在深圳公车上目睹一男当众掏出了一个女人胸部
物之屏
出 品： 千高原艺术空间
艺术总监： 刘杰
策 展 人： 鲍栋
艺 术 家： 陈秋林、关音夫、肖雄、余极、张慧
开幕酒会： 2009年7月28日下午3点
展览日期： 2009年7月28日至9月30日
展览地点： 千高原艺术空间，芳沁街87号，成都
一直以来，艺术的本体论在中国始终未被人们关注，甚至提及，当代艺术批评及艺术史的实践都在试图绕开这一无法被绕开的问题，甚至没有意识到这一关键领域的存在。这表现为，一方面是对作品所涉的社会及心理内容的描述和归纳僭越了对艺术活动及作品本身的感知与分析，另一方面，是把作品匆匆还原为社会态度或政治观点。我们的关键词不是“反映”与“表现”，就是“批判”或“表达”，总之，不是一种贫乏的现实主义思维模式，就是一种浮泛的后现代主义思想框架。
然而，艺术如何才能是反映与表现，又如何才能构成有效的批判与表达？这是一个回避不了的问题。把艺术作为认识的途径的，或者实践的工具，这些都是艺术的某种可能的“身份”，但是艺术的“身体”到底是什么？这就已经提出了一个本体论的问题。当代艺术的本体论，即思考“艺术是什么”，这不是在寻求一种表象化的智识性的艺术定义，而是在沉思艺术的“当下上手状态”，换句话说，是在为艺术而“烦”。
通常，艺术品被认为是一种物化的结果，艺术活动被理解成一种物化的过程，即主体、精神、形式、内容及心灵的施行过程，在这里，物的本真状态被纳入到了一个表征结构之中了，物成为了被施行的对象。于是，艺术被视为一面映照着自然或社会的镜子，或者一块容纳了精神与思想的空地，本体的问题遂被忽略。
但在这个展览中，我们把艺术中的物理解为某种屏障，而不是一种容器。在这里，“物”涵盖了客体、物质、材料、媒介及身体，它是对所有异质性因素的召唤，它抵抗着表征的同一性驯化，但又不得不处于某种表征关系中。而在这种关系中，艺术活动的真正价值即是不断地反思既定的表征实践，让世界在表征的遮蔽（Lethe）中闪现出无蔽(Aletheia)，这正是艺术在本体论视域中的真理性。因此，我们用“物之屏”这个概念来形容艺术活动所真正面对的问题——异质性的在场。
Obstruction
Director: A Thousand Plateaus Art Space
Art Director: Liu Jie
Curator: Bao Dong
Artists: Chen Qiulin, Guan Yinfu, Xiao Xiong, Yu Ji, Zhang Hui
Opening: July 28th 2009, 3pm
Exhibition Time: July 28th – Sept. 30th, 2009
Exhibition Venue: A Thousand Plateaus Art Space, 87 Fangqin Jie, Chengdu
Ontological questions on art have not yet been raised in China. Contemporary art critics and art historians seem to avoid this question. Some do not even seem to realize its importance, although its key position in art research is abundantly evident. The reason for this neglect is twofold. In the first place, the emphasis on the social and psychological content of art works has so far dominated the perception and analysis of art events and the art works itself. Secondly, art works have too often and too quickly been forced into a political and society- related interpretation. Therefore, our main focus should not be limited to a mere ‘reflection’ or ‘display’, but should broaden its scope to ‘critique’ and ‘expression’. Our concern should not be based on a poor modern thinking pattern but should depart from a rich post-modern frame of thought.
How does art ‘reflect’ or ‘display’ and, more important, how can art effectively ‘critique’ or ‘express’? This is a question essential to our understanding of art. Whether art is a theoretical thoroughfare or a practical tool, they are all equally possible identities of ‘art’. But every identity is also intrinsically connected to a body. This question on the body of art is in se ontological in nature. In its reflection on the nature of art, contemporary art ontology is not looking for a representational and epistemological definition of art. It rather aims to reflect on the ‘ready-to-hand’ (Zuhandenheit) status of art, which means in other words, being ‘concerned’ (Sorge) about art.
Art works are often seen as a result of materialization. Art events are understood as a process of materialization, as a way of processing subject, mind, form, content and soul. Objects have entered a representational structure and as such are being ‘processed’. In this context, art is seen as the mirror of nature or society. It is an empty space containing mind and thought, but where the ontological question is slowly being neglected.
In this exhibition we see the art object not as a representation but as an obstruction. The object is a veil that covers subject, substance, material, medium and body. It rallies all heterogeneous elements and opposes a one-sided homogeneous representation. At the same time however, the object can not be but subsumed under this representational relation, for it is in this relation that art events can solidify their real value in being a continuous reflection on the established representational art practice. By lifting the ‘unconcealment’ (Aletheia) from the ‘concealment’ (Lethe), the essential truth of art ontology reveals itself. Therefore we have chosen Obstruction as title of this exhibition, since the real question that should preoccupy art events is the presence of heterogeneity.
