附件2，深圳雙年展20070423 新聞通稿

2007年深圳城市/建筑雙年展在確定了馬清運作為獨立策展人后，目前已經形成以馬清運為核心，以深圳、上海、洛杉磯三點為據(jù)點的網(wǎng)狀互動籌策團隊。這樣一個具有國際化特征、互動高效的工作團隊本身成為本屆雙年展集思廣益、交流溝通的核心樞紐，策展行為本身也將成為雙年展的一個有機部分和重要特色，目的在于將城市市民與世界市民集中起來，挖掘城市的意義、珍惜城市的前景，通過不同媒介，達到互動共力的積聚能量。策展的思想與展出的內容具有同等重要價值，現(xiàn)階段正在進行的工作包括：雙年展的出版工作流程及合作支持團隊、策展人特約委托調研課題方向、外圍展主題策劃以及城市建筑項目。

出版媒體工作作為本屆雙年展的一個重要特色部分，計劃通過出版的形式記錄雙年展的整個過程以及探討大范圍思想聚集的可能性。目前我們已經初步商定由多位國內外藝術家組成的視覺設計團隊以及大范圍專業(yè)媒體合作單位，在展覽形式和空間設計概念上我們也提出了“圖書超市”、互動媒體等創(chuàng)新概念。高質高量的出版物將會成為本屆雙年展的成果結晶和思想運轉的軌跡。

本屆雙年展提出“策展人委托研究課題”的想法，這一想法的提出旨在表明雙年展不但要有作品，還要有研究，避免雙年展流入平庸思想和陳舊展品集合的俗套。本屆雙年展不但是總結展示兩年來的完成作品，更重要的是從兩年來的思考中攝取、并發(fā)掘出新思想，啟示新精神。目前擬定的研究課題已經超過20項，所有研究方向都是圍繞雙年展主題“城市過期與再生價值”所展開的討論，包括國土所有權、土地開發(fā)價值，環(huán)境效能變化、生產力轉化、生活質量的構成等內容。首要的研究人員也來自各個領域，涉及建筑、學術、藝術及媒體等專業(yè)。策展團隊通過“策展人特約委托調研”的方式進行具體的研究觀察。其研究成果將作為一種構建深圳雙年展“公共面貌”的手段，通過對深圳城市的體驗、研究和狀態(tài)紀實而不斷形成。這樣做的延伸目標是使雙年展的當?shù)厝后w可以參與到和城市交錯網(wǎng)絡的對話中來，一場極具挑戰(zhàn)性的、綜合性的、振奮人心的對話。

為配合雙年展主題，擴大影響力和輻射范圍，與雙年展同期舉辦的外圍展將與深圳大學名牌專業(yè)建筑系合作，希望以長遠的眼光關注超越建筑實用性的文化論題，共同關注深圳特質。一個城市的大學歷來承擔著城市思想的核心力量，目前策展工作組已經擬定外圍展覽策劃書與深圳大學達成合作意向，中國壁畫協(xié)會已經主動申請加入外圍展專題展覽研究部分。

目前，策展團隊還策劃了另一個亮點：在世界范圍內策動盡可能多的，思考城市問題的專家研究者，對城市再生做各自的思考，形成策展人比參展人多的局面，也將是本屆雙年展的特色之一。本屆雙年展將在聚焦中國城市問題的基礎上，將整個世界聯(lián)成一個網(wǎng)絡，通過百花齊放式的討論世界不同城市的發(fā)展歷程，探討一種新型的共存城市，并通過社會、經濟、宗教、政治等不同的思考角度啟示建筑手段以外的方式來解除城市困擾。

附件3，西安文獻展策展文案

影骨

前幾天跟一位著名策展人聊即將開幕的威尼斯雙年展和卡塞爾文獻展，得知日本的一些策展人要聯(lián)合亞洲其他一些策展人一起組織一個“影子展覽”，來對抗威尼斯和卡塞爾的“霸權”。

我心里想，為什么我們成了“影子”？中國藝術家在威尼斯雙年展的“中國館”呈現(xiàn)的作品、中國藝術家在卡塞爾文獻展上呈現(xiàn)的作品真的是“中國當代藝術”的“真身”嗎？這些藝術“代表”的合法性是如何建立的？

