第三种方式

乌利 希客与陆蓉之的对话

乌利希客: 在谈及田伟的作品之前，先解释一下我原先的说法。如果一个欠缺书写中国书法技能的西方人谈论中国的书法，这就像是在谈论世界的另一端。就算我们没去过那 里，并不表示我们不能想象那里是什么样子，至少我们可以谈谈这些想象。陆蓉之:是的。所以有趣的是，我们现在就是在做着这个谈论。因为我们是从两个极端在 作探讨。从西方的观点而言，西方不曾有过称为文字艺术的书法的历史。当然，在中世纪，圣经手稿曾是某种程度上的书法艺术，但与中国书法不同。中国书法是用 文字形式表达深刻的精神境界。所以在艺术上，这是一个完全不同的概念。从中国人的观点来看，书法不仅止是视觉艺术，其含义，即诗性内涵或是说诗性的抒发必 须与视觉形式一同来进行表达。所以，它比较类似于伊斯兰的书法。但是，伊斯兰书法具有宗教的目的—其书写中的威严与神圣的部分是关注的主要问题。但是中国 书法更多的是形式的艺术，所以，它必须要有视觉的效果。乌利:我认为阿拉伯书法有所不同。我会写阿拉伯字母。它们是字母，不到30个字母。所以，与其比作 中国书法我还不如把它比作其他的书写形式，因为中国书法是基于一种颇为不同的概念的。蓉之:但是很多的伊斯兰书法作品都用图案和花样作装饰，所以，它成为 了一种非常独特的装饰艺术—一种具有神圣意味的艺术，而这种神圣意味中国书法是不存在的。中国书法与宗教没有多大关系，即使是抄写佛教的经书—雷同于中世 纪抄写圣经一样地抄写佛经，通常不怎么被认同为艺术。田伟用中国书法的形式书写英文字母，所以很有意思。因为对大多数看他书画的中国人来说，并不容易解 读，因为大部分的观众不懂英语，所以如果不告诉他们那些字的含义，他们就读不懂那些字。所以，他在移植这一书法方式，并使之更具纯艺术性，更具有纯书画视 觉艺术性。对我来说，这种移植很有意思，因为中国书法有它自己的标准，有它自己的历史，对其好与坏的评价也有很长久的历史。篆书、隶书、楷书、草书—它们 都有一定的标准，而且其字体的构成也有一定的结构。但是田伟的作品具有书法各种不同形式的结构，尽管看起来更像草书，甚至更像狂草，但是两者之间却没有什 么关系。所以，就我而言，看到他的作品，就不再有可读性了。而文字内容的可读性是中国书法很重要的部分。可现在，在这个现代化的时代，中国的年轻一代不再 能读懂古代的书法作品了。所以中西大众间又有什么不同呢？再没有多少不同了，因为年轻的一代不再读那一类的书法作品了。乌利:可对我来说，这些绘画作品为 中国人打造了一个典型的西方处境，因为不懂英文的中国人就读不懂这种书法。蓉之：对，我就是这个意思。乌利:这正是面对中国书法时西方人所采取的立场。而 且，那些作品会有意思，是因为他得处理语言与书写之间的误解。作为西方人，我们看到中国书法作品时，总是想从一个方块字中辨认出它是个什么物件，因为我们 认为中国字就是那么创造出来的—从一个具体的物件创造出意象，然后将这个意象简化，然后再使其转变为文字。这是西方式的想法。所以，不论何时西方人面对中 国书法的时候，他们都会竭力地搜寻可能隐藏于其中的含义。当然这不奏效。而且最终会是另外的东西—它或许会从原先一个真实的表述一件事物的文本变形成为一 个非常抽象的符号，而不是其他别的东西了。所以看到这些作品的西方人起初必须要分辨出这是一个英文词，这不是一个汉字。可是所有这一切对我们来说又意味着 什么？那意味着在书写中国字时一定有某种中国人的精神在里面，而这种中国人的精神正如其直白地显现于汉字中一样，似乎也出现在了英文词中。这正是由于我们 读不了汉语而产生的印象。蓉之:所以田伟的作品正是在中西观念之间架起了一座桥梁。看到这些书法作品的中国人，首先看到的是线条流动的视觉部分，他们看到 是这种结构是否构成了强有力的意象。而这部分比较容易得到满足，因为它是视觉性的。随后期待那些字母具有含义，却又立刻变成一片空白，因为这些中国人再读 不了这些书法作品了—它们不是用汉字书写的。而此时处于另一方的西方人，却突然意识到这些是他们能读懂的字母，而我们中国人却读不了。这样构建了一座桥 梁，将来自于两种语言的两种经历联系了起来，尽管文本是可读或不可读的。乌利:我认为他是提供了一座桥梁，但是人们是否会走过这座桥梁还很难估量。只有一 次展览才会说明他们是否真正愿意跨过这座桥梁。他们也许就呆在他们的安全角落。最有意思是看到人们，无论中国的或西方人，在未经任何解说的情况下，如何对 这些的作品做出反应呢。蓉之: 所以我认为很多人，包括您和我，都将田伟与另一位利用书法创造艺术的中国艺术家徐冰作比较。我想知道您对将他们的作品进行比较的看法。乌利:我认为我们还 应该加上谷文达，把他也作为一位从事中国书法的艺术家。蓉之:对，也包括谷文达。乌利:我认为他们采取了完全不同的途径，而每一种途径都有其自身的重要性 和含义。如果我们想到徐冰，那仅仅是因为他也利用英语和西方的字母去传输，而且创造了一种新的视觉语言。我不认为这是田伟的目标。他全然不这么思考，所 以，他不像徐冰是一位语言的探索者，而田伟是一位绘画的探索者。我认为这是有区别的，我的观点是如此，不存在孰重孰轻的判断，它们诚然只是代表两种非常不 同的立场。蓉之:即使两者都涉及到了字母，两种拼音字母。乌利:对，两种拼音字母。蓉之:对我来说，我觉得田伟更多的是在画书法。因为在过去，书法本身就 是一门独立的艺术。但是他在运用这一传统的同时，却是在画字而非书写字。在书写字的时候，含义更为重要，因为你在用字来表达含义。可是他是在画英文字母， 所以更重要的是视觉效果—画作的整体结构如何传递。就我而言，我会从他的作品中看到两重层次、两重含义，就像两个时区，将两个世界引入了一幅绘画作品之 中。所以你会看到，为这些浮动的文字，他有意地使用了不同的背景，这些背景有时并非直接地与字母发生联系，但有时这些背景可以为这些字母提供了信息。所以 两个时区、两种空间的这种融合，的确反映了他长期生活在西方而形成的感觉。我不认为他自己意识到了西方文化与艺术对他的艺术产生了如此大的影响。 我在洛杉矶看过他的早期作品。在他早期作品形成的阶段，他所关注的以及现在他所关注的—正走在一条不同的道路上。尽管一些书法作品反映了他的过去，正如那 些线条的形成一样，但是概念不同了。所以，我相信西方的抽象艺术的确使田伟的作品发生了很大的改变。乌利：对我而言，那是一个表层，两个世界—同一个表层 上的两种文化空间。当我看到它时的触动，我的想法是，一位一直在中国生活的中国艺术家不可能创作这样的作品，生活在美国的美国艺术家也不可能创作出这样的 作品。描绘这样的作品需要他那种特殊的人生，那种生活经历。它只能由一个学过中国书法与西方绘画的人，特别是，我们会想到抽象表现主义，但是它已超越了这 些。正是这些触动了我—这些绘画需要那种经历去完成。蓉之：所以很难模仿这种艺术，因为对我来说它是一种文化体验。你能看到他将一些中国书法添加到了英文 书写上。即使是罗伯特 毛德维尔也创作不了这样的东西。它有与弗朗茨 克莱因相似的笔势，相似的黑色线条动态。乌利:很多西方人，特别是在抽象表象主义内，往往最终产生一些看起来像亚洲的结果，不过我还是认为那是完全不同 的。蓉之:他们主要关注空间。乌利:它们甚至有时是明显的借助于中国书法。不过总是采取这种立场，我在开始时已经描述了，由于不理解含义，而只能仰赖视觉 的冲击力。所以这就导致了有趣的问题：关于中国人的精神，它是什么呢？因为他这些画中的词语明白地告诉我们，它可能是一个汉字或是一个西方的符号，一个西 方的字母，可是它会在作品中给我们某种中国人精神的印象。因此它就引发了这个问题：这种中国人的精神是什么？不论是西方单词还是汉字，是什么带领了我们以 中国符号去解读？这是对我来说这些作品有趣的地方。蓉之:我也能看到美国观念艺术的影响，因为他没有写完整的句子。他也没有给我们一幅肖像画。他只给我们 一个单词。而这个词却是一个有力的信息。这信息本身就是艺术。所以这就联系到了美国的观念艺术—利用某些符号表达特定的含义，而符号本身就是艺术。它可以 是一盏霓虹灯，它可以是数字化灯光系统，它可以是石上的刻字，而符号本身就是艺术。所以解读与面对田伟的作品，需要复杂的系统。而运用颜色的目的，也反映 了他在美国时期曾从事过的服饰业，大量生产的成衣业那段经历。乌利:当然，那些成衣是在中国生产的，而他那时或许并不在中国。蓉之:可他那时生活在美国， 引进这种时装。就美国市场而言，有一种对绚烂色彩的强烈兴趣，特别是那些荧光色系。乌利:我觉得那是一种西海岸的感觉。从他的画作中我能分辨出一种西海岸 的感觉。蓉之:我在洛杉矶生活了20年，这种西海岸文化与东海岸以纽约为中心的文化非常不同。他以前曾在夏威夷生活—看看夏威夷的T恤衫，你能看到什么颜 色? 所以，田伟不知不觉地，并不是有意地，将他的生活经历转变成了一个空间—画布。所以，那些颜色和背景就揭示了他的人生经历。乌利: 我很欣赏他画作中的这些成分。对我而言，它们是坦诚的作品，因为牵涉了许多潜意识并将它发展成为这些表白。我认为那是需要他曾拥有的那种感觉所流露的坦诚 作品。当然我认为它也许很容易被模仿，但是经历却不能被模仿。我们在将来也许会看到一些仿作，一些其他艺术家或许会如此画，但我认为他们将缺少那种独特的 感觉，以及那种独特感觉的逐步成长过程。蓉之:而他处理色彩的方式也很有意思。他喜欢用比较纯的颜色，你基本看不到什么混合色。他试图去表现纯净的色彩— 它强化了他在单词中所传递的强劲信息。从而使那个单词变得非常有力。