石玩玩&赵晨
本文是应石节子美术馆之邀，基于2017年11月份在石节子村创作《照沟渠》所做的一篇对话，文章首次发表于石节子美术馆微信公众号，感谢赵晨博士为本文所做的帮助，也感谢石节子美术馆、石节子村与靳勒村长给予作品的帮助。
赵晨=赵
石玩玩=石
在地性作品背后的普遍性意义是“人心”
赵:在这件作品里,石节子这个地方是不可替代的,还是换成其它地方也行?
考虑方案的时候,肯定还是希望这件作品不可替代,这也是在地性创作的基本特征和最大价值。石节子这个地方本身就是一个很特殊的地方,艺术家遇到这种地方一般都会很兴奋,比起普通的地方,会容易使上力。其次,在地性创作也是我现在思考的一个方向,所以,肯定还是想做一件不可替代的作品。
赵:结果你认为达到了没有?
石:应该算达到了吧。
赵:如果是在你老家如皋的农村,也有这样一个小村子,你做一个一模一样的作品行不行?
肯定不行的。我觉得这件作品的结构挺清楚的,我从全村13户居民家里,把他们家正在使用的灯泡借过来,在村边的一个山坡上,组成了一个大笑脸。从形式的角度,我再去借一堆灯泡组成一个笑脸,那没问题。但脱离了石节子这个特殊语境,那作品的指向就完全发生了变化,变成另外一件作品了。这也是我们常说的,当代艺术不是一门形式主义的艺术,我们不能只是从作品的形式来判断作品,这样也容易误读作品。
赵:你同意所有的在地性作品都是针对专属语境做作品吗?变成特殊语境的定制作品?
石:是的,特殊语境容易给作品明确、足够的力量,但也确实容易限制作品的格局。我觉得作品来自于特殊场所、特殊语境,但我希望作品背后的格局能更大。比如黄永砯的两本美术史,其实不仅仅讨论的是美术家的事,更多还是中西方现代性的问题。《照沟渠》我也希望“照到的”不仅仅是石节子村,或者石节子村的问题,我觉得还是一种普遍意义上的“人心”。“我本将心向明月,奈何明月照沟渠”,还是具备一种普遍意义的吧。艺术家不也是这样吗?
赵:你指的是不是,所有的社会环境都有无奈的因素?
石:是的,打个比方,你说你做艺术这么多年,你图的啥?你说是理想,那这个理想真能实现吗?很难讲,如果不能实现你还干吗?你不还得干吗?
赵:你说的是什么理想?
石:没那么具体,就是你做艺术的原动力吧。你说你为什么做艺术?
赵:做艺术是从动物本能到理性自觉的一种需求吧。对艺术家来说,做艺术是为自己做,还是为其他目的做,这个问题你怎么看?
石:这个不可分割,都会有。尼采把人的两端解释成动物性和超人性,一个是回到人性的最基本属性,一个是超越普通人的最高属性。他在《悲剧起源》里将艺术起源也分成酒神说和日神说,比如音乐是典型的酒神,造型艺术、雕塑之类的是日神。但今天你看,其实很多艺术形式两者都有,你很难说是动物性、本能在帮助你进行艺术创作,还是超理性在推动你的艺术创作,这个没法分开,也不用分开。作品是给别人看的,还是给自己看的,也是一样的,往往是混在一块的。往往造成悲剧的是,艺术家把这两点人为分的太开了,艺术家做艺术一辈子只给自己看,不管别人,就给自己做艺术,其实可能吗?我觉得不可能的。还有一种,艺术就给别人做的,给市场做的,艺术家自己不重要,真能做到这样吗?杰夫·昆斯都不敢这样承认。
所以做完这件作品,我也反问过自己,这件作品的出发点是在地性创作,但这件作品真的离不开这个山沟吗?这件作品实施完之后,这些灯在山谷里亮了一夜,老靳的父亲还觉得特别浪费电,因为这一夜是没人看的,我也走了,村民也都睡了。我觉得就这样没人看的时候,一个大笑脸在山沟里亮一夜,这种感觉挺好的,挺孤独的。
赵:挺好的。我还要问的是,艺术家的意愿得到满足了,那村民们得到什么呢?
