【艺术部落】

 找回密码
 注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

查看: 25371|回复: 4

【范跑跑】跑进艺术圈赴北京798双年展实施作品受争议

[复制链接]
发表于 2009-7-23 18:02:20 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
13_20428_e5e14a3ee74ac0b.jpg

“范跑跑”进军艺术圈【成都讨论会】分为四个部分:

1、    为范跑跑颁发2009年北京798双年展邀请书。
2、    关于范跑跑受邀感言,及个人眼中的当代艺术。
3、    关于当代艺术来源于民众及民间精神的讨论。
4、    大家讨论如何看待网络造星的时代。


华西都市报:

“5·12”地震时因“逃跑事件”引发争议的范美忠,将赴京展出艺术作品,再度引发争议

  ◎受邀理由:鉴于您在公民社会进程发展中的事迹,遵循“人人都是艺术家”的原则,特邀您参展
  ◎参展作品:无可奉告
  ◎展览时间:8月15日

  昨天下午3点,成都廊桥当代艺术中心引来了一场特别的讨论会。之所以特别,是因为它邀请的主角是去年汶川地震时凭借着“逃跑门”而火速蹿红的范美忠,人称“范跑跑”。一样的黑框眼镜,一样的条纹衬衫,不一样的是“范跑跑”这次的身份——2009北京首届798双年展受邀嘉宾。“范跑跑”要当艺术家了?到底是一场炒作还是事实,引来众多人的争议与猜测。

 “范跑跑”:啥子都不想,为自己而活

  昨天下午位于草堂路的廊桥当代艺术中心门口一张不起眼的A4宣传海报引来众人驻足观看——“‘范跑跑’进军艺术圈——暨‘人人都是艺术家’成都讨论会”,“范跑跑”确实又行动了。

  讨论会现场,“范跑跑”一脸严肃,正畅谈当代艺术。“当代艺术一般有两种,一是颓废的表现,比如理想受挫,对现实妥协的主题;二是先锋艺术。一些艺术家逐渐丧失艺术家的精神,甚至置身其中无法反抗,而我希望人人都拥有自由的权利和不被剥夺的权利。”“请问你没搞过艺术,能做好艺术么?”对于质问,“范跑跑”的回答非常直接:“并非所有搞艺术的人都懂艺术。”“其实早就有人将你逃跑的做法称为行为艺术了,现在你正式进军艺术圈,会不会被误解为哗众取宠或炒作?”有人追问。“我啥子都不想,只为自己而活。”“范跑跑”的眼神开始有些怒色,但并没有表现出明显的排斥。

  对于被质疑以创作材料身份参加北京首届798双年展的问题,“范跑跑”严厉声称不是以创作材料加入,而是会带上自己的作品以艺术家的身份出席。“至于具体的作品,现在就一句话:‘无可奉告’!”

  策展方:他是小人物,没必要炒作

  在“范跑跑”的邀请函上,记者看到主办方的邀请理由是“鉴于您在公民社会进程发展中的事迹,我们遵循‘人人都是艺术家’的原则,特邀请你以艺术家的身份于8月15日参加2009北京首届798双年展。”既然是遵循“人人都是艺术家的”原则邀请,为什么不邀请一名普通的工人或者农民,而偏要邀请处于风口浪尖的“范跑跑”呢?莫非是为了推广展览特意策划的炒作么?

