日本艺术家小山正从1990年代末一直致力于寻找一种关于当代东亚的视觉美学。为此他每年多次往返中国、日本和韩国，寻找他的同道，并再三地策划了很多次展览。我与他在横滨、釜山和上海也一起策划过多次大型展览。其中重要的巡回展是2000年的《东亚的位置——横滨、釜山、上海巡回展》，和已经持续到第三届的《“来自东亚之风”当代艺术巡回展》。
东亚有没有一种属于自己的视觉美学？这仍然是一个针对西方艺术史的问题。也许这个问题转变成“我们如何重新建构一种具有亚洲自我传承性的当代视觉”更有意义一点。“现代艺术”在中国是一个来自西方的概念，我更倾向于将中国的“现代艺术”称作为“现代艺术在中国的实践”。我想这个命题同样对日本和韩国也适用。
现代艺术在中国的实践到1990年代已经基本终结。“现代艺术”概念在中国的实践主要是媒介的引入和艺术的意识形态政治性的表现，它没有使中国的“现代艺术”找到与十九世纪以前的中国艺术传统在语言谱系上的联系，无论这种联系是继承性的还是反叛性的，实际上的还是虚构的。
以山水画为例，中国绘画传统实际上是一种“形制艺术”，而欧洲的“现代艺术”则是一种“反形制”艺术，两者实际上具有一种内在的根本差异和冲突。“现代艺术”在基本倾向上首先是以推翻艺术传统的整体性和思想基础为目标的；其次，“现代艺术”强调时代性、社会参与性以及人的情欲性的本能价值；另外，“现代艺术”强调脱离传统的语言谱系，重新引入新媒体。
从“形制”的绘画传统看，中国绘画传统是一种强调在固有图像形制的框架内在文人哲学和美学层次上进行的职业视觉游戏。这个游戏规定了一个基本的框架原则：1）保持基本的形式元素和图像系统，比如像山水画，每个时期只是在趣味和气质上可以进行基本的改变，其它方面不能有根本的变化；2）趣味和气质的变化可以在图像上有线条和物质形态的风格变化，但不能改变基本的图像形制；3）时代性主要体现在对于趣味和气质的影响，但时代的现场、事件和社会思想并不是表现主体。换而言之，一切时代性和人性转变的吸收都必须通过绘画整体的趣味和气质层次去表现，但这并不是说它必须去直接表现关于时代性和欲望的现实图像；4）这个游戏主要强调一种超时代性的文人境界。这个境界在哲学和美学上旨在一种综合的自我境界的表现，并且主要跟历史上属于这个体系的文人群体发生联系。
但中国绘画传统在图像形制上是一种不具有摄影性形态的形式化的哲学的图像，或者说，它实际上是一种哲学的视觉形制。西方古典油画即使是宗教绘画，它在哲学和宗教上与绘画图像实际上没有视觉形制化，或者说它没有像中国绘画传统那样在形式上本体化。这个问题是直到欧美现代艺术时期才开始解决的。
中国绘画从十三世纪到十八世纪这一段时期没有像欧洲那样表现出强烈地反叛或者推翻传统整体性的愿望，一方面可能是因为作为文人身份的画家不像欧洲早期城市职业画家或者宫廷画师那样有着急切的经济目的，他们的性欲和情欲也很容易满足，因此也无需在画面上体现情欲和经济等级带来的表现冲动。但另一个更内在的原因，则可能在于中国绘画的形制模式在思想性和个人表现性方面是开放性的，但这个传统实际上是拒绝时代性凌驾于超时代的超验的文人境界之上的，而整个中国绘画传统向现代的转向，本质上是一个吸收现代性的问题，并且应该去维持一个超历史的群体传统。也就是说，这个传统中每个画家的时代性差异不太重要，他们只是约定爬同一座山，爬的时间和方式不同，高度不同，仅此而已。
因此，东亚的当代艺术如果要在语言具有原创力量，仍然必须保持这个地区的艺术传统在语言上的基本传承性。东亚的当代艺术当然可以不断的变换山头爬山，但这个地区的艺术精英仍然应该坚持长期爬一座山，这座山应该在我们自己本土。
在这次展览中，小山正和上海美术馆的肖小兰选择的众多作品有一个基本的视觉特征，那就是重新继承了东亚艺术传统中“安静”的视觉，这种安静表现为对于个人日常性的一种对于对象的“凝视”，从而发现这个对象基本的视觉形式。这种形式又恰当的使用了当代艺术的形式，比如摄影、丝网版画，铜版画，平面数码印刷等。
这个展览反映出一种中日韩艺术家重新回到内心凝视和这种凝视所需要的安静的存在方式。这种凝视当然不可能在当代重新回到一种绝对安静的内心传统，这是现代性对于个人影响的一个结果。但这种逐渐有些骚动不安的静默和凝视至少形成一种当代艺术的视觉张力。
“Wind From East Asia”, Contemporary Art Exhibition(III)
By Zhu Qi
The Japanese artist Oyama Tadashi keeps searching the visual aesthetics which can represent the contemporary art of East Asia. So he travels between China, Japan and Korea to look for his partners and held many exhibitions in the three countries. I worked with him to hold several large-scale exhibitions in Yokohama, Busan and Shanghai. The most important travelling exhibition is the <The Location of East Asia—Travelling Exhibition in Yokohama, Busan and Shanghai >.
