他山之石：一位西方收藏家对于“中国当代艺术院”的看法
作者：Josep 来源：艺术国际
吴鸿：
这里给你发来刚刚收到我在西班牙的一位收藏家的来信，信中他表达了对中国当代艺术院的看法。我觉得有意思。在我们讨论这个问题的时候，听听局外人的看法也许有益。在过去几年里，Josep收藏了不少中国当代艺术的作品（例如王广义的《大批判》）。他对中国很热爱，并且在学习中文和传统哲学。我与他的认识有点时间了，知道他的看法是具有善意的。建议您能够将他的信发表在“艺术国际”网站上，让更多的人分享。
吕澎
2009年11月26日
吕先生：您好，
我能想象得到关于“中国当代艺术院的成立”在中国引起的沸沸扬扬的讨论，这里也是一样，但是你们那有超过10亿人的氛围。
我先给您介绍一下我所知道的欧洲文化体系。
这个体系很大程度是公众性的，大的博物馆和雄厚资金来源于政府。
实际上，文化是美术、舞蹈、剧院、电影以及所有文化表现形式的综合体。因此相对而言中国当代艺术院要好多了，因为它只关乎一种艺术媒介形式。而在欧洲，大多数讨论都是围绕各种媒介所占的分量和它们所占的资金份额。
总体来说，欧洲文化体系可以分为两种类型：欧洲大陆型和盎格鲁撒克逊型。
欧洲大陆一般是由政府的文化部集中权力，他们直接负责博物馆的人事任免、财政预算，并且对扶持哪种艺术或文化类型具有决定权。
而盎格鲁撒克逊型是要成立“艺术理事会”，这个由文化界人士组成的团体发挥着重要的作用，为政府相关部门提供意见、提交博物馆的领导人选等。显然他们要独立于政府部门，不受政府的影响，但是资金最终是来自政府的，理事会的成员也是由政府或议会（归根结底还是由政治势力尤其是执政党）来任免。
西班牙有一个受中央政府控制的文化部，而在加泰罗尼亚自治政府有一个“艺术理事会”。不过部长被任命几个月就离职，因为政府控制着财政，并试图干涉。（请参见我给你的Word文档中的介绍）
我认为这些是在东、西方都会发生的情况，不管中国还是欧洲、黑人还是白人，都不重要，这是人性使然。为什么他们任命这些而非那些？为什么这种艺术形式更具代表性而非其他形式？为什么在涉及到艺术分类里有时有有时会没有策展人、参展商、艺术家、批评家、画廊？为什么文化部或多或少地对艺术加以控制？为什么不是我们就是别人不能掌管这部分钱？为什么我们只能提供建议而文化部却决定做了别的事情？如此等等。
中国当代艺术院的成立，我认为这是一件好事。当代艺术第一次被政府认可。里面的成员都是很重要的艺术家，叶永青是一位艺术理念开阔的知识分子（我是基于你写的这位艺术家研究的判断）。他们能做什么?他们将促使政府去做什么？他们会被政府牢牢控制还是在其带动下中国会出现更多省一级的艺术机构？他们将决定或提供强有力的意见而导致政策来履行吗?在募集公共资金方面他们会提供强有力的意见吗？他们有权决定哪项活动可行与否吗？他们为什么支持这项活动而非其他？新事物肇始之前，是有很多问题的，这也是常理。至少当代艺术会普及到整个社会，这对艺术家、策展人、博物馆，以及所有从事艺术的人是件好事。更进一步说，如果中央政府赞成这个“机构”，我想各省都会实施，有关艺术方面的成就也会得到认可，而随后的讨论也是致力于让社会也认可它们。所以，如果你感兴趣于那些更加复杂的内部问题，试图与人讨论并争取支持，恐怕是很困难的，但实际情况就是如此。如果说，他们唯一能做的就是扩大人们对当代艺术的兴趣，并给予当代艺术更好的呈现，那么当代艺术院的成立已经是很成功了。
我曾跟你说过我四年前的中国之旅，那时到了798，798刚开放。我的司机不知道去哪，我们的导游也不知。当我们走进一个个画廊（很遗憾，都是很小很少的空间），这个导游女孩发现了一个前所未知的新世界，她很年轻，聪慧、思想开阔、有大学教育背景。而现在，你们在建立博物馆、在国内外举办展览，政府又成立了中国当代艺术院。
不管在哪，政府都会试图掌管人们的大量活动，中国也不例外。但是你们的处境正好相反，你们国家政策独特并是中央政策，他们开启了一个小小的门，如果你们去反抗它，将会头破血流，政府的力量在各个地方都很强大，但是你们能做的，就是联合起来把这扇门开启得越来越宽，如果需要去反抗，最好的办法就是从里面去改变而非从外面。西班牙政治变革的历史表明：尽管变革的不是很大、很彻底，至少也有改变，并且从内部去努力就容易使工作很有成效。
我们很多时候都会考虑，我们的时间就要终止，而我们前面的时间还很漫长。讨论很有趣，但是，作为历史学者你大概知道，随着时间的流失我们会以更为轻松的态度去谈及曾经的争论，而去更多地评价那些实际取得的成就；相反，那些理想主义者和理论家很难取得更快、更全面的进步。你说我很实用主义，但是我们西班牙在70年代末80年代初所经历了艰难变革，那些所谓的“实用主义”者们比那些“理想主义者”获得了更显著的成功。
这个理论可以应用于任何机构，同时也可适用于企业。以前我做销售经理时，很有成就，我经常告诫我的同事跟员工，首先是月亮，再是星星。我相信很多人不懂得这个简单道理，他们在缺乏牢固基础的情况下总是去做那些过分困难以至无法完成的事，而没考虑那些他们能做什么事情，对他们而言，最好是仅仅跟随一个梦想而不是付诸行动。
下面是一些链接：
我觉得加泰罗尼亚的案例很有趣，因为这是刚刚发生的事情（第一页用Google工具翻译了）：
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/CulturaDepartament/menuitem.08b5bfd30a1b7a434fbfd875b0c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
英国的：
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/about-us/
加拿大的蒙特利尔：
http://www.artsmontreal.org/mission.php
法国和西班牙的中央文化政策，这里没有“艺术理事”的内容：
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/min/index-min.htm
http://www.mcu.es/promoArte/CE/InformacionGeneral/Gestion.html
一切顺利，
约瑟夫
Hi Lü,
I can imagine the discussions about CAAC, I'm sure that are the same than here, but you are more than 1.000.000.000 people there!
Let me told you what I know from the European system of culture.
This system is mainly public, big Museums and Big money comes from Government.
Actually, Culture is a mix of arts, dance, theatre, cinema and all kind of cultural expressions. Therefore, in the case of CAAC is much better because there is only one type of media. Here most of the discussions came about the weight of each media regarding representatives and the part of the money's pie!
