| Liu Dahong and Qu Guangci － BANG!
刘大鸿 瞿广慈 － 升堂
aura gallery beijing
April 25 – May 25, 2008
opening reception April 25, 3 - 6 PM
BANG!
by Yaji Huang
translated by chieh jane Anderson-wu
Belief means absolute obedience to authority without any doubt. It is
impossible to question it before accepting it.
- Ludwig Wittgenstein
Religions and myths begin with no particular forms, but after interpretation
by different ethics with the knowledge and logic they had imply, the
connotations have been largely changed. In many cultures one single
deity has eventually replaced the anonymous many, and the individual
responsibility of each god was therefore given to the new god. The Isis
of Egypt is the name of thousands of deities, and Allah in the Koran
means the name above one hundred gods.
China, so far a nation under control of a centralized state government,
recognizes no higher power. On the one hand, this lack of recognition
is due to the nature of oriental religions in a Chinese society, on
the other it means that there is no clear boundary between sacred and
profane worlds in China. Through traditional Chinese art forms, Liu
Dahong and Qu Guangci make use the ambiguity between the two worlds
in their art in order to dissect the ideas of religion, monotheism and
worship as they question the compliance to authority and the obedience
to religion by the multitude.
Like religious paintings, Liu Dahong's artworks are all narrative, and
his narrative system refers to western art history. The scurrying pygmies
are the Chinese edition of paintings by Hieronymus Bosch, the similarities
in styles, hues, the collage fashion, metaphors applied by the narrative
structure and the religious implications are quite evident. Such an
appropriation-- allegorizing heaven and hell to the social situation,
or intervening in classical paintings by adding or substituting some
modern elements-- is more and more common in contemporary Chinese art.
The fermentation of Chinese flavor in the 21st century gives Liu Dahong's
art a fresh feel, but undeniably such a development is a matter of course.
The "Hall" series conveys multiple levels of text and meanings.
The series includes the "Buddha Hall", "Mao Hall",
"Confucius Hall" and "Christ Hall" that symbolize
people's beliefs in authority, and "Dining Hall", "Ceremony
Hall" that represent the practice of doctrines upon class consciousness.
Among these halls, the "Buddha Hall" demonstrates the artist's
attempt most directly. In the Orient, artworks regarding religious themes
usually will be presented with perfection and heavenliness, but such
characteristics are not seen in Liu Dahong's work at all. Instead, the
artist has calculatedly created chaos by placing parallel elements in
his painting. Images of the frequently waged crusades in the history
of the West, the horrifying witchcraft and the rigid statues of westerners
have changed the Tibetan Buddha hall into a theater of the absurd. In
the center an innocent girl struggling to get away from the stake is
the most dramatic spectacle, and the giant, puppet-like Buddha along
the people standing or sitting around constitute the scene of trial.
In the backdrop, the landscapes and atrocities of wars often seen in
western religious paintings are a keen contradiction to the people piously
praying in the front. Their belief looks so hopeless.
 
With similar endeavors, the artist has created disarray in his "Dinning
Hall" again; nevertheless, this time he placed peace among the
disquiet. Liu Dahong vividly depicted the people, men and women, old
and young, dinning in the hall, and the viewer can almost hear the sound
of their chewing. The disturbance was restrained. Zhang Hong has an
unusual view about this painting: "Eating in the communal dinning
hall soothes everyone because it assures us that we share the same stomach,
even the same digestion system. That's the basis of the “Communist histology”.
The beggars behind the dinning room, presented sculpturally, reminds
me of the Japanese comic "Drifting Classroom"-- what it implies
is not class difference, but the discrepancy between worlds in different
dimensions.
The fatalism in Qu Guangci's art has been compared to the myth Gotterdammerung.
Fatalism can't be clearly interpreted without depicting fears and anguish,
that's the reason why Qu presents suffering, despair, regret and helplessness
in both his "Knife Gang II" and "Killing Bear".
