反现实的时刻场景　

徐坦

陈侗的艺术以及绘画活动具有一种特殊的创造性指向，如果联系到他对生存和文化的一些基本态度，会得到更明显的了解。

首先，在开始从事当代艺术活动的时候，陈侗就彰显了反现实主义的态度。这种基本态度，不是指反对绘画手法上的具象方式，这和西方艺术史的判断不同。西方艺术史上常常将具象和极具象的艺术表达看成”现实主义”，而陈侗的判断是，艺术不能直接来源于生活，要切断生存和艺术之间一种紧密直接的联系性，之后即使你采用了具象的或者任何方式的表达，都将是在拆除了现实主义的认知基础以后的工作。

那么什么是生存与认知的”现实主义”基础呢？我和陈侗一致认为，这就是对生存的知觉是建立在一种”功效主义”根基性的存在性认知。简单说，就是一种根深蒂固的，建立在意识里的，有用的，具备”有效性”的基本认知态度。我们大部分的人都会斟酌自己的每一个行为或者知觉行为是否有用。有的艺术工作者会对外声称自己的艺术对于现实是无用的，但不排除其在生活态度上采用现实主义的态度。而陈侗认为，这依旧是一种在现实主义基础上的艺术活动，他常常主张做一些没有用的事情，做一些从根基上来说，或者从现实生活角度来说都很没有用的事情。

要详细说明的是，一个持现实主义生活态度的艺术工作者，认为可以在自己的艺术中表达一种非现实的情境，但是，正好是这样一种生存观念和其创作的联系性，成为了他艺术活动的十分隐藏性的基础，我们可以把这种艺术家的创作称之为”现实主义者的浪漫情怀”。

陈侗对于”现实主义”或”功效主义”的认知态度和一些我所知道的西方现代哲学是相反的，比如，美国（实用主义）哲学家理查德.罗蒂（Richard Rorty），他总结了实用主义哲学和欧陆现代哲学在认识论的基本倾向，认为人的认识活动，除了追求效用，不存在一种另外的动机，即并非人对真理的纯粹追求，在驱动着我们的认知活动。陈侗说他没有读过罗蒂，但这并不妨碍他有一种我极为欣赏的反功效主义的基本态度。

虽然我们要睁开眼仔细看看现实，但是却要带着”没有用”的眼光。

陈侗这样一个持远离现实主义的艺术工作者，当他使用具象绘画语言描绘现实社会情境的时候，你也可以发现其绘画缺少现实性的判断。我认为这是他的优点。在现实主义气息极浓的当代中国，每个当代艺术家都知道，要做当代艺术，就必须在现有的路径上工作，我称之为”现存的有效公路”，也就是说，你要选择”当代”媒介–装置、影像、行为；或者选择当代图像–抽象、卡通、风格化的图形。”条条道路通罗马”，但你如果不在”路上”跑，或者想另辟蹊径，能否到达就不得而知了。

此外我们常常会听说”当代水墨”之类的词，那是因为要将这条有争议的”路”合法化，使之成为通罗马的道路之一。然而陈侗的绘画活动，即”乱画”，却远离了当代艺术的日常有效的活动路径，也无法被纳入这条当代水墨之路。

主要的问题在于，艺术家如果要进入了任何一条道路，必须要符合一些规则和潜规则，特别是这些潜规则的难以把握性，让艺术活动显得不易言说，有些潜规则来自于传统，或者说前人留下来的图式。比如当代绘画，或者当代水墨应该画什么，或者有哪些东西，哪些情境不宜入画，这是一个很难清楚描述的事情，但是对于大多数艺术家来说，似乎有一种类似社会性意识的判断，有某些难以解释的集体选择，或者集体拒绝。