  “我们展览邀请的都是顶尖艺术家,他只是小人物,我们没必要炒作。”2009首届北京798双年展项目策划人王军说,原来曾考虑过邀请普通人与艺术家互动PK,但因为过于普通的人思想架构不足,难以体会艺术的本真,就放弃了。“想到今年展览的主题为‘流动的社群’,侧重对主流社会之外人群的存在状态和精神状态关注,而‘范跑跑’无疑是一个典型。重庆‘钉子户’也在邀请行列。”王军认为撇开逃跑事件不谈,范美忠其实是一个非常有学问的人,不能因为一时的事情就剥夺他成为艺术家的权利。“我们的展览是纯粹的无商业展览,邀请了数百名国际顶级艺术家参加,比如被誉为中国当代艺术教父的艾未未等。完全不需要也没必要借范来炒作,只是觉得他也是一种真实的存在,应该有自我表达权利。”

  市民:简直就是自取其辱

  “我情感上还是没法接受,毕竟为人师表却在学生身处危险时逃跑了。”市民张合表示,作为普通大众,他对“范跑跑”的道德缺失依旧无法原谅,成为艺术家更是哗众取宠。胡女士对于“范跑跑”的转型也表示强烈的不满,她以嘲讽的口气说:“恐怕只会自取其辱,不晓得他们怎么想的。”

 业内人士:要当艺术家得看作品

  “我们不关心他以前做过什么,也不希望他通过特殊事件就马上可以介入艺术圈。从常识来看,要想成为艺术家还是得看作品说话,这样对范本人和对其他艺术家也才公平。”川音美院老师、艺术家陈墨认为,“范跑跑”在对中国教育的反思上还是值得肯定的,而且从他的言语和文章上看,是一个有一定学术修养的人,但绝不能因为某个事件就真的配得上艺术家的名声,必须有作品。“当艺术家也不是什么了不起的事情,大家平常心对待就好。”

    记者 陈颖  

“范跑跑”进军艺术圈成都讨论会:
到场参与的人员:周斌 、王军、范美忠 (跑跑)、 宋凯 、小日、 吴成典、 何利平、 刘炜、 张羽、陈建军、陈默、赵欢、吴飞等

关于当代艺术来源于民众及民间精神及如何看待这个网络造星的时代。
 楼主| 发表于 2009-7-23 18:04:30 | 显示全部楼层

在去年“5·12地震”后备受争议的“范跑跑”(范美忠)受邀参加8月举行的北京798双年展,目前,具体作品形式与内容暂时“未知”,但可能以行为艺术的方式呈现。会以实验性的娱乐方式让非艺术家来实施艺术作品,策划人王军试图以这种类似于解构的方式来刺激中国当代艺术圈。



李媛 绘图

正在筹备中的首届北京798双年展透露消息,8月15日的双年展开幕式上,“5·12地震”期间由“范跑跑言论”引来诸多关注的范美忠将受邀以艺术作品的形式参与本届双年展,但是,范跑跑表示,具体作品形式与内容暂时“无可奉告”!他的受邀理由为:“鉴于您在公民社会进程发展中的事迹,遵循‘人人都是艺术家’的原则,特邀您参展该项目。”

根据年轻的策划人王军与范美忠沟通和商议的结果,范跑跑此次的艺术作品主题将与“逃跑事件”稍有关联,比如“再次面对地震带来的巨大恐慌会不会进行重新选择”,作品很有可能以行为艺术的方式呈现。

不仅仅是范跑跑,此次798双年展上,著名的重庆最牛钉子户女主人吴萍也将以装置艺术的形式出现在展场中。王军此前5月曾任北京举行的“前提行为艺术节”策划人,他认为,照片中钉子户本身孤零零地独立于一片废墟之上的楼房就已经很像艺术家的行为了。“‘人人都是艺术家’是一种理想状态,艺术家是精神层次的讲法,艺术家可以被广义地称为艺术人、艺术者。”王军说。


  
  


非艺术家PK职业艺术家

范跑跑本身并不是一位艺术家,甚至从来没有做过艺术作品,但是,在王军的口中,他仍然是一位有学问和独立思想的人:“范跑跑一直在研究鲁迅,当我们把他的事件撇开,在一起聊天的时候都会谈到黑格尔、萨特。”

