Curators'
Words
Lu Jie
and Qiu Zhijie
Reconstructing
memory
As curators,
our attention to contemporary art in China focuses on the
relationship between artistic creation and interactive reception
by its viewers inherent in the current exhibition culture.
A major characteristic of art in contemporary China is that
art has left the audience, has moved from the broad masses
of the people toward the elite, from private studios toward
hierarchical structures (things like biennials, blockbuster
exhibitions, and other authoritative spaces), and from China
toward the world beyond China. These three movements have
led the avant-garde directly into the trap of the global
market and the maze of mutually determinant relationships
that it implies. The emergence of an international platform
for artists could be called the defining characteristic
of Chinese art in the 1990s. Other sociological questions
about art in China-questions like the relationship between
the masses and the elite, between tradition and reality-fell
to the back, as the "differentiation of China and the
West" came to occupy a premier position, becoming a
guiding parameter for both theoretical debate and artistic
creation, systematically producing our feelings of awkwardness
and grievance. This is a classic example of artistic consumption
coming to drive artistic production. It is unreasonable
to let artistic production sink to fit the limited understanding
of foreign art consumers, or to wait for the Chinese economy
to develop such that domestic art consumers can support
contemporary art. The excuses of the market hide the true
problems of art itself-the rift between the masses and the
elite, and the disconnect between tradition and reality.
We must begin from our own understanding of ourselves as
practitioners of Chinese art, raising anew these issues
which have been set aside in recent years. In this process,
one important task is to revisit our memory of the Chinese
revolution and assess the impact of socialism on contemporary
visual culture.
The key influence on Chinese art has been the system which
drives its circulation as currency, i.e. the dislocation
produced by the current system in which exhibition, collection,
and exchange proceed in a unidirectional manner "from
in towards out," with "out" referring mainly
to the West. We believe that Chinese contemporary art is
beset by the illusory conviction that it is avant-garde.
Revolution remains in certain slogans and individual feelings,
but in China, professional revolutionaries have often been
the least revolutionary of all. Contemporary Chinese art
emphasizes signification over experience, preaching away
in the empty language of inflated conceptualism.
In recent
years, we first imported expressionism and made it cooperate
with the formalist elements of traditional art, producing
many feeble images. Next came Political Pop, which announces
itself as avant-garde while speaking the same didactic language
of the cartoon comic books, New Year's prints, and illustrations
which were the artistic mainstream before 1989. In this
way, art was made once again into a footnote of ideology.
In the same way, conceptual art has devolved into a fixed
canon of visual and linguistic devices. Are these manifestations
of collective consciousness or collective unconsciousness
indeed a singularly Chinese phenomenon? Or is this simply
the state of affairs in each periphery of our post-colonial
world? How do these peripheries respond to the question
of tradition vs. modernity? How are their responses similar
to and different from ours? We hope to re-interpret these
questions using the framework of "from outside toward
inside." By this we mean not simply seeing ourselves
as the center, thus falling into the struggle between "essence"
and "utility," but to make a broad-ranging comparison
between ourselves and other historical and geographical
locales in the process of forced contact with the West in
order to reconsider the process of dissociation of signification.
In other words, we wish to re-examine the fixed interpretation
of the "local context" which has come to seem
conventional. This method of turning the telescope around,
looking "from the outside in" may be beneficial
to art both in China and abroad.
By and
large, Chinese contemporary art has reflected the historical
and social reforms of the past 20 years. Chinese ink and
wash art lingers in a strangely un-moored traditional circle.
From the perspective of the audience, it has reoccupied
its position as art for the elite and has thus become their
metaphysical candy. At the same time, owing to the onset
of outside ideology and market demand, Chinese ink and wash
has weakened into the darling of an elite market, suggesting
the generally awkward situation of traditional culture in
contemporary China. So-called avant-garde art diverges from
tradition, but in doing so has been incorporated into the
ideological realm of conceptual art. Avant-garde art has
easily attained elite status, consolidating its authority
based on its success in the overseas market even as its
interpretation of Chinese history and society becomes shallower
and shallower.
The
dialectic between "essence" and "utility"
(ti yong zhi bian) was a passive strategic response to the
compulsion and stimulus of the outside world on China in
the early 20th century. It never necessitated a self-conscious
re-formulation of Chinese culture. Its conclusions about
the relationship between cultural tradition and modern circumstance
retain an illusion that we are searching for something essentialist.
Contemporary Chinese art, setting off from this dichotomy,
has formulated strategic responses to the questions of how
to utilize traditional cultural resources, resources stemming
from socialist revolutionary culture, and resources from
abroad. It thus avoids ontological and methodological innovation,
particularly emphasizing "results." In many ways
we misread Chineseness similarly to our Western counterparts.
