我曾經(jīng)就江衡的作品發(fā)表過意見，認(rèn)為僅僅用“卡通”這樣的概念，并不能充分說明他的藝術(shù)追求。在我看來，江衡所表達(dá)的，是一個(gè)與成長有關(guān)的問題，混合在這當(dāng)中的，則是持續(xù)的混亂、不間斷地規(guī)訓(xùn)與癡迷如夢的青春想象，是在成人社會(huì)合法化介入下，或真或假半真半假是真是假地拒絕成長。當(dāng)中的關(guān)鍵詞有三個(gè)，分別是成長、物欲與偶像。我認(rèn)為，江衡的藝術(shù)實(shí)踐及其意義，基本上就包含在這三個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞中。
第一個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞：成長。
至今我還記得法國存在主義作家薩特說過的一句話，大意是：人無法選擇出生，人的出生就是，他突然被拋向了一個(gè)成人社會(huì)。原話不太記得，但意思是準(zhǔn)確的，符合存在主義的基本原則，那就是“存在先于本質(zhì)”。在薩特看來，人原無本質(zhì)，本質(zhì)是后天給予的。就人而言，這個(gè)“后天”就是成人社會(huì)。所以，人的出生就構(gòu)成了一個(gè)事件，一個(gè)被“拋”向社會(huì)的事件。人一旦被拋向成人社會(huì)，成人社會(huì)就開始用種種法則來“書寫”與“塑造”人的本質(zhì)，然后把人建構(gòu)成，如大多數(shù)哲學(xué)家所論述的那樣，具有“本質(zhì)”意義的“先天”存在。站在存在主義立場上看，人的本質(zhì)并不是先天的，而是一種強(qiáng)加。人的本質(zhì)也不自我派生，反倒它要派生出其他東西，比如哲學(xué)家所談?wù)摰?ldquo;先天本質(zhì)”這樣的東西。
如果把存在主義這個(gè)原則移來談?wù)撍囆g(shù)，尤其是藝術(shù)風(fēng)格時(shí)，我們就發(fā)現(xiàn)，藝術(shù)，包括其風(fēng)格，同樣是被建構(gòu)的，是藝術(shù)社會(huì)的種種法則，依照自己的意義所描述出來、以供辨認(rèn)的“特征”。也就是說，藝術(shù)家本人，一旦決定從事藝術(shù)，就等于被拋向了藝術(shù)社會(huì)，然后在創(chuàng)新與摸索當(dāng)中，獲得了本質(zhì)。這里當(dāng)然指的是藝術(shù)的“本質(zhì)”。藝術(shù)原無本質(zhì)，藝術(shù)的存在先于其本質(zhì)，這似乎是無可懷疑的事實(shí)。
從這個(gè)角度來說，談?wù)撍囆g(shù)，并不是談?wù)撍^的風(fēng)格，而是把藝術(shù)作為證據(jù)，作為一種特殊的精神癥候，來談?wù)摯俪善涠ㄐ偷纳鐣?huì)，從藝術(shù)社會(huì)到成人社會(huì)再到權(quán)力社會(huì)。對我而言，從來就不存在著純藝術(shù)。純藝術(shù)本身是一套說辭，用以表達(dá)對社會(huì)現(xiàn)實(shí)的拒斥或反抗。而否定純藝術(shù)的存在，也就等于否定談?wù)撍囆g(shù)的美學(xué)路線。甚至，在我看來，藝術(shù)和美并沒有關(guān)系。就江衡而言，他筆下的物欲偶像，瞪著一雙媚眼，似乎在討好觀看者，其實(shí)，從江衡的實(shí)踐來看，他的作品和審美相距甚遠(yuǎn)。
江衡的藝術(shù)首先指向了成長，指向一個(gè)他無法選擇、不得不生活其間的環(huán)境。他一開始就被拋向這個(gè)環(huán)境，然后接受這個(gè)環(huán)境的規(guī)訓(xùn)。同時(shí)，在某個(gè)時(shí)候，某個(gè)契機(jī)下，學(xué)到了一種回應(yīng)。這一回應(yīng)，既是藝術(shù)，又不是藝術(shù)，而是一種調(diào)節(jié)，用以緩解現(xiàn)實(shí)社會(huì)之規(guī)訓(xùn)所帶來的緊張。一旦風(fēng)格成為有效的調(diào)解器，象征意義也就趁勢建立。從這一意義看，藝術(shù)的確是一種象征，而不是其它，比如是哲學(xué)或?qū)徝乐悺?/p>
