -- even for the Oracle of Omaha.
More from NYTimes.com:
• Merger Will Create U.K. Mobile Giant
• Rebuff by Cadbury Doesn't Deter Kraft
• Auto-Tune Isn't Dead. It's Coming to Your iPhone
At 79, Mr. Buffett is coming off the worst year of his long, storied career. On paper, he personally lost an estimated $25 billion in the financial panic of 2008, enough to cost him his title as the world's richest man. (His friend and sometime bridge partner, Bill Gates, now holds that honor, according to Forbes.)
And yet few people on or off Wall Street have capitalized on this crisis as deftly as Mr. Buffett. After counseling Washington to rescue the nation's financial industry and publicly urging Americans to buy stocks as the markets reeled, in he swooped. Mr. Buffett positioned himself to profit from the market mayhem -- as well as all those taxpayer-financed bailouts -- and thus secure his legacy as one of the greatest investors of all time.
When so many others were running scared last autumn, Mr. Buffett invested billions in Goldman Sachs -- and got a far better deal than Washington. He then staked billions more on General Electric. While taxpayers never bailed out Mr. Buffett, they did bail out some of his stock picks. Goldman, American Express, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp -- all of them got public bailouts that ultimately benefited private shareholders like Mr. Buffett.
If Mr. Buffett picked well -- and, so far, it looks as if he did -- his payoff could be enormous. But now, only a year after the crisis struck, he seems to be worrying that the broader stock market might falter again. After boldly buying when so many were selling assets, his conglomerate, Berkshire Hathaway, is pulling back, buying fewer stocks while investing in corporate and government debt. And Mr. Buffett is warning that the economy, though on the mend, remains deeply troubled.
"We are not out of problems yet," Mr. Buffett said last week in an interview, in which he reflected on the lessons of the last 12 months. "We have got to get the sputtering economy back so it is functioning as it should be."
Still, Mr. Buffett hardly sounded shellshocked in the wake of what he once called the financial equivalent of Pearl Harbor. (An estimated net worth of $37 billion would be a balm to anyone's psyche.)
"It has been an incredibly interesting period in the last year and a half. Just the drama," Mr. Buffett said. "Watching the movie has been fun, and occasionally participating has been fun too, though not in what it has done to people's lives."
Investors big and small hang on Mr. Buffett's pronouncements, and with good reason: if you had invested $1,000 in the stock of Berkshire in 1965, you would have amassed millions of dollars by 2007.
Despite that formidable record, the financial crisis dealt him a stinging blow. While he has not changed his value-oriented approach to investing -- he says he likes to buy quality merchandise, whether socks or stocks, at bargain prices -- Buffettologists wonder what will define the final chapters of his celebrated career.
In doubt, too, is the future of a post-Buffett Berkshire. The sprawling company, whose primary business is insurance, lost about a fifth of its market value during the last year, roughly as much as the broader stock market. While Berkshire remains a corporate bastion, it lost $1.53 billion during the first quarter, then its top-flight credit rating. It returned to profit during the second quarter.
Time is short. While he has no immediate plans to retire, Mr. Buffett is believed to be grooming several possible successors, notably David L. Sokol, chairman of MidAmerican Energy Holdings at Berkshire and also chairman of NetJets, the private jet company owned by Berkshire.
After searching in vain for good investments during the bull market years, Mr. Buffett used last year's rout to make investments that could sow the seeds of future profits.
Justin Fuller, author of the blog Buffettologist and a partner at Midway Capital Research and Management, said the events of the last year, while painful for many, provided Mr. Buffett with the opportunity he had been waiting for.
"He put a ton of capital to work," Mr. Fuller said. "The crisis gave him the ability to put one last and lasting impression on Berkshire Hathaway."
For the moment, however, Mr. Buffett seems to be retrenching a bit. Like so many people, he was blindsided by the blowup in the housing market and the recession that followed, which hammered his holdings of financial and consumer-related companies. He readily concedes he made his share of mistakes. Among his blunders: investing in an energy company around the time oil prices peaked, and in two Irish banks even as that country's financial system trembled.
Mr. Buffett declined to predict the short-run course of the stock market. But corporate data from Berkshire shows his company was selling more stocks than it was buying by the end of the second quarter, according to Bloomberg News. Its spending on stocks fell to the lowest level in more than five years, although the company is still deftly picking up shares in some companies and buying corporate and government debt.
Among the stocks Mr. Buffett has been selling lately is Moody's, the granddaddy of the much-maligned credit ratings industry. Berkshire, Moody's largest shareholder, said last week that it had reduced its stake by 2 percent.
The shift in Berkshire's investments suggests Mr. Buffett is starting to worry, said Alice Schroeder, the author of "The Snowball," a biography of Mr. Buffett.
But Ms. Schroeder said Mr. Buffett was also growing anxious about how he would be remembered. He wants to remain relevant in the twilight of his career, she said, and is taking a more prominent role on the public stage. That shift means ordinary investors are getting a chance to hear more of his sage advice, but it also carries some risk.
"Before, he always made sure to dole out the wisdom with an eyedropper," Ms. Schroeder said. In the past, Mr. Buffett "said it was a mistake to believe that if you are an expert in one area that people will listen to you in others," she said.
Whatever his recent missteps, many people, from President Obama down, listen to what Mr. Buffett has to say. He is important in his own right as a billionaire businessman but also because millions of ordinary investors follow his homespun aphorisms, copy his investing strategies and await his pronouncements on the markets.
Mr. Buffett refused to be drawn out on where stocks are headed, but he warned about the dangers of investing with borrowed money, or leverage, which proved disastrous when the crisis hit.
As for regrets, he has a few. His timing was bad, he concedes. He should have sold stocks sooner, before the markets tumbled. Then he served up a Buffettism that any investor might heed:
Asked if anything was keeping him awake at night, he said there was not. "If it's going to keep me awake at night," Mr. Buffett said, "I am not going to go there."
