囚-047 150×150cm Acrylic on canvas 2007
2006年春，在成都郊外藍頂藝術(shù)區(qū)，筆者第一次見到這組以“囚”命名的系列作品，由此而認識羅杰，一位語速平緩、氣質(zhì)溫和，略顯靦腆的藝術(shù)家。后來得知，羅杰當時剛剛進駐‘藍頂’，擁有一間向往多年的工作室，其獨特的個人創(chuàng)作風格也在這一時期得以形成，并延續(xù)至今。
相隔三年，我仍清晰記得初遇作品時的驚觫：肉身異化成粗礪糾纏的繩索，精神依然徘徊其中，咆哮沖撞，焦灼痛楚，又時有冷漠和凄惶。無論是危險不安的暴力場景，還是疏離疲憊的肢體語言，都令人困惑難解。又因似曾相識，更添遐想與恐懼。這種特殊而異樣的視覺經(jīng)驗，從何而來?如果從發(fā)生學角度考量，圖像生成乃是根植于個體的生命體驗，那么，如何檢索、喚醒及呈現(xiàn)潛伏的個人記憶，并把它轉(zhuǎn)換成有意義的視覺表達，使其在當代社會文化情境中，具有特殊的符號學意義呢?基于此，我對羅杰的作品產(chǎn)生了興趣。
羅杰就讀四川美術(shù)學院期間，正值中國當代藝術(shù)的轉(zhuǎn)折點，——上世紀八十年代末九十年代初期，新潮美術(shù)因政治事件嘎然而止，中國當代藝術(shù)陷入沉潛期。此時，四川美院創(chuàng)作處境微妙：一方面，油畫創(chuàng)作總體上與當代藝術(shù)并不相交，日益商業(yè)化的風情寫實與日益主流化的鄉(xiāng)土敘事相互助長，一度被港臺畫商所操縱。另一方面，四川美院當代藝術(shù)的個體探索并未停滯，并以其邊緣、地下的方式持續(xù)進行。如張曉剛、葉永青、陳衛(wèi)閩、楊述、張瀕、忻海洲、郭晉等。更重要的是，從1991年開始，四川美院批評家王林逆流而行，策劃組織中國當代藝術(shù)研究文獻資料展，并發(fā)起對于“八九后藝術(shù)的討論”，提出了包括“政治波普”在內(nèi)的一系列藝術(shù)概念。這項活動延續(xù)十年歷經(jīng)六屆，集中呈現(xiàn)了中國八九后藝術(shù)的創(chuàng)作傾向，并動員國內(nèi)批評力量深入研究當代藝術(shù)問題與八九后中國美術(shù)現(xiàn)狀，對中國當代藝術(shù)的發(fā)展影響深遠。以上三條線索，大致可以勾勒出羅杰當年身處的學習環(huán)境：沉悶、壓抑，卻不乏獨立精神和批評鋒芒。當然，還有學院門口不時輾過的坦克車，和新近生產(chǎn)的防暴車。這里靠近兵工廠，公路也是軍械實驗的道路。
這段時期，留給羅杰的生命記憶，對其后來創(chuàng)作的影響是巨大的。究其畫面，至少有三點值得探源：
其一是其表現(xiàn)主義傾向。中國當代藝術(shù)明顯的表現(xiàn)主義創(chuàng)作傾向，汲取西方現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)成果轉(zhuǎn)向直面本土社會及歷史問題，尋求充滿中國經(jīng)驗的話語表達。其價值在于，敢于直面當代人的心理矛盾、精神沖突及個體生命對生存異化的反抗。同時，關(guān)注社會意識形態(tài)變化，揭示隱含其間的現(xiàn)實問題。至世紀之交，中國當代藝術(shù)的先鋒精神面臨著消費文化、權(quán)力資本和后殖民文化的侵襲，因利益共謀而將表現(xiàn)主義創(chuàng)作加以遮蔽。2006年前后，羅杰反其道而行之，其“囚”系列作品，深入內(nèi)心揭示精神苦難，表達了對中國歷史、社會和個人曾經(jīng)歷過的和正在經(jīng)歷的現(xiàn)實體驗。這里有的是藝術(shù)良知和藝術(shù)家的尊嚴，而不是名利場邏輯。
其二是作品的象征性轉(zhuǎn)喻。羅杰運用置換手法，讓非物質(zhì)的物質(zhì)性與物質(zhì)的非物質(zhì)性之間產(chǎn)生歧義。其人物造型，并非鮮活的肌體，而是一具具用粗繩捆繞的活動模具，有著屬人的表征卻是被異化了的‘生物’。其作品把日常發(fā)生的情景進行陌生化處理，使之懸置于后工業(yè)化時代特有的冰冷時空中，從而讓閱讀者遭遇到文化、社會、現(xiàn)實的種種問題。象征性轉(zhuǎn)喻不僅體現(xiàn)了畫家強烈的個人情感，也體現(xiàn)了作者鮮明的批判性。同時，也是藝術(shù)家轉(zhuǎn)換寫實手法使之具有觀念性的繪畫方式。