对那些“成功”的艺术家,王军备感失望,因为“那些成功的艺术家处于失语的状态。他们几乎所有人都在追逐市场,近两年来没有人得空思考当代艺术艺术语言的问题”。此次798双年展行为艺术单元就是着力邀请一些非艺术家,以实验性的娱乐方式让非艺术家来做艺术,王军试图以这种类似于解构的方式来刺激中国当代艺术圈。非艺术家和职业艺术家直接的PK,而两者之中,王军更看好非艺术家。

“今年798双年展的主题为‘流动的社群’,侧重对主流社会之外人群的存在状态和精神状态关注,谈社会价值的取向,而‘范跑跑’就是一个社会人物。这也是用顶尖的艺术来治疗他们,希望他们能从过去的事件中早日摆脱出来。”王军否认了借社会疑问人物炒作的提法,“要炒作的话,可以请其他更有争议的职业艺术家来参展。”

是不是艺术家已经不重要

德国艺术家波伊斯曾说过:“人人都是艺术家。”此言把艺术从散发着高贵神秘气息的罗浮宫倏忽归入了平常人群的寻常生活中。一方面,这种对艺术生活的憧憬已然成为草根大众生活的追求和目标,平民文化长期压抑之后对艺术的向往,从来没有像现代这样释放过、勃发过。另一方面,真的人人都能成为艺术家么?当代艺术没有标准与门槛,有思考,有想法,寻找到一种适合自己的表达方式、有表达能力即可,艺术技巧未必成为首要因素,只是长期被主流传统占据了空间的思维,还能不能具备表达出非主流的能力?

中国当代艺术来源于民众精神,798双年展艺术总监朱其把双年展的主题定为“流动的社群”,他对于王军邀请范跑跑参加双年展的主意持赞许态度,798双年展出发点就是邀请非艺术家参加,“通过艺术来讨论社会问题,是不是艺术家已经不太重要。”



主题阐释:“流动的社群”

此次双年展的主题展“流动的社群”,主要侧重对主流社会之外人群的存在状态和精神状况的关注。
中国“当代艺术”尽管在商业上和国际化上很成功,但与中国的本土现实总体上还是脱节的。当代艺术只有真正的参与中国社会的进程和精神状况的改进,表达中国的精神现实,从本土的精神现实寻求它自身的形式,而不是直接拿来西方的形式改造,使语言形式真正与传统的根源建立联系,中国的“当代艺术”才会具有真正的创造力,也才能真正被中国社会所认同。
“流动的社群”在含义上试图探讨这样一些指向:

(一)民间“流动性”
社会的改变在于民间的流动性。任何主流体系都在于承认结果,但人群在主流之外的流动、游牧、变迁,以及通过追求自由和想象驱使的行为状态的变化,一方面,改变了个人与群体之间的总体关系;另一方面,人群之间也重新在体系之外形成了新的网络,并最终带来社会结构的改变,以及总体意识的新观念。
这是新文化和新艺术产生的基础,即存在状态重新定义艺术的价值取向和形式。“当代艺术”过于观念化,注重语言与艺术自身观念的关系,而忽视了艺术总体上的变革与生存状态变迁的基本关系。而中国正发生着人的存在状态的根本变化,中国每天都处在一种戏剧性和超现实的流变状态,这种现实的戏剧性和超“现实”性包含了未来艺术的语言模型,及其结构性特征。
当代艺术的语言创造应该向中国的现实学习,如果中国房地产拆迁民居引起的反抗,导致“钉子户”的孤岛形态,可以看作最具原创精神的集体创作的“社会雕塑”,它不是由某一个体的艺术观念导致的,而是各种社会力量因为利益在某一个点上对峙达到的“僵持”状态。这是它的物质外观折射和隐喻了一种社会结构,因此是存在的结构力量导致了新的视觉性的社会景观。
中国社会的流动性和戏剧性变迁,事实上,会给“当代艺术”的重新定义带来启示。