对于绘画来说，选择哪一个或几个时刻，固定为一个场景或图像，成为物质性的存在，始终是十分重要的初始性工作，画家都会不自觉地选择一些更为典型性的时刻场景，作为某个具象绘画的总体画面的基础–选择一个典型时刻场景，加上挪用不同时刻事件的浓缩；绘画成为不同时刻场景浓缩的结果，比如《最后的晚餐》，里面基督和诸圣徒的关系，事实上可以看成并非同时刻发生的事情被浓缩到同一个画面时刻。绘画时间性浓缩带来一种事实性的结果，从意义表达上来说，给予了符号与表达的可能性，所有现实主义绘画都根据了这一规则，使画面变成一个大的符号，表达艺术家的看法和情境判断。同时我们也能看到，这种典型古典式的、因果直接挂钩的思维和表达方式，对于表达瞬息万变、资讯爆炸的当代社会和艺术活动来说，颇显简单。一般来说，这种典型时刻场景的经营，是对符号有效性的追求，也会带来时间感的延伸，在时间方面有延伸感的绘画常常被看成好的绘画。

而陈侗最有意思的工作是利用了那些潜在的不宜入画的主题，他的绘画，多半使用了非典型的时刻场景，在他的一个画面场景中，看不到一种被期待着的下几帧，或上几帧。而且重要的是，这还是一种来自社会、情境、情怀判断的典型性缺乏，看不到这个整体符号对于现实的紧密联系和表达。总的来说，陈侗这种反现实的时刻场景绘画包含了两个方面，一个是他对于绘画典型时刻场景特殊选择的态度，这和他早年从事连环画研究看似有关；而画面缺乏对于现实情境的浪漫判断，则来自于他的非现实主义的艺术与存在观念，来自于他反对艺术对于现实存在的功效性表达。这种非典型画面，无法完成观者的期待感，除了由此带来的意外感，还刺激了自由想象，观看的时候你发现自己的意识进入一种十分轻松、飘逸的、多方向的想象，虽然绘画给你一个潜在的方向暗示。

我们都知道陈侗是一个持自由主义观念的知识分子型的人，但是，从他画的政治人物的肖像上，却看不出任何赞誉或者批评感觉的评价。以上这些似乎都是对艺术作品的负面判断之词，而恰恰也正是我对陈侗绘画的高度赞扬之词。

如果我们以为，现实主义的生存和艺术态度是一种朴素的唯物主义的对”实在”的反应–我们姑且不谈是否存在一种所谓的朴素唯物主义的认识，就如我们每个人都知道的名言”世界是物质的”只是一种断言–那么，重点在于，我们此时所谈的现实主义更接近一种集体意识性质的、功效主义的信念。有效，即认识。陈侗所涉及的非现实的问题，实事上是反对”有效＝认识”这样一种关系。

从陈侗的绘画艺术，我们真正地引入了一个有关人的意识和”实在”关系的问题，这样一种在艺术中呈现出来的具体关系，是我们一向笼统讨论”存在与意识关系”时不会涉及的。而且，很重要的是，这种意识活动是在有关艺术的社会语境中展开的。

陈侗谈及他在造实验工作室现场创作的”钱学森”时提到了他在那几天内看到、并且受到刺激的某些信息，如从电视上看到旧电影《奇袭》，联想到炸武汉长江大桥。”钱学森”的绘画主题来自当天的报纸，所有的11月7日的绘画主题都来自偶然从媒体中得到的的不连贯的信息。陈侗这种认识现实，或者说和现实发生关系的方式，可能会迅速遭来非议。对于认识现实，一般性的社会常识是要系统地、连贯地学习，只有获得知识信息和和搜集知识背景，才能有效地认识世界，同时这也是有效的学习认识方式。那么，陈侗这种通过传播媒介信手拈来的方式，从一开始就显得无效和不严肃，本身就不能正常地获得或理解现实世界。我认为，他一开始就对”有效、认识”这种方式提出了严肃的质问。特别是在现在所说的”信息爆炸”的时代，很多人都想回避的一个问题就是：在这种人类知识量几年翻番的情况下，什么是对”实在”的正确的认识？陈侗这种片断的、信手拈来的方式，是否比一种系统、连贯学习的方式更不能认识现实世界？但这是否也就是我们这个时代的文化人不得不采用的放弃式的、无力的认知方式？所谓无力，是针对功效而言。对于功效及现实主义的认识方法来说，陈侗提出了一个严峻的问题。

