艺术家的政治与江湖

何炬星

来源公众号：SSSSTART

在艺术家的生命历史里，江湖始终是艺术滋养的活水，但江湖也往往是艺术家败坏的根源；而政治永远是艺术背后的战场，却始终是艺术家真正的对手。这个艺术史最辩证本质的问题一般不会被引入普通人思考，而明白人或许也懒得翻来覆去。

在叶永青事件上，这个问题或许会成为典型案例。

传播是个怪物，它往往在是非上找对江湖的病菌。叶永青作品被比利时艺术家质疑的消息一出，这个江湖，在什么都不明白的时候就迅速开始审判，即使如老栗这样充满朴素感情的＂回应＂实际上也掉进了审判老叶的陷阱。审判是什么，审判就是做结论，而江湖的审判就是用江湖有限的是非观和认知做结论。这个所谓抄袭的眼见为实，的确让那些即便是至亲、以及至亲的艺术家同行、藏家甚至艺术家自己都落进了审判的陷阱。这就是江湖的力量，也正是江湖的局限。

但是，艺术到底是什么，这个站在江湖之上的问题，超越作品图像、语言、材料和表达之上的问题，以及作品背后更大的社会背景和某些艺术家作为感知社会介入社会的思想立场问题等等，在这个时候总是缺席，或许是故意沉默，但更多的是确实不知。

叶永青 《冬天的九个鸟笼》

丝绸网印综合材料装置

高300cmx9

1996年作

1996年上海首届双年展展出作品

在我看来，艺术从来就不是赏心悦目喜闻乐见的东西，相反，我所听见看见的艺术及其历史，往往是艺术家的匣中剑声、袖里匕首，这才是艺术家作为时代知识分子的本色、才是好艺术家及其作品产生于时代的意义，古今中外被历史铭记和传承的艺术家概莫例外。叶永青先生在这个层面上有强烈的艺术家个性，其气质和思想力量远超图像本身，更远超那个生存境遇完全不同的比利时人。

在中国这样的时代里，艺术家无论成为文化动物还是艺术泼皮都是存在的必然和必须。艺术家在这样的社会里，青春荷尔蒙本能的冲动就是最肆无忌弹的匕首，在这里，所有依赖的图像图式和语言都成了制造利器的工具，这就是中国艺术家的政治，任何脱离这个现实谈论所谓中国当代艺术的审视都缺乏基本认知。

在中国的历史文化背景里，艺术作为政治层面的思考往往是非常警惕的，由此发展的种种思考逻辑从未真正被普及和训练过，即使在知识暴炸扩张的当代人中，除了“接受”的知识之外，实际上仍然缺乏展开讨论的个人勇气和社会基础。

王广义《毛泽东－红格二号 》

布面油画

148x118cm

1988年作

叶永青作为艺术家的一生，是否借用过其他社会产品和符号，这种借用在艺术上是否成功，构成什么样的出发点和结果，这是一个需要讨论的问题，完全不应该是做结论的时候，但我至今为止看到的评论和表态，都失之于粗暴简单，有人甚至借此否定整个中国当代艺术八十年代九十年代这样一个历史性辉煌的群体，这到底体现了一个什么样的江湖和政治值得深思！

顺便提出另一个问题：我认为所有那些关于中国当代艺术西方本体论的学术出发点，以及少数西方藏家价值发现论，都是舍本逐末，其出发点和动机不是无知就是歪曲事实，就如本文插图所例，其艺术锋芒及意义远超其图像本身，这需要以后慢慢聊。

The Politics and Jianghu of Artist

He Juxing

In the personal history of the artist, Jianghu is always like running water that nourishes art, and yet it is also the root of corruption for the artist; politics is always the battlefield behind art, as well as the true opponent of the artist. The dialectical and essential question of art history as such would seldom be introduced into the thinking of ordinary people, and those smart ones would not bother to toss about it.

In the incident of Ye Yongqing, this question might be a typical case.

Media is like a monster that takes advantages of Jianghu in the matter of right and wrong. As soon as the news that the works of Ye were questioned by that Belgium artist got out, this Jianghu, before anything is figured out clearly, immediately starts to make judgements. Even those modest responding by Li Xianting all falls into the trap of making judgements of Ye. What is a judgment? Making judgments is making conclusions, while the judgement of Jianghu is making conclusion according to its constrained value of right and wrong, as well as its limited cognition. This so-called “fact” of plagiarism indeed makes those intimate ones, close peers, friends, collectors and even the artist himself fall in to the trap of judgement. This is the power of Jianghu, and its constrains at the same time.

Nevertheless, what is art indeed? This question stands beyond the question of Jianghu, beyond the questions of images, languages, materials and expressions of the artworks, as well as the questions of a bigger social background and the question of thinking where some artists perceive the society or make social intervenes and so on, this question is somehow always absent, or remains silent deliberately, and more is yet to know.

In my opinion, art is never something that pleases the eye. On the contrary, the art and its history that I’ve seen and heard, is like the sound of sword in the sheath, the dagger hidden in the sleeves, and this is the true quality of the artists as the intellectuals of this era, and what good artists and their artworks mean to this era. All those artists that are remembered in the art history at all time and in all over the world are no exception. Mr Ye Yongqing has a strong artistic character in this sense, his quality and power of thinking are way beyond the image itself, and beyond that Belgium guy who lives under a completely different circumstance.

Ye Yongqing, Nine Birdcages in Winter

Silk print on fabric, mix media

hight: 300cmx9

1996

Shown on First Shanghai Biennale in 1996 

In such a time in China, whether the artist would become cultural animals or art hooligans are existentially inevitable and necessary. In such a society, the instinctive impulse generated by the adolescent hormones of the artists are like unbridled daggers, where all languages relying on images become tools for making weapons. This is the politics of Chinese artists, all discussion about the so called Chinese contemporary art regardless of this reality is lack of fundamental cognition.

Under the Chinese historical and cultural background, it shall be vigilant to regard art on the level of political thinking. Its internal logic has not been trained and disseminated properly yet. Even though the knowledge and information is exploded nowadays, people are still "accepting" the knowledge. In fact, we are still lack of personal courage and social foundation to conduct profound discussions on these problems.

Wang Guangyi, Mao Zedong －Red Grids No.2

Oil painting on canvas

148x118cm

1988

As a professional artist, whether or not Ye has referenced other social products or symbols in his lifetime creation, or to what extent the referencing is achieved artistically, what is the artist's intention and what results or reactions it leads to, all these problems still remain to be discussed, and not to give conclusions. However, the comments and critics I've read so far are all crude and simple, so much so that some are denying the historical honor and importance of the entire artist group of 1980s and 1990s. It reflects that the Jianghu we are living in and the politics behind, and this is the question that is more valuable to think about deeply.

Meanwhile, there is another question I would like to raise here: in my opinion, all those academic perspectives on the western centrism of Chinese contemporary art, and the thinking of its value discovered by some western collectors, all show the attention to the superficials and the neglect of essentials. The motivation and intention are either ignorant or twisty. Just like the two examples in this texts, the cutting-edge and meaning of the art are way beyond the image itself, which shall be talked afterward.

原文始发于微信公众号（SSSSTART）：[文章]艺术家的政治与江湖 - 何炬星