對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō)，劉永剛的歸來(lái)是2006年中國(guó)當(dāng)代藝術(shù)中一個(gè)令人震奮的現(xiàn)象。他傳遞了一種新的信息，這就是一批長(zhǎng)期在海外研究學(xué)習(xí)的藝術(shù)家獲得了一種不同于國(guó)內(nèi)藝術(shù)家的文化視野，并且在藝術(shù)語(yǔ)言的表達(dá)上初步找到了屬于自己的方式。這種方式不同于80年代以來(lái)普遍的追隨西方雙年展的藝術(shù)模式，也不同于當(dāng)下一些在畫(huà)廊商業(yè)操作下急于成功的風(fēng)格樣式，具體地說(shuō)，這是一種真正有價(jià)值的融會(huì)東西，打通中外的中國(guó)當(dāng)代藝術(shù)，雖然這仍然不是十分成熟，但具有深厚的文化底蘊(yùn)，是可以持續(xù)發(fā)展的藝術(shù)道路。評(píng)論家鄧平祥稱(chēng)劉永剛具有打通東西兩種文化的能力，實(shí)際上表述了這樣一種判斷，即在全球化時(shí)代，要想發(fā)展出真正具有藝術(shù)史價(jià)值的當(dāng)代藝術(shù)，必須對(duì)東西方文化進(jìn)行深入的研究，而非表面性地選取若干政治、商業(yè)、流行文化的符號(hào)，拼湊所謂的“中國(guó)樣式”，以博取國(guó)際策展人和畫(huà)廊商人的青睞。

劉永剛的抽象性繪畫(huà)無(wú)疑是十分優(yōu)秀的當(dāng)代繪畫(huà)，既具有德庫(kù)寧式的激情，也有德國(guó)表現(xiàn)主義繪畫(huà)的自由，同時(shí)還在色彩與構(gòu)成方面表現(xiàn)了深厚的形式修養(yǎng)，是他去國(guó)十余年潛心研究的合理收獲。當(dāng)然，較之那些厚重顏料的表現(xiàn)性繪畫(huà)，我更喜歡那些以綜合材料創(chuàng)作的類(lèi)似于文字結(jié)構(gòu)和雕塑草圖的構(gòu)成性繪畫(huà)。在這些作品中，色彩的因素退居于后，起而代之的是畫(huà)家對(duì)空間與結(jié)構(gòu)的研究，其中既有宏大的紀(jì)念性意志，也反映了一種強(qiáng)烈的在空間中伸展衍生的激情，這種激情與大地和生長(zhǎng)有關(guān)，是植物性的，生命性的，如德國(guó)藝術(shù)史家法蘭克博士所評(píng)論的那樣，充滿(mǎn)了生命的沖動(dòng)。這是十分契合劉永剛個(gè)人內(nèi)在性格與精神追求的，反映了劉永剛藝術(shù)中某種古典主義的氣質(zhì)，也就是古典建筑與繪畫(huà)中所蘊(yùn)含的人文主義傳統(tǒng)，那種對(duì)人的生命尊嚴(yán)的理解，對(duì)人的交往和情感的渴望，這在本質(zhì)上是屬于文藝復(fù)興以來(lái)米開(kāi)朗基羅為代表的宏觀歷史的人文傳統(tǒng)。正是站在人類(lèi)歷史的宏觀視野中，劉永剛發(fā)掘出了中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)文化所代表的古典人文主義的尊嚴(yán)，以漢蒙等不同文字的另類(lèi)表達(dá)方式，展現(xiàn)了一個(gè)多民族大國(guó)曾經(jīng)有過(guò)的輝煌文明和未來(lái)理想。