石:艺术在历史进程中,艺术在人类的发展中,到底扮演一个什么样的角色。艺术到底能给予社会什么?这是一个很大的问题,也是我们所有人都面临的问题。在北京、上海、纽约、伦敦和石节子,都会存在这个问题。回到这个作品,这件作品我想应该是无法给村民带来什么直接好处的,甚至对村民的生活还会带来不便。但我想,为什么村民、村长还是给予了我巨大的热情,帮助我完成了这件作品。
赵:为什么呢?
石:我觉得首先是信任,我不知道他们是否能理解我的创作意图,或者说他们是否同意我的观点,但基于对艺术的信任,这么多年他们一直是这么做的。其次,是中国传统里最朴素的待客之道。我是客人,客人的愿望总是应该给予最大可能性的满足,即使有些无理,也不用挑明。所以,即使你给他们生活带来了不便,一夜家里都没有亮光,这些都没问题。
认知世界和改造世界同样重要
赵:这个我同意。回到艺术能给村民什么这个问题上,我举几个例子。一个是村民在节假日里,自己花钱请人到村子里唱戏。在这件事里,村民们自己掏了钱,但享受到了他们自己需要的精神生活;第二个是老靳说的,他三叔在卡塞尔接受媒体采访时记者问他“艺术和雨水哪个更重要?”老人家说:“如果没有艺术,我也不会来德国开这么大的眼界,但我们是庄稼人,没有雨水我们没法生活,所以艺术重要,雨水也重要。”第三个就包括你的这件作品。这些事里都有现实生活和精神生活的关系。你怎么看待这几个例子?
石:去德国给予了村民眼界的提高,甚至于自豪感的提升,这些都是潜移默化的。我们无法用修个厕所、挖个水道这样方式来论证艺术无用论。更放宽点说,艺术或者文化的作用是帮我们更好的认识这个世界,认识我们的生活;而工具可以直接改造生活。你说,是认识世界重要,还是改造世界重要?我觉得老靳这10年的工作,确实造成了村民自豪感的提升、眼界的提高,从而给改造他们的生活带来了可能性,在这里面,艺术或者说艺术活动起到了重要作用,这么说不为过。
一次共同的“情感经历”
石:你说对艺术家来讲艺术跟生活哪个更重要?看起来一样的问题,但其实不同之处在于,艺术对于艺术家来说是自主选择,而艺术对村民来讲,不是主动的选择。这样看来,是有点不公,但我觉得10年的过程就证明了村民们对于这种选择的认可。
赵:艺术有权力让别人生活不便吗?
石:没有。但在这件作品里,这又是特别重要的一个环节,所以,在不影响作品的前提下,把这种不便降到最低,就一个晚上。这里面村民的不便和沟渠里的笑脸都是这件作品里必不可少的一个部分。我自己觉得,村民们还挺喜欢这件作品的,他们觉得挺漂亮的。我原来想,如果他们不愿意,我就在9点前给他们还回去,结果他们说不用,他们还没看呢!我突然感觉到了他们的参与感,这其实是一件我们一起完成的“事儿”,在这件事情里,大家各有分工,大家都要付出,不计较彼此,是一种协商。但事情有没有意思很重要。所以,最终,大家都很满意这件事,在“干了件有意思的事”的前提下,我们达成了共识。所以,这就不是问题了。
赵:只是一件“事”?
石:从某种意义上讲,是的,只是一件事。就像一群陌生人一起干了一票特棒的事,然后就散了。其实更像是一种共同的“情感经历”,在这样的“情感经历”里,在那一瞬间,大家达成了共识。其实这是我觉得公共性艺术最有魅力的地方,而不在于是否留下什么东西,或者只是某种关怀。
不以生产图像为目的,图像只是自然形成的结果。
赵:《照沟渠》现在是一个录像和一张摄影图片吗?
石:是的,录像更像是一个作品的纪录片,交代了这件作品的完成的过程和最终的效果。照片就是一张黑夜里的“笑脸”。
赵:你为什么不选择把这13户村民的“黑夜”展示出来?