(二)“社群”意识
全球资本主义以及中国的市场经济的奇迹,铸就了更强大的国家体系、金融资本的权力以及全球化的资本、劳动力、信息传播和交通平台,与此对应的是更极致的个人主义。而被弱化和削弱的则是“社群”意识。在共产主义运动失败之后,人们不知道在资本主义和垄断体系之外,如何重建更有意义的社区模式以及社会群体的自主性。
在中国,当代的社群意识还很模糊。首先在于社会和国家没有严格的区分形态,社会没有自己的土地,土地属于国家管辖和支配。对社会而言,土地就像一张可以随时被“抽空”的地毯,社会因此对国家具有一种依附性。改革三十年,中国在个性主义和消费社会的引导下,新一代普遍发展出一种极端的自我中心主义和个人意识,但在强大的国家和个人之间,仍然缺乏明确和自主的“社群”意识。人们的社会自救习惯于求助普遍意义的国家和市场,而不是各种形式的社区,人们对民间社会也不报更高形态的希望。
当代艺术过去十年的主流是热衷于与权力、资本和符号的捆绑和联合,而忽视与民众和民间社会的精神联系。本次双年展强调艺术家的“社群”意识,强调以艺术的名义和方式参与某一个社会主流之外的人群,艺术家自己与一个“社群”建立民间的联系,并因为艺术的名义或方式,对他们的存在形态和“社群”意识有一定的促进作用,至于具体形式和概念是不是“艺术”,则不重要。
在当代艺术商业化过去几年喧嚣的同时,有一些当代艺术家已经实质性的以个人的方式开始了这一进程,比如艾未未以自己的方式调查北川学生死亡情况,南京的艺术家郭海平到精神病院教精神病人绘画,甘肃的艺术家靳勒成为自己村庄的村长,并在村子里建起了当代艺术馆。上海的艺术家原弓参与四川地震的救助并记录了灾区的底层社会的状况。
在社会性题材的艺术领域,上述艺术家的方式应该成为中国当代艺术的一个重要取向。中国“当代艺术”的生存特征决定当代艺术在中国还是要具有一种“庄严性”和“神圣性”,而不是卡通、玩世不恭和“新犬儒主义”。当代艺术的社会语言也要反映中国社会深层现实的精神特征,以及它自身对土地、“社群”和史无前例的流动性及其“悲壮”性的感受特征。

Introduction: “The Drifting Communities”

The name of the main exhibition in this year’s biennial is “The Drifting Communities.” This exhibition focuses on the different forms of existence and behaviors of people outside of the mainstream status quo.

“Contemporary art” in China had achieved phenomenal success in the market and on the international stage. But this thriving representation is in fact very much disjointed from the actual domestic conditions that are happening in China. Only if contemporary art can participate in the actual social development and in the refinement of its present “state of mind,” that is, to express the real psychological conditions in the mainland, and to seek for ways of expression from locally-rooted conditions (and not simply manipulating existing forms of artistic expression that originate from the West, so that a developing language of expression can be truly linked to its tradition), then will Chinese contemporary art be identified as truly innovative and thus be recognized by its society.

“The Drifting Communities” attempts to explore the following tendencies:

1. The “Drifting” in a society

The transformation of a society is based on the idea of drifting in a socially-based environment. Any mainstream status quo is the representation of a compliance of a specific result. But outside of the mainstream, people are drifting, transiting, keeping a nomadic existence, and desiring different ways of living as motivated by the urge for freedom and imagination. All of these activities, on one hand, change the holistic relationship between the individual and the group; on the other hand, a new network is formed by people outside of the mainstream that will ultimately cause change to the main social structure—this enables a new conceptual transformation to take place in the overall social consciousness.

This is the basis for the production of new culture and new art; a basis which can also be translated as a re-interpretation of the value and forms of art as reflected by its own state of existence. Chinese “contemporary art” over-emphasizes conceptualization, with much focus paid to the relationship between language and art’s own self-reflexivity. This focus neglects the basic relationship between art’s continuous transformation as a whole and the shifts that exist in different conditions of existence. People’s lives are undergoing fundamental changes in China. Everyday, different dramatic and surrealistic becomings are found everywhere. The drama and the hyper-real in China contain all the language modes and structural characteristics that are available for the future exploration in art making.