由此，我看到劉永剛在中國(guó)美術(shù)館展出的以“愛(ài)擁”為題的102件石材雕塑組成的宏大裝置時(shí)，涌入我腦海中的第一印象，竟然是秦漢時(shí)的大型兵馬俑場(chǎng)面，他的這些站立的文字就獲得了一種森然默立的無(wú)聲的尊嚴(yán)。“紀(jì)念碑性”（monumentality）可以定義為“紀(jì)念的狀態(tài)和內(nèi)涵”，它不僅要求有巨大的、持久的、藝術(shù)中的超常尺寸的含義，也指在歷史中那些顯著的、重要的、持續(xù)的價(jià)值。而劉永剛所要表現(xiàn)的，正是他對(duì)于人類(lèi)永恒的愛(ài)與關(guān)懷的尊崇，在這一意義上，劉永剛以曾經(jīng)具有廣泛流通性，為民眾熟悉的文字形式，打通了民族與國(guó)界的局限，以冰冷的巖石，表達(dá)了火熱的激情，在獨(dú)特的空間形式構(gòu)造中，將材料與精神結(jié)為一體。在中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)中，紀(jì)念碑與文字書(shū)法，曾經(jīng)是一種密不可分的結(jié)合形態(tài)，但文字仍然從屬于內(nèi)容的表述，書(shū)法與雕刻也僅限于作為一種藝術(shù)媒介的表達(dá)，劉永剛的獨(dú)特之處在于，他打破傳統(tǒng)的字碑組合，使之成為字碑一體，字即是碑，碑即是字，而當(dāng)我們進(jìn)入劉永剛的文字藝術(shù)裝置空間中，又全然忘卻了哪里是字，哪里是碑，字與碑在人的基礎(chǔ)上已經(jīng)融為一體，成為人類(lèi)生命與精神的象征。

在這里我們涉及到文字、語(yǔ)言、書(shū)法與當(dāng)代藝術(shù)的討論。在80年代以來(lái)的中國(guó)當(dāng)代藝術(shù)中，中國(guó)文字已經(jīng)成為重要的公共藝術(shù)資源，當(dāng)然與之相關(guān)的中國(guó)書(shū)法也是重要的資源。但是，著眼于文字與著眼于書(shū)法是很不相同的。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，最早用有關(guān)中國(guó)文字進(jìn)行創(chuàng)作的藝術(shù)家有谷文達(dá)、吳山專(zhuān)、徐冰，他們更多地是運(yùn)用觀念藝術(shù)的方式來(lái)解析文字與運(yùn)用到作品中的。這反映了從不同文化背景對(duì)于語(yǔ)言和文字的態(tài)度，即是注重形態(tài)還是意義，這是當(dāng)代藝術(shù)中不同的處理傳統(tǒng)文化的思維模式。劉永剛對(duì)中國(guó)文字和中國(guó)書(shū)法的研究借鑒，在這個(gè)大的文脈系統(tǒng)中也可以得到觀照與分析。可以說(shuō)，劉永剛對(duì)文字的研究，在文化角度上，更多的是著眼于歷史性、人文性的；在視覺(jué)藝術(shù)的意義上，更多是著眼于空間性與構(gòu)成性的，正如評(píng)論家賈方舟所言，他的作品不具有文字的可讀性，而具有造型藝術(shù)的可視性，這表明了劉永剛的藝術(shù)與中國(guó)人文傳統(tǒng)和古典藝術(shù)的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系。