“钱学森”这个作品体现了混合使用符号和形象（image）的有趣的方式。使用的符号和形象，包括了蘑菇云、 炸桥的人梯、 森林和有恋爱学生的校园。题有”钱”字的画面是蘑菇云上躺着小人，方式上来说是沿用一种传统的漫画，而且是更为简洁的漫画式符号，这种方式我们可以从丰子恺的绘画情境里看到；”学”字，表现为一个人在读书学习，这是从字义的角度来作诠释；”森”字，用画树林来表示，是用相应的形象来解释这个字（中国绘画和民间文化的悠久传统中还有很多与之类似的表现方式，比如，齐白石用鱼的形象表示”余”，仅仅因为”鱼”和”余”谐音）。我们可以看到，在陈侗的绘画里，绘画的传统事实是比所谓的现实世界更为重要的意识事实。尽管陈侗一再表明他强烈地反对中国文化的象形和谐音的传统，然而另一方面，他又利用他反对的东西来破坏那种固有的现实主义的合理方式。通常情况下，从字面意义的角度来形象地描绘主题的绘画很容易让人接受，因为很易懂。如果看懂了在你面前的事物，很多人也就停止继续观看和思考了，这同样是”功效”在起作用。

陈侗在武汉创作的另外一些”打电话”的绘画作品，电话是媒体。通过给在别处的朋友打电话，陈侗即时画出对方当时的动作和场景（这个过程虽然说是陈侗在武汉活动计划之内的，但是正如陈侗自己所质疑的：计划的依据是什么？）。

既然”电话是媒体”，那么我们都知道，媒体是另外的”存在”，媒体自身带有遮蔽性。每个使用电话的人都明白，电话两端的人都在接受着这种遮蔽。我承认陈侗打电话给我的时候，我并没有做我告诉他我正在做的事情，但是他画出了我们口头谈及的事情。我们都在接受这种改变。

对很多人来说，个人自身发生的事情和所处的环境通常就是一种现实，是被感知的。这里有两个问题需要再次说明：其一，基于对身处环境的体验，有效的经验将被当成正确的认识，暂时无法被认为是有效的认识，则行为需要依赖于常识，而在我们的社会环境里，常识常常是一种集体意识的、互相影响的结果；其二，人们在产生关于”现实”的理解之后，还会产生远离自己的状况的期望，需要某种忽视，忽视自身的反应，忽视顺从常识中的”一般”说法和规则，从而产生一种浪漫情怀。对于怀着浪漫主义情怀的现实主义者来说，私人的生活事件直接无修饰地作为绘画主题是不可取的。陈侗相反，他任意地画出每个接电话的朋友那一刻在做什么的情景–仅仅通过语音，依赖电话对方的话语描述以及在他脑子里面迅速形成的想象。

如果将”钱学森”、朋友适时电话记录的绘画都放到之前我提及的我们这个信息爆炸的时代里面来看，很显然，在这样的时代，获取信息的手段越是发达，获取信息将越是”片断的”，那么全面的、连贯的、系统地把握知识和信息系统显得如此的无望。面对作为社会交往和知识传播载体的信息，我们自知将无法有效地认识这个世界的种种关系。陈侗，毫无遮掩地揭示了这一点,不回避对信息采用片断的、枝节的、偶然的选择方式，使绘画成为呈现不同意识状况的媒介。

The Momentary Scene of Anti-reality

Xu Tan

There is a specific direction in Chen Tong’s art and in his painting activity, which can be better understood if his work is related to his basic attitude to existence and to culture.