這幾年，當代藝術霸權的話題一直被拿來進行討論，少數(shù)國外收藏家和少數(shù)國際重要雙年展的文化權力跟國家文化機關的權力，時而單獨生效、時而相互配合，產生了一批中國當代藝術寡頭。十位數(shù)的這些寡頭們壟斷了國際雙年展、收藏家等重要的藝術資源。

寡頭藝術真的能夠“代表”中國當代藝術嗎？與此同時，類似于“影子展覽”的想法與其說是在“對抗”，還不如說是在敲邊鼓。

那些真正保持跟自身環(huán)境的真誠關系的藝術家和藝術品，才是真正的中國當代藝術的代表。為什么我們不把威尼斯雙年展和卡塞爾文獻展上的“藝術家”和“作品”看成真正的“影子”呢？

這種“反認他鄉(xiāng)是故鄉(xiāng)”的顛倒邏輯主宰了我們的藝術生產和藝術批評很多年了。它的結果是，當代中國人根本看不懂“中國當代藝術”和“當代藝術批評文章”。關于消費影響生產、批評成為吹捧的論述實際上已經很多很多，不是一個多么高深的道理。但是為什么指鹿為馬的時代仍然沒有結束？

關于“影子展覽”的討論，讓我聯(lián)想到西安附近法門寺的“影骨”：在發(fā)現(xiàn)藏在法門寺地宮的佛指舍利之前，一共發(fā)現(xiàn)了3件仿制的“佛指”。這三件仿制品后來被稱為“影骨”，趙樸初用“一月映三江”來描述仿制品和真正的佛指（靈骨）之間的關系。

就此，我展開聯(lián)想：中國藝術家、藝術品在世界三大展（卡塞爾文獻展、威尼斯雙年展和圣保羅雙年展）上的表現(xiàn)實際上是“中國當代藝術”的三枚影骨；進而，中國藝術家、藝術品在亞洲的光州三年展、橫濱三年展和臺北雙年展上的表現(xiàn)是“中國當代藝術”的第二個層次的“影骨”；進而，上海雙年展、北京雙年展和廣州三年展在具備民意基礎之前，仍然是中國當代藝術的第三個層次的“影骨”。

那么，“靈骨”在哪里？影骨已經提示了靈骨的形狀、材質、大小等等信息，但是畢竟還不是真身。

“靈骨”在哪里？正是首屆西安文獻展的討論目標。

Shadow relics

Several days ago when I talked about the forthcoming La Biennale di Venezia and Kassel Documenta with a curator, he told me that some Japanese curators would organize a “shadow exhibition” with other Asian colleagues to resist the “hegemony” of Venice Binary Exhibition and Kassel Document Exhibition. Why we became “shadows”? I said to myself. Could those Chinese artworks exhibited at Venice and Kassel truly represent “China’s contemporary art”? Are there any acceptable reasons for those artworks to acquire the high status?

The topic of “hegemony in contemporary arts” is a hot one in recent years. Sometimes do it singly and sometimes cooperate with each other, both a small group of foreign collectors together with the cultural authorities in a few important international Binary exhibitions and the State’s cultural departments, urged the emerging of a few “oligarchs” of China’s contemporary art. It is them who monopolized the important art’s resources such as international binary exhibitions and collectors

How could these “oligarchs in art” truly represent China’s contemporary art? At the same time, the ideas such as “shadow exhibitions” look like hollow propaganda more than the real resistance to the “hegemony” of Venice and Kassel exhibition.

Only those artists and artworks that keep a sincere close relationship to their soil could be said as the real representatives of China’s contemporary art. It is better to take the “artists” and “artworks” exhibited at Venice Binary Exhibition and Kassel Document exhibition to be “shallows”.

Many people worship and have blind faith in foreign things; such a kind of reverse way of thinking has been dominating our art production and criticism for many years. The result of it is that many Chinese could hardly understand the “China’s contemporary art” and “contemporary arts’ critic articles”. We have seen the analysis about consummation’s effects on production and how critics become praise for so many times, and it is not so difficult to understand this point. But why is this era of taking rubbish to be cream still far from its end?