将它相比于珍妮 霍尔哲还有巴巴拉 克鲁格尔，成就于70年代的美国艺术家所以信息本身就是目的。对我来说，我立刻解读的就是这部分。乌利:但我认为那也是非常中国的。当然，书法很多情况下 并不仅仅是一个符号、一个汉字或一个单词，所以我没有看到多少珍妮 霍尔哲或巴巴拉 克鲁格尔的成分。我几乎是把它当作中国传统来看待的，把它当成一种较大的符号，尤其是近来的书法作品—并不是整个词句的作品，而只是一个字，甚或是其中的 片段。不过对我来说有意思的问题仍然是，中国人如何接受这些呢？同样，这种西方人数百年来看待中国书法的镜像反射效果，即不懂那些汉字却仍然能形成一种看 法。现在，我们会使中国人面临这样的境遇，面对英语单词，却使用的是中国式的表现方式。转注其中的情感会是什么样的呢？在他们心中会产生如何的想象呢？他 们会把它当作中国的事物而接受呢？或者他们将嫌它是一种假象呢？蓉之:对我而言，看到田伟作品从早期阶段发展至今，我真正怀念的部分是他早期作品中的绘画 特性。他是一个了不起的画家。在最初的阶段，他的确创作了非常精彩的抽象绘画作品。现在我们基本上看到的是单色的油画，如今他用单色的画布取代了他过去的 高度绘画性的空间，那种他在早期所表现出的绘画特性。现在人们看到的是几何的或是硬边的图案，像剪纸的图案。他在避免传统水墨画中用墨的各种不同的明暗 度，所谓墨分五色。乌利: 让我来介绍一下西方对这问题的看法，很多西方人可能会把他早期的作品看成是单色调的，因为它们只是黑色的。就像很多西方人经常会认为纸上的中国水墨就是单 色调的绘画，当他们能够欣赏在他绘画中的结构表层、颜色堆叠的层次。他们或许会比中国观众更注意一幅绘画作品的表面结构，所以，他们可能会比中国观众更能 发现这幅画作中的其他方面的丰富性。所以我认为这种不同，观赏作品的不同，或是通过沟通观赏作品，都会产生更多不同的理解，或许会对每个公众展开若干个新 的空间。蓉之:这是一个看待当代中国艺术的本质的新方法。过去，中国艺术家的年轻一代尝试过模仿西方当代艺术的各种潮流。现在看看田伟—他没有模仿任何潮 流，而是采取自己的立场反映自己对于如何开拓自己的空间而做的选择。所以我认为，空间在他的艺术中是非常重要的。所以你经常会看到他重叠相同的色彩，书法 的浓重颜料，由相同色彩所堆叠的平涂画面，在空间里由同一色彩所建构的两种不同色度。所以，我觉得他的画作更像是建筑空间，这对传统中国艺术来说是一个不 同的概念。所以，他将这种观点引入我们前所未有的构图之中。乌利:还有我觉得有意思的是这种“第三种方式”。我们有西方的做事方法和中国的做事方法，我们 都了解这两者。那么或许是中国将来的取向，也是全世界的未来取向，是找到一种全世界最好的综合方式。眼下我们看到了一种西方世界对中国文化的过度影响，这 也不是一件对的事情。当我认为，我们需要某种综合，而且我的想法超出了绘画，我想的是文化，而且在他的画中我看到为此所付出的一种努力。至于那是否已经就 是解决问题的方法，倒不是这么重要的问题，但要有一些人努力把它全提到表面来。我认为这点儿很有意思，而且在当今的文化生活和经济生活的诸多方面仍需去实 践，或许我们得找到那个“第三种方式”来处理我们所面对的课题。蓉之:我也觉得注意到田伟的作品是相当重要的，因为在过去的20年中，对中国当代艺术的关 注一直局限于一个狭小的范围里。只有关于政治的作品，或是涉及社会批评的艺术才被认为是当代的，这两类以外的艺术，似乎都被认为是不合时宜的。我的观点是 中国当代艺术应该是折中的，它应该是多元的。多元化是非常重要的，因为中国人经历了那场试图将人们归于单一的“文化大革命”。年轻的一代人要反叛这种单一 性，所以这种新的多元主义明显地回应了这种单一性。田伟就是一个例证。他把自身对于书法传统的诠释，用于他的西方生活之中。在这里他是个外国人，尽管他看 起来是中国人，说汉语，但在很多方面，因为他有很长一段时间远离了这片土地，所以他带有这些西方文化的影响，但他不是模仿—因为他就是西方。我有类似的经 历和感觉。我看起来是中国人，讲汉语，但我的思维如何？我从20岁起在西方受教育，实际上与中国当代艺术相比，我更了解西方当代艺术。我觉得挺不可思议的 是，您比我更了解中国当代艺术—您是外国人，而我是中国人。可事实上您在此生活了很长时间。您眼见了中国当代艺术的发展，您认识那么多我们这个年代的中国 艺术家，比我认识的还多，所以您对中国当代艺术的理解要比我深远得多。而那时我是生活在西方，我了解美国当代艺术。70年代我在洛杉矶有个画廊，当时我只 和美国艺术家打交道，因而我熟知美国的当代艺术。人们已经不能再用国籍以及种族背景来判定一个人了。这是一个新时代的开始。人们不再用种族、语言、国籍来 区别人，而是人的一生经历。乌利: 你提出了一个很有意思的观点。尽管当我思考田伟的作品时，我极力地去排除中国人走出国门时所面临的移民等这类混杂的问题。你知道的，所谓身份认同的问题。 他们是中国人吗？他们是西方人吗？他们或许两者都不是。他们也可能意识到了这点，而且会在他们的个人生活中造成某些问题。我对这种复杂的存在并不太感兴 趣。我没有这种问题，因为我不是中国人。即使我在中国呆很多年，但我还是西方人。所以我对这个既存的问题不太感兴趣。我比较感兴趣的是这种沟通特征，还有 作品本身。尽管我知道这是一个很大的问题。蓉之:这也是我的观点。我看到你、我，看到我们在这里形成了一个新的场景。认同不再那么重要，那是认同的消失。 当你面对中国当代艺术时，常常你会忘记你身为瑞士公民的身份。这并不重要。你在面对当代艺术本身。对你来说，这是某个艺术家的生活经历。正是这种沟通渠道 对于今天的当代艺术来说是重要的。我不是在谈论全球化问题。很多人一谈到全球化问题，就认为是西方侵入了东方。我不喜欢这样的论调。事情并非如此。那不是 侵略。西方文化没有这种占领东方的超级力量。我没有看到如此。我看到一个新的领域：我们都在这里，经历某种多元的生活方式—第三种方式，一种不同的看待事 物的方法，所以人们不再对西方还是东方这两方进行选择。这是一种融合的新体验，一种折中主义—也是我俩上一次一起策展时的思维，即是异质的美学。我的意思 是这种异种组合很重要，因为人们没有偏见，没有被迫去找寻自己的身份认同。在田伟的作品中我看到了这些。他不再找寻身份认同了。他不喜欢而且也厌倦了这样 的寻觅。所以我们不用费力气，如您所说的，去处理移民问题。何苦呢？对他来说这是一个自然而然的接受、选择、融合并产生新形式的过程。这就像是通过杂交而 产生新的品种。我是这么认为的。这也是为什么他被邀请参加了我们策划的展览。乌利:是的，我也看到这艺术和文化中的全球化，为顶尖的艺术家创造了丰富的可 能性，可供他们选择。但我也承认对于次一级和再次一级的优秀艺术家来说，它无可避免造成了困惑。蓉之:为什么是困惑呢？乌利:因为有太多的来源，太多的信 息了。为了利用信息，你得对它们进行优劣分类，组织它们，诠释它们并进行选择。但是要这么做，你得思考，得研究，你得花时间而且得非常努力地工作。只有时 间会使它成熟，不是瞬间的，所以很多艺术家因为这一点就放弃了。他们不愿经历这样的过程，他们就停留在那里，它们闭门造车。或许他们对于所有事物全盘接 受。这两种方法，我认为，皆非正途。所以，这就要有强烈的意志力，一种集中精神的意志力，去思考，去经历这些—某种以艺术中的丰富性去面对全球化的一种韧 性。但是如果你这么做了，在你的整个创作过程中，你就会是一个更加富有的个体，你将增添个人的武器装备至你整体功能。蓉之:我在新的世纪中看到了这一点， 我们已经迈入的信息时代中。我的确认为在中国当代艺术中我们最大的问题之一，是艺术家们接收太多的信息，有太多的东西要去学。所以有些艺术家就关起门来拒 绝学习了。对田伟来说，它的艺术形成于他人生的各个学习阶段。在达到现阶段之前，他曾做过大量的幕后研究工作。所以他的方法对现今的当代艺术来说也是重要 的。乌利:事实上，我认为他经历了我前面试图描述的那一过程—搜集所有信息，在自己的头脑中组织它们，做出自己的选择，形成自己的见解—我认为他已那么做 了。蓉之:是的，他那么做了。他展现了这正是他处理这一问题的方法。但是有些艺术家拒绝这么做，他们仅仅模仿这种当代折中主义的表面现象。所以对我而言， 能够解读画布的言外之音，在我的职业中是很重要的。在年轻艺术家的作品中，我见到过那种危机。他们不再愿意动脑筋，只是用眼和手。这是我看到的事情，但我 并不担忧，因为在我的生活中我见过很多的艺术家，不过优秀的、具有天赋是少数的。你在遇到的5000位艺术家之中，可能只有几个—或许只有5个—会吸引 你，或震撼你，从而影响到你。艺术家不应该是平庸的。他们本非寻常百姓。你是在普通人当中搜寻异常人。对我来说，这种永不停息对卓越的搜寻就是我们的人生 旅程。你得审视而挑选，你也得审视而放弃。在这一过程中，你发现了一位艺术家的深邃，其艺术的深邃。我们的工作就是如此。所以对我来说，而今很多的当代艺 术仍很肤浅。这是因为他们没有承载它的盆底，没法深邃到可以汇入历史长河中。对我来说，田伟是一位其艺术反映自身生活的艺术家。他的经历被他的回乡改变 了。所以你会看到他的艺术随着他的生活方式而改变。我不认为他的艺术会停留在任何阶段。就像我曾经问过他，你为什么不像以前那样作画？他回不到从前，但这 并不是因为他不能，是他不愿意再回到从前，是因为他的生活改变了，他的经历改变了，他的感觉改变了。所以他是一位总在面对现实经历的艺术家，而不是一位墨 守自创风格的艺术家。乌利:嗯，我们会充满好奇地静待随后的进展。蓉之:这正是我从他的艺术中感觉到的。

