手稿的秘密

The Secret of Manuscripts


手稿的秘密    

段君

谢谢鲁虹老师,谢谢艺·凯旋画廊。我发言的题目比较平庸,就叫“手稿的秘密”。刚才前面几位专家都讲得非常深入,我谈几点我的感想和看法。


1、鲁虹老师这次策划的展览让我看到了平时很少看到的一些手稿,对于理解中国当代艺术史里比较经典的作品很有帮助。


2、除了对理解成品有帮助之外,手稿当然有它本身的价值,尤其是它的趣味,特别是画家的作品,展现了很多跟成品不一样的手稿趣味。我着重谈一下这次展览中装置和行为艺术家的手稿,主要是手稿和最后实施的成品之间的差异何在。这里面包括艺术家在构思草图的时候是否考虑到现场出现的突发因素,或者是环境的变化,或者是各种制度的限制,他将面临不同的问题,会怎么去解决,我对这方面的问题很感兴趣。我也注意到了刚才盛葳提到的《被枪毙的方案》,我们要关注的是为什么方案会被枪毙,在它背后的机制是什么样的?包括艺术机制、社会机制,《被枪毙的方案》是一个很好的展览,但当时只有展览画册,好像没有引入更多研究力量的介入,所以在好的主题之下似乎没有形成相应的理论成果,这次鲁虹老师召集了研究的力量,相信主题的价值将会放大。


手稿上的文字,我觉得这可能会形成一个专题,有很多艺术家,比如说傅中望老师,他在德国国际雕塑创作营的方案,就把他的感受、对观念的认识,以及作品创作的意义写得非常明确,使手稿成为作品意义的固定原始物,但我也关注作品在作者之外意义的变化和流动,以及流动的原因和过程。


今天的展览,我从其中两位艺术家的作品中看到了我过去没有注意到的几个细节。第一个是宋冬2012年在德国卡塞尔文献展上做的装置《白做园》,他画的草图上有假山(垃圾)、霓虹等,假山园的背景画的是树林自然景观,但我们看最后在现场实施成品的照片里,假山园的背后有一座宫殿,当时是一个科技展览馆,在这个馆里展出了很多历史上的科技品,但都已经过时了,这其中就包含了生活垃圾与科技垃圾之间的映照,所以这是作品在实施以后新意义的生成。第二件作品是宋冬的《印水》,他草图上的文字写道:击打水面,在水面上溅起水花,水中有水。过去至少我没有注意到这个细节,只是关注他举起印章砸向水面的行动。


再就是马六明画的《草图之二》,有一个玻璃金字塔,金字塔上面有十余人堆成当年《为无名山增高一米》的形状,是马六明为1999年泽曼策划的威尼斯双年展所做的方案,但草图上没有文字,单看这张图并不能完全了解创作的背景和传达的意图,这反而逼迫我们去深入研究它背后的意义。另外一件作品是《芬-马六明的午餐(二)》,草图上的文字写出了他创作这件行为的程序细节,比如他在化妆前后坐在床边有一个抽烟的环节,但这个环节在很多艺术史对这件作品的描述里并没有提到,我自己也没有注意到。但抽烟这个行动本身颇有意味,除了艺术家个人当年生存的困境和内心的焦虑,其实还包含着20世纪90年代消费主义里蕴含的中性化特点。


我刚才的文字和图像之比较方法,其实还是一种比较常规的做法,任何人只要关注细节都可以做到,所以我觉得更重要的,还是要在这次会议之后,可以讨论出更多的研究手稿的途径或方法,我们如何运用我们的知识背景和理论结构去进入分析作品的途径,比如说鲁虹老师在展览前言的开篇已经谈得很清楚,他引入心理学的研究:达芬奇强调要快速地用笔头写下、画下头脑中出现的奇思妙想,而不去考虑形体的准确。这里面有很强的超现实主义的特点,超现实主义在文学里主张作家应该不经过大脑,想到什么就记录下来,不要首先考虑文字的修辞。这对于今后的手稿研究十分有意义,我觉得更多的研究手稿中出现的无意识、下意识、快速的构思和快速的写作,包括被涂改掉、修改掉的文字和图像,它们的重要性已经超过了有意识,以及作品成型的构思。


当然从心理学的角度达成某方面的认识,并不是最终的定论,也不是最终的目标,特别是对于心思缜密的艺术家来说,他们可能不会在手稿中留下无意识的痕迹,所以我们需要更多其他的研究方法,以便提供不同的,对手稿的认识、对成品的认识。今天的这次手稿展不仅好看,而且对我们批评界、理论界研究水准的提高也提出了更高的要求,对双方来说都是一种推动。




The Secret of Manuscripts


I’d like to thank Mr. Lu Hong and Triumph Gallery for giving me the opportunity to make this speech, entitled "The Secret of Manuscripts". Several scholars spoke before me have initiated an in-depth discussion about this exhibition and here are some of my thoughts.