江衡的成長面臨兩重困境，一重是成人社會(huì)給予的，一重是視覺上下文。
第一重給予具有普遍性，是成人社會(huì)規(guī)訓(xùn)成長的日常內(nèi)容。這一規(guī)訓(xùn)日復(fù)一日在進(jìn)行，成為伴隨所有成長中人的題中應(yīng)有之義，呈現(xiàn)為社會(huì)現(xiàn)象的便是社會(huì)學(xué)通常所定義的“代溝”，用以描述兩代人在趣味上的差異甚至對立。成長是必須的，而且還得基本上按照成人社會(huì)的規(guī)則來成長。但沖突也不可避免，還要與時(shí)俱進(jìn)，讓沖突演變?yōu)閲?yán)重的社會(huì)問題，折磨著、也日漸深入地改造著過度老化的成人社會(huì)。這一沖突往往表現(xiàn)為青春期騷動(dòng)，體現(xiàn)在人格上，就是一種拒絕，拒絕成長，拒絕變?yōu)槌扇松鐣?huì)所希望的樣子。但是，成長是無法拒絕的，唯有趣味可以固置，所以拒絕成長也就順勢演化為藝術(shù)，而呈現(xiàn)為風(fēng)格的反抗。
拒絕成長，不僅是江衡藝術(shù)的原點(diǎn)，也是那些固執(zhí)地以青春風(fēng)格為對象的藝術(shù)實(shí)踐的持續(xù)動(dòng)力。這就不得不涉及到江衡學(xué)習(xí)藝術(shù)時(shí)的背景，一種變化當(dāng)中的視覺上下文。
曾幾何時(shí)，一種被認(rèn)為是淺薄的畫風(fēng)，也就是今天人們所熱衷談?wù)摰?ldquo;卡通風(fēng)格”，居然成為整整一代人的追逐目標(biāo)。當(dāng)年，李貝斯坦大膽地把流行的迪斯尼風(fēng)格作為他的藝術(shù)準(zhǔn)則，就是因?yàn)榄h(huán)境，一種適宜波普風(fēng)尚流行的環(huán)境的結(jié)果。當(dāng)然，我們不知道究竟是波普造就了李貝斯坦，還是相反，是李貝斯坦參與推動(dòng)了波普。但這不太重要，重要的是，在這樣一種環(huán)境下，流行成為新藝術(shù)的目標(biāo)，讓少年時(shí)代、青春年代、普羅大眾所沉浸其中的通俗視覺樣式，一躍而為前衛(wèi)。這對過度熱衷于深度判斷的美學(xué)來說，無疑是一種顛覆。
上世紀(jì)九十年代是日本卡通沖進(jìn)中國的時(shí)候，大量盜版的卡通圖書，伴隨著電視中的動(dòng)漫與商店里吸引人的卡通玩具，成為年輕人消磨少得可憐的私人時(shí)間的玩伴，而形塑了他們的觀看趣味。不僅如此，在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中，隨著成人社會(huì)過度虛偽地“禁止”，新一代人有意無意便把這一趣味作為他們拒絕的載體，好從中奪取“自我表達(dá)”的權(quán)利。這就是江衡成長時(shí)最為重要的視覺上下文，也是解釋江衡藝術(shù)風(fēng)格的基礎(chǔ)。也就是說，江衡是在這一視覺上下文中成長的，也是在這一上下文中找到了日后風(fēng)格的依據(jù)。今天看來，江衡的媚眼女性形象，既承載了內(nèi)心對拒絕的向往，同時(shí)又有效地固置了視覺上下文中的卡通要素，并適時(shí)成長為個(gè)人藝術(shù)的有效符號(hào)，而為藝術(shù)界知曉。
于是這就不得不談?wù)摰诙€(gè)與第三個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞，物欲和偶像。在我看來，這兩個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞既有區(qū)別，也有分離。在概念上它們是有差異的，但在視覺領(lǐng)域，它們構(gòu)成江衡藝術(shù)，以及與此有關(guān)的同類藝術(shù)潮流的風(fēng)格原點(diǎn)。