Does East Asia have its own visual aesthetics? It is a question to compare with the western art history. Maybe we can transfer this question into “how to reconstruct the contemporary vision in the traditional Asian style”, it can be more meaningful. “Modern Art” is a concept channeled from the western countries. I am more inclining to name China’s “Modern Art” as “the practice of contemporary art in China”. I think the name both suits that in Japan and Korea.
The practice of modern art in China ended around 1990s. The practice of “Modern Art” in China is mainly about the introduction of media and ideological behavior of politics, it didn’t help China’s “Modern Art” find its connection with the Chinese traditional art before the 19th century, no matter such connection is successive or rebellious, practical or imaginary.
Take the landscape painting as an example, Chinese traditional painting is actually a kind of “System Art”, while Europe’s “Modern Art” is a kind of “anti-structure”. There is a rooted difference and conflict between the two systems. First of all, “Modern Art” aims to overthrow the traditional art’s integrity and theory. Secondly, “Modern Art” puts focus on modernity, social participation and value of instinctive ardor. In addition, “Modern Art” emphasizes on its abandon from the traditional art language and introduces new media.
Talking about the “System Art” of art tradition, Chinese traditional painting emphasizes on visual structure on the level of intellectual philosophy and aesthetics. Thus Chinese painting sets up a basic frame of principle: 1) Maintain the basic shape and visual system. For example, the landscape painting just gives some changes in taste and sentiment, it is impossible to see changes in other ways; 2) The change in taste and sentiment just leads to diversification in lines and shapes, but it won’t change the basic structure; 3) the modernity is mainly reflected in the affects to the taste and sentiment, but the environment, event and social ideology of the era is not the highlight. In other words, all the transformation of era and humanity must be reflected through the integral taste and sentiment of the painting, but it does not mean that it must directly reflect the actual image of modernity and ardor; 4) The principle mainly emphasizes on the intellectual spirit. Such intellectual spirit aims to reflect a kind of ego spirit, which is also relative with the intellectual groups in the history.
But Chinese traditional painting’s visual system art is not like the photographic image, or we can say, it is actually a kind of philosophic visual structure. The western classical oil painting, even its religious paintings, never carried the kind of philosophical or religious significance, in other words, Western classical art never held to the noumenon. The problem only started to be solved in the modern art period in Europe and America.
From 13rd century to 18th century, Chinese painting didn’t show the rebellion against tradition as strong as the European art. On the one hand, artists who were also intellectuals didn’t pursue economic profit as hard as those earlier professional artists or artists working for the royal family in Europe. Their ardor and sexuality were also satisfied easily. So it was no necessary to reflect the impulse brought by ardor and economic class. On the other hand, which is more important is that, maybe Chinese painting was more open to represent individual ideology. The whole Chinese painting’s transfer to modernity, is a process of absorbing modernity, it is a must to maintain a group’s tradition which goes beyond the history. In other words, artist’s diversity is not so important, they just decide to climb onto the mountain, but the time, way and height can be different.
So if East Asia’s contemporary art wants to have its original power, it must keep the region’s tradition. Of course, the East Asia’s contemporary art can climb onto different mountains, but the elite artists in the region should persist in climbing the same mountain, and the mountain should be located in the region.
In this exhibition, works by Oyama Tadashi and Xiao Xiaolan from Shanghai Art Museum have a basic visual character: inheriting the “peaceful” vision in the traditional art of East Asia. Such “peace” representing the gaze during a person’s daily life, after gazing, the visual image has been found. It also applies proper forms of contemporary art which include photography, silk screen, etching and digital print etc.
The exhibition shows that all the artists from China, Japan and Korea begin to gaze at their heart again, they also find the existence of peace which is the precondition of the gaze. Such gaze is certainly impossible to return to a traditional extreme peace, it is a result of modernity affecting the individual. But such slightly chaotic peace and gaze at least form a visual power of contemporary art.