Wen Yipei 温一沛

创作阐述

文 | 温一沛

我的作品始终是关注在“风景”这一题材上的,从最早的室内空间,到去年开始尝试结合室内与室外空间。这几张小幅作品的内容是“风景”这一题材的一个延伸—建筑结构。与之前的作品通过颜色、结构去营造氛围不同,这一系列作品更集中关注在单纯的几何形建筑结构之间的关系上面。但不同于一般的处于自然中的建筑,我试图通过将这些结构从自然状态中抽离、截取、并放置在一个密闭的、人造光线的空间中去进行一个更加私人化的讨论。如此,建筑的属性被剥离,仅剩下“结构”。

 

Artist Statement

Text | Wen Yipei

My works have always paid attention to the subject matter of “Landscape”, from the earliest interior space to the trial combination of interior and exterior space last year. The content of these small works is the extension of “Landscape”, i.e. architectural structure. Unlike the former works, which create atmosphere through color and structure, this series of works focus more on the relation between simple geometric architectural structures. Normally, architecture locates in natural environment; however, I attempt to extract, capture these structures from their natural condition, and place them in a closed space with artificial light for a more private discussion. Consequently, the property of architecture is stripped only the “Structure” remains.

 

 

温一沛: 飞鸟之影

文 | 孙冬冬

 

走走停停看看,当温一沛决定让游历与观展的节奏在展厅空间重合时,墙上他那些描绘景观的画作,则钩沉起绘画的一个历史性话题——空间艺术与时间艺术的界限——18世纪德国文艺理论家莱辛在《拉奥孔》对“诗画之辨”的讨论,至少有一部分从符号经济角度来看是合理的,面对画布上并列的图像符号,观众可以反复观看细节,所以绘画更方便于再现,而通过声音传播的诗歌,连续的话语符号很容易消逝,如果诗歌耽于描写,听众为了记住这些细节则要付出更强的脑力记忆,所以与绘画相比,诗歌更适于表达先后承续的东西,比如动作,这也符合诗歌媒介的物理性质。与之对应,在温一沛的展览现场,观众眼前的画作围绕一座发电站展开空间结构,温一沛将一次游览过程分解为一组视点、视域、视距不同的静态画面,就像从运动影像中的取帧,观众的注意力与脚步随着画作移动,借由不同的观展路径,构建出不同的时空结构。亦如我们知道的,在人类经验中时空结构是一个整体,温一沛看似遵循了莱辛的“劝告”,注重于再现性的描绘,但紧接着,他又通过观展行动的连续性,串联起碎片化的空间,转而向观众叙述起自己的一次“游历”。然而,对于温一沛而言,这个展览只是一次关于形式结构的修辞游戏吗?

画笔如锚,一旦落下就不会停在图像之海的表面,势必会钩住水下的岩石凸起,那是历史累积的关于绘画的知识谱系,相比水面上生动鲜活的浪花与涟漪,水下的岩石才是我们确认画家观念的位置锚点。为此,让我们再回到莱辛的“诗画之辨”——事实上,莱辛对于空间艺术与时间艺术的区别并不如他所言的那般天然,而是一种人为的界定,他不仅有意识的回避了绘画过程的时间性以及诗歌的阅读性,而且他的文本实则是一种意识形态的价值判断:绘画摹仿自然,受限的、满足眼睛快感的人造物,她制造偶像崇拜,是一个需要法律加以控制的“幻觉效果”,而诗歌代表了人类精神的理性法则,是一个抵抗物化、更为广泛的“时间、话语和历史领域”——作为一个新教徒,莱辛的观点显然带有宗教原因,而在《拉奥孔》中,他直接反对的对象也是被他称为“虚伪的高雅”的法国的绘画主义诗学,以及法国的罗马天主教偶像崇拜。所以,在貌似公立的原则下,莱辛的文本实则还包含了当时欧洲文化地图上在政治上的一种竞争关系。于今而言,莱辛的“诗画之辨”早就替换为“图像—语词”之间关系的讨论,它已不是古典时期姊妹媒介之间的比较,而是一个现代符号学的问题。而作为画家的温一沛,在时隔三百多年之后为什么旧话重提,“每一个尚未此刻视为与自身休戚相关的过去的意象,都有永远消失的危险”(瓦尔特·本雅明),反之说明,与我们本人有关,或者说,温一沛的这个展览就是在表述与他绘画实践相关的历史影响。