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
走向多元:2006当代艺术文献展
作者：杨卫 2006-12-05 13:53:20 来源 ： 雅昌艺术网专稿
如果把1989年作为一个分水岭，那么，二十世纪九十年代以后的中国当代艺术无疑是朝向更加多元的方向发展。这种多元首先是因为社会形态的改变。即九十年代之后的市场化潮流，打破了原来的社会格局，把整个社会从单一的意识形态对立关系中解脱出来，分散到了市场运作的各个环节。这股商业大潮对意识形态的瓦解，由上而下，层层渗透，层层剥离，从而又直接导致了整个社会由下而上的多元走势。正是这种多元的社会模式成为艺术发展的基石，使得艺术从由八十年代的整体文化启蒙转变成了现实参与，并在市场化的进程中分散成不同的探索视点。
一个显而易见的事实是，九十年代以后的中国当代艺术几乎再也没有了像八十年代那样共同的文化主张，也少有了像1989年《中国现代艺术展》那样能够包揽全局的艺术展事。尽管这之后有了双年展、三年展的运作模式，但也分散给了各种各样的独立策展人，被他们极具个人化的研究视野所分割，切换成了一个又一个艺术发展的小板块。这之后，惟一一个可以称之为总结性的展览，应该说还是2002年的《广州中国当代艺术三年展》。正是在这个展览上，现执教于美国芝加哥大学的巫鸿教授为九十年代以后的中国当代艺术提出了实验性的概念。之所以提出实验，就是因为九十年代以后的中国当代艺术失去了单一的意识形态背景，无论是样式还是观念均都呈现出一种空前的多元。实验只是一个措辞，与其说是为了给艺术的发展寻找学术命名，不如说是为了给这样一个多元的背景下批评和理论的逐渐失语寻求再次进入的方式。
事实上，谈到实验艺术这个概念，可能更加适合于八十年代的“新潮美术”。因为就实验的特征而言，有着某种“为艺术而艺术”倾向，也就是说更加注重的是形式上的探索。而八十年代的“新潮美术”正是全面向西方引进现代艺术的各种样式，进而朝向本土实验的阶段。也正是因为有了“新潮美术”那段实验，把艺术形式提到了一个前所未有的高度，由此摆脱掉过去长期受意识形态控制的阴影，才使得“为艺术而艺术”的“新潮美术”具有了人性解放的内容，从而跟八十年代的整体文化启蒙联系到了一起。其实，就这一点而言，也正是西方现代艺术曾经走过的历程。西方艺术史逻辑也是从印象派到立体主义直至抽象艺术的一步步发展，以对形式的推崇，脱离艺术原有的社会功效和文学叙事的依附，才使其作为纯粹的审美样式，独立出某种自律形态，真正具有了现代意义上的人文内涵。
有人将中国八十年代的“新潮美术”说成是现代艺术，而九十年代以后的中国当代艺术属于后现代艺术，当然有一定的道理。不过，我觉得这种分析还是得从形式和社会背景的双层关系入手，而不是简单地扣上一顶文化的帽子。事实上，从八十年代的“新潮美术”发展到九十年代以后各种艺术现象的多元并置，正是艺术从形式主义实验到文化意义生成的阶段。而这个转折也恰如现代与后现代的承接关系一样，包含了上承下启的逻辑与必然的发展趋势。
1995年前后，中国当代艺术界有过一场关于意义的讨论，导火索是因为易英先生的一篇文章《力求明确的意义》。在这篇文章中，易英追溯了克莱夫•贝尔的形式理论，并分析了从克莱夫•贝尔到格林伯格的形式主义理论在西方产生与发展的背景，指出其形式理论的现代主义特征，正在受到后现代主义的意义分解与转换。他还以此对照中国八十年代的“新潮美术”，指出“新潮美术的意义在于以理性精神支持的整体价值，由于这种在整体上思想解放和文化批判的意义，使个体的作品在制作上的粗糙和意义上的模糊降到了次要地位。” (《力求明确的意义》)继而，他在进一步分析了西方后现代理论与艺术实践之后，把矛头掉向转型时期的中国社会，认为九十年代以后出现的“新生代”绘画和“政治波普”艺术，对八十年代“新潮美术”的消解，是“从意义的模糊走向意义的明确”。
易英是研究形式出身的理论家，对克莱夫•贝尔、帕诺夫斯基和格林伯格等人的现代主义形式理论有过很深入的研究，之所以九十年代后，他放弃形式主义理论，而力倡意义的明确，就在于社会背景的变化，使原来他所钟情的形式主义理论变成了文化的空壳。
易英的确是一位非常敏感的理论家，在激烈的社会转型时期，他敏感到了艺术所针对的背景，而不是固执地坚持自己过去的研究方向，表明了一个理论家所具有的开放视野。正是因为易英的意义理论在这一时期及时地出炉，为九十年代以后出现的“政治波普”、“新生代”、“艳俗艺术”等等一系列艺术现象提供了新的研究方法，也为艺术的形式延伸找到了社会文化的具体内容。
如果我们把九十年代以后的中国当代艺术说成是具有了某种后现代特征，那么其最大特征就是摆脱了过去大一统的意义模式。易英所说的那种意义明确，实际上是针对社会与个人而言的，是文化针对性上的意义，而不是整体的精神意义。邱志杰曾经在1995年第7期《江苏画刊》上撰文《一个全盘错误的建构》，批评驳斥易英，认为他把意义和含意相混淆，从而抽离了艺术创造的中心价值。其实，在一个多元的社会背景下，不可能再有整体的意义产生，所谓整体的意义恰恰是由若干的个体从文化相对性的角度来促成。正是因为有了各种各样的艺术家在同一个现实下表达出了不同的生存含意，才构成了一个多元时代的整体意义。