The Third Way

Uli Sigg in Conversation with Victoria Lu


Uli: Just to finish my definition of where I stand before I can go into Tian Wei’s work: if a Western person lacking the skill of writing Chinese talks about Chinese calligraphy, it’s like talking about the other end of the world. We haven’t been there; it doesn’t mean we don’t have an imagination of what it is, but we can only talk about this imagination. Victoria: Yes, so it’s interesting that we are having this conversation, because we are talking from two extreme ends. From a Western point of view, there isn’t a history of calligraphy, the art of readable letters. In the Middle Ages, of course, the manuscripts were a kind of a calligraphic art but not the same as Chinese calligraphy, where we actually use the letters’ forms to express very deep spiritual matters. So this is a totally different concept in art. And so from the Chinese point of view, calligraphy is not only visual forms; the meaning, the poetic meaning, or the statement has to be expressed along with visual form. It is more similar to Islamic calligraphy. But Islamic calligraphy has a religious purpose – the dignified, the sacred part of the writing is a main issue. But Chinese calligraphy is more in the form of art, so it has to have the visual effect as well. U: I think Arabic calligraphy is different. I can write the Arabic alphabet. It’s an alphabet, it’s less than thirty letters. So I compare it more to other writing than to Chinese calligraphy which is based on a very different concept. V: But a lot of Islamic calligraphy is decorated with patterns and designs, so it becomes a very special kind of decorative art – one with sacred meaning. That sacredness is not a part of Chinese calligraphy. Chinese calligraphy has nothing to do with religion. Even though there are the writings of Buddhism, Jing Shu, where they copied the book of Buddhism the same way they copied the Bible in the Middle Ages. But that was not considered art as much. Tian Wei uses the Chinese calligraphic form but writes in English letters. So that is really interesting because for the majority of Chinese people looking at his paintings, it’s incomprehensible. Unless we tell them what the meaning of the word is, most of the Chinese viewers don’t know English, they can’t read the words. So he is transferring this calligraphic method and making it more of a pure art, more a pure painting visual art. This transformation is of interest to me because Chinese calligraphy has its standard, its history; the judgment of whether it’s good or bad has a long history. The kind of zhuan shu, li shu, kai shu, cao shu – they have a certain standard and the format of the letters has a certain structure. But Tian Wei’s work has all the structures of all the different forms of calligraphy, even though it looks more like cao shu, even more like kuang chao, but it really has no relationship with the two. So from my point of view, when I see his work, it’s actually no longer readable. But to be able to read the content of the letters is the main part of Chinese calligraphy. But now, in this modern age, the younger generation of Chinese can no longer read ancient calligraphy. So what’s the difference between Westerners and Chinese people? There no longer is much difference because the younger generation no longer reads that kind of calligraphy anymore.U:But to me, these paintings create a typically Western situation, now mirrored for a Chinese person. Because a Chinese person that doesn’t speak English won’t be able to read it. V: Yes, that’s what I mean. U: That’s the position Western people have with regard to Chinese calligraphy. And also, the work is interesting because he deals with these misunderstandings between language and its script. As Westerners, we look at Chinese calligraphy and always try to determine what object we can recognize within a character because we think that’s how