在此,不得不提到徐悲鸿——温一沛在国内求学时所在的中央美术学院油画系一工作室,被认为在教学上直接继承了徐悲鸿从“科学美术”思想发展出的写实主义绘画。徐悲鸿一脉所谓的“科学”,实际上包含了两层含义,一是对世界观的改造,将唯物性置于绘画实践的首要目标,二是对绘画形而下层面尤其是技术上的规范,以切实、理性的方法论训练造型基础。从徐悲鸿个人美术观念的选择,到最终被确立为国家艺术的美学范式,从写实主义到现实主义,在救亡与启蒙的历史语境中,徐悲鸿一派的绘画实践确实可以更有效的嵌入现代国家的动员机制中。在1920年代末,关于中国美术价值判断与路线取向的“二徐之争”,徐悲鸿对徐志摩提倡的西方现代艺术的批判,也是从如何振奋疲弱的国民性角度而谈的。所以,从某种意义上说,徐悲鸿的艺术之路是一种政治性选择。同样都含有政治性,与莱辛的表述相比,徐悲鸿从法国古典绘画拿来的写实主义,更接近于一种伦理价值,如同我们在谈科学时,会先想到实用性,其实与莱辛所讨论的“理性”与“真实”的观念论相距甚远。或许,徐悲鸿意识到了这一点,只是西方的形而上学思想如同清代“四王”的绘画一样,对于解决当时中国的现实困境并无切实的用处。

然而,像温一沛这样的后来者,却无法回避这样的视差,尤其在时代的议程改变之后,如何理解与转化学院前辈的遗产,成为我们需要面对的问题。并且,与之对应的还有他在美国留学时的艺术经验,实际上,在本次展览之前,温一沛的绘画更多显现的是一种近似于新几何(neo-geo)画派的观念:现代建筑的室内空间,搭配几何形状的家具灯饰,形象间于抽象与具象之间,但要比新几何画派更强调绘画性。从这一点看,上一系列的结构方法仍出现在温一沛现在的画中,比如在画面近景的发电站建筑的局部,被有意识做了扁平化处理,在视觉上削弱物体感,只保留抽象的几何形状。与之前不同的是,远处的山景与树林,则是直接描绘,强调形与质的塑造。分明是两种不同路径的语言,却又汇集在同一个画面中,彼此又不冲突——这种协调感从何而来,固然有画家绘画能力的原因,但更为重要的是,温一沛是将极简主义的实在主义,与央美油画传统对形质的客观性要求跳接在一起,从而使得自己的绘画成为了一种知觉与情境,从某种意义上说,整个展览的空间结构也加剧了这种“剧场效应”。

如果从体裁来看,温一沛描绘景观的画作大致可以归为“风景画”。之前提到的莱辛或者徐悲鸿,“历史画”才是他们眼中最高等级的绘画体裁,虽然身份、时代以及目标不同,但人的形象是他们话语的重心。显然,在温一沛的画中,人是一种缺席的形象,这种形象是由我们这些画外的观者来补位的。与西方油画不同,中国画传统分类是以山水画作为最高等级的体裁,自然作为一种”天理“的象征,是与人相合的。但我们眼前的画作,发电站作为一种理性之物占据在前景,而自然退后成为一种背景,这是一种现代化的景观:科学“公理”的理性形象正如徐悲鸿一辈人所期待的,已经横亘在我们与自然之间。然而,“真实”到底是什么?却不是温一沛绘画所能呈现的,亦如在西方绘画理论中,关于绘画的起源总是和“影子”与“幻觉”相伴的。温一沛所能回应的,就像庄子所说的”飞鸟之影“,眼前的静像,对于时空中的我们而言,是需要等待历史之光照向我们的那一刻。