我在這里提出“文字的抽象與具像”這一概念。在當(dāng)代藝術(shù)中，不乏運(yùn)用不同民族文字的案例，但存在著對(duì)文字運(yùn)用的抽象與具像角度。比較而言，前者關(guān)注的是文字的意義與概念，像美國(guó)概念藝術(shù)家克魯格運(yùn)用放大的英文詞句直接表述對(duì)于社會(huì)的觀念。而劉永剛則是運(yùn)用文字的形式與結(jié)構(gòu)，著眼的是文字的形象所具有的象征性意味。劉永剛運(yùn)用的是篆書(shū)的結(jié)構(gòu)美與線條美，仍然是文字運(yùn)用方面的具像派，或者說(shuō)是象征主義。例如他的作品《愛(ài)擁》，就具有男女相擁的視覺(jué)形象，比之具像的人，他的雕塑要抽象，但比之文字，要顯得具像一些。但是從抽象雕塑的角度來(lái)看，我認(rèn)為劉永剛的作品在抽象與解構(gòu)方面還可以走的更遠(yuǎn)一些。我希望劉永剛的作品能夠進(jìn)一步向抽象發(fā)展，對(duì)文字的整體形象進(jìn)行解構(gòu)，將篆書(shū)文字的整體美解構(gòu)為線條的獨(dú)立的抽象美，例如西班牙雕塑家奇里達(dá)的雕塑《風(fēng)之梳》，巨大的彎曲的條型鋼結(jié)構(gòu)，在海岸的懸崖上迎著海風(fēng)而傲然挺立。我也建議劉永剛可以研究華裔法國(guó)雕塑家熊秉明的雕塑，他的雕塑比奇里達(dá)更為具像一些，將鶴的形象高度簡(jiǎn)化為飛舞的抽象線條，但仍然不失鶴的形態(tài)韻味。

劉永剛的歸來(lái)和舉辦展覽，使我注意到90年代以來(lái)中國(guó)在海外的藝術(shù)家群體，特別是一批從德國(guó)留學(xué)歸來(lái)的藝術(shù)家值得我們關(guān)注。他們中有相當(dāng)一部份人是采用了抽象藝術(shù)的方式進(jìn)行創(chuàng)作的。如較早回國(guó)的許江、馬路、譚平，近來(lái)在中德兩地十分活躍的有蘇笑柏、朱金石、張國(guó)龍、劉野、馬樹(shù)青以及運(yùn)用影像媒介為主的繆曉春，而劉永剛也正是屬于這一個(gè)留學(xué)德國(guó)的藝術(shù)家群體。我們可以從德國(guó)文化對(duì)中國(guó)藝術(shù)的影響這一角度來(lái)審視劉永剛的藝術(shù)，身處不同的文化環(huán)境中（當(dāng)代物質(zhì)生活交流越來(lái)越多，也越來(lái)越相近，但文化傳統(tǒng)并不因此而發(fā)生根本的變化），劉永剛的作品反映了這種不同文化的綜合。我認(rèn)為，對(duì)于21世紀(jì)的中國(guó)當(dāng)代藝術(shù)，新的一代海歸藝術(shù)家值得期待，是很有希望的生力軍，這是因?yàn)樗麄冮L(zhǎng)期在海外文化的氛圍中生活，具有創(chuàng)造性的文化交流與融合的能力，與那些偶爾出去看一下的藝術(shù)家不同，他們的理解要更深刻、更全面一些。而在物質(zhì)生活方面，他們也由于比較早地解決了基本的生活和創(chuàng)作條件，了解藝術(shù)市場(chǎng)對(duì)于藝術(shù)家的扶持與殺傷的雙重性影響，從而能夠更為純粹地專(zhuān)注于藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作。

同時(shí)，劉永剛的創(chuàng)作，也印證了我在上個(gè)世紀(jì)90年代初期評(píng)論許江時(shí)所提到的關(guān)于法國(guó)文化與德國(guó)文化的區(qū)別，這對(duì)于我們進(jìn)一步深入理解不同的西方文化背景，破解籠統(tǒng)的東西方二元對(duì)立的思維方式，從而針對(duì)性地從個(gè)人的文化背景出發(fā)，創(chuàng)作更貼近個(gè)人特性的當(dāng)代藝術(shù)有所助益。