我就是从这么一个角度来理解中国当代艺术的所谓后现代状况的。这个后现代当然不会完全归于西方后现代的理论范畴，必然有其自身的现实与文化特性。但是，它对过去意义模式的消解，所衍生出不同的歧义，却跟西方后现代的理论思维颇为接近。而这种接近不仅只是表明了中国当代艺术已经被纳入到了世界当代艺术之林，更重要的是，它对自身内部的激活，犹如卸下了千年的文化枷锁一样，使这个时代的艺术获得了空前的繁荣。
一切都成了资源，包括历史和现实，在这一时期被不同艺术家的探索视点重新昭示了出来。正是这种不同视角的昭示，将个人价值从过去意识形态的束缚中彻底解放，才真正深化了八十年代“新潮美术”所提出来的人性解放主题。而通过这种深化，把一切价值最终落实到创造性个体身上，不仅为我们这个时代拓展了历史的经验，更是丰富了我们这个时代的文化表情。我不清楚这是否可以称之为后现代，或是中国方式的后现代，但我知道，通过这种多元所揭示出来的人文内涵，将会带给中国艺术史上一些从未有过的新意。
2006.10.25于通州
作者：杨卫 2006-12-05 13:53:20 来源 ： 雅昌艺术网专稿
如果把1989年作为一个分水岭，那么，二十世纪九十年代以后的中国当代艺术无疑是朝向更加多元的方向发展。这种多元首先是因为社会形态的改变。即九十年代之后的市场化潮流，打破了原来的社会格局，把整个社会从单一的意识形态对立关系中解脱出来，分散到了市场运作的各个环节。这股商业大潮对意识形态的瓦解，由上而下，层层渗透，层层剥离，从而又直接导致了整个社会由下而上的多元走势。正是这种多元的社会模式成为艺术发展的基石，使得艺术从由八十年代的整体文化启蒙转变成了现实参与，并在市场化的进程中分散成不同的探索视点。
一个显而易见的事实是，九十年代以后的中国当代艺术几乎再也没有了像八十年代那样共同的文化主张，也少有了像1989年《中国现代艺术展》那样能够包揽全局的艺术展事。尽管这之后有了双年展、三年展的运作模式，但也分散给了各种各样的独立策展人，被他们极具个人化的研究视野所分割，切换成了一个又一个艺术发展的小板块。这之后，惟一一个可以称之为总结性的展览，应该说还是2002年的《广州中国当代艺术三年展》。正是在这个展览上，现执教于美国芝加哥大学的巫鸿教授为九十年代以后的中国当代艺术提出了实验性的概念。之所以提出实验，就是因为九十年代以后的中国当代艺术失去了单一的意识形态背景，无论是样式还是观念均都呈现出一种空前的多元。实验只是一个措辞，与其说是为了给艺术的发展寻找学术命名，不如说是为了给这样一个多元的背景下批评和理论的逐渐失语寻求再次进入的方式。
事实上，谈到实验艺术这个概念，可能更加适合于八十年代的“新潮美术”。因为就实验的特征而言，有着某种“为艺术而艺术”倾向，也就是说更加注重的是形式上的探索。而八十年代的“新潮美术”正是全面向西方引进现代艺术的各种样式，进而朝向本土实验的阶段。也正是因为有了“新潮美术”那段实验，把艺术形式提到了一个前所未有的高度，由此摆脱掉过去长期受意识形态控制的阴影，才使得“为艺术而艺术”的“新潮美术”具有了人性解放的内容，从而跟八十年代的整体文化启蒙联系到了一起。其实，就这一点而言，也正是西方现代艺术曾经走过的历程。西方艺术史逻辑也是从印象派到立体主义直至抽象艺术的一步步发展，以对形式的推崇，脱离艺术原有的社会功效和文学叙事的依附，才使其作为纯粹的审美样式，独立出某种自律形态，真正具有了现代意义上的人文内涵。
有人将中国八十年代的“新潮美术”说成是现代艺术，而九十年代以后的中国当代艺术属于后现代艺术，当然有一定的道理。不过，我觉得这种分析还是得从形式和社会背景的双层关系入手，而不是简单地扣上一顶文化的帽子。事实上，从八十年代的“新潮美术”发展到九十年代以后各种艺术现象的多元并置，正是艺术从形式主义实验到文化意义生成的阶段。而这个转折也恰如现代与后现代的承接关系一样，包含了上承下启的逻辑与必然的发展趋势。
1995年前后，中国当代艺术界有过一场关于意义的讨论，导火索是因为易英先生的一篇文章《力求明确的意义》。在这篇文章中，易英追溯了克莱夫•贝尔的形式理论，并分析了从克莱夫•贝尔到格林伯格的形式主义理论在西方产生与发展的背景，指出其形式理论的现代主义特征，正在受到后现代主义的意义分解与转换。他还以此对照中国八十年代的“新潮美术”，指出“新潮美术的意义在于以理性精神支持的整体价值，由于这种在整体上思想解放和文化批判的意义，使个体的作品在制作上的粗糙和意义上的模糊降到了次要地位。” (《力求明确的意义》)继而，他在进一步分析了西方后现代理论与艺术实践之后，把矛头掉向转型时期的中国社会，认为九十年代以后出现的“新生代”绘画和“政治波普”艺术，对八十年代“新潮美术”的消解，是“从意义的模糊走向意义的明确”。
易英是研究形式出身的理论家，对克莱夫•贝尔、帕诺夫斯基和格林伯格等人的现代主义形式理论有过很深入的研究，之所以九十年代后，他放弃形式主义理论，而力倡意义的明确，就在于社会背景的变化，使原来他所钟情的形式主义理论变成了文化的空壳。