石:你的问题是,当我把这笑脸点亮的时候,背后13户村民家却是暗的,为什么不把这个交代清楚?我不太倾向于怕观众看不懂,什么都面面俱到说不停。其实录像里这些都交代清楚了,所以最终我把想象留给了观众。也许大部分观众只看到了“笑脸”,但“笑脸”背后的代价,光亮背后的“黑暗”是我们不太容易察觉的,这也是事实,也是这件作品存在的价值。没看到,没想到也没关系,只看到笑脸也没关系,有些事,是需要我们再想想的。
赵:相比较传统艺术只呈现经典结果,当代艺术可以展现过程、台下,戏剧艺术中有打破第四堵墙。视线的转移可以带来视角的拓宽。这种不只是展现台上一分钟,而是连带着真实的展现一分钟背后的台下十年功的血肉连带关系,这样的表现手法在当代艺术里屡见不鲜了。在这个前提下,我是否可以理解,你把13户村民家即时的状况排除在作品最终形式之外,是否还是一种传统思维模式?
石:不同意啊,如果我只展现一张照片,可能会被你问倒。但我还有一个录像,这个录像包含了所有的过程,所以我认为呈现方式并不传统。我理解你说的意思,在这件作品里,我的目的并不是做个“灯”而已,而是从与村民商量、到借灯、到用借来的灯组成笑脸、到山崖上亮一宿以及13户村民家陷入黑暗,这一系列全过程,构成了这件作品。借用尼古拉斯·伯瑞奥德的观点:艺术史的发展从单纯的做个东西的“thing”、到有艺术家、艺术家签名的形式的“works”、到今天的“event”。与“works”的不同,“event”不是一个孤立的物质,也不是一个孤立的“image”,它应该是一个一连串的事件组成的场域,虽然它最终跟观众交流的还是“图像”,但此“图像”已经非彼“图像”了。简单的说,经典艺术的核心价值就是创造“图像”,而事件艺术不以生产图像为目的,图像只是事情自然生成的结果。
赵:我们再做个假设,你如果在每个村民家,在村民不知情的情况下都装上监控摄像头。当你在山崖上亮灯的时候,你能获得最真实的村民反应,这样是不是更让你的作品触碰到真实呢?
石:我不同意你的观点。毫无疑问,如果我把这13个黑乎乎的监控摄像与亮着灯的微笑同时在展厅展示出来,观众会更好懂。但是观众好懂与作品更好之间并没有必然联系。其次,村民将灯泡大方的借给我,就不用去猜测村民是否真心借给我,还是会有其他不同观点了。他借给我,就是信任,不用再多想这个信任是否真心,没有必要。
By Shiwanwan & Zhao chen
This article is an invitation to the Shijiezi Museum, thisdialogue based on an artwork named " But the Moom Shines on the Ditch"made in August 2017 in Shijiezi Village. The article was first published in theWeChat official accountat the Shijiezi Museum, and thanks to Dr. Zhao Chenfor the help of this article, I also thank the Shijiezi Museum, ShijieziVillage and Jin Le major for their help.
Zhao Chen=Zhao
Shi Wanwan=Shi
The universal meaning of the local works is "the human emotion".
Zhao: So Shijiezi is the irreplaceable location in this work? Can other location be replaced?
I certainly hope this work is irreplaceable when considering the plan. It is also the basic characteristics and the most important value of local creation. Shijiezi is such a special place that artists are usually excited to be here. In the other word, they are more likely to be inspired in Shijiezi. Secondly, local work is one of the directions I’m considering right now so I prefer an irreplaceable work.
Zhao: As far as this result is concerned, do you achieved what you wanted?
Shi: Maybe, I think.
Zhao: Can you draw an identical painting if there were a same village in your hometown, Rugao?
Definitely I can’t. The structure of the work is clear enough, I think. I made a big smile on a hillside beside the village in some bulbs in use which I borrowed from 13 households of the village. Formally, it doesn't seem any different that I borrowed such a bunch of bulbs to form a smiling face again. However, the direction of the work will completely change and the work itself will become another piece of work after breaking away from Shijiezi, the special artistic conception. That is our saying goes, contemporary art is definitely not formalistic that we can’t consider work only by its form or the work is easy to misread by the public.