To organise that there are two systems: Mainland Europe and Anglo-Saxon.
The European one is centralise all the power in the Culture Ministry. They are responsible directly of the Heads of the Museum, the Budgets, how distribute them and decide which kind of art/culture promote.
The Anglo-Saxon is to create an "Arts Councils". An organisation with people from culture to manage a big part of the pie, advice the Ministry and propose for example the Heads of the Museums. Apparently they have to be independent and without influence of the Government, but the money comes at the end from Government and they are appointed by it or the Parliament (but in any case by politicians and mostly by the Party on charge at that moment).
In Spain there exists a centralised Ministry of Culture and in the Catalonia Autonomous Government there exists an Arts Council. By the way the Head dismissed a few months after been nominated because the Ministry cut budgets and wanted to influence him (see article in word document).
I think that all this things happens in east and western, to be Chinese or European, black or whites, doesn't matter. It's part of the human nature.
Why there appointed this ones and not this others? Why there are more representative from this kind of art or this other? Why there are or not representative from any category involved in art: curators, exhibitors, artists, critics, galleries...? Why the Ministry wants to control more or less? Why we can not manage this amount of money or this other? Why we advice about that but the Ministry decides that other thing? and much more...
In the case of China I think is a good thing. For the first time Contemporary art is considered by the Government. People inside are among the most important painters.Ye Yongqing appears to me an intellectual with open mind (I'm based on your biography). What they can do? What they will be able form the Government to do? Will be centralised or will exists more Councils at Province level? They will decide or have a strong advice about which policy to follow?
Will they have a strong advice on how invest public money? Will they decide in which activities invest or not? Why they supported this activity and not this other? A lot of questions when something new starts, but always is like this. At least contemporary art will be more known to the Chinese whole society and that's good for artist, for curators, for Museums... for all the people involved in the Arts. Moreover, if the Central Government approves this Council, I'm sure the Provinces will follow, so more acknowledgement about Art, and the discussions afterwards will only contribute to a more acknowledgement by people. Ok, if you are interested inside this world will be tough to discuss with others and fight for support and so on, but is always like this. If the only thing they were able to do is to expand the interest for Contemporary art and give to it a better visibility, CAAC will be already a success.