The discussion about “shadow exhibition” makes me think about the “Shadow relics” (that are the mimics of Sacred Buddhist Remains). Three shadow relics were found in the underground palace of Fa Men Temple (close to Xi’an City), and later they were called “Ying Gu (shadow relics)”. Zhao Puchu, a master of Buddhism used a metaphor “one moon shining over three rivers” to describe the relationship between real finger relics and its shadow relics. So I make my mental association that the performances of Chinese artists and artworks at the three major art exhibitions (Venice Binary Exhibition, Saint Polo Binary Exhibition and Kassel Document Exhibition) are actually three “Shadow relics” of China’s contemporary art. The same reason, their performances at Gwangju Triennial, Yokohama Triennial and Taipei Binary Exhibition are “shadow relics” of the second level; and Shanghai Binary, Beijing Binary and Guangzhou Binary Exhibition are “Shadow relics” of the third level before they get the people’s hearts.

Where is the “real finger relics”? “Shadow relics” have already hinted the information as the form, material and size, but after all they could not replace the real one.

Where is the “real finger relics”? This is the main goal for holding the First Xi’an Document Exhibition.

紡織-防止-仿制

紡織城藝術車間的成立，是我們討論“影骨”和“靈骨”的一個契機。建國初期建設的紡織城；2007年藝術車間對紡織城進行的“再生”處理；西安文獻展跟卡塞爾文獻展以及威尼斯雙年展同時進行……給我們討論中國當代藝術“真身”提供了一些有意思的話題。

紡織：專業(yè)的枷鎖

建國初期，中國的社會主義建設基本上參考了蘇聯(lián)模式。無論是工業(yè)化還是教育，常常是根據(jù)專業(yè)來進行規(guī)劃和設計。大學教育不再采用“通才”模式，而是采用“專才”模式。西安的東郊被規(guī)劃為紡織城。

今天，過于專業(yè)化的教育和工業(yè)布局的弊端已經不斷暴露，大學的合并、重組、對“通才”的重提，正在對之前的“偏執(zhí)”進行糾偏。大量的老工業(yè)基地的廢棄、改革、工人下崗、再就業(yè)等等狀況提示著我們后遺癥仍然存在。

藝術，也正在經歷著對藝術教育制度、藝術創(chuàng)作的理論和材料基礎、展示空間等的重新定義。

實際上，面對紡織城所折射的“專業(yè)化”以及“蘇聯(lián)模式社會主義”的后遺癥，跟我們面對美術學院的“專業(yè)化”困境是同在一條歷史反思緯線上面的。諸如“國畫的現(xiàn)代化”、“油畫的本土化”都不過是這個專業(yè)化困境中的子話題：如果我們無法走出這個專業(yè)化的困境，如果我們無法勇敢地面對“紡織城”的后遺癥，我們也就沒有討論“中國當代藝術”真身的基礎。

防止：隔離和迷惑

紡織城藝術車間的藝術家們?yōu)榱怂囆g區(qū)的安全操了不少心，從藝術區(qū)的封閉式設計、門衛(wèi)制度到藝術區(qū)與藝術區(qū)之間、藝術區(qū)與紡織廠之間、藝術區(qū)于區(qū)政府之間等等的關系，都做了很多“隔離”設計的工作。在藝術家的內心里面，也做出了、或者清晰了、強化了一些隔離工作。就像9層寶函守護著舍利，藝術家在內心里也在守護著他們的藝術理想、原則和立場、品位和尊嚴。一方面要跟一些東西告別，另一方面要跟未來的諸多誘惑保持距離。

“防止”話題也會組織參與西安文獻展的藝術家、設計師、策展人、學者等通過討論同時進行的威尼斯雙年展和卡塞爾文獻展的方式來討論中國當代藝術的在“進取”和“保護”之間應有的態(tài)度。

影骨是對靈骨的保護，或者是通過迷惑來進行保護？這種聯(lián)想方式有助于我們用一種相對簡潔和具有象征意義的方式來厘清中國當代藝術跟西方文化、學術、藝術的關系；增加中國當代藝術的能見度；我們也會討論文化遺產跟當代藝術的關系；甚至會在佛教影響中國和中國現(xiàn)代化進程之間進行對比。

仿制：弘揚或污染

這個話題希望把我們對與當代藝術的關懷延伸到對西安城市視覺生態(tài)的關懷上來。西安正在通過巨大的行政、財政以及文化資源讓整個城市“再現(xiàn)盛唐雄風”。我們在一個巨大的唐景觀公園大唐芙蓉園的高處可以看到，真古董（大雁塔）被規(guī)模宏大的假古董（唐風小區(qū)和唐風旅游建筑群等）包圍著，顯得孤立、無辜。