Zhao: Do you agree that local works are all done for the special artistic conception?
Shi: Yes, the special context makes the work clear and powerful enough but it is also really easy to limit the pattern of a work. Work comes from special place and special context, I think. But I also hope that there is a much larger pattern behind the work. For example--the two books on art history by Huang Yongping, in fact, they include not only artists discussing but also the current generation of Chinese and Western issues. I also hope that the "shine" is not only Shijiezi village or its problem but also the "heart" in the universal sense. "My gaze toward the moon, but the moon shines on the ditch." There is also full with universal significance in this poem. And artists are also like this.
Zhao: Do you mean that all the social environment partly results from resignation?
Shi: Yes. For example, you have been working with art for many years, and what for? Ideal? Are you sure you can achieve it? It is hard to say, is that true? And will you continue your work if the ideal cannot come true? There’s no doubt that your answer is yes.
Zhao: Ideal? You mean what?
Shi: Just like the motive force of your art work. Why are you in art?
Zhao: Art is a kind of need which is from human instinct to rational consciousness. What do you think about that if the artists does artwork for themselves or for other purposes?
Shi: They are indivisible. Nietzsche interprets the two ends of man as animal and superhuman--the first is to back to the most basic attributes of human nature and the other is opening the eyes to the highest attribute beyond ordinary people. In the Origins of Tragedy, he divides the origins of art into the Dionysus and the Sun-Gods, such as a typical Dionysus, music and typical Sun-Gods like the plastic arts and sculpture. But as you can see, in fact, nowadays many art forms contain both of the above. It’s hard to tell whether what helps you create art is animal or super rational. It can't be separated and doesn't have to be. Just like that whether the work is for others or for yourself. Tragically, some artists split the two points too far. They do art to show themselves all their lives, regardless of others. There is also an artist whose art is not important to others and to the market. Is it realistic? Jeff Koons can’t admit that, either.
So after finishing this work, I also asked myself, the starting point of this work is local creation, but is this work really inseparable from this mountain and ditch? When the lights lit up all night in the valley, Jin's father felt that electricity was a waste of electricity, because no one had seen it that night and I had gone too, the villagers also had gone to sleep. It’s a pretty nice feeling that a big smile in the valley overnight when no one is watching, I think, a bit lonely.
Zhao: Not bad. But I also have a question to ask, what do the villagers get when the artist's will has been satisfied?
Shi: In the course of history and in the development of mankind, what role does art play and what does art give to society? That is a big problem that we all face and it exists not only in Beijing, Shanghai, New York, London but also Shijiezi. Back to this work, I think it has not brought any direct benefits to the villagers, and even taken inconvenience to the lives of the villagers. But I guess why the villagers, the village chief, gave me great enthusiasm to help me finish the work.
Zhao: Then why?
Shi: Firstly, the trust, I think is trust. I don't know if they understand my creative intentions or if they agree with me but they've been doing this for years because of their trust in art. Secondly, it is the simplest way of hospitality in Chinese tradition. As a guest, my wishes are always being given the greatest possible satisfaction even if it’s a little unreasonable, they would also not identify. So that it doesn’t matter even if you're inconveniencing their lives and there's no light at home all night.
It's just as important to recognize the world as to transform it
Zhao: I also agree that. In response to the question of what art can give to villagers, I will cite a few examples. One is that if villagers spend money to sing in the village during holidays, then they paid themselves for the spiritual life they needed. The second was said by Lao Jin. When his third uncle was interviewed by the media in Kassel, the reporter asked him, "Which is more important about art or Rain Water?" "If there were no art, I wouldn't have come to Germany to have such a big view," said the old man. "But we are farmers. We can't live without Rain Water. The art is important, too." The third is from the work of yours. These examples all include the relationship between real life and spiritual life. What do you think about those?
Shi: Going to Germany gave villagers a better outlook and even a higher sense of pride, all of which were imperceptible. We cannot demonstrate the futility of art by repairing a toilet and digging a waterway. Broadly speaking, the role of art or culture is to help us better understand the world and our lives, but tools can directly transform life. And do you think it is important to know the world or to transform the world? I feel that Jin's 10 years' work has really led to an increase in villagers' pride and vision, thus bringing about the possibility of transforming their lives. In this case, art or artistic activities have played an important role. That is not to say too much.
