Ten Miles Away 十里遠
“No stone looks alike at ten paces, yet mountains all look alike from ten miles away.� --- Han Zhuo (Song dynasty)
「石無十步真，山有十里遠」——韓拙（宋）
Contents 目錄
Balancing the Books 平衡·書 Barbara Pollack
The Evolving Perception of Objects 格物之變 Xu Lei 徐累
The Rules and Attractions of Jiehua: The New Jiehua of Peng Jian 法度與趣味——彭劍的新界畫
6 32 52
Chen Yan 陳研
About Peng Jian 關於彭劍
86
Balancing the Books Barbara Pollack
We live in an information age where books and newspapers seem old-fashioned and out-of-date in comparison to the surplus of digital media flooding our brains. With Weibo and WeChat, blogs and infomercials, television and social media, modern viewers are tasked with the responsibility to sort out fact from fiction, to find a corner of beauty in our busy, cluttered lives. It is just this sort of respite that the artist Peng Jian creates for us with his lovely paintings of domestic interiors, landscapes assembled from books, shelves, tables and Rubik’s Cubes. Deceptively simple, these rudimentary arrangements are highly sophisticated balancing acts composed of precarious accumulations which would fall apart if even one element tumbled out of place. Peng Jian’s paintings do not merely depict balancing acts, they are feats of balance themselves. Weighing the long history of Chinese painting against the more recent history of western abstraction, the artist manages to allow each legacy its place within each of his artworks. It is not an easy arrangement, given the somewhat contentious history between the two cultures, where guohua (Chinese-style painting) and xihua (western-influenced art) are sometimes seen in opposition to each other. Even within the relatively new field of contemporary ink art, Peng Jian holds a special place. Rather than merely combining east-west influences, he subtly mixes the two, coming up with a unique expression that is all his own. Born in 1982, Peng Jian manages to harmonize several different strains of art within his paintings because he is thoroughly educated in the history of each of his influences. As both an undergraduate and pursuing a master’s degree at the China Academy of Fine Art, he specialized in Chinese painting, learning the intricacies of 6
ink painting not only as technique but also as the embodiment of evolving philosophies from one dynasty to the next. But he also spent a great deal of time at the academy’s library, pooling over catalogues of western masters, most particularly Piet Mondrian and Kazimir Malevich, groundbreaking artists who invented abstract art. In both traditions, Peng Jian viewed art as a kind of time machine, taking him back to formative periods. He studied the paintings not to learn about composition or form, but to absorb different ways of seeing the world, framed by the historic circumstances of their creation. Throughout it all, Peng Jian has made interesting choices about his influences. For example, rather than merely revere literati painting or calligraphic expressionism, he has undertaken techniques from jiehua, or ruled-line ink painting, that originated in the Southern Song dynasty (1127 -1279). Deriving from a long tradition of architectural drawing, jiehua is the only nonfreehand style of Chinese painting involving the use of a specially designed brush that could move smoothly along a groove in a ruler, allowing the artist to draw consistently even, straight lines. Following in this tradition, Peng Jian uses a ruler to frame out his geometric compositions. But rather than merely adopt this technique as an easy tribute to the past, he links this innovation to the experiments in suprematism and neoplasticism from early 20th century abstraction. This creates a tension between representation and nonrepresentational art, as jiehua was a means to depict specific architectural landscapes, and abstraction rejects such illustrative realism. These two seemingly oppositional strains of art are therefore brought together in Peng Jian’s paintings, allowing the viewer to both see realistic elements and experience an overall nearly abstract, geometric composition.
This is precisely the complex aesthetic experience that the artist wants to achieve, as he has said in his own words, “I define different objects in a limited space – I do so not just to depict a specific image, but by harnessing symbolism, I wish to express the hidden, profound meaning.” He views his compositions, which are often jam-packed with information, as minimalist works, drawing the viewer into the meditative and repetitive actions of the artist. The forms themselves do not necessarily convey meaning. For example, there are no titles or author’s names on the bindings of the books on view. He does not wish for you to read these books, but to witness the relationships between the volumes, to reflect on their hard-earned stillness, a serenity difficult to achieve in contemporary life. So while Peng Jian’s technique owes a great debt to jiehua painting, his overall compositions are highly influenced by western art’s treatment and appreciation of the grid. Throughout 20th century modernist art, understanding of the grid, that is ruled-checkerboard like compositions, has dominated artists’ treatments of abstract space. As explained by renowned art historian Rosalind Krauss, the grid is “a structure that has remained emblematic of the modernist ambition.” In its replication of framing devices – the picture frame, the camera viewfinder – the grid both is a structure to be viewed and a method for organizing other diversified forms. “The grid’s mythic power,” Krauss asserts, “is that it makes us able to think we are dealing with materialism (or sometimes science, or logic) while at the same time it provides us with a release into belief (or illusion, or fiction).” Krauss could be speaking of Peng Jian’s paintings with these words as he himself has described his work as minimalist. “The reason why I chose to adopt a mechanical
and artificial method of composition is because I think it is a more direct way of conveying an artist’s concept,” he says, adding, “It’s like the way that Ming dynasty furniture is predetermined by a fixed and artificial design – of course you can say that method can be found in western abstraction as well.” It is Peng Jian’s talent that allows him to find the through-thread from Ming furniture to western abstraction, a continuity that would be lost on a more casual observer. Rather than view these traditions as oppositional, he sees a continuity in their approaches to form, not based on external elements of design, but on a philosophy that seeks to encapsulate a worldview within simple geometry.