物欲，加上犬儒主義與去智化，這三者共同形塑了九十年代以來的中國當(dāng)代藝術(shù)，并成為這一運(yùn)動(dòng)的思想背景。不管其中的個(gè)別風(fēng)格有多少反抗性，也不管這一運(yùn)動(dòng)起源于對傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)樣式曾經(jīng)存在的有效顛覆，到了在九十年代以及新世紀(jì)，在經(jīng)濟(jì)騰飛藝術(shù)資本膨脹的刺激之下，無一例外成為物欲、犬儒主義與去智化的視覺替代品，共同書寫著這一時(shí)代的整體精神病癥。
但江衡的特別之處是，當(dāng)他把物欲具體化時(shí)，他不僅讓內(nèi)心對成人社會(huì)的拒絕外化為偶像，而且，他還讓這偶像帶有似乎輕佻實(shí)則中性的氣質(zhì)。
也就是說，江衡筆下的美女，那些個(gè)瞪著媚眼、呆望前方的形象，事實(shí)上與性沒有什么關(guān)系。也就是說，江衡的美女并不性感，原因頗為簡單，他的美女并不是肉體，而是一種物欲的外表，一種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的偶像。甚至，當(dāng)江衡不斷重復(fù)他的偶像時(shí)，他只是在述說一個(gè)概念，一個(gè)關(guān)于物欲與偶像的關(guān)系的概念。
這是一個(gè)有趣的現(xiàn)象，以美女為偶像，卻去除那一份肉體的含義。從這個(gè)角度看，江衡是一個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的概念畫家，而不是感性畫家，表現(xiàn)性不是他的目標(biāo)，甚至相反，消滅表現(xiàn)性才有助于達(dá)到他所希望表述的概念。這樣，他就和表現(xiàn)主義劃開了界限。
有意思的是，江衡的概念具有個(gè)人的感性經(jīng)驗(yàn)，其中混雜了過多的成長風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，是濾去橫流的欲望之后，所剩下的一種艷麗表象。
不知為什么，每當(dāng)我盯視江衡的表象，也就是那些似乎有重復(fù)嫌疑的偶像系列時(shí)，一種窺探他成長的內(nèi)心隱秘的想法，就會(huì)泛濫開來。在我看來，江衡在這一表象背后，潛藏著一個(gè)少年的心理迷夢，這一迷夢可以用擺脫母體奔向父權(quán)的向往為中心線索。
我并不了解江衡的少年生活。一般而言，成長的困境與反抗，以及對成長的拒絕是他們這一代人，在我看來，還應(yīng)當(dāng)包括下幾代人的共同問題。恰好日本卡通形象背后的那種游戲般的放縱，給予這一拒絕以視覺的合法性，得以讓整整一代少男少女們尋找到了躲避成人社會(huì)入侵的機(jī)會(huì)。但是，這是一種想象中的得以躲避的機(jī)會(huì)，實(shí)際上成長既然不可避免，人總要長大，而且總是在成人社會(huì)的規(guī)訓(xùn)下長大，那么，反抗就一定會(huì)演變?yōu)榘兹彰詨?，演變?yōu)橐环N逃脫與出走的結(jié)合。
我敢斷定，江衡對于女性有一種無法言說的依賴。這還不是那種通常意義的肉體依賴，那種依賴是物理性的，具有荷爾蒙的氣味。在一個(gè)開放的社會(huì)，這種物理性的氣味到處都彌漫著，以至于讓人厭煩。瀟灑的江衡不會(huì)在意這種表面的東西。他刻骨銘心的，是一種曾經(jīng)伴隨著少年時(shí)代漸漸遠(yuǎn)去的溫柔，這一溫柔，肯定和他所每天面對的規(guī)訓(xùn)，也就是一種權(quán)力有關(guān)。
我以為我們完全可以把成長看成是一個(gè)脫離母體的過程。伴隨這一過程的是對父權(quán)的體認(rèn)。有意思的是，認(rèn)識(shí)父權(quán)和接受規(guī)訓(xùn)是一致的，規(guī)訓(xùn)的目的是讓自由之身成為約束的對象，好讓父權(quán)有一個(gè)落實(shí)的載體。從這一層看，身體這似乎可以證明，脫離母體的過程，同時(shí)會(huì)留下依戀，讓日漸成熟的肉身保留母體的體溫。江衡也許并不完全意識(shí)到他的成長對他的形象選擇的意義，但他一再把視覺停留在以少女編織而成的偶像上，就是母體殘余的一種曲折顯現(xiàn)。