易英的确是一位非常敏感的理论家，在激烈的社会转型时期，他敏感到了艺术所针对的背景，而不是固执地坚持自己过去的研究方向，表明了一个理论家所具有的开放视野。正是因为易英的意义理论在这一时期及时地出炉，为九十年代以后出现的“政治波普”、“新生代”、“艳俗艺术”等等一系列艺术现象提供了新的研究方法，也为艺术的形式延伸找到了社会文化的具体内容。
如果我们把九十年代以后的中国当代艺术说成是具有了某种后现代特征，那么其最大特征就是摆脱了过去大一统的意义模式。易英所说的那种意义明确，实际上是针对社会与个人而言的，是文化针对性上的意义，而不是整体的精神意义。邱志杰曾经在1995年第7期《江苏画刊》上撰文《一个全盘错误的建构》，批评驳斥易英，认为他把意义和含意相混淆，从而抽离了艺术创造的中心价值。其实，在一个多元的社会背景下，不可能再有整体的意义产生，所谓整体的意义恰恰是由若干的个体从文化相对性的角度来促成。正是因为有了各种各样的艺术家在同一个现实下表达出了不同的生存含意，才构成了一个多元时代的整体意义。
我就是从这么一个角度来理解中国当代艺术的所谓后现代状况的。这个后现代当然不会完全归于西方后现代的理论范畴，必然有其自身的现实与文化特性。但是，它对过去意义模式的消解，所衍生出不同的歧义，却跟西方后现代的理论思维颇为接近。而这种接近不仅只是表明了中国当代艺术已经被纳入到了世界当代艺术之林，更重要的是，它对自身内部的激活，犹如卸下了千年的文化枷锁一样，使这个时代的艺术获得了空前的繁荣。
一切都成了资源，包括历史和现实，在这一时期被不同艺术家的探索视点重新昭示了出来。正是这种不同视角的昭示，将个人价值从过去意识形态的束缚中彻底解放，才真正深化了八十年代“新潮美术”所提出来的人性解放主题。而通过这种深化，把一切价值最终落实到创造性个体身上，不仅为我们这个时代拓展了历史的经验，更是丰富了我们这个时代的文化表情。我不清楚这是否可以称之为后现代，或是中国方式的后现代，但我知道，通过这种多元所揭示出来的人文内涵，将会带给中国艺术史上一些从未有过的新意。
2006.10.25于通州
一场精心策划的追尾：“追尾”当代艺术展
作者：刘洵 2007-06-25 17:24:17 来源 ： 雅昌艺术网专稿
无论旭日当头还是夜幕低垂,城市这个巨大的现实装置空间里,汽车构成了不可或缺的重要元素。汽车是个人或家庭继房地产之后最重要的私有家财,它是肉体的延伸和可以移动的家什,更是当代社会私人扩张性欲望的主要象征物。国人近百年的富国强民之梦,近二十年,新一轮“超英赶美”与国际对话接轨的态势,都使中国城市比以往更疯狂地改变着它的外观与内核。如果说,城市宛如平躺在地的身体,四通八达的公路即是肌肤下的血管,运动的车流就是都市血管里的活性因子和文明工业最显性的符号。 当年未来主义者对速度的痴迷与呼喊余波未绝,今天,最日常的都市体验便是肉眼在汽车掩护下的快速移位。无论驾驶者如何遵循交通规则与道德约束,在这条或宽或窄的血管里,堵塞与碰撞在所难免。充满动感的城市里,汽车与汽车之间的追尾事故演义为关于控制和暴力的都市风景。
转型期的中国社会似乎比任何一个时期都显得充满动感,扩张的环城公路与流动汽车构成城市的新景观，国际化的技术革命正改写普通人的生活方式,物质主义巨大的力量也无法弥补传统精神整体的缺失,贫富差距扩大化与不完备的法制建设,个人欲望膨胀与经济泡沫的繁荣,社会价值判断失衡与集体的公共意识的缺口,这一切都彰显当下变化莫测又混乱不堪的文化实况。新世纪以来，中国当代艺术以其独有的社会文化现实和政治背景,成为世界当代文化阵营中最鲜活的声音。近年来，艺术市场风向标的移位，西方艺术机构的介入,让国中当代艺术频频制造市场神话，使得北京上海这样的“名利场”上人头攒动，犬儒主义和机会主义尘嚣未落,当代艺术的实验精神和直面现实的情怀却湮灭在市场的叫卖声中。
对于那些暂时不在北京或上海工作的艺术家们，市场的运营与名利的追逐变得不象中心地带那般激烈。在前方无市场召唤,后方面临地方保守势力压制的现实面前,我们的工作方式不是固步自封和被动的。这里，因特网建立起我们与世界的联系,也建构出新的人际关系。对待艺术，更主动的出击是我们对待工作的态度，更灵动的方法论是我们守望自身文化和与国际对话的策略，更多位的当下社会文化切口是工作的基点，更团结的人脉关系是我们真诚交流和改善本土文化生态的法宝。与其说，“追尾”是一个本土当代艺术展览的文化主题，不如说，它体现一个远离文化中心的当代艺术团队在当下社会的集体发言。发言与都市有关、与汽车有关、与暴力有关、与人性有关、与权力和体制有关、与当代艺术有关。参加展览的十二位艺术家有着迥异的工作角度，他们凌驾媒介和寻找文化切点的方式不径相同，但作品与作品之间具备有机的联系并互为表里，共同营造出鲜明的实验态度和关于社会和文化冲突的艺术现场。
