蔣建軍的智慧集中體現(xiàn)在他對(duì)“線”的使用上。在他的作品中，“線”既是自然的，也是文化的；既是作品的語言，也是作品的形式；既是作品的媒介，也是傳達(dá)觀念的載體。然而，這些線所具有的不同品質(zhì)都來自于藝術(shù)家的創(chuàng)作過程。他的創(chuàng)作過程既簡單又復(fù)雜。簡單的是他直接將各種色彩的線粘貼到畫布上。由于二維的平面不會(huì)讓觀眾產(chǎn)生空間的幻覺，此時(shí)的線便向本身的物性回歸，即回歸媒介本身的自然屬性。游走的線代表著連綿不斷的時(shí)間，整個(gè)創(chuàng)作的體驗(yàn)實(shí)際上也是對(duì)“時(shí)間”的體驗(yàn)。但是，一旦線條結(jié)束，整個(gè)體驗(yàn)也就結(jié)束了。最后，“時(shí)間的印記”變成了一片抽象的線。作品的敘事意義消失了，作者消失了，惟有那些看似抽象的圖式在提醒著我們，除了線條，什么也沒有。這是一種解構(gòu)主義的策略，也是一種對(duì)既定繪畫觀念的否定與超越。長期以來，人們相信藝術(shù)家能賦予作品以意義和價(jià)值，然而，在蔣建軍的作品中，因?yàn)楫嬅鏇]有了圖像，所以抽象的線拒絕一切來自于社會(huì)學(xué)意義上的各種闡釋。相反，意義只是體現(xiàn)在過程之中，體現(xiàn)在線條游走在畫面的時(shí)間之中。
除了對(duì)線的觀念性表達(dá)外，蔣建軍作品的另一特點(diǎn)便是線本身的材料物性。在西方，藝術(shù)家對(duì)于材料本身表現(xiàn)力的強(qiáng)調(diào)已經(jīng)有近150年的歷史了，從現(xiàn)實(shí)主義的庫爾貝到立體主義的實(shí)物拼貼，再到西方60年代的極少主義，作為藝術(shù)媒介方式的材料從未有過如此獨(dú)立的表現(xiàn)力。盡管我們可以說，隨著西方現(xiàn)代主義的沒落，西方藝術(shù)家對(duì)材料本身的重視，已經(jīng)不再是一個(gè)值得留意的藝術(shù)問題，但在中國，這個(gè)問題卻一直沒有得到深入的討論。在中國大部分藝術(shù)家的理解中，材料始終是為作品的主題服務(wù)的，與作品的主題和意義相比，材料永遠(yuǎn)都是處于從屬的、非獨(dú)立的婢女狀態(tài)。盡管從學(xué)術(shù)上講，對(duì)材料獨(dú)立的討論仍停留在現(xiàn)代主義的美學(xué)范疇，并未進(jìn)入觀念的層面，但并不能說對(duì)材料意義的重新認(rèn)識(shí)就不具有當(dāng)下的意義。
盡管蔣建軍的作品在形式上十分接近西方抽象藝術(shù)的形式外觀，但在作品的觀念表達(dá)上，則是不相同的，因?yàn)椤熬€條游走的時(shí)間”本身就具有一種逃離了形式的主體體驗(yàn)。由于對(duì)材料物性的表現(xiàn)也使其作品具有了某種實(shí)驗(yàn)意義。但是，這并不妨礙蔣建軍的作品具有后抽象繪畫的品質(zhì)。
何桂彥
Jiang Jianjun features the use of “l(fā)ine”. In his works, “l(fā)ine” is natural and cultural as well. It is the language of works, but also the format; it is not only the media, but also the carrier of the works to deliver the concept. But, what the line carries is from his creation process, which is not only simple, but also complicated. For the simplicity, he just sticks the colorful lines to the canvas. Because the two-dimensional plane will not produce the illusionary feeling to audience, the line is just the line itself. Moving line stands for the continuing time and the feeling of creation is that of time. But once the line is over, no feeling at all. At last, “marks of the time” become group of abstract lines. The meaning of narration disappear, so does the painter. Only the abstract format left to remind us that there is nothing at all except the line. This is the strategy of deconstruction and also the denial and exceed of established painting concept. For long, it is believed that artists attach the meaning and value to works. Because there is no image in his works, the abstract lines refuse various explanations from sociology. In the contrast, it is in the process and in between the lines.
Except the conceptual expression of the line, another character of his works is the material of the line itself. In the west, artists have emphasized the role of material in artworks for 150 years from Courbet featured with realism to cubism of collage and then to the minimalism in 1960s in the west. It has never played such an independent role as a medium. Although focus on the material by western artists has never been an eye-catching problem along with the down of the western modernism, it has never been deeply discussed in China. Most thought that material exists for works, and it is always in a minor state compared with the theme and value of the works. Discussion on material is still about the modernism of aesthetics, but not concept, which does not mean that recognition on material is nonsense nowadays.
Although works by He Jianjun is so close to the appearance of western abstract art, it is different on conceptual express. “Time of line moving” is a kind of experience nothing to do with format. Even though works by Jiang Jianjun are still featured with post-abstract paintings, the expression of material endues certain experimental meaning with his works.
He Guiyan