海报
张慧,可疑的绘画-风景 No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-风景 No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-静物 No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-静物No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.3,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
陈秋林 , 侧着的女人, 废纸,雕塑,67x85x57.5cm, 2008
陈秋林, 趴着, 废纸,雕塑, 175x50x18cm,2009
陈秋林, 漂浮No.6, 废纸,雕塑,140x110x54cm,2009
陈秋林, 我的30年, 废纸,雕塑, 2008
陈秋林, 坐着, 废纸,雕塑,85x96x69cm,90x53x43cm,91x63x57cm, 2008
肖雄 , 21世纪的起源 ,录像 ,8分15秒, 2008
肖雄 , 唯物主义 , 图片,72x120cm, 2006, Ed.8
肖雄,桃 ,图片,15x192cm, 2007, Ed.10
关音夫, 默默的等待, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 240x240cm, 2008
关音夫,离开躯体的人, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 200x200cm,2008
关音夫,庸脂俗粉, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 200x200cm, 2008
余极 ,变脸 , 录像,单屏投影,4分钟,2009
余极, 舐纸呼吸 No.1, 行为录像, 2002
出 品： 千高原艺术空间
艺术总监： 刘杰
策 展 人： 鲍栋
艺 术 家： 陈秋林、关音夫、肖雄、余极、张慧
开幕酒会： 2009年7月28日下午3点
展览日期： 2009年7月28日至9月30日
展览地点： 千高原艺术空间，芳沁街87号，成都
一直以来，艺术的本体论在中国始终未被人们关注，甚至提及，当代艺术批评及艺术史的实践都在试图绕开这一无法被绕开的问题，甚至没有意识到这一关键领域的存在。这表现为，一方面是对作品所涉的社会及心理内容的描述和归纳僭越了对艺术活动及作品本身的感知与分析，另一方面，是把作品匆匆还原为社会态度或政治观点。我们的关键词不是“反映”与“表现”，就是“批判”或“表达”，总之，不是一种贫乏的现实主义思维模式，就是一种浮泛的后现代主义思想框架。
然而，艺术如何才能是反映与表现，又如何才能构成有效的批判与表达？这是一个回避不了的问题。把艺术作为认识的途径的，或者实践的工具，这些都是艺术的某种可能的“身份”，但是艺术的“身体”到底是什么？这就已经提出了一个本体论的问题。当代艺术的本体论，即思考“艺术是什么”，这不是在寻求一种表象化的智识性的艺术定义，而是在沉思艺术的“当下上手状态”，换句话说，是在为艺术而“烦”。
通常，艺术品被认为是一种物化的结果，艺术活动被理解成一种物化的过程，即主体、精神、形式、内容及心灵的施行过程，在这里，物的本真状态被纳入到了一个表征结构之中了，物成为了被施行的对象。于是，艺术被视为一面映照着自然或社会的镜子，或者一块容纳了精神与思想的空地，本体的问题遂被忽略。
但在这个展览中，我们把艺术中的物理解为某种屏障，而不是一种容器。在这里，“物”涵盖了客体、物质、材料、媒介及身体，它是对所有异质性因素的召唤，它抵抗着表征的同一性驯化，但又不得不处于某种表征关系中。而在这种关系中，艺术活动的真正价值即是不断地反思既定的表征实践，让世界在表征的遮蔽（Lethe）中闪现出无蔽(Aletheia)，这正是艺术在本体论视域中的真理性。因此，我们用“物之屏”这个概念来形容艺术活动所真正面对的问题——异质性的在场。
Obstruction
Director: A Thousand Plateaus Art Space
Art Director: Liu Jie
Curator: Bao Dong
Artists: Chen Qiulin, Guan Yinfu, Xiao Xiong, Yu Ji, Zhang Hui
Opening: July 28th 2009, 3pm
Exhibition Time: July 28th – Sept. 30th, 2009
Exhibition Venue: A Thousand Plateaus Art Space, 87 Fangqin Jie, Chengdu
Ontological questions on art have not yet been raised in China. Contemporary art critics and art historians seem to avoid this question. Some do not even seem to realize its importance, although its key position in art research is abundantly evident. The reason for this neglect is twofold. In the first place, the emphasis on the social and psychological content of art works has so far dominated the perception and analysis of art events and the art works itself. Secondly, art works have too often and too quickly been forced into a political and society- related interpretation. Therefore, our main focus should not be limited to a mere ‘reflection’ or ‘display’, but should broaden its scope to ‘critique’ and ‘expression’. Our concern should not be based on a poor modern thinking pattern but should depart from a rich post-modern frame of thought.
