25000 Interview, answers
Interview
25000 Interview, answers
Edited by Yan Bing
Spring is here, the mating season.
The art world didn’t show any reaction as the second “25000” Prize was announced in mid-February, it seems that this flow of prizes leave everyone indifferent.
Aside from being academic, the aim of this prize also consists in expanding its influence and seeking more action possibilites. Art-Ba-Ba community will present on March 16th a serious constructive discussion. The topic will be “Why? What?”. Art-Ba-Ba invited busybodies and prestigious people from every corners of the country to hold an open dialogue on internet.
Exhibitions selection’s issues:
1: Voting differences between specialists and internet users
Guest: There is a big difference between the selection made by the specialists and internet users’ votes. What does this show? That the result of this selection was done within the specialists’ circle and that internet users’ votes were apparently largely crooked.
Lu Jie: You can’t really look at things this way, the public opinion is mainly the same as last year’s one, so after all it is in favor of the public. Specialists and public opinion are also very close, so it should be quite rational, no?
Xu Zhen: If this small circle can be efficient, or if advantages outweigh disadvantages, it is a good thing, it means that this small circle is useful. And vice versa. We don’t have any evidences that there were no cheating in internet users’ voting process. But it is not excluded that some audience like some exhibitions a lot, and overdid it. This is impossible to control.
To sum up, as long as it is active, that people are participating, and we can discuss, the aim of this prize is reached. For me, it doesn’t matter who’s first and who’s second.
2. Why? What’s the matter?
Fei Dawei: this time there is a “why?” in this discussion, what does the question “why?” stand for? Why does Chinese contemporary art have these problems? Or why do we do art? Or what other questions?
Xu Zhen: Why is everything so weak now, why now that our conditions are good we don’t feel that great. We always wanted to ask what’s the matter with people and things. It seems there are many questions, but we don’t know where to start.
Fei Dawei: “there are many questions, but we don’t know where to start”. I think that the word “start” is problematic, it seems we have to solve some issue. The art problem can’t be “solved”, it can only be discussed, and it is actually good to provoke a real collision. “Real collision” means talking about concrete questions, without personal consideration. For example, talking about this prize: a vote on internet isn’t the best solution, everyone knows why. I think that later we can “hang” an artist or a work to let everyone criticize it, insults should be erased and valuable critics remained, this way we can talk about one or various topics in depth.
Guest: Discussions about art will then go back to critics’ hands, a lot of artists are not good in using words to express themselves, aside from using simple words of indignation.
Fei Dawei: He he, I understand what you mean. I also don’t wish that discussion is restrained to the small circle of “critics”. Artists’ capicity of expressions is always limited, not only when discussing, but also when thinking of their works or expressing them. But I think artists should learn to express their thoughts. Nowadays, a lot of artists, aside from producing works, only say swearing words which is actually one of our ‘bottlenecks’.
Xu Zhen: The origin of interviews and dialogues on internet comes from our revulsion towards traditional symposiums’ pedantry and academic arbitrariness. Things have been like that for two years already. If some abuses or problems produced by this internet system occur, we have to think of a way to avoid them.
Xu Zhen: What are the academic construction, environment or surviving situation that young critics are facing?
Guest: A lot of artists still lack of management knowledge, or self-exploitation, and lost what is called “opinion”, “inspiration”, in this self deception. Of course this is also true for me.
Xu Zhen: What do you mean by management knowledge?
Guest: For example: even though everyone’s conditions are good, why doesn’t everyone feel great?
At least, we lack of some kind of stable attitude of creation, and we are too opportunistic.
Guest: What the people of the 85 New Wave did was necessary at that time, because China was then excessively secluded, and nowadays everyone still naively do things very close to the 85 New Wave, there’s a lack of reflection. Critics are still empiricist when it comes to classic imagination, and possibly neglected the importance of innovative thoughts. In this period where exhibitions are more and more popular, “artwork” are being selected as a unit, tied, compared. “Artwork’s semblance” weakness can’t be used in specific exhibitions. This is another choosing dilemma. The imagination of what is called “artwork’s semblance” is inspired by classics from this last century, in fact this idea of choosing something from the ‘Avant-garde’ period is conservative. I consider that these last five years’ “Long March -- A walking Visually Display” is very good, it needed to be done.
“General Survery of Yanchuan papercutting” was also realized because it was needed, preceding policies, it was professionally and consciously done. The following “Yan An Art Education Symposium” was done at the right time, Cai’s big structures were also very appropriate, there was an architectural feeling. “New Folk Movement” was a very good standpoint, it corresponded well to the country’s rectified reflection, filling “From up to down” working insufficiency. That year Li Xiaoshan wrote “Chinese contemporary painting from my point of view” which was fundamental at that time. Li decided in 2002 to start “Prayer beads and brush strokes”, his focusing on this period can easily be disputed, but he did what he considered important. People who think of big issues easily look at present questions from another point of view, therefore his decisions time-wise are very diffcult to understand. Qiu Zhijie’s fever came down, of course he is very winsome, Li is too dismal, Zhang Song, Chen Danqing, Chen Shouxiang… for me, are all winsome, no matter what they said, it is alright to thank these people. Wu Guanzhong wrote: Superfluous!
What to do? For me, many artists are always thinking of this topic, but thoughts focusing on construction significance can"t easily be turned into an exhibited work, numerous artworks comprising equivocal features are issued from good ideas, but as soon as they become an artwork, they are charged with old stuffs, so doing something constructive from an artist’s point of view is very difficult.