the script has been constructed – from a concrete object, create the image, then simplify the image, then turn it into a character. That’s the Western way of thinking. So whenever Western people are faced with Chinese calligraphy, they desperately try to find the meaning which might be hidden there. But of course it doesn’t work. In the end it is something else – it morphed from maybe a really early script where it was actually representing a certain object into a very abstract signal rather than anything else. So Western people looking at this work also first have to identify that this is an English word,that this is not a Chinese character. But what does all of this mean to us? It means there must be some kind of Chinese spirit in writing, and this Chinese spirit seems to appear even in an English word as it does, obviously, in a Chinese word. V: So Tian Wei’s work is actually creating a bridge between the Western point of view and the Chinese point of view. When Chinese look at the writing, first looking at the visual part of the movement of the lines, they are seeing whether the structure has created a powerful image. And that part can be satisfied easily, because it’s visual. Then to expect the letters have meanings but immediately it's blank, because the Chinese can no longer read the writing – it’s not in Chinese. Then the Westerner from the other end suddenly realizes these are letters that he can read, and that we, Chinese, can no longer read. That creates a bridge, bridging the two experiences from the two languages; the script can be readable or not readable.U:I think it offers the bridge but will people go over this bridge, this is hard to assess. Only an exhibition will tell if they will actually cross the bridge. They may just stay on their safe shore. This will be most interesting to see, how will somebody without any introduction react to this painting, Chinese or Western. V: So, I think many people, including you and me, compare Tian Wei with Xu Bing, another Chinese artist who uses calligraphy to make art. I would like to know what you think about comparing their work. U: I think we would probably have to include Gu Wen Da as an artist who also deals with Chinese script. V: Yes, Gu Wen Da. U: I think they all went very different routes, and each route has its own importance and meaning. And if we think of Xu Bing, it’s only because he also uses the English language and the Western alphabet,but rather to create a new visual language. I don’t think this is the ambition of Tian Wei. He doesn’t think in these terms, he is not a researcher in language, as Xu Bing is. He is a researcher of painting. There is the difference, in my view. This is no value judgment, they just represent two very different positions. V: Even though they are both involved with characters, two alphabets. U: Yes, two alphabets. V: To me, I see Tian Wei as more like painting the calligraphy. Because in the past, calligraphy itself stood as a form of art. Even though he is using this tradition, but painting it rather than writing it. With writing, the meaning is more important, because you are writing the character to express its meaning. He is painting the character, so more important is the visual effect, how the whole structure of painting will deliver. To me, I will see in his work two layers of phase, of meaning, like two time zones that bring the two worlds together in one painting. So you will see that he purposely uses different kinds of backgrounds for these floating characters. So the background sometimes, not directly, has connection with the letters. And sometimes the background can deliver the message for the letters. So this composition of these two time zones, two spaces, is actually a representation of his feelings living in the West for so long. I don’t think he himself realizes how deep Western culture and art is actually affecting his art. I have seen his early work in Los Angeles; what he