同時(shí)，他不讓自己駐守在肉欲之中，而讓母體殘余，現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)變成了的物欲偶像符號(hào)化，是希望隱藏那種無法去除的對母體的溫暖回憶。同時(shí)，江衡對父權(quán)始終猶豫不定，不肯輕易把自我交給以父權(quán)為根基的成人社會(huì)。幸好他以藝術(shù)為業(yè)，這樣，他就有機(jī)會(huì)通過不間斷地描繪少女偶像，來抗拒父權(quán)的霸道與橫蠻，以及當(dāng)中所散發(fā)的囂張氣焰。從這一點(diǎn)看，江衡在他的形象中保持了一份似乎物欲的矜持，顯然這是有其內(nèi)在理由的。江衡對少女偶像的認(rèn)識(shí)，本身就夾雜著一份自持，以及自持當(dāng)中，無法瓦解父權(quán)的無奈。這說明江衡不是那種反抗型的藝術(shù)家，他的藝術(shù)，是對成長的回應(yīng)，帶有玫瑰般的色澤，帶有艷麗而去除性感的歌吟。結(jié)果，江衡在長達(dá)十年的藝術(shù)實(shí)踐中，鞏固了他對物欲偶像的崇敬，以及內(nèi)里，可能連自己都無法言明的對日益遠(yuǎn)去的母體的依戀，和對父權(quán)的徘徊。這樣，在新一輪的藝術(shù)運(yùn)動(dòng)中，江衡就成為一個(gè)突出的實(shí)例，讓他，以及他那一代人，在物欲中國成人社會(huì)規(guī)訓(xùn)中成長的同時(shí)，竭盡全力保持一塊視覺的私人領(lǐng)地，好讓成長的殘余獲得形式的外表，從而維持一份精神底氣，繼續(xù)，盡管無望，與父權(quán)，進(jìn)而與權(quán)力的進(jìn)行溫柔的糾纏。這一糾纏非常重要，一旦完結(jié)，就會(huì)讓江衡，以及他那一代人，或者擁有與相同藝術(shù)觀念的作品，失去最后一點(diǎn)價(jià)值。
在江衡的作品中，除了典型的大眼美女外，不斷出現(xiàn)的另一個(gè)形象，就是飄忽的蝴蝶。江衡畫蝴蝶肯定有他的含義，是物欲偶像的一個(gè)視覺說明，也是對一種飄忽情境的飄忽記憶。但是，我卻覺得，這飄忽的蝴蝶卻像一組象征性語句，述說著脫離母體的輕盈與面對父權(quán)的徘徊，并在徘徊當(dāng)中夾雜著一絲敵意，這敵意并不濃郁，相反，也是飄忽著的，在半天升騰與墜落?；蛟S，對江衡那一代人來說，母體與父權(quán)本身就像飄忽著的蝴蝶。
【編輯：大崔】
Behind “Butterfly Flutters”
Revisiting Jiang Heng’s Material Worship and the Patriarchic Mindset behind it
Yang Xiaoyan
I once commented on Jiang Heng’s works and was of the opinion that the conception of “cartoon” did not fully explain his artistic pursuit. In my view, what Jiang Heng seeks to express is an issue to do with growth and development, which is accompanied by constant chaos, incessant coaching and upbraiding, and infatuated dreamlike youth imagination. It is a denial of growing up either genuinely or spuriously, in the intervention of the legitimization of adult society. There are three keywords to this: growth, material desire and idol. I think that the artistic practice and significance of Jiang Heng’s art reside in these three keywords.