25000 Interview, answers
Edited by Yan Bing
Spring is here, the mating season.
The art world didn’t show any reaction as the second “25000” Prize was announced in mid-February, it seems that this flow of prizes leave everyone indifferent.
Aside from being academic, the aim of this prize also consists in expanding its influence and seeking more action possibilites. Art-Ba-Ba community will present on March 16th a serious constructive discussion. The topic will be “Why? What?”. Art-Ba-Ba invited busybodies and prestigious people from every corners of the country to hold an open dialogue on internet.
Exhibitions selection’s issues:
1: Voting differences between specialists and internet users
Guest: There is a big difference between the selection made by the specialists and internet users’ votes. What does this show? That the result of this selection was done within the specialists’ circle and that internet users’ votes were apparently largely crooked.
Lu Jie: You can’t really look at things this way, the public opinion is mainly the same as last year’s one, so after all it is in favor of the public. Specialists and public opinion are also very close, so it should be quite rational, no?
Xu Zhen: If this small circle can be efficient, or if advantages outweigh disadvantages, it is a good thing, it means that this small circle is useful. And vice versa. We don’t have any evidences that there were no cheating in internet users’ voting process. But it is not excluded that some audience like some exhibitions a lot, and overdid it. This is impossible to control.
To sum up, as long as it is active, that people are participating, and we can discuss, the aim of this prize is reached. For me, it doesn’t matter who’s first and who’s second.
2. Why? What’s the matter?
Fei Dawei: this time there is a “why?” in this discussion, what does the question “why?” stand for? Why does Chinese contemporary art have these problems? Or why do we do art? Or what other questions?
Xu Zhen: Why is everything so weak now, why now that our conditions are good we don’t feel that great. We always wanted to ask what’s the matter with people and things. It seems there are many questions, but we don’t know where to start.
Fei Dawei: “there are many questions, but we don’t know where to start”. I think that the word “start” is problematic, it seems we have to solve some issue. The art problem can’t be “solved”, it can only be discussed, and it is actually good to provoke a real collision. “Real collision” means talking about concrete questions, without personal consideration. For example, talking about this prize: a vote on internet isn’t the best solution, everyone knows why. I think that later we can “hang” an artist or a work to let everyone criticize it, insults should be erased and valuable critics remained, this way we can talk about one or various topics in depth.
Guest: Discussions about art will then go back to critics’ hands, a lot of artists are not good in using words to express themselves, aside from using simple words of indignation.
Fei Dawei: He he, I understand what you mean. I also don’t wish that discussion is restrained to the small circle of “critics”. Artists’ capicity of expressions is always limited, not only when discussing, but also when thinking of their works or expressing them. But I think artists should learn to express their thoughts. Nowadays, a lot of artists, aside from producing works, only say swearing words which is actually one of our ‘bottlenecks’.
Xu Zhen: The origin of interviews and dialogues on internet comes from our revulsion towards traditional symposiums’ pedantry and academic arbitrariness. Things have been like that for two years already. If some abuses or problems produced by this internet system occur, we have to think of a way to avoid them.
Xu Zhen: What are the academic construction, environment or surviving situation that young critics are facing?
Guest: A lot of artists still lack of management knowledge, or self-exploitation, and lost what is called “opinion”, “inspiration”, in this self deception. Of course this is also true for me.
Xu Zhen: What do you mean by management knowledge?
Guest: For example: even though everyone’s conditions are good, why doesn’t everyone feel great?
At least, we lack of some kind of stable attitude of creation, and we are too opportunistic.
Guest: What the people of the 85 New Wave did was necessary at that time, because China was then excessively secluded, and nowadays everyone still naively do things very close to the 85 New Wave, there’s a lack of reflection. Critics are still empiricist when it comes to classic imagination, and possibly neglected the importance of innovative thoughts. In this period where exhibitions are more and more popular, “artwork” are being selected as a unit, tied, compared. “Artwork’s semblance” weakness can’t be used in specific exhibitions. This is another choosing dilemma. The imagination of what is called “artwork’s semblance” is inspired by classics from this last century, in fact this idea of choosing something from the ‘Avant-garde’ period is conservative. I consider that these last five years’ “Long March -- A walking Visually Display” is very good, it needed to be done.
“General Survery of Yanchuan papercutting” was also realized because it was needed, preceding policies, it was professionally and consciously done. The following “Yan An Art Education Symposium” was done at the right time, Cai’s big structures were also very appropriate, there was an architectural feeling. “New Folk Movement” was a very good standpoint, it corresponded well to the country’s rectified reflection, filling “From up to down” working insufficiency. That year Li Xiaoshan wrote “Chinese contemporary painting from my point of view” which was fundamental at that time. Li decided in 2002 to start “Prayer beads and brush strokes”, his focusing on this period can easily be disputed, but he did what he considered important. People who think of big issues easily look at present questions from another point of view, therefore his decisions time-wise are very diffcult to understand. Qiu Zhijie’s fever came down, of course he is very winsome, Li is too dismal, Zhang Song, Chen Danqing, Chen Shouxiang… for me, are all winsome, no matter what they said, it is alright to thank these people. Wu Guanzhong wrote: Superfluous!
What to do? For me, many artists are always thinking of this topic, but thoughts focusing on construction significance can"t easily be turned into an exhibited work, numerous artworks comprising equivocal features are issued from good ideas, but as soon as they become an artwork, they are charged with old stuffs, so doing something constructive from an artist’s point of view is very difficult.