朱朝晖与石劲松都热衷于采用绘画方式，并不约而同的截取了都市人物作为发言的材料。水墨这种并无当代质感的材料被他们灵活的再次运用，如果石劲松的绘画并未将绘画的外壳抛弃的话，朱朝晖却宁愿将绘画变成物体。从外观看，朱朝晖的人物直接取材于照片中的现实人物，但它们被艺术家刻意从背景中抽离出来，作品精妙绝伦的尺度感很明白的告诉观者，那些纸上人物只不过是城市人群无面目的标本符号。在皮纸和水墨的合力渲染下，这些小人物轻盈得如同丧失了肉体的魂魄，轻飘飘地无所归依。在这里，都市群像被晒干,变成了任人把玩的人偶，装置化的排列方式悬垂出当下新都市的皮影，它们击活我们的想象力，也逼迫我们重新思考我们是谁的古老命题。显然，石劲松在描绘之初也借鉴了照片作为蓝本，但他从照片的物象上脱离出来，天马行空想象增添了他对图像有机重构的能力，他以图像学的方式直观的表证着现实,并撕开了反讽各类现实人物的窗口。放大的作品尺度使他选择的人物孤立为另一种舞台上的剧照。他的绘画以素面朝天的方式简化了生活的色彩，笔端却又滞留了对细节的迷恋，对比强烈的线条并没有应物象形，而是显性增加了画面的荒诞气质。也许是都市文脉的滋养，也许是他本人气质的自然流露，这些面目表情怪异的人物，复印着生活快照并又时时提醒我们应与这些人物保持距离。
唐建文装置作品的切口和刘洵的影像都是关于都市欲望的，唐建文选择了材料与空间的综合表述法，刘洵迷恋声画与时间的影像合成。在现场，唐建文直观的还原了汽车飞速撞入墙体的暴力场面，戏剧性的演义了物欲与生理欲望同构的一刻。在物欲膨胀的时代，名车是都市身份和财富的象征，是欲望的物质载体。汽车消费神话的背后，潜藏着多少变异的生理和心理的机能。墙上喷绘的女性涂鸦,广告式的显现了时尚文化的本质,它让唐建文的现场生猛而充满视觉快感，装置作品生动地印证了鲍德里亚所说：“汽车的神奇性与崇高性就是，它是一个阳具或一个阳具性物品”。我们在震撼之余，能感受到一种机器时代特有的生殖崇拜的力量。多年以来,刘洵持续性的在影像领域工作，他回避了唐建文式的物质叙事，而通过镜头和荧屏进行现场发言。在十二分钟的镜头链条里，夜的迷离、夜的空洞、夜的欲望与夜的潮湿通过声音和画面的交合组成。在语言层面上，蒙太奇手法与长镜头摆拍合二为一，外在的现实与内化的幻象分段落铺陈。长夜无眠的黑暗中，不灭荧屏的幽光里，都市青年亚健康的生活方式以电影化的镜头还原再生。短片中,人机对话的疲惫拟写了都市青年在暗夜的另类生活,它导演着身体欲望后工业方式释放的青春神话。
刘希与何玲在年龄和阅历上明显不同，但作品在精神指向上却又有着某种联系。灵与肉,这古老的话语被刘希用录像装置方式展示，并生硬的放置在现实中,它逼迫我们的思维不得不穿越三界时空。何玲的身体表演选择平面摄影为媒介证明,复原远古神话的梦想只是一种表象,戏剧性的表白身体与环境之间的故事才是他的良苦用意。刘希作品里,精心设计和制作的汽车模型并不是现实车模,明眼人会知道,那是开往天国承载魂灵的明器,轻飘而脆弱。车窗中恍恍忽忽的无声的倒置着模糊人影,弥漫着生命彼岸的灵性气息,同时又将虚无的生命观物质化了。此刻,刘希努力扮演着招魂的巫师,而他营造的鬼魅道具真能安抚不安宁的都市心灵吗?抑或,当下人车关系是留给未来考古用的残片?鸿爪雪泥的生命印痕也许真隐含在那充满冲突的车箱里。何玲对精神的追问常常是游戏化和身体化的,这次,他改玄更张不用肉身直接搏斗,而是带着标志性的翅膀上路。戏剧效果通过精心设计的摆拍实现。照片中,他一己血肉之躯伦为异化的神鸟肢体, 挺立在城市的各种建筑上,营造出超现实主义的都市图景。作品包含着多种悖论挥之不去:历史符号的东方神鸟突兀的出现在当代城市中,以古通今的寓言用荒诞美丽的构图法呈现,个体渺小的身躯与城市环境中多元混乱的视点等。何玲表意性的证明了那张梦想翅膀遮挡不住现实里变化无穷的光影。
史智勇和林小烽都对摄影情有独衷,他们躲在照相机后部观看,并将窥视的物件压成一张平面影像。不同处是前者直接采用抓拍手段,后者痴迷摆拍伎俩,前者将自我入镜,并把自我与环境的关系演义为互为他者,后者总是欲说还休,需通过借喻的方式玩弄视觉游戏,勾引他人猜测镜头外的玄音。史智勇的相机在手中旋转了360度,并拍摄了不同角度的画面,他简化的还原了古老电影的神话。当这台多角度的扫描仪象机枪一样向着自我和他人开火时,人物与现实环境都变成了图像学的魔方。无疑,史智勇是制造混乱图像的高手,图片之间无法对齐的接口是质疑现实标准的,游戏式的拍摄方式里隐含着他建构摄影方法论的决心,后现代城市文化的破碎感用最直白的语言显影,它成为搭建现实视觉与梦幻镜像的桥梁。林小烽近年来一直在建构他的<<伤花系列>>摄影作品,这批照片精致且冷艳, 宁静且伤感,美丽且残酷,其中玩偶的身影是林小烽精神外化的道具,是隐喻现实问题的载体。真假花卉与改造后的人偶陈列在幽暗的背景中,它们在镜头美学和数字技术双重的掩体深处,欲盖弥彰。一个真假模糊的商业时代,一个人造欲望的矫情时代,一个人工智能的科技时代给予照片外向延伸的社会背景。假做真来真亦假似的古典话语,被林小烽转移了时代语境,透过画意十足的照片,直观地散发出让人迷惑不解的气息。