First of all, Chen Tong assumed an attitude of anti-realism when he began working in the realm of contemporary art. His basic attitude is not against the techniques of representation and its place in Western art history. Representational artistic style and surrealistic figurative style are generally called “realism” in Western art history. Nevertheless, in Chen Tong’s view, art is not directly derived from real life. We have to give up the idea that there is a close and straightforward relationship between life and art. Therefore, it is necessary to dismantle the cognitive structure based upon realism, whether you express yourself in a representational style or in any other style.

What is the “realistic” foundation of existence and cognition? Chen Tong and I agree that the perception of existence is formed from cognition on a basis of “utilitarianism”. In brief, this is an essential cognitive attitude, which is useful, deep-rooted in the conscious mind and has “utility”. Most of us are able to consider whether our actions or our perceptive behaviors are effective. Some artists claim that their art is useless in relation to reality, but they don’t exclude their realistic attitude toward life. Chen Tong believes that this is still art activity based on realism. He frequently proposes to do something worthless, to do something essentially very unprofitable, or very ostracizing from the perspective of real life.

To elaborate further: although some artists maintain a realistic attitude towards life, they believe they can represent a kind of unrealistic scene in their art. This notion of existence and this relationship to creation becomes the covert basis of these artists’ art activity, and, thus, we can see these artists’ creation as having a “realistic romantic mood.”

As far as I know, Chen Tong’s cognitive attitude toward “realism” and “utilitarianism” is contrary to some Western modern philosophy. For example, Richard Rorty, an American pragmatist philosopher, summarized the primary trend in the epistemology of pragmatism and continental modern philosophy. He believes that there are no other motives in human cognitive activity than the pursuit of benefits. That is to say, our cognitive activity is not driven by the simple pursuit of truth. Chen Tong has not read Rorty’s books, but this does not prevent him from his basic attitude of anti-utilitarianism as I see it.

We shall open our eyes to look at the real world, but at the same time from an “unprofitable” point of view.

Chen Tong is an artist who stays away from realism. When he depicts a real social scene in a representational style, you will find that his work of art is short of some view of actuality. I think this is his merit. In contemporary China, there is an atmosphere of realism everywhere. Under these circumstances, every contemporary artist understands that if you want to produce a piece of contemporary art, you will have to work on the existing paths which I call “the ongoing effective highway.” In other words, you must select “contemporary” media－installation, video, performance－or select contemporary images－abstraction, cartoon style, stylistic figures – as the saying goes  “All roads lead to Rome.” But it is not known that this path won’t give you access to success if you don’t walk “on the highway”, or if you endeavor to find another path.

Furthermore, we often hear phrases like “contemporary ink-and-wash paintings” – this is because there is an attempt to legalize this controversial “highway,” to become one of the roads to Rome. However, Chen Tong’s painting activity, namely his style of painting at random is away from the common, effective road, the road that is followed in contemporary art, and, therefore, can not be included in the category (on the road) for contemporary ink-and-wash paintings.

The main problem is that these roads must conform to the rules and hidden rules because the artists want to follow them. Especially owing to these hidden rules that are hard to grasp, some of which stem from tradition or from the diagrams our predecessors left behind, the arts seem difficult to explain. For example, in contemporary painting or contemporary ink-and-wash art, what should be painted? Or which thing, which scene is out of place? It is very difficult to interpret clearly such cases. But for most artists, there seems to be a certain judgment similar to a social consciousness. There are certain collective choices that are difficult to explain and there are certain collective refusals.

To choose one or more moments in order to fix a scene or an image, to turn this scene into material existence, has always been an initial choice of much importance for painting. The painter would unconsciously select some of the more typical momentary scenes as a basis for the overall picture in certain representational paintings – the artist chooses a typical momentary scene, applies it to several events, making different moments into one moment; a piece of art becomes the outcome of abstracting the scenes at different moments. For example, in The Last Supper, the relationship between Jesus Christ and all the Saints can, in fact, be seen as events which didn’t happen simultaneously, but were put onto the same screen. In terms of expression, the assembly of time in the painting creates a kind of reality, which causes there to be the possibility of symbols and representation. All of the realistic arts obey this rule, so that the painting turns into a big symbol, indicating the artists’ perspective and judgment of the situation. At the same time, we can also see that this type of classic thinking and expression, in which the cause and effect are directly linked, appears to be very simple for contemporary society in which expression changes very fast, and there is an information explosion, and this affects artistic activities.