The making of a language in Chinese contemporary art can be enriched from a reflection on the actual conditions that are happening within China. For example, the formation of a “nail household” caused by local resistance against the development of the Chinese real estates; such can be seen as an innovative, artistic collaboration in the making of a “social sculpture.” The “nail household” is not the result of an art project originating from an individual, but a “stalemate” formed by various social forces that happened to meet at a point due to a confrontation of different vested interests. The “nail household” is simply a refracted “thingly” appearance and a metaphor for a social structure; it is actually the inherent structural force that brought forth a new visual social landscape.

The drifting and the dramatic changes that are happening in China will in fact play a crucial role in re-defining the category of Chinese “contemporary art.”

2. A sense of the “Communities”

The miracle of globalized capitalism and China’s market economy has fostered a much stronger nation-system, a powerful financial capital, and a globalized resource, labor force, dissemination of information, and commuting platform; all with a corresponding sense of intense individualism. But what has been weakened and crippled is the awareness of the “communities.” After the failure of the communist movement, people have lost a sense of direction as to how best to rebuild a meaningful model for a self-regulating community outside of a system of capitalism and its associated monopolization.

In contemporary China, community awareness is still a rather blurry concept. One reason for this is because of a lack of strict distinction between the society and the nation-state. The people do not possess their own land, since all land is administrated, distributed, and controlled by the country. From the point of view of the people, the land is like a carpet that can be taken away at any time, so the society has grown to be dependant on the state. During the three decade since the Chinese economic reform, and under the guidance of individualism and socially-driven consumerism, a new generation has developed with an extreme egocentrism and self-awareness, but in between the immensity of the country and the individual subject, a definite and self-regulating “community” mentality is still missing. People lack the sense of self-sufficiency in the society because they have become habitual in appealing for assistance to the state and to the market, both of which can only provide help in the most general way. The people do not appeal to different kinds of local communities for help, as they do not expect to receive any support from them.

Mainstream contemporary art in China in the past ten years had shown a keen interest in the exploration of power, money, and symbols. But it has neglected a close tie with the public and the civil society. This biennial stresses on the idea of the “communities,” and under the banner and through the means of art, this biennial attempts to work with those who are not part of the mainstream, and to help artists in forging a relationship with the “communities” in a society. Under the term art and its different signifying possibilities, this year’s exhibition targets on promoting the artists’ condition of existence and the awareness of the “communities.” It needs to be pointed out that this exhibition is not concerned with whether the specific forms and concepts presented are considered “art” or not.

The clamor of commercializing Chinese contemporary art during the passed few years had also witnessed a number of artists who started paying substantial attention to the need for social participation. For example, Ai Weiwei investigated the casualties of the students at Beichuan; Nanjing artist Guo Haiping taught painting to patients at a psychiatric ward; Gangsu artist Jin Le was the head of a village where he built a contemporary art museum; Shanghai artist Yuan Gong participated in the rescue of the Sichuan earthquake and recorded the situation of the underprivileged in the disaster stricken zone.

In the arts, and under the category of the social, the different engagements initiated by the artists mentioned above are considered important departure points in the field of contemporary art. The present characteristics of Chinese “contemporary art” call for a sense of “reverence” and “sanctity,” and not cartoons, cynicism and “neo-cynicism.” The language of the social in contemporary art must reflect the essential characteristics that originate from a deeper understanding of the reality in China; this language must also be related to the land, to the “communities,” to the unprecedented drift in mobility, and to the unique expressions of “tragedy” that exist today.

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

手机版|联系我们|【艺术部落】 ( 京公网安备1101140085号  

GMT+8, 2018-7-21 02:32 , Processed in 0.112950 second(s), 21 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表