六十年代生动的历史文化背景给予了石强和罗阅同样的文化滋养,也让他们的作品切口总在社会体制与历史考古之间徘徊。智性的反思与视觉的置换成为他们常常采用的方法。石强偷换传统书法王者风骨的同时,罗阅将凝重的符号改为轻盈漂亮的装饰物,石强让看客视觉和心理都发生了偏离,罗阅解构了人们意识深处的庄重,并让政治符号重新充满能量。石强以少有的冷静面对历史,他选用的徽宗书法貌合神离的摆脱了历史的轨道,生硬的出现在当代文化的现场里。石强置换了现成品,材料学的媒介转换,摄影化的书法图像,直接的终止了书法痴迷者的来路与归途。让我们追问的是:历史典籍的墨香变质霉坏了吗?挥之不去的蚊蝇让我们静观历史困难重重吗?还是,古与今的链接里本来就充满着重构与怀疑?石强作品书卷气背后隐含着批判权力的精神,他巧妙制造的视觉冲突越过了条幅限定的空间,让我们可以闭目,但不能不沉思。罗阅的生活和工作背景使他对往昔岁月有着清晰的记忆,集体主义时代的精神意志在社会转型的今天早已烟消云散,凝重的意识形态的宏大叙事被艺术家更日常的当下经验取代。罗阅建立了一种新的 “政治波普”立场,文化批判和历史反思不再是简单的表白,在他营造的更为综合立体的现场中,变换质感的符号具有光鲜的装饰效果,它远离了历史和政治的暴力语境,在朦胧的红色沙帘中,悬浮出轻盈美丽的当下气质。
陈泽慧和贺龙元都是对社会学感兴趣的艺术家，他们假以艺术的方式直面现实生态,并力图从固化的美学象牙塔突围,这回,他们精心设计着关于社会调查的问卷。陈泽慧采用田野调查似的方法,通过对城市特色街区的直观陈列,追问全球化带来的新都市课题,贺龙元喜欢用现成品制作作品,作品舞台化的再现了暴力的事故,并让每一个观众成为隔岸观火的看客。今天,正在发展中的大小城市里,步行街这种模式已是一种最具中国特色的窗口。它们模式化的显现了城市表面的发展与繁华,毫无个性可言的统一街市建设,混乱地彰显着国家资本的后现代性,公共性的商业化休闲街道的背后却是城市虚无悬置的文化实质。所谓的步行街,是当下社会性和城市人文的缩影,也是权力化和殖民化合谋的产物,更是关于城市泡沫经济最简单的注解。陈泽慧抛弃了艺术家的职业外衣,用群众艺术馆馆员的身份直接写作,他的调查报告中,图片和影像资料是物证,文本是记录与讨论的讲义,它们共同实录城市建设光鲜其外,暴力其中的时代本质。贺龙元是生活在城市的新无产者,他的自由身份,使他能以特立独行的眼光观看城市故事,他常通过廉价的各类报纸解读社会感知城市,在资讯膨胀的时期,名目繁多的各类新闻只不过是饭后谈资,信息构建的超文本也使事实真相无法考证,湮灭在无法认真阅读的文字中。贺龙元的装置现场恰似一个小型的悲剧舞台, 灾难感由翻转的汽车、倒塌的砖头、不息的红灯、戏剧性的残雪和零乱的报纸构成,
杂乱的实物用游戏的方式摆出了莫名的城市悲情。不可避免的,充满冲突的作品也将会被过度消费的城市人遗忘。
把“追尾”当动词使用,它包含着冲突和暴力,意旨速度与自我控制。将它视为名词时,它是形而下的当下生活,是机器时代和汽车时代特有的城市景观。以日常词汇作为当代艺术展览的学术主题,并以此,制造一个生动有趣的展览事件。鲜活展览表明了艺术家对当代文化的态度,滋生了有趣的作品,而作品再反向引发一串的质疑和思考,这构成了当下我们的工作方法和最丰富的文化生态链条。
无论朱朝晖晃动的人偶, 石劲松怪异的肖像, 唐建文直观的汽车与涂鸦, 刘洵诗学的镜头, 还是刘希脆弱的灵车, 何玲灵动的表演, 史智勇顽皮的眼光,林小烽阴险的道具,抑或是石强解构的书法, 罗阅悬置的符号,陈泽慧怀疑的采样, 贺龙元悲情的玩具,都不是简单的可复制的图式,而是生动文化现场的个性化角度。
随着我们实验步伐的加快,我们将寻找出更有效更有趣的出发点,填平地域文化与国际主流舞台的护城河,链接艺术游戏与日常体验的无形网络线,下一次展览实践也许更令人期待。
作者：刘洵 2007-06-25 17:24:17 来源 ： 雅昌艺术网专稿
无论旭日当头还是夜幕低垂,城市这个巨大的现实装置空间里,汽车构成了不可或缺的重要元素。汽车是个人或家庭继房地产之后最重要的私有家财,它是肉体的延伸和可以移动的家什,更是当代社会私人扩张性欲望的主要象征物。国人近百年的富国强民之梦,近二十年,新一轮“超英赶美”与国际对话接轨的态势,都使中国城市比以往更疯狂地改变着它的外观与内核。如果说,城市宛如平躺在地的身体,四通八达的公路即是肌肤下的血管,运动的车流就是都市血管里的活性因子和文明工业最显性的符号。 当年未来主义者对速度的痴迷与呼喊余波未绝,今天,最日常的都市体验便是肉眼在汽车掩护下的快速移位。无论驾驶者如何遵循交通规则与道德约束,在这条或宽或窄的血管里,堵塞与碰撞在所难免。充满动感的城市里,汽车与汽车之间的追尾事故演义为关于控制和暴力的都市风景。
转型期的中国社会似乎比任何一个时期都显得充满动感,扩张的环城公路与流动汽车构成城市的新景观，国际化的技术革命正改写普通人的生活方式,物质主义巨大的力量也无法弥补传统精神整体的缺失,贫富差距扩大化与不完备的法制建设,个人欲望膨胀与经济泡沫的繁荣,社会价值判断失衡与集体的公共意识的缺口,这一切都彰显当下变化莫测又混乱不堪的文化实况。新世纪以来，中国当代艺术以其独有的社会文化现实和政治背景,成为世界当代文化阵营中最鲜活的声音。近年来，艺术市场风向标的移位，西方艺术机构的介入,让国中当代艺术频频制造市场神话，使得北京上海这样的“名利场”上人头攒动，犬儒主义和机会主义尘嚣未落,当代艺术的实验精神和直面现实的情怀却湮灭在市场的叫卖声中。