I've already explain you my visit, just 4 years ago, to 798 area when started. Our driver doesn't know where to go, our guide nor. When we entered to the Galleries (well, a kind of small and empty spaces!) this girl discovered a new world that never before know about it, and she was young, smart, open minded and with University career. Now, you build Museums, Exhibitions flowered around all China and abroad, Government starts this CAAC...
It's true that Government, there and here, try to embrace the maximum of our activities, and China could not be different. But in your case the direction is the contrary, from a unique and centralised policy, they open an small door. It's impossible to fight against, it's sterile. The power of the Governments it's everywhere too huge. But what it's possible to do is collaborate to make the door wider and bigger and bigger, and if it's needed to fight, much better from inside to promote change than outside. History of the political transition in Spain show us that maybe the changes won't be so high and radical, but at least changes, and it's easier but less spectacular to do it inside. A lot of times we think that the time is finishing by now, and the time is a long way ahead of us. Discussion are interesting now, but, you probably know as historian, that with the time things and fights become viewed with more relativity and achievements will be more positive evaluated than idealisms or theories much more difficult to achieve fully and immediately. You call me a pragmatic, but we had a tough transition in Spain in late 70's and beginning 80's and the approach of "pragmatic" people was more successful than "idealists". And this theory can be applied at any Institution or, let me say, also Company. When I used to be Marketing Director my better successes and what I teaching to my colleagues and employees was always: First the Moon, after Mars! And I can assure you than a lot of people doesn't understand this simple principle, they always wanted to do things too difficult to achieve without first consolidate position and do the things were be possible, for them was better not to act in order to follow a dream rather than act.
Below a few links:
I think that the Catalan one is quite interesting because it's the most recent experience. (this front page translated in word document using Google tools).
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/CulturaDepartament/menuitem.08b5bfd30a1b7a434fbfd875b0c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
UK
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/about-us/
Montreal
http://www.artsmontreal.org/mission.php
Centralised cultural policies in France and Spain. Not Arts councils there.
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/min/index-min.htm
http://www.mcu.es/promoArte/CE/InformacionGeneral/Gestion.html
Warm regards
Josep
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
注：信件由“艺术国际”网站编辑刘正花翻译，吕澎译校
吴鸿：
这里给你发来刚刚收到我在西班牙的一位收藏家的来信，信中他表达了对中国当代艺术院的看法。我觉得有意思。在我们讨论这个问题的时候，听听局外人的看法也许有益。在过去几年里，Josep收藏了不少中国当代艺术的作品（例如王广义的《大批判》）。他对中国很热爱，并且在学习中文和传统哲学。我与他的认识有点时间了，知道他的看法是具有善意的。建议您能够将他的信发表在“艺术国际”网站上，让更多的人分享。