其三是關(guān)于作品的個體化表達。如果說，生命體驗和生存經(jīng)驗的相互開啟是當代藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作存在個體化的基礎(chǔ)，那么，羅杰的生活際遇則是其獨特表現(xiàn)語言的誘因。羅杰畢業(yè)之后，迫于生活壓力，獨自南下謀生。結(jié)果可想而知。九十年代初期的深圳，物欲膨脹，就連空氣也散發(fā)著銅臭味兒。每天高強度勞動過后，羅杰再也不想和這座城市發(fā)生任何關(guān)系，躲進書堆，尋找慰藉。正是這一時期，羅杰漸漸養(yǎng)成了文字書寫的習慣和獨立思考的能力。而看似枯燥的工作，也令其頗有受益，即對繪畫材料性能的熟練把握。工作中用的全是荷蘭進口顏料和日本動畫紙，這對羅杰而言，可是貨真價實的奢侈品啊!但陌生的環(huán)境讓他倍感孤獨，甚至出現(xiàn)憂郁癥傾向。1993年，羅杰懷揣兩萬塊錢回到西南，還是想當藝術(shù)家!在重慶遇到了趙能智,封勝,何森，陳文波,杜俠等美院畢業(yè)的同學,后來又到了成都。一晃過了兩年，羅杰花光了積蓄，無法支撐畫畫所需的基本開銷，于是只能在成都杜甫草堂邊上住下，畫些小稿，生活毫無著落。畫廢了的紙張羅杰舍不得扔掉，用筆一遍遍地在上面重復勾勒涂抹。有一天，突然驚覺，這些線條怎么像父親編織的漁網(wǎng)，這突如其來的記憶一下啟發(fā)了他。
羅杰的父親是一位孤獨善良卻脾氣暴躁的男人，一生守護在青藏高原阿木柯河道班，是紅原縣318國道上的養(yǎng)路工人。為了遠方妻兒補貼家用，經(jīng)常編織漁網(wǎng)，捕魚賣魚。但有一次父親騎自行車外出捕魚，被一輛貨車撞傷，再也不能站起來了。這位孤身流放的‘囚徒’因此回到家中。羅杰經(jīng)常看到他坐在院子里，靠在椅子上編織著漁網(wǎng)。父親離家日久，似乎忘了如何與家人交流，編織漁網(wǎng)是一種無需表達的生活方式，是其生命存在的唯一寄托與慰藉。自卑而又倔強的父親，只有在編織漁網(wǎng)時，心靈才得以平靜。那張永遠也編織不完的魚網(wǎng)，與父親牽連了一生，深深嵌入羅杰的生命記憶中，成為其生命必須承受之重!
這樣，一根線的無止無休的纏繞出現(xiàn)在羅杰的作品中，這就是他的作品“囚”系列。一方面，畫面語言呈現(xiàn)于視覺充滿了丑陋、毀滅與撕裂等負面的心理暗示;另一方面，潛藏在羅杰內(nèi)心深處強烈的修復欲望卻不知不覺地被牽扯出來。父親對愛的追尋，體現(xiàn)在對漁網(wǎng)周而復始的編織中，漁網(wǎng)對他而言，實用功能已退居其次。而羅杰在作品完成過程中，在編織紛繁復雜的繩索時，同樣是在修復著無法忘卻的傷痛。與父親靜態(tài)修復不同，羅杰屬于動態(tài)修復，是藝術(shù)家把個體的經(jīng)歷與苦難，放置在一個歷時性的時間維度及共時性的空間背景中，思考個體與社會之間的歷史關(guān)系，反省人在有限的生命歷程中必須面對的文化制約，由此產(chǎn)生的批判精神。從2006年創(chuàng)作開始，“囚”系列作品從反抗激情和場景化的強烈沖突逐漸讓位于個體化的復雜細膩的心理矛盾，如作品《敏感者》、《抽煙的人》、《哪里會是象牙塔》等。畫面構(gòu)成和人物刻畫則愈見簡練，看得出來，羅杰更傾向于敏感的體悟和開闊的視野，來審視當代人所面臨的精神問題。
鄭 娜
2009年4月11日
寫于二沙島廣東美術(shù)館
The Story of a Mind Mender
In the spring of 2006, at the Landing Art Quarters in the outskirts of Chengdu, I saw the series of works named Imprisonment for the first time and subsequently got acquainted with Luo Jie, a slowly-speaking, mild-tempered and somewhat timid artist. Later, I got to know that Luo Jie had just come to and settled down at Landing to have a studio he had been dreaming of for many years. His unique style of artistic creation also took shape in this period and remains unchanged till now.
