He Jing | 贺婧





Copyright © 2014 He Jing Art.
All rights reserved.

尉洪磊 肥鼠

天线空间,上海

文/贺婧
原文发表于燃点网:
http://www.randian-online.com/zh/np_review/yu-honglei-fat-mouse/

“肥鼠”究竟是不是一个有关雕塑的展览?这是在进入展厅之后就一直困扰着我的一个问题。很显然,物的属性与样态、雕塑在空间中的存在感、造型语言的精确度、材质与肌理的指向性……所有这一切都将观感引至一个实在和确切的层面,从而使得关于眼前之物的发想无不与一种具象的重量缠绕在一起,由此观众似乎就不得不认同展览新闻稿里的说法——尉洪磊更愿意我们称呼他为 “造型艺术家”。


尉洪磊个展现场


尉洪磊,《香耳》,雕塑,14×8.5×3cm,2014

但好像又不尽然。在“肥鼠”中,与确切呈现的雕塑和物相并列的,是另一条由观念贯穿下来的线索,后者并不比实际可感的空间与体量更为隐形。无论是对现成品的挪用、对各种概念及其背后推论的怀疑、抑或是对西方艺术史的征引,尉洪磊在整个展览中以不停变换的方式交代出他的创作系统与观念艺术之间孰近孰远的关系。这种变换和聚焦不定恰恰印证了艺术家在自我生活/创作行为中所笃信的和所怀疑的,而这两者在尉洪磊那里又常常是同一件事情。作为一名创作者,“(西方)艺术世界成了我生活的一部分”这个事实似乎一方面在理所应当地推动着尉洪磊的创作,而另一方面也成为其作品反叛基因的源头。如果深究下去,虽然他惯于使用“现成品”作为出发点和承载媒介,但所谓艺术与生活之间的界线在尉洪磊这里从来没有弥合或是消散,它们只是互相置换了位置并且不可避免地在不属于自己的场域里发出隔涩的声音,——焦虑由此产生。这种焦虑事实上兼容了对自我坐标的不断锚定和对外在潮流的一种本能式的职业嗅觉,在原生创作资源和自我智识化的模糊地带徘徊,它反而成为尉洪磊创作中最为真诚也或许是最为核心的一种动能;而它所反映出的外在形式,即是“肥鼠”作为一场展览所呈现出的奇特质感、一种在“造型”与“观念”之间带有明显接痕的粘合方式。


尉洪磊个展现场


尉洪磊,《她的一周》,装置,30×30×211cm (7个) 2014

剧场感依旧是尉洪磊擅长的手法。在“肥鼠”中,艺术家刻意营造了一个静默的剧场,精心调控的作品位置与方向为展场中的每个元素赋予了生命感和诉说的冲动,而原子灰、树脂、假发和带有塑料感的视频画面所强调出的物质性又让现场的作品陷于一种道具般的沉默之中。如果说尉洪磊在上一个展览“任何事物都是极其重要的没有什么是不会再回来的”中细碎地传达出一种关于“不可言说”的焦虑,“肥鼠”的表达则更为完整和理性——如艺术家自己所说,“相当地克制”、“丧失了更多温度”。借助“肥鼠”,尉洪磊的创作进入了一个新局面:在渐渐远离了从自身体验出发的原生性创作方法之后,开始建立起一套较为完整的客观视角和反思机制。在之前的大多数作品中,尉洪磊仍然会将未经太多加工的个人经验直接置入创作里,语法具象但不够明确,带有早期作品疏于筛选的开放性。“肥鼠”则更像是一个干湿度调配适宜的场域,更理性、系统的创作方法和更为精良的展览制作都在某种层面上有效地保障了作品的精准呈现和观看品质;恰当的克制姿态、包括与美术史的积极互动,也使得艺术家开始得以用自我之外的视角来观察和反思他身处其中的“艺术世界”。
对于现阶段的尉洪磊来说,这种反思的维度可能不止一层,除了需要站在 “自己之外”,他还需要随时警惕顺利进入当代艺术之安全无菌生产线之后的恒温状态。而更进一步的问题在于,当你变得越来越“认真”和严肃,该如何保持自己的幽默感?如果说一直以来尉洪磊对于创作本身的焦虑和之于它的反思无不以一种幽默的手法来试图达到他所说的“传达的有效性”,那么,在“肥鼠”的现场,观众或许可以期待一种更甚于“肥鼠”这个题目本身的幽默感——无论它是依赖于一种本能的倾诉能量,还是被智识所调控出来的精准刻度,或者两者皆有。展览其实与好坏无关,只与幽默有关。