Generally speaking, the arrangement of the typical momentary scene is a way to pursue the utility of the symbol, and it also creates an extension of the sense of time. A painting that has an extension in terms of time is often regarded as a good painting.

It is most interesting when Chen Tong makes use of potential themes, which appear inappropriate, putting these in his paintings. He mostly puts atypical momentary scenes into his paintings. We cannot see what is next to the scene, which we have been looking forward to, or what is before it in the previous scenes. And it’s crucial that this is a sort of typical lack of opinions from society, situation and emotion. This symbol as a whole, which can have close contact with reality and can express the truth, cannot be seen. By and large, Chen Tong’s paintings with these anti-realistic momentary scenes contain two factors. One is an attitude, which he holds, that the typical scene in the painting should be individually selected and distinguished from other scenes. This is seemingly related to his study of the comic strip in his early years. The other is the lack of romantic judgments for the realistic situations in his picture, which is derived from his unrealistic ideas about art and existence, and from his opposition to art that reflects the utility of real existence. Such atypical pictures are unable to completely satisfy the expectations of the audience, and result in an unexpected feeling, but they can also inspire the imagination of the audience. Although the paintings give you a hint of a potential direction, you can find that your consciousness enters into a kind of very relaxing and elegant fancy that goes in many directions when you are observing them.

As we know, Chen Tong is an intellectual and his ideas are liberal. But it is difficult to talk about any opinion, whether of admiration or of criticism in the portraits of the politicians that he has painted. This seems to be a kind of negative assessment of a work of art, while it is exactly my high praise for Chen Tong’s painting.

If we suppose that the realistic attitude to existence and to art is a reaction to “reality” from the austere materialistic point of view – leaving aside whether there is a so-called austere materialistic cognition or not, exactly as the well-known dictum “all things are composed of material” is nothing more than a statement – the keystone is that the realism here we are referring to is closer to a faith of utilitarianism that has the nature of collective consciousness. Effectiveness is namely cognition. Actually, Chen Tong’s problem of unreality is against the judgment that “effectiveness is equivalent to cognition”.

Through Chen Tong’s artworks, an issue about the connection between human consciousness and “reality” is authentically brought into our discussion, and we didn’t touch upon this specific connection that was revealed in the art when we discussed in a vague way “the connection between existence and consciousness”. Moreover, it is very important that the activity of consciousness is evolving in the social context in relation to the arts.

When talking about producing “Qian Xueseng” on-the-spot in his Manufactura’s Studio, Chen Tong mentioned that what he saw during those several days and some information from what he saw inspired him – things like an old film Impromptu/Rapid Attack that he saw on television, also, Wuhan Bridge over the Yangtze River when it was bombed which came into his mind. The themes of his paintings “Qian Xueseng” stemmed from the newspapers he read on November 7, and all the themes of these paintings came from the incoherent information that he obtained from the media by accident. The way in which Chen Tong understands reality, or the way in which he has a relationship with reality, will quickly provoke strong criticism. For the sake of understanding reality, we have to learn general knowledge about society methodically and coherently. We are able to know the world effectively only by acquiring knowledge and collecting information, and this is also an effective cognitive style. So from the beginning, it seemed of no avail and not earnest that Chen Tong gained information at random from the mass media, by means of which we can’t normally obtain information or understand the real world. I think he raises a serious question at the outset about the means of “effectiveness and understanding”. Nowadays, especially in the “information explosion” era, many people try to avoid an issue which is this: with human knowledge multiplying several-fold within just a few years, what is the correct understanding of “reality”? Is the fragmentary and casual way in which Chen Tong knows the real world less feasible than a systematic and coherent way? However, is it also an abandoning and weak cognitive style that today, we, the culturati have to accept? The so-called weakness is put forward in the light of utility. Chen Tong presents a serious concern about the cognitive style of utility and reality.