Three years have passed, but I still remember distinctly the shock to me when I saw his works at the first sight--- rough ropes tangling together are incarnation of human bodies, whose souls are still lingering around, roaring and rampaging, full of anxiety and agony, and sometimes coldness and confusion. Everything is bewildering, from the disturbingly perilous and violent scenes to the body language representing alienation among and tiredness of people. The seemingly familiar scenes add to fancy and fear all the more. Where has this kind of special and strange visual experience come from? From genetics perspective, the generation of images is rooted in individual experience of life. Then, how to retrieve, awake and present dormant personal memories and transform them into meaningful visual expressions so that they can bear some special symbolic meanings under present social and cultural circumstances? To find an answer to this question, I got interested in Luo Jie’s works.
The contemporary Chinese art was just at a turning point while Luo Jie was studying in Sichuan Fine Arts Institute (SFAI). At the turn of the 1990s, the modern fine arts movement came to an abrupt end because of political events, and the contemporary Chinese art sank into a dormant period, during which the creative atmosphere at Sichuan Fine Arts Institute was very delicate. On one hand, oil painting creation was largely irrelevant to modern art. On the other hand, two painting styles, namely the realistic style, which was ever-increasingly commercialized, and the narrative style, which was ever-increasingly becoming the mainstream, fostered each other. The market was once prevailed by painting dealers from Hong Kong and Taiwan. On the other hand, exploration into modern art by individuals, such as Zhang Xiaogang, Ye Yongqing, Chen Weimin, Yang Shu, Zhang Pin, Xin Haizhou and Guo Jin, etc., never stopped at SFAI but proceeded in a marginal and subtle way instead. More importantly, in 1991, Wang Lin, a critic from SFAI, going against the general trend, planned and organized the Exhibition of Chinese Contemporary Arts For Study, initiated the “discussion on post-1989 art”, and put forward a series of artistic concepts including “political pop art”. It has been 10 years since the inception of this movement and there have been 6 exhibitions, collectively presenting the tendencies in post-1989 art creation in China and encouraging domestic critics to explore the problems with contemporary art as well as the current state of the post-1989 Chinese fine arts. These activities have produced a far-reaching influence on the Chinese contemporary art. With the above three clues, we can basically sketch out the academic environment for Luo Jie at that time: a dull and depressing one, but with the spirit of independence and criticism. Of course, there were also tanks roaring past the gate of the institute and the newly built anti-riot vehicles. This place was near an arsenal, and the roads were also used for the test of ordnance.
The memory of this period in life had a significant influence on Luo Jie’s later creative work. Looking at the images, there are at least three points worthy of deep exploration:
The first is his expressionist tendency. The contemporary Chinese art has an obvious expressionist tendency, and changed from drawing upon the fruits of western art into braving local social and historical problems in quest of an expression full of Chinese experience. Its value lies in its bravery in facing the psychological and spiritual conflicts as well as the opposition by individuals against existence alienation. At the same time, it pays attention to the changes in social ideology and tries to disclose the actual problems hidden behind it. At the turn of the century, the avant-garde spirit of the contemporary Chinese art was facing the encroachment by consumption culture, power capital and post-colonialist culture. Expressionistic creation was overshadowed by conspiracy of interests. Around 2006, Luo Jie did the contrary to the current and expressed the actual experience that had been experienced and was being experienced by China history, society and individuals by exploring deeply into the heart and disclosing spiritual miseries with his series of works named Imprisonment. What dominate his works are the conscience in art and the dignity as an artist rather than “vanity fair” logic.