The first keyword is growth.
I still remember the word by French existentialist writer Jean Paul Sartre, which basically means that one can not choose his birth; and at one’s birth, he is thrust into adult society. I cannot remember his exact words but the meaning is there and it complies with the basic laws of existentialism, which is “existence precedes essence”. In Sartre’s view, people are not born with the thing-in-itself; it is given to us after birth by the external environment, which, to us, is the adult society. Therefore, one’s birth constitutes one episode, in which one is thrust into the society. Once he is there, the adult society starts “writing” on and “shaping” his nature/essence, until he is remade, or as most philosophers argue, is possessed with an inherent existence. From the standpoint of existentialism, the essence in one’s nature is not born but imposed upon him. One’s nature is not self-derivative but other things will derive from it, such as the predetermined essence that philosophers discuss.
If we apply the theories of existentialism to art, in especial, to artistic styles, we will find that art, including its style, is also created and defines the many rules in an artistic society, described in line with its own significance so as to provide people with its identifiable traits. In other words, an artist, on deciding to do art, will be flung to the artistic society where, through his exploration and innovation, he will acquire the essence. Of course, the essence here denotes the essence of art. Art initially does not have any essence and its existence precedes its essence. That is an undisputed fact.
From that point, when one discusses art, one does not discuss its so-called style but rather, uses art as evidence to discuss the society, which gives rise to its birth and shape. Then the artistic society drifts towards the adult society and then to authoritarian society. To me, there has never been such a thing as pure art. Pure art exists only in theory and is used as rhetoric, to express one’s rejection of or resistance to social reality. Yet, to deny the existence of pure art is to refuse discussing the aesthetic roadmap of art. I even think that there is no connection between art and beauty. The material idols under the brush of Jiang Heng, with their enchanting eyes, appear to be patronizing the spectators. In fact, seen from Jiang’s practice, there is a long distance between his artworks and aesthetics.
First of all, Jiang Heng’s art points to growth, to an environment he can not choose but have to live in. He was hurled into it at the very outset and there he had to accept the rules of the game. At the same time, at a certain point, under certain conditions, one learns how to respond to things. This response is art and at the same time, not art. It is an adjustment, with which one lessons the tension he is under living in social reality. Once the style has become an effective mediator, its symbolic significance is established. In that context, art is indeed a kind of emblem rather than anything else, such as philosophy or aesthetics.
Jiang Heng’s development faces two dilemmas. One is created by adult society and the other by the visual context.
The first is of a universal character, which is a common feature of adult society in which rules and disciplines reign. These rules are repeated day after day and, hand in hand with one’s growth, immersed into adult life. When characterizing social phenomena, they become what is defined by sociologists as generation gap, so as to describe the discrepancies or even confrontations in taste between two generations. Growth is indispensable but it has to be achieved in accordance with the rules of adult society. Yet, clashes are also inevitable and, evolving with the changing time, may lead to serious social problems, which will then harass and increasingly reform the aged adult society. The clashes often take the form of youth agitations and, on a personal level, become the will to refuse, to refuse to grow up, to refuse to bend to the rules of adult society. However, growth cannot be denied or stopped. Therefore, only interests may be stalled. If one refuses to grow up, he had better subsequently evolve towards art, and show his resistance to the style.