was concerned with during the making of his early works and what he’s concerned with now – he is going on a separate road. Even though some of the calligraphy refers to his past, like the way the lines are done, the concept is different. So I believe Western abstract art actually imposed a great change on Tian Wei’s work. U: To me it’s one surface, two worlds – two cultural spaces on one surface. And what struck me when I saw it, my thought was, a Chinese artist spending his life in China could not do this work. An American artist living in America could not do this work. It takes his particular life, that life experience to paint that work. It could only be done by a person who studied Chinese calligraphy and Western painting. In particular we may think of abstract expressionism, but it goes beyond that. But that is what struck me – this painting requires that kind of biography. V: So it’s very difficult to imitate this art, because to me it’s a cultural experience. You can see he has superimposed some Chinese kind of calligraphy on English writing. Even Robert Motherwell can’t do something like this. It has similar gestures, similar dark line movements to Franz Kline… U: A lot of Western people, particularly in abstract expressionism, have come up with something seemingly Asian, still I think this is completely different. V: They deal mainly with space. U: They resort, even explicitly sometimes, to the Chinese script. But always with the position, I have described in the beginning, of not understanding the meaning, just by having a visual impact. So this leads to the interesting question: what is it about this Chinese spirit? Because obviously the words in his paintings show us, it may be a Chinese character or it may be a Western sign, a western alphabet, but it will give us this impression of a Chinese spirit in there. So it evokes this question: what is this Chinese spirit? What exactly leads us to read it as a Chinese sign, whether it’s a Western word or a Chinese character? This is so interesting about the work to me. V: And also I can see the influence of American conceptual art, because he is not writing a full sentence. He is not giving us a portrait. He is giving us one simple word. And the word is a strong message. And the message itself is art. So this is a reference to American conceptual art – using some signal to give out certain meanings, and the signal itself is art. And it can be a neon light, it can be a digital lighting system, it can be carving on a stone, and the message itself is art. So to read, to face Tian Wei’s work, it takes a complicated system to really be able to do it. And the purpose of using colors is also a reflection of his experience of dealing with the clothing, the mass – produced, ready – made fashion he was involved in the States. U: Of course that ready – made fashion is made in China, while he may not have been in China at the time. V: But he was living in America, importing this kind of fashion. And for the American market, there is actually a great interest in shiny colors, especially those kinds of florescent colors systems. U: To me that is very much a West Coast feeling. I identify a West Coast feeling in his paintings. V: I lived in the LA area for 20 years and this West Coast culture is very different from the East Coast, New York – centered culture. And he lived in Hawaii before – and looked at Hawaiian t–shirts, what colors you get in those? So unknowingly, not purposely, Tian Wei transformed his lifetime experience into one space – the canvas. So the color and the background are revealing his experiences in life. U: I appreciate that very much in his paintings. To me, they are honest works, because they evolved very much subconsciously into these manifestations. I think it’s honest work requiring that kind of feeling that he had. Of course I think it could be imitated , but not the history. We may see imitation in the future, some other