对于那些暂时不在北京或上海工作的艺术家们，市场的运营与名利的追逐变得不象中心地带那般激烈。在前方无市场召唤,后方面临地方保守势力压制的现实面前,我们的工作方式不是固步自封和被动的。这里，因特网建立起我们与世界的联系,也建构出新的人际关系。对待艺术，更主动的出击是我们对待工作的态度，更灵动的方法论是我们守望自身文化和与国际对话的策略，更多位的当下社会文化切口是工作的基点，更团结的人脉关系是我们真诚交流和改善本土文化生态的法宝。与其说，“追尾”是一个本土当代艺术展览的文化主题，不如说，它体现一个远离文化中心的当代艺术团队在当下社会的集体发言。发言与都市有关、与汽车有关、与暴力有关、与人性有关、与权力和体制有关、与当代艺术有关。参加展览的十二位艺术家有着迥异的工作角度，他们凌驾媒介和寻找文化切点的方式不径相同，但作品与作品之间具备有机的联系并互为表里，共同营造出鲜明的实验态度和关于社会和文化冲突的艺术现场。
朱朝晖与石劲松都热衷于采用绘画方式，并不约而同的截取了都市人物作为发言的材料。水墨这种并无当代质感的材料被他们灵活的再次运用，如果石劲松的绘画并未将绘画的外壳抛弃的话，朱朝晖却宁愿将绘画变成物体。从外观看，朱朝晖的人物直接取材于照片中的现实人物，但它们被艺术家刻意从背景中抽离出来，作品精妙绝伦的尺度感很明白的告诉观者，那些纸上人物只不过是城市人群无面目的标本符号。在皮纸和水墨的合力渲染下，这些小人物轻盈得如同丧失了肉体的魂魄，轻飘飘地无所归依。在这里，都市群像被晒干,变成了任人把玩的人偶，装置化的排列方式悬垂出当下新都市的皮影，它们击活我们的想象力，也逼迫我们重新思考我们是谁的古老命题。显然，石劲松在描绘之初也借鉴了照片作为蓝本，但他从照片的物象上脱离出来，天马行空想象增添了他对图像有机重构的能力，他以图像学的方式直观的表证着现实,并撕开了反讽各类现实人物的窗口。放大的作品尺度使他选择的人物孤立为另一种舞台上的剧照。他的绘画以素面朝天的方式简化了生活的色彩，笔端却又滞留了对细节的迷恋，对比强烈的线条并没有应物象形，而是显性增加了画面的荒诞气质。也许是都市文脉的滋养，也许是他本人气质的自然流露，这些面目表情怪异的人物，复印着生活快照并又时时提醒我们应与这些人物保持距离。
唐建文装置作品的切口和刘洵的影像都是关于都市欲望的，唐建文选择了材料与空间的综合表述法，刘洵迷恋声画与时间的影像合成。在现场，唐建文直观的还原了汽车飞速撞入墙体的暴力场面，戏剧性的演义了物欲与生理欲望同构的一刻。在物欲膨胀的时代，名车是都市身份和财富的象征，是欲望的物质载体。汽车消费神话的背后，潜藏着多少变异的生理和心理的机能。墙上喷绘的女性涂鸦,广告式的显现了时尚文化的本质,它让唐建文的现场生猛而充满视觉快感，装置作品生动地印证了鲍德里亚所说：“汽车的神奇性与崇高性就是，它是一个阳具或一个阳具性物品”。我们在震撼之余，能感受到一种机器时代特有的生殖崇拜的力量。多年以来,刘洵持续性的在影像领域工作，他回避了唐建文式的物质叙事，而通过镜头和荧屏进行现场发言。在十二分钟的镜头链条里，夜的迷离、夜的空洞、夜的欲望与夜的潮湿通过声音和画面的交合组成。在语言层面上，蒙太奇手法与长镜头摆拍合二为一，外在的现实与内化的幻象分段落铺陈。长夜无眠的黑暗中，不灭荧屏的幽光里，都市青年亚健康的生活方式以电影化的镜头还原再生。短片中,人机对话的疲惫拟写了都市青年在暗夜的另类生活,它导演着身体欲望后工业方式释放的青春神话。
刘希与何玲在年龄和阅历上明显不同，但作品在精神指向上却又有着某种联系。灵与肉,这古老的话语被刘希用录像装置方式展示，并生硬的放置在现实中,它逼迫我们的思维不得不穿越三界时空。何玲的身体表演选择平面摄影为媒介证明,复原远古神话的梦想只是一种表象,戏剧性的表白身体与环境之间的故事才是他的良苦用意。刘希作品里,精心设计和制作的汽车模型并不是现实车模,明眼人会知道,那是开往天国承载魂灵的明器,轻飘而脆弱。车窗中恍恍忽忽的无声的倒置着模糊人影,弥漫着生命彼岸的灵性气息,同时又将虚无的生命观物质化了。此刻,刘希努力扮演着招魂的巫师,而他营造的鬼魅道具真能安抚不安宁的都市心灵吗?抑或,当下人车关系是留给未来考古用的残片?鸿爪雪泥的生命印痕也许真隐含在那充满冲突的车箱里。何玲对精神的追问常常是游戏化和身体化的,这次,他改玄更张不用肉身直接搏斗,而是带着标志性的翅膀上路。戏剧效果通过精心设计的摆拍实现。照片中,他一己血肉之躯伦为异化的神鸟肢体, 挺立在城市的各种建筑上,营造出超现实主义的都市图景。作品包含着多种悖论挥之不去:历史符号的东方神鸟突兀的出现在当代城市中,以古通今的寓言用荒诞美丽的构图法呈现,个体渺小的身躯与城市环境中多元混乱的视点等。何玲表意性的证明了那张梦想翅膀遮挡不住现实里变化无穷的光影。