First of all, some of the manuscripts in this exhibition are rarely available in my daily work, and are very helpful to the understanding of the classical works in Chinese contemporary art.

In addition, manuscripts have an inherent value and taste which is different from that of the finished works. On this occasion, I’d like to focus on how the difference came into being between the manuscripts and completed works of installation and performance art. Did the artist, when making drafts, take contingencies, environmental changes or restrictions from various regulations into account? How would he/she address such problems? These are the issues that I find very interesting.

I have also noticed "the Abolished Plan" mentioned by Sheng Wei just now, what we should be concerned about is the reason why the plan was abolished in the first place. What is the mechanism behind it, including the artistic and the social ones? Though a good exhibition with a provoking theme, "the Abolished Plan" showcased only catalogs and almost no academic forces were involved. As a result, no theoretical gains came out of it. In contrast, the strength of academic research was summoned this time, which I believe will magnify the power of this subject. 

In terms of this exhibition, I think the text on manuscripts may form a topic of its own. Mr. Fu Zhongwang could be cited as an example. His"German International Sculpture Creation Camp Project" documented his feelings, understanding of concepts, and the meaning of his work very clearly.  This has become a primary reference affiliated to the finished work. I’m also interested in the changing meaning of the work independent of the artist, as well as its causes and processes.

Coming back to this exhibition, I noticed a couple of details that I failed to see in the works of two artists, Song Dong and Ma Liuming. The first one is for Doing Nothing Garden, an installation by Song Dong from the Documenta in Kassel, Germany in 2012. In his draft, the junk-made mountain and neon-sign are arranged against the natural backdrop of forestry, which, in the final installation, is replaced by a palace of science and technology where many outdated historical achievements are displayed. Thus, a metaphorical echo is formed between domestic rubbish and technological rubbish, and so is a new layer of meaning for the finished work. In the draft of Stamping the Water, another work of Song Dong, writes "punch water to create splashes and make water in the water". Until I saw this draft, this detail had escaped from my notice and I had only paid attention to his act of hitting water with a stamp.

Now we come to Manuscript Part 2 painted by Ma Liuming for the 1999 Venice Biennale curated by Harald Szeemann. In this sketch, a glass pyramid is topped with more than ten people piled up on it in the shape of The Anonymous Mountain Raised by a Meter. As there is no accompanying text to explain its background and intention, we’re forced to delve into its meaning more deeply. Another work, Manuscript for Fen-Ma Liuming's Lunch records a detailed procedure of its creation. For example, he would have a smoking session sitting on the bed before and after makeup, but this act has been omitted from many art history books, neither did I notice it myself. However, the act of smoking itself is quite connotative, pointing to the unisexualized feature contained in consumerism in the 1990s as well the artist’s inner anxiety and existential predicaments.

The method of comparing texts and images I used just now is quite conventional, and anyone can make such discoveries as long as they pay attention to the minutiae. Therefore, I think that it is more important to explore more approaches to the research of manuscripts, i.e. making use of our expertise and theoretical frameworks to analyze them. For example, Mr. Lu Hong draws on psychological studies in the beginning of his preface article. In the article, Lu states that Leonardo da Vinci emphasizes the necessity to jot down any whimsy, without considering the physical accuracy, a noted characteristic of surrealism. In literature, surrealism also advocates that writers should note down what is in their mind without thinking, regardless of the rhetoric. This is very significant for future manuscript research. In my opinion, we should pay more attention to study the unconscious, subconscious notes in the manuscript, including the blotted-out and modified texts and images, which are more important than the consciously created final work.

Nonetheless, the conclusion draws from a psychological point of view remains open for discussion, nor is it our ultimate goal; after all, there’re artists who are very discreet about leaving unconscious traces in their manuscripts. Therefore, more research approaches are needed to understand the manuscript and the finished work from different angles. This is an interesting manuscript exhibition, which also makes higher demand for today’s art critics and theorists. It is a promotion for both sides.