［此帖子已被 小mo 在 2008-8-11 5:00:21 编辑过］
For instance, the year that Huang Yongping realized “The History of Chinese Painting and the History of Modern Western Art Washed in the Washing Machine for Two Minutes”, raised questions were are all very topical, concrete, it resembled to a self-questioning. In fact as long as it becomes an “artwork” everything get weak! Wake up, Beuys is like that, Duchamp is like that, still no one has surpassed them?
Exhibitions, artworks, artists individuals
1. Car collision
Guest：How do you look at Liu Wei’s works?
Fei Dawei: Liu Wei’s works are very stringent, but for me, reflect issues shared by Chinese artists, which is a lack of familiarity with Western contemporary art. The fundamental thoughts of his last works have already been used by Western artists in the 80’s. Looking at objects from a certain angle, then cutting off their outlines. 20 years later, can we develop these ideas and innovate?
Guest: These are words from a person who doesn’t understand Chinese art history.
Fei Dawei: Contemporary art evolves in an international context, if Chinese contemporary art wants to go abroad, this kind of issues must be faced, except if you don’t wish to bring it abroad, then it’s different
Liu Wei: This has nothing to do with objects’ outlines or angles of view.
Fei Dawei: Then I probably didn’t understand your work. Could you explain its concept?
Xu Zhen: Fei. Is this issue what we often call a “car collision”? Is this kind of car collision interesting? Will there be some new ideas out of it?
Fei Dawei: This is a car collision topic, I often noticed that real collisions can’t be made between Chinese and Foreign artists. I experimented this myself during the exhibition in Lyon, Xu Zhen must also remember the proposals he gave then and the reasons they had to be modified.
Liu Wei: Professeur Fei says that my artwork focuses on Beijing’s characteristics, on the emptiness behind objects and power, in fact these kind of issues are boring and careerist, my main concern was the exactitude of this cutting process.
Fei Dawei: Anyone familiar with artworks by artists of the 80’s would make a link between Liu Wei’s artwork and them. One of the main rules in Contemporary art is to avoid language that has already been used, except if you purposely make use of someone’s language as another kind of language… Even if this kind of ideas have already been exploited by American artists in the end of the 80’s.
The key in car collision’s topic is that generally speaking our Chinese artists’ thoughts didn’t step aside from the way already followed by Western artists, at least they never really tried. This is of course also a global problem, and it doesn’t concern the Chinese artists only. This kind of result is that artists from certain regions are creating a new road, some other artists external to this circle will reproduce artworks of these regions, and justify themselves by claming that “national feelings” are different. I find this disappointing.
Liu Jianhua: It doesn’t matter if there is a “car collision” or not. China and Western countries don’t face the same issues. If artworks are only judged by their aspect, then it’s not very interesting. It’s not because Western artists already used some methods that Chinese artists can’t refer to them.
Liu Wei: I don’t consider that art is about invention, all the issues and visions’ elements already exist, but contexts are different, things expressed by people are also different.
Jin Feng (lao): Liu Wei, could you develop this issue? For instance, how would you describe today’s context, what is your difference? Maybe everyone would like to know…
Guest: Car collision is in fact an elementary clash caused by the artwork, if it’s well done, then artwork’s feelings are obviously different
Fei Dawei: Car collision doesn’t matter, some artists are satisfied with working in an established area. However, in the long run, the best is not to have any car collision. Because, if you always hit cars, you are still following the path of Westerners. The worst is to use the Chinese background as an excuse, this is an art issue, we always relate everything to the Chinese background, this problem started in 1985.
Wang Xingwei: Looking at car collision from a level/knowledge point of view.
Supremo: I don’t think it’s a problem of car collision or not. Fei just said that the best was to avoid the collision, or it would be like following other’s steps. Aren’t our Chinese artists always following old paths? Chinese contemporary art is directly concerned. We don’t have any rational background, according to that we should reorganize our past.
Fei Dawei: Reorganize our background, this looks to me like an empty slogan. More concretely, we should talk about works, one after the other.
Exhibitions, artworks, artists individuals
1. Car collision
Guest：How do you look at Liu Wei’s works?
Fei Dawei: Liu Wei’s works are very stringent, but for me, reflect issues shared by Chinese artists, which is a lack of familiarity with Western contemporary art. The fundamental thoughts of his last works have already been used by Western artists in the 80’s. Looking at objects from a certain angle, then cutting off their outlines. 20 years later, can we develop these ideas and innovate?
Guest: These are words from a person who doesn’t understand Chinese art history.
Fei Dawei: Contemporary art evolves in an international context, if Chinese contemporary art wants to go abroad, this kind of issues must be faced, except if you don’t wish to bring it abroad, then it’s different
Liu Wei: This has nothing to do with objects’ outlines or angles of view.
Fei Dawei: Then I probably didn’t understand your work. Could you explain its concept?
Xu Zhen: Fei. Is this issue what we often call a “car collision”? Is this kind of car collision interesting? Will there be some new ideas out of it?
Fei Dawei: This is a car collision topic, I often noticed that real collisions can’t be made between Chinese and Foreign artists. I experimented this myself during the exhibition in Lyon, Xu Zhen must also remember the proposals he gave then and the reasons they had to be modified.
Liu Wei: Professeur Fei says that my artwork focuses on Beijing’s characteristics, on the emptiness behind objects and power, in fact these kind of issues are boring and careerist, my main concern was the exactitude of this cutting process.