artists will paint that way, but I think they will lack that particular feeling and the slow growth of its particular manifestation. V: And the way he deals with color is also very interesting. He likes the purer colors. You see very little mixing. He tries to present pure, clean color – it reinforces the strong meaning he is conveying with one word. And so that one word becomes very powerful. Compare it to Jenny Holzer, Barbara Kruger, those American artists that rose in the 70s… So the message itself does the service. To me, I read that part immediately. U: But I think that’s also very Chinese. Of course, calligraphy very often is not more than one sign, one character, one word, so I don’t see so much Jenny Holzer or Barbara Kruger, I see this as a Chinese tradition almost, to have this one large sign, particularly the more recent calligraphy – it’s often not the whole text, it may just be a character or even a fragment thereof. But the interesting question to me remains, what’s the reception by the Chinese? And again this mirror effect of Western people having looked at Chinese calligraphy for centuries, not understanding the characters but still forming an opinion and now we may have Chinese faced with this situation, facing an English word but in a Chinese manifestation. What kind of emotion is going to be transferred to them? What kind of imagination will it create in their minds? Will they accept it as something Chinese or will they resent it as a fake? V: For me to see the development of Tian Wei’s work from his early stages to this point, I think the part that I really miss the most is the painterly quality of his early works. He is actually a great painter. He actually did really powerful abstract paintings at an earlier stage. Now we see mostly a monochromatic canvas. Now he is using the monochromatic canvas instead of the highly painted space he displayed in the past, the painterly quality he displayed at an earlier stage. Now you see geometric or hard – edged patterns, like paper – cutting patterns. He is avoiding all the different shades of inks that you deal with in traditional ink painting, as ink can be divided into five colors. U: But let me introduce a Western position to this. Many Western people may view his older paintings as monochromatic, because it’s only black. Just as many Western people may think of Chinese ink on paper very often as monochrome painting, while they would appreciate the surface structure, the thick layers of colors in his paintings. They would maybe pay more attention to the surface of a painting than a Chinese viewer. So they might discover some other richness in this painting than a Chinese person would. So I think this difference, looking at the work by difference, or by bridging, would allow for many more interpretations and may open new spaces to each public. V: This is a new way to look at what Chinese contemporary art can be. In the past, the younger generation of Chinese artists has tried to imitate the Western contemporary art movements and now looking at Tian Wei – he is not imitating any movement but taking upon his own position and reflecting his choice of how he wants to make his space. So I think the space in his art is so important. So you often see he uses the same color to superimpose, the thick paint of the calligraphy, and layers of same color build a flat surface and two different shades of same color in the space. So to me, it’s almost like architectural space in his paintings, which is a different concept for traditional Chinese art. So he is bringing this reference to the composition which we’ve never had before. U: What I also think is interesting is this kind of “third way.” We have a Western way of doing things, we have a Chinese way of doing things, we know both. And the way China should go,and the whole world should go, they will have to find a synthesis of the best of all worlds. Right now we have seen an overpowering of