The second is the symbolic metonymy of his works. Luo Jie is good at transposition, creating misunderstandings between the materialness of non-material and the non-materialness of material. The figures are not lively bodies but moving carriers wrapped up in thick ropes, transformed “creatures” with the external features of humans. In his works, everyday scenes are treated as strange situations, suspended in the cold space unique to the post-industrial era, so that the audience can encounter various problems in the cultural and social reality. This kind of symbolic metonymy not only embodies the strong personal feelings of the artist but also his clear criticism. At the same time, it is also a shift from the realistic painting style to one with conceptual characteristics.
The third is about the individualized expression of works. If the communication between the experience of life and that of survival is the basis for the existence of individualization in artistic creation, then the turns in Luo Jie’s life are the causes of his unique expression. After graduation, Luo Jie went to the South for a living by himself. The result is imaginable. In Shenzhen at the early 1990s, people’s material desires were swelling, and even the air smelt of the stink of money. After hard labor every day, Luo Jie would not have any relationship with this city; instead, he buried himself in books and tried to find comfort from them. It was just during this period that Luo Jie formed the habit of writing and independent thinking. And he also benefited from the seemingly monotonous work—that is, he developed a skillful command of the features of painting pigments. What Luo Jie used in his work--imported Dutch pigments and Japanese animation paper—was bona fide luxury products for him. But the strange environment also made him extremely lonely. He even showed symptoms of melancholia. In 1993, Luo Jie came back to the Southwest with 20,000 yuan in hand, still dreaming of becoming an artist! In Chongqing, he met He Sen and spent some time painting together. Then he came to Chengdu. Two years passed in a flash. When Luo Jie used up all his savings and could no longer afford the basic expenses for painting, he had to move to stay temporarily near the Du Fu Thatched Cottage in Chengdu and support himself by paining some petty works, with no stable sustenance. Luo Jie was reluctant to throw away the waste paper and he would sketch and scratch on it once and once again. It was not until one day did he suddenly realize that there was great similarity between the lines and the fishnets his father had once knotted. This abrupt awakening of memory inspired him all at once.
Luo Jie’s father was a man of loneliness, goodness but hot temper. He has been guarding the Amuke watercourse shift on Qinghai-Tibet Plateau all his life as a maintaining worker of National Highway No. 318 in Hongyuan County. He often wove fishing net, went fishing and sold fish to earn more money to support his remote family. Unfortunately, his father was hurt by a truck on the way to fishing by bike and he could not stand up any longer. Thus, the solitary “Prisoner” went back to his home. Luo Jie used to see him sitting in the court and weaving fish nets on the chair. His father seemed forgetting how to communicate with the family due to long period away from the family. Weaving fishing net was a kind of life style without expressing and was the only bailment and consolation of existence of the life. The self-abasement and hard-nosed father felt calm in spirit only when weaving fishing net. The fishing net that can’t be completed forever involved in the life of his father and left permanent memory to Luo Jie as a heavy burden in Luo Jie’s life.
Thus, an endless-winding fishing thread appeared in Luo Jie’s works. This is his series of works named Imprisonment. On one hand, the image language took on negative psychological implication full of ugly, destruction and avulsion visually. On the other hand, the strong desire for mending in the deep mind of Luo Jie broke out unconsciously. The father’s pursuit for love was reflected from endless weaving of fishing net. The practical function of the fishing net was not the most important for him. When Luo Jie created his work by weaving the confused and complicated threads, he mended the unforgettable pain. Unlike his father’s static mending, Luo Jie dynamically mended the pain by placing the artist individual experience and suffering in a historical time dimension and a synchronic space background, considering the historical relations between individuals and the society and reviewing the critical spirit generated from the culture constraints that one must face with in the limited life course. Since 2006, in the series of works named Imprisonment, the rebellious passion and strong scene-like conflicts had been gradually replaced by complex and delicate individualized psychological conflicts, like in such works as the Sensitive Person, the Smoker and Where is the Ivory Tower?, etc. The composition of the images and the depiction of figures are becoming more and more succinct. It can be seen that Luo Jie is more inclined to examine the spiritual problems that contemporary people are facing.
Commented by Zheng Na at Guangdong Museum of Art
April 11, 2009
【編輯：小紅】