Fei Dawei: Anyone familiar with artworks by artists of the 80’s would make a link between Liu Wei’s artwork and them. One of the main rules in Contemporary art is to avoid language that has already been used, except if you purposely make use of someone’s language as another kind of language… Even if this kind of ideas have already been exploited by American artists in the end of the 80’s.
The key in car collision’s topic is that generally speaking our Chinese artists’ thoughts didn’t step aside from the way already followed by Western artists, at least they never really tried. This is of course also a global problem, and it doesn’t concern the Chinese artists only. This kind of result is that artists from certain regions are creating a new road, some other artists external to this circle will reproduce artworks of these regions, and justify themselves by claming that “national feelings” are different. I find this disappointing.
Liu Jianhua: It doesn’t matter if there is a “car collision” or not. China and Western countries don’t face the same issues. If artworks are only judged by their aspect, then it’s not very interesting. It’s not because Western artists already used some methods that Chinese artists can’t refer to them.
Liu Wei: I don’t consider that art is about invention, all the issues and visions’ elements already exist, but contexts are different, things expressed by people are also different.
Jin Feng (lao): Liu Wei, could you develop this issue? For instance, how would you describe today’s context, what is your difference? Maybe everyone would like to know…
Guest: Car collision is in fact an elementary clash caused by the artwork, if it’s well done, then artwork’s feelings are obviously different
Fei Dawei: Car collision doesn’t matter, some artists are satisfied with working in an established area. However, in the long run, the best is not to have any car collision. Because, if you always hit cars, you are still following the path of Westerners. The worst is to use the Chinese background as an excuse, this is an art issue, we always relate everything to the Chinese background, this problem started in 1985.
Wang Xingwei: Looking at car collision from a level/knowledge point of view.
Supremo: I don’t think it’s a problem of car collision or not. Fei just said that the best was to avoid the collision, or it would be like following other’s steps. Aren’t our Chinese artists always following old paths? Chinese contemporary art is directly concerned. We don’t have any rational background, according to that we should reorganize our past.
Fei Dawei: Reorganize our background, this looks to me like an empty slogan. More concretely, we should talk about works, one after the other.
2. China’s Yang Fudong? World’s Yang Fudong?
Guest: Let’s talk about Yang Fudong’s exhibition, is he in the ‘bottleneck’?
Guest: There are more foreign investments in Yang Fudong’s art than Chinese ones, therefore Yang Fudong spend more energy now abroad then in China. This is not surprising. The problem is: is this the only road that this kind of ‘national treasure’ can follow? Can flowers only open outside the walls and be smelled from the inside? This is not only a problem of the system, this is also what artists should individually think of.
Guest: On the contrary, I don’t think this is a problem, Yang Fudong is an international artist placed in a global context, his influences are naturally international, on top of that, in a new environment Yang Fudong might even become bigger. Always being concerned about the fact of being a “Chinese artist” is not necessarily a good thing.
4. Untiring Hipic
Guest: Let’s talk about Hipic, they have been working very hard, though Hipic concept is outdated.
Guest: In fact, I have always been curious about Hipic’s working situation.
This is the only selected exhibition which is still going on.
Guest: We are doing a lot of efforts to carry out this project!
Art groups, spaces and vagues
1. 85 New Wave and contemporary art
Leizi: Mr. Fei, looking back at 1985, can you review contemporary art’s wayout in the dialogue between East and West?
That one: Fei, recently some people doubt that 1985 is a sensationalization of history, what do you think?
Fei Dawei: For people who like sensationalism, everything is sensationalism. But the thing is that evidences should be presented. People who talk about 1985 have their own aims and ideas. Some of the ideas are very pertinent.
That one: I share your opinion. Today what the art circle needs the most is a “statement”, some people talk about it (1985) this way, it is also a “statement”. Without this statement, speech will not be heeded, therefore this statement is absolutely necessary. Then, what are your expectations towards the uneven situtation between the different “Chinese Contemporary Art” fields? Can this “Chinese contemporary art” coming from a few areas be fully qualified of “Chinese”?
Fei Dawei: Uneven is natural, even is unnatural. Each region can be a part of “Chinese” contemporary art, this “Chinese contemporary art” is a group of things in the middle of chaotic changes, no one can assume the qualification of “Chinese”.
Guest: Fei, the 85 New Wave Exhibition was largely criticized, being the curator of this show do you feel aggrieved? Will you pursue your work on the 85 New Wave?
Fei Dawei: I think that most of the critics towards this exhibition was due to a lack of knowledge about 85, and incomprehension of professional exhibitions methods. There weren’t enough interesting critics. 1985 archives are still being collected, this year I will concentrate on this project to achieve it. There are still many documents which need to be shared, I wish that these historical materials weren’t monopolized by a few persons only.
2. 25000’s Red flags, Snow Mountains, Grasslands.
Guest: I have a question for the organizers! How will the next 25000 be organized? If people still use electronic voting system, what will you do?
Xu Zhen: We will summarize this issue, next time we will do our best to improve this system. If we notice that people use electronic voting softwares we will divulge it.
Qiu Zhijie: I consider that 25000 vote cannot possibly make sense, because as I said last year, no one is specialized in visiting exhibitions, for example myself, there are not a lot of exhibitions that I’m interested in seeing, there are many exhibitions that I found interesting but that I haven’t seen because of schedule issues, and even more exhibitions that I didn’t see because I wasn’t interested in them, therefore I shouldn’t pretend to have an overall knowledge of them. For that reason, I won’t participate to this vote, no matter if as a specialist or a simple Guest.