 

Static Shadow: Wen Yipei Solo Exhibition

 TEXT | Wen Yipei

Rambling and seeing in the exhibition space, Wen Yipei resolved to make the rhythm of tour and gaze coincide there while the landscape paintings on the wall evoke the historical topic about painting, i.e. the boundary between spatial and temporal arts. The discussion about the difference between painting and poetry by Lessing, the 18th century-German art critic in his famous work Laocoon, is at least partially reasonable from the angle of symbolic economics, in the sense that the audience could look at the details again and again when they face the pictorial symbols that are juxtaposed in the canvas. Hence, painting is more convenient for representation while the continuous symbols of poetry elapse very easily, since poetry is communicated through voice. If poetry is obsessed with description, the audience will have to employ more intensive brain memory to remember these details. Thus, compared to painting, poetry is more suitable to express continuity such as movements, which fits for the physical essence of poetic media. Accordingly, on the exhibition site, the artworks in front of the audience unfold the spatial structure around a power station. Wen Yipei divides the tour into a group of static scenes with respective point of view, sight and sight distance. Just as taking a frame from motion pictures, the audience can move their attention and footsteps along with the artworks, then construct distinctive temporal-spatial structures caused by different tour paths. As it is known, the temporal-spatial structure is experienced by human kind as a whole. Wen Yipei seems to obey the “advice” of Lessing to emphasize the representative depiction though; he connects the fragmental space with the continuity of visiting exhibition and begins to recount his own “tour”. However, for Wen Yipei, is this exhibition merely a rhetoric game about formal structure?

Painting brush works as an anchor. Once it falls down, it will not stay on the surface of the pictorial sea. It will definitely hook onto the rocky protrusion underwater, which is the knowledge genealogy about painting that is accumulated in history. In comparison with the lively and vivid spindrift and ripple on the surface of water, the rock underwater is the location anchor through which we confirm the ideas of the artist. To this end, let us return to Lessing’s differentiation about poetry and painting. Actually, Lessing’s distinction of spatial and temporal arts is not as natural as he claimed, yet, it is an artificial definition. Not only did he consciously avoid the temporality of the painting process and the readability of poetry, he also implied an ideological value judgement in his texts. That is to say: painting imitates nature; painting is confined and is an artifact to satisfy the pleasure of eyes; painting produces idol worship and its “illusionary effects” require legal regulation; on the contrary, poetry stands for the rationality of human spirit and resists being materialized in the broader “temporal, discursive and historical fields”. Although as a protestant, Lessing’s opinions had its religious background, he straightforwardly opposed what he called the “hypocritical elegance” of painting poetry in France and the idol worship of Roman Catholic in France. Thus, beneath the seemingly fair principles, Lessing’s texts indicate the political and competitive relationship on the European cultural map. Nowadays, Lessing’s distinction of poetry and painting is replaced very early with the discussion about the relationship between image and word, which is not the comparison of different media in the classical period, but a modern semiotic issue. As an artist, why does Wen Yipei arise this old topic after almost 300 years? According to Walter Benjamin, “every image of the past that is not recognized by the present as one of its own concerns threatens to disappear irretrievably”. Conversely, this topic is relevant to us, or in other words, Wen Yipei’s solo show is the expression of the historical influence in his painting practice.