"Killing Bear" is an exceptional work and the first featuring
a riding animal. The dynamics of an obese man riding on a cow is comparable
to the lively movements presented by Peter Paul Rubens, and the protagonist
bending backward to stab the bear draws an association in my mind with
the image of Japanese writer Mishima Yukio as a savior.
 Qu's people
are not as noisy as Liu's, the former simply wants to create a personal
stage for his own sarcastic mimes. According to Roland Barthes, "coldness"
is an essential element in popular shows, and the killing in popular
shows "has inherited the legacy of myth. For example, a nod of
the god would change the whole fate of human beings, and the magic wands
of fairies and wizards also follow this tradition". The stages
of Qu belong to the same narrative tradition-- gangsters or deities
don't talk, they solve problems simply by signaling. The black humor
carried by the moves of Qu's works is a proof of Barthes' idea: "What
is really effective is silence."
The obesity of Qu's figures is also suggestive. Overweight figures with
stereotypic Chinese facial characteristics have expressively represented
the insignificant multitude, and their intolerable mediocrity is an
irony of the divinity they believe in. Such a sardonicism has existed
in both the eastern and western worlds for a long time, but the artist
did not merely appropriate it, instead, he transforms it . The icons
of "Tall Man I" and "Tall Man II" come from the
old European autocratic regimes. The artist has reproduced symbols that
were loved by autocratic powers. The frozen gestures are august and
authoritarian, as dignified as gods. But their solemnity is disturbed
by one thing: the long and thin legs that destabilize them and the audience
is urged to reflect on their overly empowered authority. In a complete
symbolic system, Qu Quangci's has proposed a deep self-examination of
the past, of the collective memories we rely on and the truth we pursue.
升堂
BANG!
文 / 黄 亚纪
信仰意味着对权威的屈从。一旦屈从便毫无反抗可言，你不可能先是对它表示质疑，然后又发现它是可以接受的。