I think that among all the activities that Long March did, this one is quite a mistake. I advice Lu Jie not to continue this project, or at least cancel the voting on internet. Chinese internet and BBS culture particularities are determinant here, the evil face of people is more easily emphasized. All the voting results here lack of liability. From the beginning, participants didn’t think of their responsibility, we still have to discuss about this topic today, isn’t that stupid? Perhaps some people enjoy every minute of it, but I don’t find this game funny. I also don’t think that this system is democratic. Furthermore, we shouldn’t blindly believe in democracy, which killed Socrates. Last time, we saw Fei’s interview about 85 New Wave exhibition on this forum, watching him facing unceasing boring insults, pranks from all kind. I don’t worry about Fei, who of course was able to cope – Fei was playing around on internet, raising his arm to kill the “mice”, many children there still didn’t have all their teeth. But I still felt grieved to see Fei’s brain being used to answer these questions, it was really a waist. I think that by organizing this interview, Xu Zhen is committing a crime. We should know that Fei, Lu, this kind of people’s brains, are the wealth of our country, waisting their time and energy, insulting their intelligence quotient, is a waist of national resources and human beings, and is a crime against humanity.
Guest: Qiu is a little bit extreme, no? Entertainment is a very good thing!
Chen Shaoxiong: I think this Prize can’t be totally denied, Professor Qiu. From Director Lu point of view, doing this kind of thing is good for Long March Space, it’s a kind of advertising, from the current situation’s angle, whether this Prize is professional or not, it doesn’t matter, at last it can be a reference for the future. In comparision, a lot of galleries are only focused on selling now, or only think of their own galleries affairs, including competition. Director Lu is bright, this method is useful to him and everyone. The problem is: how long will this enthusiasm last for, because this Prize is a little bit like a game, which is funny to play with. We can play with it “harmlessly”, but if we continue, I’m afraid everyone will find it very boring.
Xu Zhen: Shaoxiong, being a participant, do you have any advice? We can talk more concretely.
Chen Shaoxiong: Also, as because the Prize is only this, therefore the main stream’s taste impercetibly started to have an accruing effect, and led to a simplification of the taste. I advise Director Lu that if he wants to do it then to do it well, first by accepting to spend more money on it.
Guest: This advice is very realistic, boss Lu today everyone is showing his position, I heard that even people who won the prize didn’t receive any reward!
Chen Shaoxiong: I advise Director Lu who has been the organizer to quit the voting process, because no matter who did it, the name of Long March is already here. I dream of a prize in China, which could dominate Sigg’s one. So, how should we do? This issue is more important. To do this well, first, things should be fair, and professional.
Xu Zhen: This problem comes from our organization, we didn’t spread this project to a bigger network. But, it is very difficult to do this thing in a completely democratic and impartial way. It is very difficult.
Lu Jie: Shaoxiong’s understanding of this prize is probably erroneous, and I think it probably represents quite a lot of people’s misunderstanding, as the organizer we will explain here the details. When this prize was initiated, there weren’t so many prizes of this kind in China, and simply saying that because there are already many prize
Guest: Let’s talk about Yang Fudong’s exhibition, is he in the ‘bottleneck’?
Guest: There are more foreign investments in Yang Fudong’s art than Chinese ones, therefore Yang Fudong spend more energy now abroad then in China. This is not surprising. The problem is: is this the only road that this kind of ‘national treasure’ can follow? Can flowers only open outside the walls and be smelled from the inside? This is not only a problem of the system, this is also what artists should individually think of.
Guest: On the contrary, I don’t think this is a problem, Yang Fudong is an international artist placed in a global context, his influences are naturally international, on top of that, in a new environment Yang Fudong might even become bigger. Always being concerned about the fact of being a “Chinese artist” is not necessarily a good thing.
4. Untiring Hipic
Guest: Let’s talk about Hipic, they have been working very hard, though Hipic concept is outdated.
Guest: In fact, I have always been curious about Hipic’s working situation.
This is the only selected exhibition which is still going on.
Guest: We are doing a lot of efforts to carry out this project!
Art groups, spaces and vagues
1. 85 New Wave and contemporary art
Leizi: Mr. Fei, looking back at 1985, can you review contemporary art’s wayout in the dialogue between East and West?
That one: Fei, recently some people doubt that 1985 is a sensationalization of history, what do you think?
Fei Dawei: For people who like sensationalism, everything is sensationalism. But the thing is that evidences should be presented. People who talk about 1985 have their own aims and ideas. Some of the ideas are very pertinent.
That one: I share your opinion. Today what the art circle needs the most is a “statement”, some people talk about it (1985) this way, it is also a “statement”. Without this statement, speech will not be heeded, therefore this statement is absolutely necessary. Then, what are your expectations towards the uneven situtation between the different “Chinese Contemporary Art” fields? Can this “Chinese contemporary art” coming from a few areas be fully qualified of “Chinese”?
Fei Dawei: Uneven is natural, even is unnatural. Each region can be a part of “Chinese” contemporary art, this “Chinese contemporary art” is a group of things in the middle of chaotic changes, no one can assume the qualification of “Chinese”.
Guest: Fei, the 85 New Wave Exhibition was largely criticized, being the curator of this show do you feel aggrieved? Will you pursue your work on the 85 New Wave?
Fei Dawei: I think that most of the critics towards this exhibition was due to a lack of knowledge about 85, and incomprehension of professional exhibitions methods. There weren’t enough interesting critics. 1985 archives are still being collected, this year I will concentrate on this project to achieve it. There are still many documents which need to be shared, I wish that these historical materials weren’t monopolized by a few persons only.