劉永剛的藝術(shù)的獨(dú)特之處，就在于其作品中的表現(xiàn)性，不是一般性的情緒化的表現(xiàn)，不只是我們通常認(rèn)為的“跟著感覺(jué)走”，也不是技巧性的優(yōu)雅表現(xiàn)，或是對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題的功利性的主題解釋?zhuān)笳邅?lái)源于18世紀(jì)的法國(guó)及法國(guó)革命傳統(tǒng)，即政治化、功利化的行動(dòng)主義傳統(tǒng)。18世紀(jì)的法國(guó)啟蒙主義哲學(xué)家，像文藝復(fù)興早期的公民人文者一樣，崇尚積極活躍的生活，不贊成沉思默想的生活，對(duì)形而上學(xué)沒(méi)有興趣，關(guān)心此時(shí)此地的人生中的實(shí)際問(wèn)題——道德的、心理的、社會(huì)的問(wèn)題，他們對(duì)人類(lèi)的前途充滿(mǎn)了信心，對(duì)歷史的進(jìn)步具有毫不懷疑的信念。但是劉永剛作為一個(gè)富于思考的藝術(shù)家，卻具有一種東方式的宏觀視野，這種東方式的思維與日耳曼式的黑格爾傳統(tǒng)有相同之處，即是一種注重統(tǒng)一整體價(jià)值勝過(guò)建功立業(yè)價(jià)值的沉思系統(tǒng)，整體性與思辨性是其特點(diǎn)所在。劉永剛所關(guān)注的不是某一時(shí)期、某一個(gè)具體的社會(huì)問(wèn)題，而是對(duì)人類(lèi)歷史的整體性思考。在劉永剛的作品中，我感受到對(duì)現(xiàn)存人類(lèi)文明與歷史的批判性審視，以及藝術(shù)家內(nèi)心深處的焦慮。在我們這個(gè)時(shí)代，傳統(tǒng)的信念受到當(dāng)代生活經(jīng)驗(yàn)的深深打擾，到處可以看到命運(yùn)的無(wú)常與拒絕對(duì)之屈服的人之間的沖突，在內(nèi)心深處，劉永剛?cè)匀皇赝约旱娜宋膬r(jià)值信念。

劉永剛的作品具有某種雄強(qiáng)博大的氣質(zhì)，整體上看類(lèi)似秦漢的兵馬俑。但劉永剛的作品發(fā)展趨向是雕塑作品的組合排列還是當(dāng)代裝置？在我看來(lái)，僅僅是雕塑作品的并置并不能構(gòu)成裝置，如果是這樣，我們能否說(shuō)秦始皇兵馬俑是中國(guó)最早最大的一件裝置藝術(shù)？裝置要求作品的不同構(gòu)成要素之間具有一種共謀關(guān)系，而不是簡(jiǎn)單的并列關(guān)系。我認(rèn)為，劉永剛還可以發(fā)展出更為壯闊的公共空間中的景觀作品。我們可以設(shè)想一下，劉永剛的作品在廣袤的草原上出現(xiàn)，大漠孤煙，長(zhǎng)河落日，如雄兵百萬(wàn)站立在一望無(wú)際的草原上，會(huì)是什么樣的視覺(jué)景象？我希望劉永剛注意和強(qiáng)化室外雕塑的輪廓與剪影，這是決定作品視覺(jué)力度的重要因素。除了作品所具有的由形象表達(dá)出來(lái)的“愛(ài)”與“相擁”的象征意味，劉永剛是否還會(huì)注意作品中的簡(jiǎn)潔、單純、和諧、精到以及節(jié)奏的活力等在中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)特別是書(shū)法藝術(shù)中最具有抽象意味的形式審美要素？簡(jiǎn)言之，對(duì)劉永剛的未來(lái)發(fā)展，我充滿(mǎn)期待，很顯然，他目前的創(chuàng)作，找到了一條源自傳統(tǒng)，通向未來(lái)的重要道路，但仍然是大業(yè)初創(chuàng)之時(shí)，有關(guān)他的藝術(shù)，在形式結(jié)構(gòu)的研究和材料運(yùn)用表達(dá)方面，還有許多工作要做。可以確定的是，劉永剛已經(jīng)不再局限于繪畫(huà)、書(shū)法、雕塑這些傳統(tǒng)的藝術(shù)媒介，而是在綜合材料與綜合藝術(shù)的方面拓展了一條寬闊的平臺(tái)，對(duì)這樣的優(yōu)秀藝術(shù)家來(lái)說(shuō)，一切才剛剛開(kāi)始。