Refusing to grow is not only the starting point of his art, but is also the continuous power source behind the artistic practice, which doggedly targets youth. This begs the revelation of the backdrop, against which Jiang Heng studied art, a visual context that is shifting.
It was not a long time ago when what had been termed as “shallow art” became “cartoon style”, which is now accepted and widely discussed. It was the pursuit of a whole generation. A few years ago, Stan Lee boldly used the popular Disney style as his artistic principle. That was attributable to the environment, which was conducive to the spread of pop culture. Certainly, we do not know if it was pop art that resulted in the emergence of Stan Lee or the other way around, i.e. Stan Lee’s participation promoted pop art. That is not so important. The important thing is in an environment, to be popular becomes the objective of the new art, and traditional visual styles, with which teenagers, the youth and general public are infatuated, suddenly becomes Avant-Garde art. This is doubtless a kind of subversion to the aesthetics, which is obsessed with making in-depth analysis. .
In the 1990s, when Japanese cartoons made inroads into China, a quantity of pirated cartoon books, along with the cartoon programs on TV and attractive cartoon toys in the stores, became the playmate of the young people, who barely had any private time. These shaped their visual taste. In addition, in reality, as adult society pretentiously prohibits things, the young generation intentionally or unintentionally regarded the taste as a carrier of their denial, so as to unleash their right to self-expression. That is the most important visual context that accompanied Jiang Heng’s growth, and it explains the basis of his artistic style. In other words, he grew up under the influences of such visual contexts and could find justification in the process for his later styles in art. Today, his images of women with seductive eyes, not only carry the yearning one has for denial but also effectively strengthen the cartoon elements in the visual context. In time, they will grow into striking symbols of individual art, and will become celebrated in the artistic community.
Now, we have to come to the second and third keywords: material desire and idol. In my view, these two keywords are both different and similar. They vary in the concept but in the visual field, they constitute Jiang Heng’s art, and the stylistic origins of the artistic trend, which is associated with his own.
Material desire, cynicism and pretending to be daft, these combine to shape contemporary Chinese art since the 1990s, and are the ideological background to this movement. No matter how rebellious some of the individuals are, regardless of the once effective subversion that lay in store in traditional artistic style, out of which the movement stemmed, by the 1990s and the succeeding century, spurred by the economic boom and inflation of art capital, everything becomes the substitute of material desire, cynicism and sham stupidity. Together, they mark and exhibit the holistic ethos of the age. What is special about Jiang Heng is that, when he gives material desire a tangible form, he not only transforms the innermost denial of adult society into an idol, but also imbues the idol with a seemingly frivolous but in fact neutral temperament.
In other words, the beauties under Jiang Heng’s brush with their winning eyes wide-open, stares into the distance, and has nothing to do with sex. That is to say, Jiang Heng’s beauties are not sexy. The reason is rather simple: his beauties are not flesh but are the exterior of material desire, a standardized idol. What is more, when Jiang Heng keeps repeating his idols, he is only stating a concept, one that is about the relationship between material desire and idol.
That is indeed an interesting phenomenon, using beauties as idols, with their physical attribute divested of its fleshiness. Seen from that perspective, Jiang Heng is a standard conceptual artist but not a perceptual one. It is not his goal to be expressional. On the contrary, stripping the works of their expressional features is conducive to the concept he wishes to express. Thus, he draws a line between him and expressionalism.
Interestingly, Jiang Heng’s concept is imbued with his personal perceptional experience, and is mixed with many growth hazards, which, once deprived of the pervading desires, is left with a flamboyant imagery.