2. 25000’s Red flags, Snow Mountains, Grasslands.
Guest: I have a question for the organizers! How will the next 25000 be organized? If people still use electronic voting system, what will you do?
Xu Zhen: We will summarize this issue, next time we will do our best to improve this system. If we notice that people use electronic voting softwares we will divulge it.
Qiu Zhijie: I consider that 25000 vote cannot possibly make sense, because as I said last year, no one is specialized in visiting exhibitions, for example myself, there are not a lot of exhibitions that I’m interested in seeing, there are many exhibitions that I found interesting but that I haven’t seen because of schedule issues, and even more exhibitions that I didn’t see because I wasn’t interested in them, therefore I shouldn’t pretend to have an overall knowledge of them. For that reason, I won’t participate to this vote, no matter if as a specialist or a simple Guest.
I think that among all the activities that Long March did, this one is quite a mistake. I advice Lu Jie not to continue this project, or at least cancel the voting on internet. Chinese internet and BBS culture particularities are determinant here, the evil face of people is more easily emphasized. All the voting results here lack of liability. From the beginning, participants didn’t think of their responsibility, we still have to discuss about this topic today, isn’t that stupid? Perhaps some people enjoy every minute of it, but I don’t find this game funny. I also don’t think that this system is democratic. Furthermore, we shouldn’t blindly believe in democracy, which killed Socrates. Last time, we saw Fei’s interview about 85 New Wave exhibition on this forum, watching him facing unceasing boring insults, pranks from all kind. I don’t worry about Fei, who of course was able to cope – Fei was playing around on internet, raising his arm to kill the “mice”, many children there still didn’t have all their teeth. But I still felt grieved to see Fei’s brain being used to answer these questions, it was really a waist. I think that by organizing this interview, Xu Zhen is committing a crime. We should know that Fei, Lu, this kind of people’s brains, are the wealth of our country, waisting their time and energy, insulting their intelligence quotient, is a waist of national resources and human beings, and is a crime against humanity.
Guest: Qiu is a little bit extreme, no? Entertainment is a very good thing!
Chen Shaoxiong: I think this Prize can’t be totally denied, Professor Qiu. From Director Lu point of view, doing this kind of thing is good for Long March Space, it’s a kind of advertising, from the current situation’s angle, whether this Prize is professional or not, it doesn’t matter, at last it can be a reference for the future. In comparision, a lot of galleries are only focused on selling now, or only think of their own galleries affairs, including competition. Director Lu is bright, this method is useful to him and everyone. The problem is: how long will this enthusiasm last for, because this Prize is a little bit like a game, which is funny to play with. We can play with it “harmlessly”, but if we continue, I’m afraid everyone will find it very boring.
Xu Zhen: Shaoxiong, being a participant, do you have any advice? We can talk more concretely.
Chen Shaoxiong: Also, as because the Prize is only this, therefore the main stream’s taste impercetibly started to have an accruing effect, and led to a simplification of the taste. I advise Director Lu that if he wants to do it then to do it well, first by accepting to spend more money on it.
Guest: This advice is very realistic, boss Lu today everyone is showing his position, I heard that even people who won the prize didn’t receive any reward!
Chen Shaoxiong: I advise Director Lu who has been the organizer to quit the voting process, because no matter who did it, the name of Long March is already here. I dream of a prize in China, which could dominate Sigg’s one. So, how should we do? This issue is more important. To do this well, first, things should be fair, and professional.
Xu Zhen: This problem comes from our organization, we didn’t spread this project to a bigger network. But, it is very difficult to do this thing in a completely democratic and impartial way. It is very difficult.
Lu Jie: Shaoxiong’s understanding of this prize is probably erroneous, and I think it probably represents quite a lot of people’s misunderstanding, as the organizer we will explain here the details. When this prize was initiated, there weren’t so many prizes of this kind in China, and simply saying that because there are already many prize
Rise up, rise up, to the metaphysical heights.
About the exhibition
Lu Jie: Fei turned back to academic topics, so is this curating or critical research, or is it a bit of both, does Qiu still believe in curating? Or does he believe in education, this is enough topic for them both to talk about, because most of the exhibitions which were selected were solo exhibitions, we can then see group exhibitions issues. Also, should curating in China be qualified of “utilitarian”, bringing together a platform and opportunities, or aren’t there any academic topic to talk about? Nowadays, everyone has all the needed conditions, and don’t need curating. Is this a biaised understanding of curating? So curating becomes something that can’t be thrown away, but at the same time very weak. I always think that group exhibitions are too important, but as soon as I think of them. I feel very tired. What do artists think?
Xh Zhen: Group exhibitions, for example, “Building Code Violations II”: as a participating artist, I wasn’t tired at all, but I just thought of how we could do such an exhibition. It was too compliant. What was the aim? What did we want to talk about? What did we want to give to people?
Lu Jie: And in comparison with “NONO”? This is an interesting question. Let’s talk about it. What was this exhibition for? How was it at the end? Comparing the two of them is interesting, it was done by the same organization, and many artists participated to both of them. I was also very tired when organizing “NONO”, but it wasn’t the same weariness.
Chen Shaoxiong: I have been very disappointed by many group exhibitions, because these group exhibitions are only about “destroying”, they aren’t very constructive, it looks like a big group fight, but why do we actually fight for, no one knows. In a group exhibition, there is no dialogue between the works, no one is discussing, there are only one or two feisty works, like the guys who stand in front in a fight, the other works are not independent. I think “Building Code Violations II” is a classic example.