Because we accept the burden of self-stereotyping, the utilitarian
praxis which underlies such a self-deprecating activity
must maintain an illusion of success and privilege. This
traps Chinese artists in a vicious circle: because they
are excessively attentive to the reception of their works
internationally, artists on the one hand leave behind the
local in the name of personal success, but on the other
hand begin to complain of frustrations in dealing with the
international realm stemming from their cultural background
as members of the periphery. We must begin by clearing the
slate; only then will we be able to develop a more constructive
approach. What remains important is that we can find a contribution
to the world in the raw material of our historical and lived
experience. The answer is not to care uselessly about the
volume of our voice, but rather to use that voice to say
something substantive, and find new possibilities in this
process of self-interpretation and self-restructuring.
The
question of how we face up to "the West" is in
reality the question of how we face up to ourselves, and
only a critical and creative self-understanding will provide
the foundation for an answer. This old topic still looms
large over contemporary art in China. It connects with other
important questions facing art in China, questions about
the possibility of art's survival, how art ought to relate
to Chinese society, and how art might free itself from the
problems of its ideological landscape, economic setup, and
educational system. The "from inside toward outside"
exhibition patterns that have characterized Chinese art
for the last decade have many proverbial positive effects,
but their limitations are also becoming more and more apparent.
Among them is the way in which the art scene's superficial
response to ideology has failed to seriously engage the
issues at stake-a phenomenon apparent in increasingly superficial
social criticism based on the failure of the Chinese revolution
or the loss of faith in utopia and idealism. A deeper understanding
of local context is necessary-especially its centuries-long
encounter with modernity, the gain and loss of its quest
for utopia, the completeness or incompleteness of its revolution,
and the mutually constitutive relationship between nationalism
and internationalism, and the contributions, errors, misreadings,
rebirths, restructurings, and localizations of Western ideologies
in the process of entering China have already deeply entered
China's social and individual consciousness. The question
of how to re-visit these issues through visual culture is
a new departure for the future. As such, it is not only
the work of China but is China's responsibility to humanity.
We should set to relocate ourselves in the local and international
consciousness. This means nothing less than attempting to
reconstruct society. Visual art bears a significant responsibility
to reconstruct the consciousness which lies below this society.
One
hundred years of revolutionary struggle and the lived experience
of socialism not only influence every facet of contemporary
society in China, but have also left a deep residue in the
memory of the people. This permeates every corner of Chinese
contemporary visual culture, becoming a resource-sometimes
apparent, sometimes not- for Chinese contemporary art. Revisiting
revolutionary memory in this way, we hope neither to parody
nor to subvert the conservative or authoritative elements
of socialist life. Nor do we seek to turn history into mythology
by simplifying the past, maintaining the integrity of the
grand narrative via creative nostalgia. Our working method
is to subtly explore this historical period's traces in
contemporary visual culture, re-organizing the chaos and
rescuing it from overused, canonized discourse. We must
search for the points where historical memories converge
with contemporary ideological trends, re-sensitizing ourselves
to the subject and bringing the past into the present so
that we can examine the traces' effects, both negative and
positive. This requires the integration of fieldwork and
linguistic analysis, of the archaeology and architecture
of knowledge. The theatricality of the stories of the Long
March, the richness of the locales into which it extended,
the simultaneous complexity and simplicity of the questions
it raises-all of these provide us with a roadmap for reconstruction.
About
the Exhibition
The
Long March is a journey of visual creation and display.
It follows the route of the historical Long March. Its curatorial
aim is to allow people on this route to see contemporary
art from China and abroad, and to create art in their presence.
The Chinese people are currently on another Long March,
the journey toward a socialist market economy with Chinese
characteristics. Long Marcher Deng Xiaoping said that "only
development is hard reason." The results of this reform
era are evident, as the annual growth rate for the Chinese
economy has hovered around 9% for more than a decade. While
rapid urbanization and commercialization have happened along
the route of the Long March, such changes have also caused
cultural losses and ideological voids. At the same time,
a new cultural paradigm has emerged in China, whereby people
regard wealth as glorious. What do people today think about
communist idealism, the seeds of which were sown along the
route of the Long March? What do they think about revolutionary
practice, in which retreat can become victory and achievement,
and which substitutes "Chinese reality" and "the
local context" for foreign "truth?" What
do they think about the theoretical and practical implications
of the transfer of power to Mao Zedong, an event which happened
during the Long March? From the viewpoint of visual culture,
Long March Culture is missionary and metaphorical. It turns
the kind of culture which derives from the people to serve
the people into a valid mainstream language. It surpasses
concrete authority, which is rooted in collective memory.