Here, we have to mention Xu Beihong Studio, where Wen Yipei studied painting in the Central Academy of Fine Arts (CAFA), the teaching of which is supposed to inherit directly from the tradition of true-life painting that Xu Beihong developed based on his thinking about “Scientific Fine Arts”. “Science” that Xu Beihong school emphasized in fact has twofold meanings: the reformation of worldview that considers materiality as the primary goal of painting practice and physical especially the technical norms that train the ability of profiling with concrete and rational methodology. The painting practice of Xu Beihong School has developed from his personal choice of artistic ideas into the national aesthetic paradigm of fine arts, from true-life painting to realism. In the historical context of salvation and enlightenment of modern China, Xu Beihong School indeed was able to integrate into the mobilization mechanism of modern states. In late 1920s, in the debate between Xu Beihong and Xu Zhimo about the value judgement and approach of Chinese fine arts, Xu Beihong also departed from the methods to stimulate the weak nationality and criticized the Western modern arts that Xu Zhimo promoted. Therefore, to some extent, Xu Beihong’s artistic career was an outcome of his political choice. While both Xu Beihong and Lessing have political concern, compared to Lessing’s expression, the true-life painting that Xu Beihong learnt from French classical painting is closer to a moral value. Just as when we talk about science, the utility would first of all calls to our mind, and that is far away from the idealism of Rationality and Truth that Lessing discussed. Perhaps, Xu Beihong had realized this, but the Western metaphysics, just as the painting of “Four Wangs” in Qing dynasty, could not bring any practical usefulness to the real plight that China face at that moment.

However, successors like Wen Yipei, can not avoid this parallax; especially when the agenda of the times have changed, how to understand and transform the legacy of the academic predecessors becomes an issue that we need to confront. Correspondingly, he has overseas artistic experience when he studied in USA. The fact is that his painting before this exhibition looks more conceptually Neo-Geo painting which depicts the interior space of modern architecture, with furniture and lamp decoration that have geometric shapes. The image is in-between abstract and figurative, but it has more emphasis on pictorial aspect than the Neo-Geo painting. In this sense, the structural methods of the last series still appear in his artworks in the exhibition. For instance, the architecture of the power station in the foreground is flattened consciously and reduced into an abstract geometric shape to undermine the sense of volume. What makes it different from his previous painting lies in his direct depiction of the mountain and forest in the background and his emphasis on the molding of form and matter. The two separate approaches of painting language converge in the same scene with no conflicts. The origins of this harmony sense of course owes to the painting ability of the artist. But more importantly, Wen Yipei combines the minimalist realism with objectivity that CAFA oil painting pursues, thereby makes his painting into a perception and situation, in a sense the entire spatial structure intensifies this “Theatrical Effect”.

With regards to genre, the artworks depicting scenery by Wen Yipei could be categorized as “Landscape Painting”. For Lessing or Xu Beihong, “History Painting” ranks the highest in the hierarchy of painting genres. Although they have different identities, they live in different times and have different goals, but for both of them, the human figure is the center of their discourse. Obviously, in Wen Yipei’s painting, human is represented as an absent image, which requires the Gestalt of the audience outside of the painting. In contrast with Western oil painting, landscape painting is the supreme genre in the categorization of traditional Chinese painting, whose philosophy believes in that nature as a symbol of “Heavenly Principle” is in accord with human. But look at the artworks in front of us, that the power station as a rational product occupies the foreground while the nature retreats into the background makes it a modernized landscape: the rational image of scientific “Axiom” that Xu Beihong and his contemporaries respected is lying in the place that seperates us from nature. However, what is “truth” on earth? That is not what Wen Yipei’s painting could present. The Western painting theory usually mentions “Shadow” or “Illusion” regarding the origins of painting. To respond, Wen Yipei could only refer to the “Static Shadow” proposed by Zhuangzi with these static images at a moment when we should wait for the light of history to illuminate us in the temporal-spatial structure.

 

 

温一沛

1988年生于河北秦皇岛

2008年毕业于中央美术学院附属中等美术学校

2012年毕业于中央美术学院油画系获学士学位

2014年毕业于美国Pratt Institute(普瑞特艺术学院)绘画系获硕士学位 现工作生活于北京

 

个展

2017 飞鸟之影,TongGallery+Projects,北京

2015 “幽明室”温一沛个展,Tong Gallery+Projects,北京

 