Xu Zhen: Yes, “Building Code Violations II” is a classic. Lu Jie, are you tired as a spectator or as an institution? “Building Code Violations II” wasn’t “violating” enough, you couldn’t spread the relationship between the works, they lacked of layers. The quality of the works was poor and coarse, it didn’t stick in your eyes or your mind, the good thing is that it was entertaining because it was coarse. “NONO” is another tiring experience, a self-esteem result. On this basis, many issues appeared.
Lu Jie: If you consider that exhibitions like “NONO” and “Building Code Violation II” are ambitious, then it’s impossible to talk about it. It is childish. The problem is that previous group exhibitions were about issues that artists face, they want to fully show them, or to provoke a collision, or artists show to everyone what they did, or show a certain attitude, or promote a certain medium. There are many aims, for example you want to create an atmosphere, to warm everything, bring some problems out, create a combat, etc.. After, you pass through the period of real estate sales promotion, after again, you enter the whole market, but, the exhibition in it, individual creation, curating, were these three things really open before? If not, these same old questions remain until now, and they are not new. It seems that now that conditions are better, there are more exhibitions, people got tired, the market is being guided, artists don’t participate to group exhibitions anymore, in fact it’s a problem of group exhibitions’ understanding.
Shi Yong: There’s still a lack of ‘violation’, I think that Zhang Qing’s video is not bad. But this has nothing to do with “violation”. Of course, creation is not led by the topic. Xu Zhen’s one only covered one wall, it wasn’t funny enough. A compressed version is not worth doing it!
Lu Jie: I agree, let’s compare NONO and solo exhibitions, as well as “Building Code Violations II” and “It’s all right”. At least, Fei saw three of them, can you talk about it? I mention this it’s only from an artistic point of view, and not from an art center’s leader point of view, quite a lot of artists participated to these 4 exhibitions.
Xu Zhen: From an artist point of view, I enjoy participating to exhibition like “It’s All Right”, there is a topic, a target, concrete work where I can participate, I know that the space of creation is very broad. In comparison, “Building Code Violations II” also has a topic, but the works on site make this subject very dry. It doesn’t matter, a topic which is almost a topic is fine, you can do whatever you want. Of course, the exhibition “It’s all right” also has some shortcomings. Therefore, does “Building Code Violations II” artworks selection need to define a direction or does the site need more characteristic?
Fei Dawei: Commander Lu, I feel ashamed, I only saw NONO and It’s All Right, so I am not able to compare. I think “It’s All Right” was a little bit better. NONO and “Aftershock, Contemporary British Art Exhibition” exhibition’s schedule were very closed, so everything had an ‘Aftershock’ taste. Perhaps it was only an illusion. As for the general energy of this exhibition, it seems that it would have been possible to spend a little more efforts. When putting these exhibitions together, what we should be vigilant about is repeting issue. I don’t know if everyone feels this way?
Xu Zhen: There are repeted things. For example the art circle: same persons, same kind of works. Schedules were tight, things which came out of it were very similar, within a small span. For instance repetition of imagination towards the public. This is a little bit empty.
Lu Jie: I think this is really weak, everyone thinks that we should do something, but space and exhibitions’ requests are too high, everyone knows there are not enough accumulation, youngsters are very concrete, middle ones very weak, olders very conscientious, what we see is big problems, but what aren’t we able to see? Why can’t we see it?
I believe that most of the artists who participate to a group exhibition in Long March are not supporting me, and I am not supporting them. Simply saying that it is for the circle, for the profits, it is completely wrong. It is still a reciprocal willing of collaborating to do things, then, with such a good basis, why are there still some problems, “NONO” was completely curated and elaborated by the artists, “Building Code Violations II” was a statement, they all share this kind of weakness. If I firmly believed that it wasn’t a problem with the space, then could it possibly mean that it’s an artist problem? You can spat at me.
Shi Yong: I only know that when I was working on “It’s All Right”, everyone spent a lot of effort to realize their project. Perhaps because in Hangzhou, the environment doesn’t give much pressure. On top of that, the organization work was done very meticulously by the artists. Therefore, in comparison, it was quite complete. But “Building Code Violations II”, even though I didn’t participate, I feel that artists I’ve been in touch with had a lot of pressure, a bit as if they had to fill a task, they looked tired, and didn’t have much creating desire. Is it because we participate and see too many exhibitions. What I mean is maybe we should really stop.
Lu Jie: When we were installing the exhibition of Fei Dawei in Lyon we had a walk in a hill, everyone was already talking about weakness, that was four years ago. At that time, I made a joke saying we should make a Biennale, where participating artists should stop doing works for two years. Shock therapy.
Xu Zhen: Who would dare to stop?
Like the ink method?
Jin Feng (lao): Fe
About the exhibition
Lu Jie: Fei turned back to academic topics, so is this curating or critical research, or is it a bit of both, does Qiu still believe in curating? Or does he believe in education, this is enough topic for them both to talk about, because most of the exhibitions which were selected were solo exhibitions, we can then see group exhibitions issues. Also, should curating in China be qualified of “utilitarian”, bringing together a platform and opportunities, or aren’t there any academic topic to talk about? Nowadays, everyone has all the needed conditions, and don’t need curating. Is this a biaised understanding of curating? So curating becomes something that can’t be thrown away, but at the same time very weak. I always think that group exhibitions are too important, but as soon as I think of them. I feel very tired. What do artists think?
Xh Zhen: Group exhibitions, for example, “Building Code Violations II”: as a participating artist, I wasn’t tired at all, but I just thought of how we could do such an exhibition. It was too compliant. What was the aim? What did we want to talk about? What did we want to give to people?