政府斥巨資在建設一個唐人街化和迪斯尼化的長安，當紀念碑邏輯和主題公園邏輯同時成立的時候，李白和白居易同時也充當了米老鼠和唐老鴨的角色。

假古董是在對真古董進行弘揚，還是進行污染？

仿制的話題并不局限在對城市視覺的關注。紡織城藝術車間跟西方流行的工業(yè)區(qū)改造成的藝術區(qū)之間的關系、跟798的關系，也是我們需要反思的。歷史上的紡織城對蘇聯(lián)模式的仿制的得失也是我們需要回顧的。

Textile—Prevention—Imitation

The establishment of the Textile City art workshop offers us a chance to discuss “Shadow relics” and “real finger relics”. The Textile City was built in the early years of New China, the “regeneration” of it was given by the art workshop in 2007; the co-conduction of Xi’an Document Exhibition, the Kassel Document Exhibition and the Venice Binary Exhibition have offered us some interesting topics to discuss about the “real meaning” of Chinese contemporary art.

Textile: Fetters of Specialty

In the early years of new China, the Chinese socialist construction has been conducted mainly according to the patterns adopted by Soviet Union. Both industrialization and education have been programmed and designed on the basis of specialty. College education has adopted the “professional talent” pattern to replace the former “generalist” one. The east suburb of Xi’an has been planned as the Textile City.

Nowadays, the disadvantages of the over-specialized education and the industry layout have been gradually exposed; the combination, reconstruction of college and the reaffirmation of “generalist” are rectifying the former deviations. All these things such as the discarding of abundant former industrial bases, the reformation, the laying off of workers and the unemployment remind us the existence of aftereffect.

The concept of art is also being redefined in terms of its educational system, the theoretical and material basis of its creation and its exhibiting space. In fact, the “specialization” reflected by the Textile City and the aftereffect of “Soviet Union socialist pattern” is similar to the “specialization” predicament of the Fine Arts College. “The modernization of traditional Chinese painting” and “the localization of oil painting” are no more than the sub-topics of the specialization’s predicament. We will be incapable of talking about the real meaning of “Chinese contemporary art” if we cannot get rid of the predicament of specialization and face the aftereffect of “the textile city” courageously.

Prevention: Segregation and Puzzling

The artists in the art workshop of the Textile City have done a lot for the safety of the art area. A lot of “segregation” works have been done in the sealing-off designing of the art areas, the doorkeeper system, the relationship between different art areas, the relationship between art areas and textile factories, and the relationship between art areas and borough governments. The artists have also clarified and strengthened some segregation work. Just as the eight-layer box that protects the real finger relics, artists also have their own art ideals, principles, standpoints, tastes and dignities deep in their hearts. While leaving something, they also need to guard against some future temptations.

The topic of “prevention” will also make the artists, designers, exhibition organizers and scholars participating in Xi’an Document Exhibition show their attitudes towards the Chinese contemporary art. It also offered an opportunity for discussion “moving forward” and “protection”. Is the protection of “Shadow relics” to “real finger relics” done by puzzling? This kind of association will help us clarify the relationship between the Chinese contemporary art and the western culture, science and art in a relatively simple and symbolic manner, and enhance the visibility of the Chinese contemporary art. We will also discuss the relationship between the cultural heritage and the contemporary art; make a comparison between the influence of Buddhism on China and the progression of Chinese modernization. 

Imitation: Promotion or Demotion

The topic draws our concern on the visual view of Xi’an City, which can be seen as the extension of our concern on modern arts. Xi’an has put enormous political, financial, and cultural resources to relive its “spirit in thriving Tang Dynasty”. On the top of “Tang Paradise”, we can see that the genuine curio (Wild Goose Pagoda), surrounded by massive forged ones (the Tang-style tour compounds), appears solitude and lonely.

The government has granted a large sum of money to build a Chang’an City in the style of China Town and Disney Land. When the monument logic and theme park logic coexist; Mick Mouse and Duck Donald will replace the roles of Li Bai and Bai Juyi, two great poets in Tang Dynasty.

Would the forged curios shed light on the genuine ones or become the eyesores?

Imitation is not only found in the out looking of the city. The relationship between Textile City art workshop and the arts’ ghettos rebuilt from industrial areas (the deal is popular in the West) should also be reflected as well as the relationship between the rebuilt and 798. We have drawn lessons from the imitation of Russian style Textile City already.