The work of art “Qian Xueseng” reflects an interesting manner of mixing up symbols with images. These symbols and images include a mushroom cloud, the human ladder for bombing the bridge, the woods and the campus occupied by students in love. The picture with the character “Qian” depicts a tiny man lying on a mushroom cloud. It follows the pattern of traditional caricature, and in a more concise comic style which we can find in Feng Zikai’s caricature. The character “Xue” is represented as a person reading and learning interpreted from the viewpoint of its literal meaning; and the character “Seng” is expressed as the woods, using the corresponding image with the word, (in the long-standing tradition of Chinese painting and folk culture, there are a lot of similar expressions. For example, Qi Baishi applied the image of the fish to the word “I/ abundance”, just because “fish” and “I/abundance” have the same pronunciation). We will find that in Chen Tong’s paintings, the examples from traditional painting are more important than the facts that we are aware of in the so-called real world. Though Chen Tong repeatedly declared that he was strongly opposed to the tradition of applying hieroglyph and homophone in Chinese culture, he utilized what he opposed in order to damage the realistic, essential and rational way. Under ordinary circumstances, it is very easily acceptable to vividly portray the subject matter in the literal sense for a painting, because it is easy to understand. Many people will stop to observe and think on condition that they know what they see in front of them, and this is also the “utility” taking effect.

Chen Tong also produced some other paintings by using the “telephone” in Wuhan. The telephone is the media. By calling a friend of his elsewhere, Chen Tong painted immediately, the activities of his friend and the scene at that time, (this process is said to be included in the programme in Wuhan of Chen Tong, but Chen Tong questions: what is the basis of the programme?).

Because of the fact that “the telephone is the media”, we all understand that the media is another “existence”, and that the media itself has the nature of obscurity. Each person using the telephone knows that the people at both sides are suffering this obscurity. I admitted I did not do what I told Chen Tong I was doing while he was calling me, but he depicted what I said. We all have been accepting this influence.

For many people, events that happen to them and the environment surrounding them are usually a sort of reality, and that is what they can perceive. There are two issues which have to be elaborated again: in the first place, according to their own experience in their environment, an effective experience will be regarded as a correct understanding, for the time being, it can not be considered to be an effective understanding, because the activities must rely on common sense. But common sense is often a result of collective consciousness and the mutual influence (among the people) in our social environment. Second, after the people having grasped what is “reality”, they also will have expectations beyond their conditions. They need a certain neglectfulness, neglecting their own responses, ignoring the “general” statements and rules that follow common sense. In this way, romantic feelings are stirred. It is not advisable that the events in private life directly apply to the themes of the paintings without any modification for the realist with romantic feelings. Instead, Chen Tong drew at random the scenes of what each friend is doing at the moment of answering the phone – merely by voice, according to what the other described by telephone, as well as the imagination rapidly formed in his mind.

If “Qian Xueseng” and the paintings about timely records of friends’ telephone calls are put into the context of our era of an information explosion that I mentioned before, it is quite clear that in this era, the more developed the manner by which we gain the information, the more “fragmentary” the information will be. As a result, how futureless a comprehensive, coherent, and systematic grasp of knowledge and information systems seems! In the face of information as social communication and the vehicle of knowledge diffusion, we are aware that we can’t have the ability to effectively understand various relationships in this world. Unabashedly/directly revealing this, Chen Tong does not shy away from the way of selecting information fragmentarily and casually, to make the painting be a medium that takes on different states of consciousness.

翻译：陈瑶琪

translation:Chen Yaoqi

校译：艾伦·茨威格

translation:Ellen Zweig