Lu Jie: And in comparison with “NONO”? This is an interesting question. Let’s talk about it. What was this exhibition for? How was it at the end? Comparing the two of them is interesting, it was done by the same organization, and many artists participated to both of them. I was also very tired when organizing “NONO”, but it wasn’t the same weariness.
Chen Shaoxiong: I have been very disappointed by many group exhibitions, because these group exhibitions are only about “destroying”, they aren’t very constructive, it looks like a big group fight, but why do we actually fight for, no one knows. In a group exhibition, there is no dialogue between the works, no one is discussing, there are only one or two feisty works, like the guys who stand in front in a fight, the other works are not independent. I think “Building Code Violations II” is a classic example.
Xu Zhen: Yes, “Building Code Violations II” is a classic. Lu Jie, are you tired as a spectator or as an institution? “Building Code Violations II” wasn’t “violating” enough, you couldn’t spread the relationship between the works, they lacked of layers. The quality of the works was poor and coarse, it didn’t stick in your eyes or your mind, the good thing is that it was entertaining because it was coarse. “NONO” is another tiring experience, a self-esteem result. On this basis, many issues appeared.
Lu Jie: If you consider that exhibitions like “NONO” and “Building Code Violation II” are ambitious, then it’s impossible to talk about it. It is childish. The problem is that previous group exhibitions were about issues that artists face, they want to fully show them, or to provoke a collision, or artists show to everyone what they did, or show a certain attitude, or promote a certain medium. There are many aims, for example you want to create an atmosphere, to warm everything, bring some problems out, create a combat, etc.. After, you pass through the period of real estate sales promotion, after again, you enter the whole market, but, the exhibition in it, individual creation, curating, were these three things really open before? If not, these same old questions remain until now, and they are not new. It seems that now that conditions are better, there are more exhibitions, people got tired, the market is being guided, artists don’t participate to group exhibitions anymore, in fact it’s a problem of group exhibitions’ understanding.
Shi Yong: There’s still a lack of ‘violation’, I think that Zhang Qing’s video is not bad. But this has nothing to do with “violation”. Of course, creation is not led by the topic. Xu Zhen’s one only covered one wall, it wasn’t funny enough. A compressed version is not worth doing it!
Lu Jie: I agree, let’s compare NONO and solo exhibitions, as well as “Building Code Violations II” and “It’s all right”. At least, Fei saw three of them, can you talk about it? I mention this it’s only from an artistic point of view, and not from an art center’s leader point of view, quite a lot of artists participated to these 4 exhibitions.
Xu Zhen: From an artist point of view, I enjoy participating to exhibition like “It’s All Right”, there is a topic, a target, concrete work where I can participate, I know that the space of creation is very broad. In comparison, “Building Code Violations II” also has a topic, but the works on site make this subject very dry. It doesn’t matter, a topic which is almost a topic is fine, you can do whatever you want. Of course, the exhibition “It’s all right” also has some shortcomings. Therefore, does “Building Code Violations II” artworks selection need to define a direction or does the site need more characteristic?
Fei Dawei: Commander Lu, I feel ashamed, I only saw NONO and It’s All Right, so I am not able to compare. I think “It’s All Right” was a little bit better. NONO and “Aftershock, Contemporary British Art Exhibition” exhibition’s schedule were very closed, so everything had an ‘Aftershock’ taste. Perhaps it was only an illusion. As for the general energy of this exhibition, it seems that it would have been possible to spend a little more efforts. When putting these exhibitions together, what we should be vigilant about is repeting issue. I don’t know if everyone feels this way?
Xu Zhen: There are repeted things. For example the art circle: same persons, same kind of works. Schedules were tight, things which came out of it were very similar, within a small span. For instance repetition of imagination towards the public. This is a little bit empty.
Lu Jie: I think this is really weak, everyone thinks that we should do something, but space and exhibitions’ requests are too high, everyone knows there are not enough accumulation, youngsters are very concrete, middle ones very weak, olders very conscientious, what we see is big problems, but what aren’t we able to see? Why can’t we see it?
I believe that most of the artists who participate to a group exhibition in Long March are not supporting me, and I am not supporting them. Simply saying that it is for the circle, for the profits, it is completely wrong. It is still a reciprocal willing of collaborating to do things, then, with such a good basis, why are there still some problems, “NONO” was completely curated and elaborated by the artists, “Building Code Violations II” was a statement, they all share this kind of weakness. If I firmly believed that it wasn’t a problem with the space, then could it possibly mean that it’s an artist problem? You can spat at me.
Shi Yong: I only know that when I was working on “It’s All Right”, everyone spent a lot of effort to realize their project. Perhaps because in Hangzhou, the environment doesn’t give much pressure. On top of that, the organization work was done very meticulously by the artists. Therefore, in comparison, it was quite complete. But “Building Code Violations II”, even though I didn’t participate, I feel that artists I’ve been in touch with had a lot of pressure, a bit as if they had to fill a task, they looked tired, and didn’t have much creating desire. Is it because we participate and see too many exhibitions. What I mean is maybe we should really stop.
Lu Jie: When we were installing the exhibition of Fei Dawei in Lyon we had a walk in a hill, everyone was already talking about weakness, that was four years ago. At that time, I made a joke saying we should make a Biennale, where participating artists should stop doing works for two years. Shock therapy.
Xu Zhen: Who would dare to stop?
Like the ink method?
Jin Feng (lao): Fe