The
biggest problem facing contemporary Chinese art is that
its audience is limited to overseas organizations and markets,
and to a handful of major cities like Beijing and Shanghai.
The vast majority of Chinese have no opportunity for direct
contact with contemporary art. Furthermore, precisely because
the Long March travels cities other than Beijing and Shanghai-places
labeled as relatively "backward"-the people with
whom it comes into contact have virtually no experience
with Western art. Therefore, there is special significance
in sharing Chinese and foreign contemporary art with them.
This activity looks to review the cause and effect relationships
between revolutionary history and cultural ideology in P.R.
China, especially Mao Zedong's ideology of "art for
the people," in conjunction with ideologies that were
prevalent in the West during the Mao era, including some
that were inspired by Maoism. It looks to analyze how "Western"
thought and art have influenced the creation and reception
of art in China in the past and present. It will re-examine
how our reading and rewriting of things Western and the
Western reading and rewriting of things Chinese has affected
the self- and mutual understanding and the further creation
of the West and China. Just like other simplifications and
misreadings of Chinese culture, Western Maoists also set
out to reinterpret Chinese history based on their own power.
We must raise a new inquiry, seeing misreading as misreading,
and acknowledging the creative power implied therein. Thus,
this exhibition also includes artworks from other countries,
just as the historical Long March involved contemplation
of foreign thought and the integration of "sinicized"
readings of such thought into Mao's guerrilla warfare tactics.
The Long March will examine the influence upon history of
these shifts in thought, along with that of the process
of national migration, capital flows, cultural changes,
and the engagements, intersections, exchanges, and connections
between human and supernatural, individual and collective,
and reality and utopia. This will not only be a process
of yearning and following the original Long March-a historic
journey that deeply influenced human society-but one of
searching and building the historic journey into something
new.
The
working model created by the historic Long March provides
us with not only a subject to discuss, but a substantive
praxis for a critique of contemporary mainstream exhibition
culture. Chinese contemporary art is in the earliest stages
of constructing a formal system, but has begun the game
of comparison and competition with the West, buying wholeheartedly
into a system based on major museums and biennial exhibitions.
We must think more carefully about the structural relationship
of this system to the global artistic hierarchy, and to
contemporary tourist culture. Nowadays, a city looking to
become a global metropolis has a de facto obligation to
develop an apparatus for contemporary art. We need to remain
sensitive and respectful of the situation of alternative
art in peripheral locales. Otherwise, a Chinese art system
which takes "oppose discursive hegemony" as its
slogan will in reality be nothing more than a tool of neo-colonialism.
The Long March looks to integrate the production, consumption,
and interpretation of art in a single scene, three issues
which have traditionally remained separate. It looks to
overcome the traditional distance between viewer and creator,
to close the gap between "host" and "guest,"
and to seek a new understanding of space. In this way, The
Long March will merge exhibition with creation, and allow
consumption and production to interact.
The
Long March is an exhibition about exhibitions. It is not
an exhibition in the traditional sense, with artworks hanging
in a fixed space, both literally and metaphorically. It
expands the notion of human exhibition culture through the
juxtaposition of temporality and permanence. The twenty
sites along the route of the Long March are excursions into
the historical, political, geographic, and artistic context
of each place. Each activity is divided into three parts:
creation, display, and debate. The display portion involves
original works, slides, video, film, and books; the debate
portion involves the artists and curators, as well as the
workers, peasants, soldiers, students, and merchants encountered
along the road. Some of the conceptual and performance works
created by artists may touch on both the "exhibition"
and "debate" portions of a given activity, making
the activity even more interactive. By exhibiting Chinese
and foreign contemporary art to the masses, by re-reading
Chinese and Western documents with them, by revisiting history
and memory, by collecting their memories and interpretations
of the old and the new Long March, by recording the details
of these varied interactions, by restructuring these visual
and textual materials and incorporating them into the next
stage of the project: in this way the entire exhibition
will continue to develop while on the road, becoming a way
for every participant to continually adjust their thinking.
The
whole Long March project will become a multi-media, multi-layered
study in the anthropology and sociology of art, a hypertext
connecting urban with rural and reality with imagination.
Through a dialogue with international contemporary artistic
thinking, it will also serve as a rewriting of post-Cold
War art history.
After
finishing the on-the-road portion of Long March-a Walking
Visual Display, a touring exhibition will be organized as
the second half of the project. The exhibition will travel
through China and abroad. A massive catalogue documenting
the exhibition will be published, along with a 20-part documentary
film and some multi-media electronic materials.
1998-2002
back
|