史智勇和林小烽都对摄影情有独衷,他们躲在照相机后部观看,并将窥视的物件压成一张平面影像。不同处是前者直接采用抓拍手段,后者痴迷摆拍伎俩,前者将自我入镜,并把自我与环境的关系演义为互为他者,后者总是欲说还休,需通过借喻的方式玩弄视觉游戏,勾引他人猜测镜头外的玄音。史智勇的相机在手中旋转了360度,并拍摄了不同角度的画面,他简化的还原了古老电影的神话。当这台多角度的扫描仪象机枪一样向着自我和他人开火时,人物与现实环境都变成了图像学的魔方。无疑,史智勇是制造混乱图像的高手,图片之间无法对齐的接口是质疑现实标准的,游戏式的拍摄方式里隐含着他建构摄影方法论的决心,后现代城市文化的破碎感用最直白的语言显影,它成为搭建现实视觉与梦幻镜像的桥梁。林小烽近年来一直在建构他的<<伤花系列>>摄影作品,这批照片精致且冷艳, 宁静且伤感,美丽且残酷,其中玩偶的身影是林小烽精神外化的道具,是隐喻现实问题的载体。真假花卉与改造后的人偶陈列在幽暗的背景中,它们在镜头美学和数字技术双重的掩体深处,欲盖弥彰。一个真假模糊的商业时代,一个人造欲望的矫情时代,一个人工智能的科技时代给予照片外向延伸的社会背景。假做真来真亦假似的古典话语,被林小烽转移了时代语境,透过画意十足的照片,直观地散发出让人迷惑不解的气息。
六十年代生动的历史文化背景给予了石强和罗阅同样的文化滋养,也让他们的作品切口总在社会体制与历史考古之间徘徊。智性的反思与视觉的置换成为他们常常采用的方法。石强偷换传统书法王者风骨的同时,罗阅将凝重的符号改为轻盈漂亮的装饰物,石强让看客视觉和心理都发生了偏离,罗阅解构了人们意识深处的庄重,并让政治符号重新充满能量。石强以少有的冷静面对历史,他选用的徽宗书法貌合神离的摆脱了历史的轨道,生硬的出现在当代文化的现场里。石强置换了现成品,材料学的媒介转换,摄影化的书法图像,直接的终止了书法痴迷者的来路与归途。让我们追问的是:历史典籍的墨香变质霉坏了吗?挥之不去的蚊蝇让我们静观历史困难重重吗?还是,古与今的链接里本来就充满着重构与怀疑?石强作品书卷气背后隐含着批判权力的精神,他巧妙制造的视觉冲突越过了条幅限定的空间,让我们可以闭目,但不能不沉思。罗阅的生活和工作背景使他对往昔岁月有着清晰的记忆,集体主义时代的精神意志在社会转型的今天早已烟消云散,凝重的意识形态的宏大叙事被艺术家更日常的当下经验取代。罗阅建立了一种新的 “政治波普”立场,文化批判和历史反思不再是简单的表白,在他营造的更为综合立体的现场中,变换质感的符号具有光鲜的装饰效果,它远离了历史和政治的暴力语境,在朦胧的红色沙帘中,悬浮出轻盈美丽的当下气质。
陈泽慧和贺龙元都是对社会学感兴趣的艺术家，他们假以艺术的方式直面现实生态,并力图从固化的美学象牙塔突围,这回,他们精心设计着关于社会调查的问卷。陈泽慧采用田野调查似的方法,通过对城市特色街区的直观陈列,追问全球化带来的新都市课题,贺龙元喜欢用现成品制作作品,作品舞台化的再现了暴力的事故,并让每一个观众成为隔岸观火的看客。今天,正在发展中的大小城市里,步行街这种模式已是一种最具中国特色的窗口。它们模式化的显现了城市表面的发展与繁华,毫无个性可言的统一街市建设,混乱地彰显着国家资本的后现代性,公共性的商业化休闲街道的背后却是城市虚无悬置的文化实质。所谓的步行街,是当下社会性和城市人文的缩影,也是权力化和殖民化合谋的产物,更是关于城市泡沫经济最简单的注解。陈泽慧抛弃了艺术家的职业外衣,用群众艺术馆馆员的身份直接写作,他的调查报告中,图片和影像资料是物证,文本是记录与讨论的讲义,它们共同实录城市建设光鲜其外,暴力其中的时代本质。贺龙元是生活在城市的新无产者,他的自由身份,使他能以特立独行的眼光观看城市故事,他常通过廉价的各类报纸解读社会感知城市,在资讯膨胀的时期,名目繁多的各类新闻只不过是饭后谈资,信息构建的超文本也使事实真相无法考证,湮灭在无法认真阅读的文字中。贺龙元的装置现场恰似一个小型的悲剧舞台, 灾难感由翻转的汽车、倒塌的砖头、不息的红灯、戏剧性的残雪和零乱的报纸构成,
杂乱的实物用游戏的方式摆出了莫名的城市悲情。不可避免的,充满冲突的作品也将会被过度消费的城市人遗忘。
把“追尾”当动词使用,它包含着冲突和暴力,意旨速度与自我控制。将它视为名词时,它是形而下的当下生活,是机器时代和汽车时代特有的城市景观。以日常词汇作为当代艺术展览的学术主题,并以此,制造一个生动有趣的展览事件。鲜活展览表明了艺术家对当代文化的态度,滋生了有趣的作品,而作品再反向引发一串的质疑和思考,这构成了当下我们的工作方法和最丰富的文化生态链条。
无论朱朝晖晃动的人偶, 石劲松怪异的肖像, 唐建文直观的汽车与涂鸦, 刘洵诗学的镜头, 还是刘希脆弱的灵车, 何玲灵动的表演, 史智勇顽皮的眼光,林小烽阴险的道具,抑或是石强解构的书法, 罗阅悬置的符号,陈泽慧怀疑的采样, 贺龙元悲情的玩具,都不是简单的可复制的图式,而是生动文化现场的个性化角度。
随着我们实验步伐的加快,我们将寻找出更有效更有趣的出发点,填平地域文化与国际主流舞台的护城河,链接艺术游戏与日常体验的无形网络线,下一次展览实践也许更令人期待。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)