吕澎
2009年11月26日
吕先生：您好，
我能想象得到关于“中国当代艺术院的成立”在中国引起的沸沸扬扬的讨论，这里也是一样，但是你们那有超过10亿人的氛围。
我先给您介绍一下我所知道的欧洲文化体系。
这个体系很大程度是公众性的，大的博物馆和雄厚资金来源于政府。
实际上，文化是美术、舞蹈、剧院、电影以及所有文化表现形式的综合体。因此相对而言中国当代艺术院要好多了，因为它只关乎一种艺术媒介形式。而在欧洲，大多数讨论都是围绕各种媒介所占的分量和它们所占的资金份额。
总体来说，欧洲文化体系可以分为两种类型：欧洲大陆型和盎格鲁撒克逊型。
欧洲大陆一般是由政府的文化部集中权力，他们直接负责博物馆的人事任免、财政预算，并且对扶持哪种艺术或文化类型具有决定权。
而盎格鲁撒克逊型是要成立“艺术理事会”，这个由文化界人士组成的团体发挥着重要的作用，为政府相关部门提供意见、提交博物馆的领导人选等。显然他们要独立于政府部门，不受政府的影响，但是资金最终是来自政府的，理事会的成员也是由政府或议会（归根结底还是由政治势力尤其是执政党）来任免。
西班牙有一个受中央政府控制的文化部，而在加泰罗尼亚自治政府有一个“艺术理事会”。不过部长被任命几个月就离职，因为政府控制着财政，并试图干涉。（请参见我给你的Word文档中的介绍）
我认为这些是在东、西方都会发生的情况，不管中国还是欧洲、黑人还是白人，都不重要，这是人性使然。为什么他们任命这些而非那些？为什么这种艺术形式更具代表性而非其他形式？为什么在涉及到艺术分类里有时有有时会没有策展人、参展商、艺术家、批评家、画廊？为什么文化部或多或少地对艺术加以控制？为什么不是我们就是别人不能掌管这部分钱？为什么我们只能提供建议而文化部却决定做了别的事情？如此等等。
中国当代艺术院的成立，我认为这是一件好事。当代艺术第一次被政府认可。里面的成员都是很重要的艺术家，叶永青是一位艺术理念开阔的知识分子（我是基于你写的这位艺术家研究的判断）。他们能做什么?他们将促使政府去做什么？他们会被政府牢牢控制还是在其带动下中国会出现更多省一级的艺术机构？他们将决定或提供强有力的意见而导致政策来履行吗?在募集公共资金方面他们会提供强有力的意见吗？他们有权决定哪项活动可行与否吗？他们为什么支持这项活动而非其他？新事物肇始之前，是有很多问题的，这也是常理。至少当代艺术会普及到整个社会，这对艺术家、策展人、博物馆，以及所有从事艺术的人是件好事。更进一步说，如果中央政府赞成这个“机构”，我想各省都会实施，有关艺术方面的成就也会得到认可，而随后的讨论也是致力于让社会也认可它们。所以，如果你感兴趣于那些更加复杂的内部问题，试图与人讨论并争取支持，恐怕是很困难的，但实际情况就是如此。如果说，他们唯一能做的就是扩大人们对当代艺术的兴趣，并给予当代艺术更好的呈现，那么当代艺术院的成立已经是很成功了。
我曾跟你说过我四年前的中国之旅，那时到了798，798刚开放。我的司机不知道去哪，我们的导游也不知。当我们走进一个个画廊（很遗憾，都是很小很少的空间），这个导游女孩发现了一个前所未知的新世界，她很年轻，聪慧、思想开阔、有大学教育背景。而现在，你们在建立博物馆、在国内外举办展览，政府又成立了中国当代艺术院。
不管在哪，政府都会试图掌管人们的大量活动，中国也不例外。但是你们的处境正好相反，你们国家政策独特并是中央政策，他们开启了一个小小的门，如果你们去反抗它，将会头破血流，政府的力量在各个地方都很强大，但是你们能做的，就是联合起来把这扇门开启得越来越宽，如果需要去反抗，最好的办法就是从里面去改变而非从外面。西班牙政治变革的历史表明：尽管变革的不是很大、很彻底，至少也有改变，并且从内部去努力就容易使工作很有成效。
我们很多时候都会考虑，我们的时间就要终止，而我们前面的时间还很漫长。讨论很有趣，但是，作为历史学者你大概知道，随着时间的流失我们会以更为轻松的态度去谈及曾经的争论，而去更多地评价那些实际取得的成就；相反，那些理想主义者和理论家很难取得更快、更全面的进步。你说我很实用主义，但是我们西班牙在70年代末80年代初所经历了艰难变革，那些所谓的“实用主义”者们比那些“理想主义者”获得了更显著的成功。
这个理论可以应用于任何机构，同时也可适用于企业。以前我做销售经理时，很有成就，我经常告诫我的同事跟员工，首先是月亮，再是星星。我相信很多人不懂得这个简单道理，他们在缺乏牢固基础的情况下总是去做那些过分困难以至无法完成的事，而没考虑那些他们能做什么事情，对他们而言，最好是仅仅跟随一个梦想而不是付诸行动。
下面是一些链接：
我觉得加泰罗尼亚的案例很有趣，因为这是刚刚发生的事情（第一页用Google工具翻译了）：
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/CulturaDepartament/menuitem.08b5bfd30a1b7a434fbfd875b0c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
英国的：
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/about-us/
加拿大的蒙特利尔：
http://www.artsmontreal.org/mission.php
法国和西班牙的中央文化政策，这里没有“艺术理事”的内容：
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/min/index-min.htm
http://www.mcu.es/promoArte/CE/InformacionGeneral/Gestion.html
一切顺利，
约瑟夫
Hi Lü,
I can imagine the discussions about CAAC, I'm sure that are the same than here, but you are more than 1.000.000.000 people there!
Let me told you what I know from the European system of culture.
This system is mainly public, big Museums and Big money comes from Government.
Actually, Culture is a mix of arts, dance, theatre, cinema and all kind of cultural expressions. Therefore, in the case of CAAC is much better because there is only one type of media. Here most of the discussions came about the weight of each media regarding representatives and the part of the money's pie!