For some reason unbeknown to me, whenever I look at Jiang Heng’s imagery, or at those seemingly duplicated idols series, I am gripped with an overwhelming desire to pry into his innermost secrets that accompanied his growth. To me, there lurks behind his imagery a psychological dream of a youth, whose core is to cast off maternal control and run towards patriarchic prowess.
I am not acquainted with Jiang Heng’s teenage life. Generally speaking, the dilemma and denial of, and resistance to growing up, in my opinion, is a common problem not only for his generation but also for his succeeding generations. The images of Japanese cartoons have behind them game-like indulgence, which visually legitimizes the refusal, sheltering the entire generation of girls and boys from the aggression of adult society. However, this is a haven in imagination only, in fact, growing up is inevitable and we all have to come into adulthood, and do so under the rules and disciplines of adult society. Then rebellion will unmistakably evolve into daydreams, into an alliance between fleeing and running away.
I dare to assert that Jiang Heng has indescribable reliance on women. It is not bodily reliance as it is commonly perceived. It is physical, with the hormonal scents scattered about. In an open society, the physical scent is so omnipresent that it has become nauseating. The handsome artist does not mind such superficial things. Engraved upon his soul is the tenderness that is drifting away from of youth; tenderness, which, like the rules he has to bow to on a daily basis, is not unrelated to power.
I think that we may without doubt consider growing up as a process by which we break free from the maternal body. Interesting, acknowledging patriarchic power and bowing to the rules are not contradictory. The objective of the rules is to make men the subject of confinement, paving the road for patriarchic power. Seen that way, the body may prove that in leaving the maternal body, certain nostalgic feelings will be retained; and with it the warmth the increasingly mature flesh has inherited from its maternal origin. The artist may not be fully aware of the significance his growth entails for his visual choice. But his vision has been consistently lingering on idols woven by young girls. This can be interpreted as a crooked representation of the maternal legacy there remains. At the same time, he does not allow himself to be made a prisoner of physical allurement. Instead, the retention of the maternal legacy, which has become an emblem of the material idol, harkens back to his concealed and irreplaceable fond reminiscence of the maternity. At the same time, he is undecided about patriarchic power, and does not wish to give himself up easily to adult society, whose foundation is patriarchy. Luckily, art is his profession and thus he has the chance to paint girl idols intermittently, so as to resist the brutality, peremptoriness and aggression of patriarchy. In this way, Jiang Heng shows in his images certain restraint that resembles material desire and this obviously makes a lot of sense. His perception of girl idols is itself imbued with restraint and helplessness at his inability to annihilate patriarchy. His art is his response to growing up and it is rosy colored: a flamboyant cantus divested of its sexuality. The result is that in ten long years of art experimentation, the artist has deepened his adulation for material-worshiping idols, his indescribable yearning for the maternal body that is drifting further and further away with each passing day, and his lingering thoughts on patriarchy. In a new wave of art movement, Jiang Heng is a prominent example, by which to keep the private visual territory, despite the social conventions and rules in the materialistic adult society. Thus, growth itself is instilled with a modal surface, while spiritual ethos is preserved deep down, so that the tender entanglement with power, with patriarchy can continue, although perhaps to no avail. Still, the entanglement is crucially important. If it is terminated, then the artist and his generation, or artworks holding similar artistic conceptions, will lose what significance there remains of them.
Apart from the typical big-eyed beauties, there emerges another object: fluttering butterflies. Jiang Heng’s butterflies are not without their connotations; it is a visual elucidation of the material-desiring idol as well as a fleeting memory of a fleeting scenario. Yet, I feel that the fluttering butterflies are like a group of symbolic expressions, which express the lightness of breaking away from maternity and of lingering alongside patriarchy. There is antagonism in the hesitation, antagonism which is not very strong but flutters upwards and downwards in the air. Perhaps, to his generation, maternity and patriarchy are like fluttering butterflies.
【編輯：大崔】