How does art ‘reflect’ or ‘display’ and, more important, how can art effectively ‘critique’ or ‘express’? This is a question essential to our understanding of art. Whether art is a theoretical thoroughfare or a practical tool, they are all equally possible identities of ‘art’. But every identity is also intrinsically connected to a body. This question on the body of art is in se ontological in nature. In its reflection on the nature of art, contemporary art ontology is not looking for a representational and epistemological definition of art. It rather aims to reflect on the ‘ready-to-hand’ (Zuhandenheit) status of art, which means in other words, being ‘concerned’ (Sorge) about art.
Art works are often seen as a result of materialization. Art events are understood as a process of materialization, as a way of processing subject, mind, form, content and soul. Objects have entered a representational structure and as such are being ‘processed’. In this context, art is seen as the mirror of nature or society. It is an empty space containing mind and thought, but where the ontological question is slowly being neglected.
In this exhibition we see the art object not as a representation but as an obstruction. The object is a veil that covers subject, substance, material, medium and body. It rallies all heterogeneous elements and opposes a one-sided homogeneous representation. At the same time however, the object can not be but subsumed under this representational relation, for it is in this relation that art events can solidify their real value in being a continuous reflection on the established representational art practice. By lifting the ‘unconcealment’ (Aletheia) from the ‘concealment’ (Lethe), the essential truth of art ontology reveals itself. Therefore we have chosen Obstruction as title of this exhibition, since the real question that should preoccupy art events is the presence of heterogeneity.
海报
张慧,可疑的绘画-风景 No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-风景 No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-静物 No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-静物No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.1,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.2,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
张慧,可疑的绘画-人物No.3,布面油画,190x190cm,2008
陈秋林 , 侧着的女人, 废纸,雕塑,67x85x57.5cm, 2008
陈秋林, 趴着, 废纸,雕塑, 175x50x18cm,2009
陈秋林, 漂浮No.6, 废纸,雕塑,140x110x54cm,2009
陈秋林, 我的30年, 废纸,雕塑, 2008
陈秋林, 坐着, 废纸,雕塑,85x96x69cm,90x53x43cm,91x63x57cm, 2008
肖雄 , 21世纪的起源 ,录像 ,8分15秒, 2008
肖雄 , 唯物主义 , 图片,72x120cm, 2006, Ed.8
肖雄,桃 ,图片,15x192cm, 2007, Ed.10
关音夫, 默默的等待, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 240x240cm, 2008
关音夫,离开躯体的人, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 200x200cm,2008
关音夫,庸脂俗粉, 木板丙烯及综合材料, 200x200cm, 2008
余极 ,变脸 , 录像,单屏投影,4分钟,2009
余极, 舐纸呼吸 No.1, 行为录像, 2002
[quote]引用第1楼guest于2009-8-5 5:23:05发表的:
可疑的不是绘画，可疑的是你
暴动的理论太理论了，完全代表中国这批不懂的所谓的批评家。
一群找不到矛坑，没屎拉，又找不到纸的人。凑合啦。
一群找不到矛坑，没屎拉，又找不到纸的人。凑合啦。
一群找不到矛坑，没屎拉，又找不到纸的人。凑合啦。
一群找不到纸，又想拉屎，正好看到一毛坑。凑合啦。
一群找不到纸，又想拉屎，正好看到一毛坑。凑合啦。
一群找不到纸，又想拉屎，正好看到一毛坑。凑合啦。
一群找不到纸，又想拉屎，正好看到一毛坑。凑合啦。
一群找不到纸，又想拉屎，正好看到一毛坑。凑合啦。
鲍栋怎么跟这几个烂人搞到一起了？
[quote]引用第10楼guest于2009-8-5 22:38:35发表的:
鲍栋怎么跟这几个烂人搞到一起了？...[/quote]
陈秋林是太烂了，一副怕卖不掉的样，可是张慧是后感性的老人了，肖雄是老长征，更别说那老行为余极了，怎么和鲍栋这种撒笔搞在一起？
[quote]引用第11楼guest于2009-8-5 23:49:24发表的:
[quote]引用第10楼guest于2009-8-5 22:38:35发表的:
应该，都是千画廊惹的事吧，朋友！
也不能就根据照片来评价作品的好坏吧。我看很多作品似乎不怎么样，可是说不定现场看是不一样的感觉呢。
我是想了解每个作品后边的故事。
现在国内的展览实在太多了。多到没有观众能真正消化。 节奏快也不一定是好事。
我是想了解每个作品后边的故事。
现在国内的展览实在太多了。多到没有观众能真正消化。 节奏快也不一定是好事。
www.artisthorizon.com
当代艺术家和收藏家的共享空间
为艺术爸爸虾兵蟹将悲哀，支持鲍栋！！
[quote]引用第6楼guest于2009-8-5 12:58:48发表的:
可疑的不是绘画，可疑的是你
这些SB有才了！看到羊，非说学的是驴
这些BS有才了！看到狼，非说学的是羊
有点用力过猛，每个人的作品都太多了，不透气