2007年2月26日

Standing Life:Interpretation of Liu Yonggang’s Art

Yin Shuangxi,PhD, executive editor in chief of Art Research, famous artcritic

The return ofLiu Yonggang was one of the most exciting events of contemporaryChinese art in 2006. He brought the new message that a number ofartists who have studied abroad have acquired a cultural horizondifferent from that of those who stayed in the country, and thatthey have found their own ways of expression. Those ways differfrom both the imitation of western biannual exhibitions that hasbeen widespread since the 1980s and the success-oriented stylesconditioned by the commercial operation of galleries. Specificallyspeaking, they have created a truly valuable contemporary Chineseart that blends Chinese and western cultures. Though it is not yetmature, it is based on a rich culture, and its way is sustainable.When critic Deng Pingxiang said that Liu is capable of finding thecommon ground between Chinese and western cultures, he was actuallyvoicing his judgment that in the age of globalization, to develop acontemporary art with real value for artistic history, one mustmade an in-depth study of eastern and western cultures, instead ofcatering to sponsors of international exhibitions or art merchantsby cobbling together some ‘Chinese pattern’ composed of an array ofsuperficial signs of politics, commerce and pop culture.

Liu’s abstractpaintings are undoubtedly excellent, with the passion of deKooning, the freedom of German expressionism, and acute formalawareness in colors and composition. Those were what he acquiredfrom over ten years’ careful study abroad. However, I prefer thecompositional paintings similar to the structures of characters anddrafts of sculptures, with composite materials, to thoseexpressionistic ones with heavy use of colors. In the former kind,the importance of color is replaced by the painter’s study of spaceand structure. That contains grand monumental wills, and reflects apassion that extends in space, a passion that is related to soiland growth, like a plant, or life. As observed by German arthistorian Dr. Frank, it is full of the drive of life. That is infull agreement with Liu’s personality and spiritual pursuit; itreflects some classical quality of his art, or the humanistictradition embodied in classical buildings and paintings. Theunderstanding of the dignity of human life and the desire forcommunications and feelings are by nature part of the humanistictradition since the Renaissance, represented by Michelangelo. Itwas from the grand perspective of human history that Liu discoveredthe dignity of classical humanism represented by Chinese culture.His special way of expression, based on the Chinese and Mongolianwritten languages, demonstrates a great multi-ethnic nation’s pastglory and aspiration for the future.

Therefore, whenI saw his grand work composed of 102 stone sculptures at theNational Art Museum of China, the first thing I thought of, to mysurprise, was the terracotta soldiers. His standing characters havea silent dignity. ‘Monumentality’, which may be defined as ‘thestate or meaning of commemoration’, requires not only artisticallyunusual, enduring size, but also prominent, important and lastingvalues in history. What Liu intends to convey is his veneration forthe eternal love and care of mankind. In this sense, Liu usedcharacters, widespread and familiar to ordinary people, to breakthrough ethnic and national boundaries, expressing fiery passionwith cold rocks, and fusing material and spirit in special spatialcompositions. In traditional Chinese art, the monument and thecalligraphy were inextricably linked, but characters weresubordinate to meanings, and calligraphy and carving were no morethan mediums of artistic expression. What was special about Liu wasthat he broke the line between the monument and the calligraphy, sothat the two are united into one. When we see his sculptures, wesimply forget that line, because the two are blended into a symbolof human life and spirit.

