错位与穿透:向国华作品展

 

 

 

2008年   意在何处之异在NO17  120x150cm材料:油画

 

 

 

 

 

错位与穿透:向国华作品展
王小箭/文

       三年前,耿纪朋等人共同策划了《我们》展,这也是向国华在大学期间参加的他认为最值得记忆的展览之一。现在,各自的领域有了一定的成就。工作于绵阳,即向国华家乡的耿纪朋策划这次展览,两人再次合作可以说是一起成长。

       向国华这次展出的作品主要有三种类型,一种是综合材料作品在宣纸或皮纸上烫洞做出的山水画或压克力板上的镂空山水画,这是他的早期风格;另一种是在画布上用油画材料绘制的错位的写意画;第三种是前两种风格的结合,即把第一种进行错位处理。这些探索花去了艺术家三年时间,几乎与他在大学读书的时间相等,而这三年时间正是艺术市场火暴,川美某些类型作品走红,很多学生没毕业就已签约三年,向国华能在这种环境下执着于自己的艺术探索,的确是难能可贵的。

 

 

2008年 《出阁.回门》 NO1  尺寸 79x133cm 材料:宣纸 香火  卡纸 丙烯

 

 

 

    向国华这三种类型的作品的共同特征,可以简单概括为“形式主义解构”或“形式解构主义”,因为无论是烫洞镂空还是错位,都是对原结构的破坏或消解,但通常的解构主义作品都是通过不相关符号的并置(错置),多符号的对语义进行解构,或使之从原语境中脱离出来,形成孤立的符号,简单说,就是通过对能指(signifier)语境的解构或重构来解构或重构所指(signified)。而向国华对原结构的破坏或解构是在形的层面,而不是在语义层面,因此并不造成语义的变更,而是造成了特殊的视觉效果。烫洞镂空的视觉效果是使形象产生的不确定性,错位的视觉效果是复位的张力或视幻效果。这两种特殊的视觉效果都对中国画的形式因进行的破坏,并因此“意”造成了破坏或扭曲。作品的标题则说明,这种“形式主义解构”在向国华那里是非常明确的,没有任何偶然性,比如《视而不见》完全是指作品的视觉特征,《意在何处》则是指形式的破坏导致“意”的破坏,而不是语义的变化。

 

 


2008年 《出阁.回门》 NO4  尺寸 79x133cm 材料:宣纸 香火  卡纸 丙烯

 

 

 

     至于作品中明显的“中国性”,我认为完全是艺术家的选择自由,没有必要赋予特殊的价值评判。在我看来,“中国性”对于中国当代艺术的的意义无非是“古为今用”,“西方性”的意义则是“洋为中用”,目的都是“百花齐放”,关键在于“推陈出新”。向国华的艺术总的来说是基于“中国性”的推陈出新,但错位则显然是一种源于西方的形式构成。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

王小箭(四川美术学院教授、批评家、美国西弗吉尼亚大学)

2008年于四川美术学院  


 

 

 

 


 

2008年 《出阁.回门》 NO10  尺寸 79x133cm 材料:宣纸 香火  卡纸 丙烯

 

 

 

 

 

Displacement and Penetration: the Artwork Exhibition of Xiang- Guohua

Wang Xiaojian


      Three years ago, Xiang Guohua attended an artwork exhibition We co-planned by Geng Jipeng and others, which was happed to be one of his most memorable exhibition experience during his collegiate years. Now, both Xiang and Geng become someone in their own field. Working in Mianyang, the hometown of Xiang Guohua, Geng Jipeng is the planner of Xiang’s artwork exhibition this time. The second cooperation of the two is a witness of their growing maturity.
There are three major types of works in Xiang Guohua’s artwork exhibition: one is landscape paintings made by synthetical materials with branded holes on a piece of rice paper (Chinese Xuan Zhi or Xuan paper, usually refers to paper made from parts of the rice plant, like rice straw or rice flour. However, the term is also loosely used for paper made from or containing other plants, like hemp, bamboo or mulberry) or fur paper, or the pierced one painted on an acrylic board, which is recognized as his early style; the other is displaced free-style paintings painted by oil paints on a canvas; still another is the combination of the above-mentioned two styles-a displaced conversion of the first one. It took the artist three years- almost the same length of his collegiate studies to practice theses attempts. It was also the time when certain creative works made by students of Sichuan Fine Arts Institute were in great demand in the market. Many of them signed contracts with companies as long as they entered university; whereas Xiang Guohua still insisted on his own artistic exploration under such circumstances. In this regard, his attempts are difficult of attainment, hence worthy of esteem.
      A common characteristic among the three types of Xiang Guohua’s works can be generalized as “the Deconstruction of Formalism” or “the Formalism Deconstruction”-because no matter branded holes, pierced work or displaced conversion are no more than the destruction or the dissolution of the existing structure; while a common piece of deconstructionist’ work is usually done by the means of juxtaposition (displacement) of irrelevant symbols, a multi-symbol deconstruction of semantic meaning, or a divorce from the existing context to become an isolated symbol. In short, it is through the deconstruction or reconstruction of the context of the signifier to achieve those of the signified. However, Xiang Guohua’s destruction or deconstruction of the existing structure is to the form, not to the context and what it brings is a special visual effect, instead of an alteration of the context. The visual effect of the branded holes is to thrust a sense of uncertainty to the image; while that of displacement is to create a tension of replacement or an effect of visual illusion. These two special visual effects are the destruction to the forms of Chinese paintings, which result in the destruction or the distortion of the “imagery”. The evident nature of “the Deconstruction of Formalism” in Xiang Guohua’s works is by no means accidental, as being indicated in the titles of his works. For instance, a Blind Eye is an absolute reference to the visual characteristics of the works; whereas Where the Imagery Comes from refers to the destruction of the “imagery” resulted from the formal destruction rather than the alteration of the context.
     As to the obvious “Chinese Characteristics” of the works, I think it is not necessary to make any special value judgment because it is only a matter of free choice of the artist.  As far as I am concerned, the significance of the “Chinese Characteristics” to China’s contemporary art is no more than “making the past serve the present”; while that of the “Western Characteristics” is to “make the foreign things serve China”. Both of them are aiming at “letting a hundred flowers blossom”, with a sticking point of “weeding through the old to bring forth the new”. Generally speaking, Xiang Guohua’s art is a re-creation of the old based on the “Chinese Characteristics” of the works; while the displacement in his works is obviously originated from the western formal constitution.