展览

2018

2018 釜山艺博会,釜山

有声儿,Tong Gallery + Projects,北京

2017

今日·未来-首届798青年艺术家提名展,贵阳798中心,贵阳

底色,UCCASTORE和 Dorm by UCCASTORE, 北京

见藏见长—中央美术学院美术馆藏毕业创作与近作对话展,中央美术学院美术馆,北京

世界史,当代唐人艺术中心,曼谷

我们何以成为我们,言午画廊,上海

2017 艺术深圳,深圳

2016

尤利西斯的凝视,今格艺术中心,北京

青年艺术100,北京农展馆,北京

温一沛 萧潇—凭空而起 有迹可循,五楼空间,广州

艺术北京,北京农业展览馆,北京

青衿计划,正观美术馆/关山月美术馆,北京/深圳

2015

青年艺术100,北京农展馆,北京

2014

Eye/画眼 温一沛;纪烨双人展,Pratt Institute(普瑞特艺术学院),纽约,美国

The Boiler Show, The Boiler Gallery, 纽约,美国

传承与前行央美师生邀请展,凤凰艺都美术馆,无锡

2013

Lunar Gala Show,哥伦比亚大学,纽约,美国

2012 中国未来-300青年艺术家,今日美术馆,北京,中国

千里之行优秀作品展,中央美术学院美术馆,北京,中国

中央美术学院本科生毕业作品展,中央美术学院地下展厅,北京,中国

2011

THE ART OF CUHK 2011 Oil Paintings of China Central Academy of Fine Arts(1994-2011),香港中文大学美术馆,香港,中国

中国油画院第二届油画新人展,中国油画院美术馆,北京,中国

中央美术学院在校生优秀作品展,中央美术学院地下展厅,北京,中国

 

 

Wen Yipei 温一沛

1988 Born in Hebei Province

2008 Graduated from the High School attached to China Central Academy of Fine Arts

2012 Graduated from the Oil Painting Department of China Central Academy of Fine Arts (CAFA)

with a bachelor degree

2014 Graduated from the Painting Department of Pratt Institute with a master degree

Currently works and lives in Beijing

 

Solo Exhibitions 

2017

Static Shadow, TongGallery+Projects, Beijing

2015

Visible  Invisible Spaces, TongGallery+Projects, Beijing

 

Group Exhibitions

2018

2018, Art Busan 2018, Busan

2018, Resonating, Tong Gallery + Projects, Beijing

2017

Today.Future- The First Exhibition for Nominated Young Artist, 798, Guiyang

Grounding, UCCASTORE AND Dorm by UCCASTORE, Beijing

Following Growth-The CAFA art museum graduate collection and recent works, The CAFA Art

Museum, Beijing

World History, Tang Contemporary Art, Bangkok

What makes us who we are, Xu Gallery, Shanghai

2017, Art Shenzhen, Shenzhen

2016

Ulysses’ Gaze, Ginkgo Art Center, Beijing

Art Nova 100, Beijing Agricultural Exhibition Hall, Beijing

Wen Yipei and Xiaoxiao—From space to space, 5art, Guangzhou

Art Beijing, National Agriculture Exhibition Center, Beijing

Elite Young Artists Program 2016, Zheng Guan Museum\ Guanshanyue Museum, Beijing\Shenzhen

2015

Art Nova 100, Beijing Agricultural Exhibition Hall, Beijing

2014

Two persons show “ Eye/画眼” with artist Ji Ye, Pratt Institute, New York

The Boiler Show, The Boiler Gallery, New York

CAFA faculties’ and student’s works, Phoenix Museum, Wuxi

2013

Lunar Gala show, Columbia University, New York

2012

The Young Artists 300, Today Art Museum, Beijing

The Start of a Long Journey, CAFA Art Museum, Beijing

Graduate exhibition, CAFA Ground Floor Gallery, Beijing

2011

THE ART OF CUHK 2011 Oil paintings of China Central Academy of Fine Arts (1994-2011), The Chinese University of HongKong, HongKong

“Dig and Discovery” the Second Chinese Oil Painting Exhibition of the Newcomers, Chinese   Academy of Oil Painting, Beijing

Works for excellence of CAFA, CAFA Ground Floor Gallery, Beijing