Zhao: Do you think the three examples are different?
Which is more important to an artist do you think, art or life? It seems that the problem is the same, but the difference is that art is an autonomous choice for artists but not an active choice for villagers. This may seem unfair, but I think the 10-year process is proof of villagers' acceptance of this choice.
Zhao: But does art have power to make people inconvenient?
No. But this is also a particularly important link in the work, so we keep this inconvenience to a minimum without prejudice to the work, just one night. I think the villagers also like this work and they think it's pretty. I thought if they didn't want to, I'd give them back before 9:00. But they said no, they hadn't seen it yet! I suddenly saw their sense of participation. It was actually a task we had accomplished together. In this case, everyone had a division of labor and everyone had to pay and regardless of each other—it was a negotiation. But whether it's interesting or not is important and in the end, everyone is happy with it. So on the premise of doing something interesting, we reached a consensus. And then there is no problem.
Zhao: So it’s just one “thing”?
In one sense, yes. It was like a bunch of strangers doing a great thing together, and then they broke up. In fact, it’s more like a common "emotional experience", in a moment of that, we reached a consensus. This is what I think is the most attractive part of public art, not whether or not to leave anything or just some kind of care.
Images are only the result of natural formation, not for the purpose of producing images.
Zhao: Is the work "But the Moon Shines on the Ditch" a video and a photographic picture?
Shi: Yes. The video is more like a documentary about a work which explains the process of completion and the final effect of the work, and the photo is a "smiling face" in the night.
Zhao: Why not show the "night" of these 13 villagers?
You mean, when I lit up this smiling face, the 13 villagers behind it are dark. Why not explain this clearly? I don't like to be afraid that the audience won't understand so that I should not stop explaining everything. In fact, this is clearly explained in the video, so I finally left my imagination to the audience. Perhaps most of the audience only saw the "smiling face," but the price behind the "smiling face" and the “dark” behind the light are not easy to detect. This is not only the fact but also the value of the existence of this work. It doesn't matter if they don't see it or just see a smiling face. After all, some things need to be reconsidered.
Zhao: Compared with traditional art which only presents classical results, contemporary art can show the process and what’s under the stage; what’s more, drama art has broken the 4th wall. The shift of sight can lead to a broadening of the perspective. This isn’t just a minute on the stand but with a real display of the next ten years of blood and flesh ties. Such a watch is not uncommon in contemporary art. Under this premise, can I understand whether you are still in a traditional mode of thinking when you exclude the immediate situation of 13 villagers' homes from the final form of your work?
Shi: No, you can’t. If I showed only one picture, I might have nothing to say. But I also have a video that contains all the processes, so I don't think the presentation is traditional. I know what you mean, but in this work, my purpose is not to make a "lamp" but the whole series of processes which makes up this piece of work, including consulting with the villagers, borrowing a lamp, making a smiling face out of a borrowed lamp, shining on a cliff for a night and sinking 13 villagers' homes into darkness. To paraphrase Nicholas Burriold, the evolution of art history has ranged from "thing" that humans do simply to the "works" in the form of an artist's signature and to "event" today. Unlike "works", "event" is not an isolated substance or an isolated "image". It might be a field of events and although it ultimately communicates with the audience with the "image," this "image" is no longer the "image." Simply put, the core value of classical art is to create "images" and images are only the natural result of things, but the art of events does not produce images for the purpose.
Zhao: Let's assume that if you put monitoring on every villager's house without the villagers' knowledge, you can get the truest reaction from the villagers when you light the lights on the cliff. Does this make your work more real?
I don't agree with you. There is no doubt that audiences will easily understand the work if I show the 13 monitors and the shining smile. But there is no necessary connection between the audience's ease of understanding and the better work. Secondly, the villagers lend me light bulbs generously, so I don't have to guess whether the villagers really lend them to me or there will be other different views. It is trust that he lent me so I need not think more about whether this trust is true. That's not necessary.