Here is involvedthe discussion on characters, language, calligraphy andcontemporary art. Since the 1980s, Chinese characters, as well ascalligraphy, have become an important public artistic resource incontemporary Chinese art. However, focus on characters differsgreatly from focus on calligraphy. For instance, the artists whofirst used Chinese characters in their creations, such as Gu Wenda,Wu Shanzhuan and Xu Bing, tend to analysis characters and use themin the manner of conceptual art. That reflects the difference inattitude towards the written language. Focus on form and focus onmeaning are different approaches to using traditional culture incontemporary art. That may be a frame of reference to put Liu’sstudy and use of Chinese characters and calligraphy intoperspective. In terms of culture, Liu’s study of characters tendsto be historical and humanistic; in terms of visual art, it tendsto be spatial and compositional. As observed by critic JiaFangzhou, instead of being legible like written language, his worksare visual like plastic art. That indicates the intrinsicconnection of his art to the humanistic tradition and classical artof China.

The return ofLiu and his exhibition drew my attention to the group of overseasChinese artists, especially those who returned from their study inGermany. Many of them have adopted the way of abstract art. Liu isone of the artists who studied in Germany, such as Xu Jiang, Ma Luand Tan Ping who returned earlier, Su Xiaobai, Zhu Jinshi, ZhangGuolong, Liu Ye and Ma Shuqing who are recently active in bothChina and Germany, and Miu Xiaochun who specializes in video andimage medium. We may examine his art with respect to Germanculture’s influence on Chinese art. Liu’s works reflect theblending of different cultures under different culturalenvironments (though material life is becoming increasingly similarbecause of the growing exchanges, cultural traditions do not changefundamentally). In my opinion, as far as Chinese art in the 21stcentury is concerned, the new generation of artists who returnedfrom abroad is promising new blood. During their long stay inoverseas cultures, they have acquired the capability of creativecultural exchange and blending. They have deeper and more completeunderstanding of culture than those who go abroad occasionally. Asfor material life, since they have long been free of financialtroubles and are aware of both the positive and negative effect ofmarket on artists, they are capable of more intense concentrationon creation.

Meanwhile, Liu’sworks proved my opinion on the differences between French cultureand German culture that I mentioned when I was criticizing Xu Jiangin the early 1990s. That will be helpful to further understandingof different western cultural backgrounds, solving the general,binary opposite ways of thinking between the east and the west, andcreation of contemporary art which is closer to personality basedon individual cultural background.

The specialthing about Liu’s art is that his works are not expressions ofgeneral emotions (what is commonly known as ‘follow the feelings’),or graceful skills, or utilitarian interpretations of practicalquestions (the latter is originated from France in the 18th centuryand its revolutionary tradition, namely political and utilitarianbehaviorism tradition. French didacticism philosophers in the 18thcentury, just like the early renaissant civic humanists, advocatedactive and vibrant way of life and fought against ruminative way.They were not interested in metaphysics, and cared about practicalissues—moral, mental and social--in their lives. They wereconfident of human future and held undoubted faith in historyprogress.) As a thinking artist, Liu has an oriental broad horizon.His oriental way of thinking has one thing in common with theHegelian tradition—greater value attached to unity and wholenessthan to accomplishment. Its defining feature is wholeness andspeculation. What Liu is concerned with are not particular socialissues of a particular period, but the holistic thinking of humanhistory. In his works I feel critical examination of humancivilization and history, and the angst at the bottom of his heart.In our time, traditional beliefs are deeply troubled by theexperience of contemporary life, and everywhere there are conflictsbetween capricious fate and people who stand up to it. Deep inside,Liu stands by his belief in humanistic values.

Liu’s worksproduce a powerful, sweeping effect similar to that of terracottawarriors. We may imagine the scenario where his sculptures standlike a formation of warriors on a prairie or a desert.

It is certainthat instead of confining himself to such traditional mediums aspainting, calligraphy and sculpture, he has blazed a broad newtrail in comprehensive materials and comprehensive art. For such anexcellent artist, all has just begun.

February 26,2007