the Western world of the Chinese culture, that’s not the right thing. When I think we need some synthesis, then I’m thinking beyond painting, I’m thinking of the cultures. And here in his paintings I see is an effort to do this. Whether that is already a solution is not so important; here is an effort to bring all this on one surface, which I think is interesting and remains to be done in many other spheres of today’s cultural life, economic life. We may have to find a third way to cope with the issues facing us.. V: And also I think it’s so important to pay attention to Tian Wei’s work because in the past two decades, Chinese contemporary art has been focused on a very narrow path. Only political works, or art dealing with social criticism could be considered contemporary; art outside of these two categories seemed to be out of fashion. And in my point of view, Chinese contemporary art has to be eclectic; it has to be plural. The pluralism is so important because the Chinese went through the Cultural Revolution, which tried to unify people to become one kind. And the younger generation wants to rebel against that unity. So this new pluralism is an obvious answer to this singularity. Tian Wei is one example; he is using his own interpretation of the calligraphic tradition in his Western life. He’s a foreigner here. Even though he looks Chinese, he speaks Chinese, in many ways he was away from this part of the world for so long. So he brings these Western cultural influences, but he is not imitating – because he is Western. I have similar experiences and feelings; I look Chinese, I speak Chinese. But what about my mind? I was educated in the West since I was 20; actually I have more knowledge of Western contemporary art than Chinese contemporary art. And I think it’s amazing that you have more knowledge about Chinese contemporary art than me – you are a foreigner and I’m Chinese. But actually you have lived here for a long time. You’ve seen the evolution of Chinese contemporary art. You know so many Chinese artists of our age, many more than I do. So what you understand about Chinese contemporary art is far greater and deeper than me. But then I lived in the West, I know about American contemporary art, I had a gallery in Los Angeles in the 1970s, and I dealt only with American artists. So I’m so familiar with American contemporary art. You can no longer judge a person by his nationality, his ethnic background. This is the beginning of a new age. You no longer distinguish people by race, language, nationality. It’s the lifetime experience you’ve had. U: It is an interesting point of view you raise. Although when I’m thinking about Tian Wei’s work, I try to eliminate this whole complex of emigrant/immigrant issues that Chinese are faced with when they go abroad. You know, the identity question. Are they Chinese? Are they Western? They may be neither/nor, and they may realize this, and of course this poses a problem in their personal biography. I’m not so much interested in this issue, which does exist,I remained a Western person even though I spent so much time in China. I am more interested in this bridge characteristic and the work itself. But I understand that this is a big issue. V: That’s my point of view. I see you and myself, and see that we are demonstrating a new situation here. No longer is identity important. It’s the loss of identity. When you deal with Chinese contemporary art, often you forget your identity as a Swiss citizen. It’s not so important. You are facing contemporary art by itself. It’s a life experience of some artist for you. It’s this communication channel that is important for contemporary art today. I’m not talking about globalization. A lot of people talking about globalization, in the end, they think the West is invading the East. I am sick of that kind of talk. It’s not true. It’s not an invasion. Western culture is not this superpower taking over the East. I’m not