Yu Honglei, Fat Mouse

Antenna Space , Shanghai
By He Jing

Published at Randian-online.com:
http://www.randian-online.com/np_review/yu-honglei-fat-mouse/

Is “Fat Mouse” in fact an exhibition about sculpture? The question confounded me the moment I stepped into the exhibition space. Evidently, the properties and configuration of the objects, the sculptural sense of presence within the space, the precision of the language in their plasticity, the directionality of the textures and materials—all these lead one’s visual impressions to a definite and faithful dimension. All imagination related to these objects before one’s eyes were thus entwined with a figurative weight, which gives the audience almost no choice but to consent to the same opinion expressed in the exhibition’s press release—that Yu Honglei would rather be called a “plastic artist”.

Yet this may not be entirely so. Running parallel to the exact rendering of sculptural objects and phases in “Fat Mouse” is a clue shot through conceptually, which is no less visible than the actual tangible reality of spaces and volumes. Whether through his appropriation of ready-made objects, the doubts he raises about various concepts and their reasoning, or his references to Western art history, in the exhibition, Yu Honglei elucidates the ever-shifting relationship between his creative system and conceptual art in constantly transformative ways. Such transformations and indefinite focus attest to the artist’s beliefs and doubts in his personal life/creative work—and with Yu Honglei, the two are often one and the same. As an artist, he says that “The (Western) art world has become part of my life”. While on the one hand, this reality seems to give direct impetus to Yu Honglei’s creative work, on the other hand, it is also where we find the streak of rebellion in his work. Upon closer examination, though the artist has a habit of using “ready-mades” as a point of departure and medium for carrying his concepts forward, the so-called boundary between art and life has never been blurred or dissipated; they have merely swapped positions with each other and unavoidably produced muffled echoes in the fields outside of their own. Here lies the disquiet of Yu’s work. In fact, such unease is compatible with the artist’s constant reevaluation of his position and his professional sensitivity to external trends. His works inhabit the grey zone of original creation and self-intellectualization, which paradoxically becomes the truest element or, perhaps, the core momentum of Yu Honglei’s work. And the external form reflected by this ambiguity is what “Fat Mouse” as an exhibition manifests: its peculiar sense of texture, and the intertwining—with obvious traces—in between “plasticity” and the “concept”.

Yu Honglei remains consummate at setting the scene for theatrics. In “Fat Mouse”, the artist has purposely fashioned a still and silent stage; the carefully calibrated positions and orientations of his pieces impart every element in the space with a sense of vitality and an impulse to tell and relate. Yet the materiality emphasized by poly-putty base, resin, wigs, and the plasticity of the video screens collapse the actual scene into a silence that is akin to a prop. If it is said that Yu Honglei’s most recent solo exhibition “Everything is Extremely Important: There is Nothing That Will Not Come Back Again” conveyed in bits and pieces some sort of “indescribable” unease, the expressiveness in “Fat Mouse” is all the more rounded and rational. As the artist himself remarked, it has been “greatly subdued”. With “Fat Mouse”, Yu Honglei’s work has entered a new phase: by gradually distancing himself from an artistic method that departs from his personal experiences, Yu has begun to construct a more comprehensive set of objective perspectives and reflexive mechanisms. In the vast majority of his previous works, Yu Honglei injected into his art many personal experiences absent of much processing; his syntax was figurative but vague, with the openness due to lack of filtering characteristic of earlier works. “Fat Mouse” is rather more akin to a “climate controlled” domain, where a more rational and systematic creative method has been coupled with a more sophisticated exhibition set-up, guaranteeing on some level the precise presentation and visual quality of the works. The aptly restrained attitude on the part of the artist, including his active interaction with art history, has allowed the artist to make use of a perspective outside of his own—in order to observe and reflect on the “art world” within which he finds himself. For this stage of Yu Honglei’s works, such a reflexive dimension may not stop at one single level; aside from situating himself “outside of the self”, he should also be wary of falling easily into an invariant “room temperature” state that follows from the antiseptic production lines of contemporary art. Yet another question arises here. As an artist becomes all the more “earnest” and serious, how does he maintain his sense of humor? If Yu Honglei has without fail deployed a humorous approach towards the anxiety of creation itself as well as towards his reflections thereof in the aims of achieving what he calls an “effective communication”, then audiences at the scene of “Fat Mouse” might perhaps anticipate a certain humor greater than that of the title of “Fat Mouse” itself—no matter whether it relies on an instinctive impulse to confide or a meticulous calibration as regulated by the intellect, or both. The exhibition itself in reality has nothing to do with good or bad; it has only to do with humor.