To organise that there are two systems: Mainland Europe and Anglo-Saxon.
The European one is centralise all the power in the Culture Ministry. They are responsible directly of the Heads of the Museum, the Budgets, how distribute them and decide which kind of art/culture promote.
The Anglo-Saxon is to create an "Arts Councils". An organisation with people from culture to manage a big part of the pie, advice the Ministry and propose for example the Heads of the Museums. Apparently they have to be independent and without influence of the Government, but the money comes at the end from Government and they are appointed by it or the Parliament (but in any case by politicians and mostly by the Party on charge at that moment).
In Spain there exists a centralised Ministry of Culture and in the Catalonia Autonomous Government there exists an Arts Council. By the way the Head dismissed a few months after been nominated because the Ministry cut budgets and wanted to influence him (see article in word document).
I think that all this things happens in east and western, to be Chinese or European, black or whites, doesn't matter. It's part of the human nature.
Why there appointed this ones and not this others? Why there are more representative from this kind of art or this other? Why there are or not representative from any category involved in art: curators, exhibitors, artists, critics, galleries...? Why the Ministry wants to control more or less? Why we can not manage this amount of money or this other? Why we advice about that but the Ministry decides that other thing? and much more...
In the case of China I think is a good thing. For the first time Contemporary art is considered by the Government. People inside are among the most important painters.Ye Yongqing appears to me an intellectual with open mind (I'm based on your biography). What they can do? What they will be able form the Government to do? Will be centralised or will exists more Councils at Province level? They will decide or have a strong advice about which policy to follow?
Will they have a strong advice on how invest public money? Will they decide in which activities invest or not? Why they supported this activity and not this other? A lot of questions when something new starts, but always is like this. At least contemporary art will be more known to the Chinese whole society and that's good for artist, for curators, for Museums... for all the people involved in the Arts. Moreover, if the Central Government approves this Council, I'm sure the Provinces will follow, so more acknowledgement about Art, and the discussions afterwards will only contribute to a more acknowledgement by people. Ok, if you are interested inside this world will be tough to discuss with others and fight for support and so on, but is always like this. If the only thing they were able to do is to expand the interest for Contemporary art and give to it a better visibility, CAAC will be already a success.
I've already explain you my visit, just 4 years ago, to 798 area when started. Our driver doesn't know where to go, our guide nor. When we entered to the Galleries (well, a kind of small and empty spaces!) this girl discovered a new world that never before know about it, and she was young, smart, open minded and with University career. Now, you build Museums, Exhibitions flowered around all China and abroad, Government starts this CAAC...
It's true that Government, there and here, try to embrace the maximum of our activities, and China could not be different. But in your case the direction is the contrary, from a unique and centralised policy, they open an small door. It's impossible to fight against, it's sterile. The power of the Governments it's everywhere too huge. But what it's possible to do is collaborate to make the door wider and bigger and bigger, and if it's needed to fight, much better from inside to promote change than outside. History of the political transition in Spain show us that maybe the changes won't be so high and radical, but at least changes, and it's easier but less spectacular to do it inside. A lot of times we think that the time is finishing by now, and the time is a long way ahead of us. Discussion are interesting now, but, you probably know as historian, that with the time things and fights become viewed with more relativity and achievements will be more positive evaluated than idealisms or theories much more difficult to achieve fully and immediately. You call me a pragmatic, but we had a tough transition in Spain in late 70's and beginning 80's and the approach of "pragmatic" people was more successful than "idealists". And this theory can be applied at any Institution or, let me say, also Company. When I used to be Marketing Director my better successes and what I teaching to my colleagues and employees was always: First the Moon, after Mars! And I can assure you than a lot of people doesn't understand this simple principle, they always wanted to do things too difficult to achieve without first consolidate position and do the things were be possible, for them was better not to act in order to follow a dream rather than act.
Below a few links:
I think that the Catalan one is quite interesting because it's the most recent experience. (this front page translated in word document using Google tools).
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/CulturaDepartament/menuitem.08b5bfd30a1b7a434fbfd875b0c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=8ceebd8139f52210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
UK
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/about-us/
Montreal
http://www.artsmontreal.org/mission.php
Centralised cultural policies in France and Spain. Not Arts councils there.
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/min/index-min.htm
http://www.mcu.es/promoArte/CE/InformacionGeneral/Gestion.html
Warm regards
Josep
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
注：信件由“艺术国际”网站编辑刘正花翻译，吕澎译校