seeing that. I’m seeing a new ground: we are all here, experiencing some pluralist kind of way of life – a third way, a different way of seeing things so people no longer have to chose either side, West or East. It’s a new experience of combination, eclecticism – the idea behind the show we last curated together, the Aesthetics of Heterogeneity. What I mean is that this hybrid combination is important because you don’t take sides, you don’t force people to look for their identities. I see that in Tian Wei’s work. He’s no longer looking for identities. That’s something he’s sick and tired of looking for. So we don’t have to struggle, like you said, dealing with immigrant issues. Why bother? It’s a natural process for him to absorb, and select, and combine, and create a sort of new species. It’s like creating a new species by hybridization. That’s how I see it. That’s why he was he invited to take part in the show we curated. U: Right. I also see, this globalization in art and culture creating a wealth of possibilities for the best artists to choose from. But I admit that for the second and third best artists, it inevitably leads to confusion. V: Why the confusion? U: Because there is so much input, so much information. In order to use it, you have to prioritize it, structure it, interpret it,make choices. But to do all this, you have to think, you have to study, you have to spend time and you have to work hard. It may only mature over time, not instantly, and many artists give up on that,because they don’t want to go through this process. They just stop there. Or they just take everything. Both strategies, I think, are not the right ones. So it requires a strong will, a will to concentrate, to think, to go through this – quite some perseverance to deal with this globalization, with this wealth in art. But if you have done that, you will be a much richer individual and you will have added to your personal arsenal.... to your whole instrumentation. V: I found that in this new century, the information age we have already entered, I really think one of the biggest problems that we have in the Chinese contemporary art world is that the artists have too much information, too much to learn. So some artists shut their doors and refuse to learn. This lack of knowledge becomes the biggest problem in Chinese contemporary art. For Tian Wei, his art comes about through the learning stages of his life. He had done so much research behind the canvas before he got to this point. So this method is also important for contemporary art today. U: Actually I think he has gone through that process I was trying to describe before – gathering all the information, structuring it in your mind, making your choices, forming your opinion – I think he has done just that. V: Yes, he has done that. He has demonstrated that this is his way to deal with this problem. But some artist’s refuse to do this and just imitate the surface of this contemporary eclecticism. And so for me, to be able to read beyond the canvas is so important in my profession. And I have seen this crisis in the works of young artists’ works. They are no longer willing to use their minds; they are using their eyes and hands only. This is something I see but I’m not worried about because I’ve seen so many artists in my life, and the excellent, gifted artists are few. You can meet 5,000 artists but only a few – maybe 5 – will attract you, or maybe struck you, and leave an impact on you. Artists shouldn’t be ordinary. They shouldn’t be normal people. You are looking for something exceptional among the commoners. For me, this continuous search for excellence is our journey. You have to look and pick, and look and give up. And during this process, you discover the depth of an artist, the depth of his art. And that’s what our job is. So for me, a lot of contemporary art today remains in very shallow waters. That’s because they have no basin for it, no depth going