－维特根斯坦
宗教和神话最初并无固定形式，但经人类思维熟知的范围和矛盾来解释它后，宗教和神话在每个民族间所建起的作用和意义便大不相同。多数国家的神话往往将众多匿名神转向为一人格神，原本各有所司的众神属性统一于此一新的神身上，例如埃及的伊丝神（Isis）是作为「千名之神」、「万名之神」之意，而可兰经里的阿拉的广大神力也表现在其「一百个名称」之上。
若以此观之，中国作为集权性国家在宗教的神性领域并无确定任何至高神体的存在，这一是东方宗教特性，一是显示中国在神性领域与凡俗领域划分并无清楚界线。刘大鸿和瞿广慈的作品透过中国固有艺术形式，运用宗教中神性领域和凡俗领域的模糊，将宗教性、统一性、崇拜性与以破除分散之同时，以凡俗领域之「众」来表达对于信仰，或是对于权威屈从的质疑。
 
如同宗教绘画般，叙事性是刘大鸿作品中极重要的部分，且其叙事系统和中西方艺术史有密切关系。刘大鸿绘画中窜动的集体小人是Hieronymus
Bosch的中国版，型态色彩、荒缪拼贴、和以富宗教（或政治）隐喻题材所架设的叙事结构也极度雷同。但是，此常见的中西方文本挪用、以宗教画中地域天堂的描述转喻当代社会的现态、或在古画模型中加入现代元素的替代技巧，也许中国特色在21世纪的发酵带给刘大鸿此类作品一股维新感受，但不可否认这类风格是艺术表现发展中理所当然的结果。
相较之下，刘大鸿有关「堂」的创作更具多重思考和文本意义。以中国所信仰的权威为题的佛堂、毛堂、儒堂、主堂， 以中国所仰仗的阶级教条为主的食堂、礼堂，都展现艺术家在寓意上的直接企图。佛堂是最具代表性的一件，在东方，宗教或描述宗教的艺术作品多倾向完美性和超世性的描写，但这些描写，在刘大鸿的佛堂中被完全破除，取代的是（刘大鸿此处以「置入」、「并列」为取代手法，达到了文本的交叉混乱，实为妙笔）西方宗教中频繁出现的宗教战争、巫术等负面形象，这些雕塑般的西方人物将西藏佛堂变化成荒诞舞台，画面中央一纯洁少女转身挣脱火刑的动作构成最强烈的力度焦点，众角色环状排列并点出审判的基本架构，且和背后如同宠物般拉扯的大佛形成呼应；佛堂后景重迭起西方宗教画内常见的风景描绘，黄土石间宗教战火连连，前景藏人和民众的诚心歌颂反而显出信仰的愚昧。
食堂同样以置入手法表现纷乱，却又是是纷乱中的宁静。在刘大鸿细腻描绘下，彷佛可听见食堂内男女老幼传出的兮兮嚼饭声，一股极度低频的群众骚动；张闳对这件作品的注解说得好：「公共大食堂里的集体进食活动令人心安。它提醒我们，大家拥有一个共同的胃，共同的消化器官。这是共产主义的器官学基础」。另一方面，食堂后面以雕塑手法塑造的则是不应出现在食堂中的乞民，整体效果让我想起日本漫画「漂流教室」－刘大鸿彷佛提示我们这幅食堂审视的社会模型不仅是阶级落差，甚可视为不同次元世界的差异。
曾以「诸神的黄昏」来形容瞿广慈作品中传达的宁静宿命感。宿命感只有用可怕的痛苦来写它才是许可的，瞿广慈的菜刀帮Ⅱ、杀熊，都以战争的场面来主张痛苦、无奈、叹息和吶喊。杀熊是瞿广慈新作中极为出色的一件，也是第一件战争场面出现骑物的作品；杀熊维持了瞿广慈在动作上的精准掌握，其特色的肥胖人体和骑牛的丰满让人联想起鲁本斯（Peter
Paul Rubens）作品中的动态表现，而抬起上半身仰天刺熊的姿态则无原由地和三岛由纪夫著名照片的救赎形象相通。
 
在「众」的表现上，瞿广慈并不制造如刘大鸿般的喧闹，作品极度宁静地圈出一块专属舞台，自主上演政治讽刺哑剧。在巴特的论述中，「冰冷」是通俗剧中重要的元素，并且通俗剧中的厮杀动作，「具有一整个神话传统，从上古时代诸神的启示，点个头即动摇了人的命运，直到仙子或法师的轻点魔棒，都属于这一传统」。以此观之，瞿广慈所创造出的舞台也属同一叙事传统－如同电影中的歹徒和诸神，不必说话，点一下头就一切解决－瞿广慈的作品寓言式地在动静中展现黑色幽默的宁静，证明了巴特所说的「惟独安静才真正有效」。
另一方面，臃肿造型在瞿广慈作品中起了极大作用，臃肿且具有中国五官特色的人物是一种象征，是一中国人的标签，是将凡俗领域中的平庸推到极致的表现，是嘲笑神性领域至高性的无情揶揄；隐藏在这些丰厚人体后的尖锐讽刺，奠基于东西方历史中以存有的文本，但却不是单纯的印象复制，而是艺术家经过省思后的形式再造。高人Ⅰ、高人Ⅱ形象明显来自于欧洲专制历史的图样，让观者封闭在纯粹的符号里，这些符号都是专制时代喜好重现的瞬间影像，是姿态的庄严冻结，表现出某种带有权威的神性动作；但是瞿广慈为这些符号增添了扰人的赌注－不可再细长的高脚，以表现不稳定感，让这些神性动作成为艺术家对于过于夸大的权力形象的再次反省。瞿广慈的作品在意义已经过度完满的符号体系中，提出了一个知识、一个过去、记忆和事实、以及一个相对的可能反思。
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)