Books in Search of an Author 無名之書 (2013)
But, of course, on first glance, Peng Jian’s paintings do not look like minimalist works. Take, for example, his 2013 composition, Books in Search of an Author. Here, a stack of books piled high appears against a field of triangle-covered wallpaper. The bindings of the books are individualized, differentiated by worn-marks and tears along their sides with pages revealed to be stained and soiled. The tower of books would be almost symmetrical except it is caught off-kilter by a pair of boxed sets in blue, weighing the arrangement down on the far left. Barely balanced and difficult to take in as a whole, the overall form would be clumsy if it did not fit together so precisely. It is in sharp contrast to his more recent 2016 painting, Pinnacle, in which piles of magazines and catalogues nearly levitate off bulky orange boxes, topped at the peak with a child’s geometric plaything. This work pops off the bright green background and appears to spring into action. Here, the books are not laying still but are moving through space, precariously close to toppling over.
Mirror Mountain, 2016, presents a landscape of books, practically a cityscape with piles of
7
manuscripts as skyscrapers. Another artist, especially one steeped in guohua, would seek to imitate a scholar’s study, a serene library punctuated with scholar’s rocks and perhaps a tea set. Instead, here Peng Jian greets us with a hoarder’s field day of printed materials, stacks upon stacks, with no discernible order. It is for us, the viewers, to instill order on this cacophony of rectangles, to try to discern patterns within this overall chaotic schema. All that holds this scene together is the bright band of blue at the top, representing a background wall, and the bold strip of yellow at the bottom. With works like these, Peng Jian demands a comparison to Piet Mondrian whose geometric compositions defied representation, yet conveyed the energy and vitality of the metropolitan grid. In his groundbreaking essay on the occasion of the landmark Mondrian retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City in 1994, curator Hans Jannsen declared, “To Mondrian’s way of thinking, the perpendicular position of straight lines and flat colours is the most balanced, pure and therefore absolute point of departure in a visual art that concentrates on its own means of expression. He sees this systematic position of lines and planes as being dictated by universal harmony.” Or in quoting Mondrian’s own words, this is the primal relationship, in which “...the utmost one and the utmost other is expressed in perfect harmony and contains all other relationships.” Similarly, Peng Jian is seeking a harmonic convergence in his disparate elements, a moment when sheer concentration (in both the act of art making and the act of viewing) provides a sense of serenity within a frenetic reality. Peng Jian is not afraid to experiment with quite challenging compositions as in his painting of off-balanced objects, Played 8
Out, 2016. In this work, a tumbling Rubik’s Cube stands catty-corner on a bold blue book, perhaps a dictionary, against a gold dense background. The pair is framed by an incongruous black shadow, so flat that it does not add a whiff of three-dimensionality to the scene. Instead, it cloaks the shapes in a dramatic form, as all three – book, cube and shadow – are rendered as individual and equal elements in a nonsensical nonreality. Likewise, in the equally difficult work, Balance of Power, 2016, two individual stacks of books are housed within a pair of boxes, one blue and one green, thrown together in a juxtaposition that defies perspective. Again, black is used to both create a shadow and frame the forms. This is a highly contemporary work challenging the authority of the grid by flattening the space and setting up a configuration that could only take place in a painting. This work informs viewers that if they think they are looking at a painting about books, they are sorely mistaken. They are looking at a painting about painting, not a picture of a study or a library. With works like this one, Peng Jian demonstrates a strong relationship to a number of western contemporary artists, despite divergent motivations. For example, his use of books, an outdated yet cherished mode of communication, echoes the predominance of antiquated devices in the work of Michael Craig Martin. With similar use of simplified lines and bright colors, Craig Martin eschews overt expression of emotion in his work, yet his gallery of used cell phones, computers and CD players are almost funereal in his obsession with outmoded technology. Likewise, there is an affinity between Peng Jian’s emphasis on relationships in his work and the Neo-Geo vocabulary of American artist Peter Halley. Halley employs blank
rectangles and stripes in bright Dayglo colors to address the social structures of contemporary life in a series of images that he describes as “prisons” and “cells.” His use of lines as conduits between various rectangular shapes mimic the look of computer circuitry yet can also be read as an interpretation of the claustrophobia of life in major metropolitan cities. Similarly, Peng Jian does not want you to think his work is about the objects he depicts but rather should be viewed as relationships between geometric forms. His desktop still lives can be viewed as cityscapes from afar, meditations on the space that both separates and connects people in contemporary social settings. Peng Jian’s formidable talents reach their apotheosis in his latest work, Standing in Line, 2017. This work is a triptych in which each vertical painting is divided into six subsections. Each section depicts a different pile of books, captured from different perspectives and distances. In the bottom far left, a stack of five multicoloured volumes fill its frame, with a pile of children’s Legos behind it. In the middle panel, magazines fill one frame while a group of heavy tombs weigh it down from the frame above. On the far right, four wide books with bright turquoise covers form a platform for other books and building blocks. Up close, this is a jumble of shapes, of rectangles abutting squares, painted flatly without dimensionality. From afar, however, this work is a study in multiple perspectives allowing viewers to see and compare differences among similar entities.
might see books as a metaphor for human activity, like a city overcrowded with people compartmentalized into cells. But for Peng Jian, the meaning can be found in the challenges he faced making the work, the absolute concentration it took for him to create the geometric configurations, draw them out with a ruler and bring them to life with paint. He is bringing viewers into his process with this painting and letting them share his problem-solving. There is an imposed serenity in his artificially constrained composition, but also quirkiness, anxiety, even violence lurking beneath the surface. Perhaps the best way to “read” a painting by Peng Jian is to imagine if any one of its elements were moved out-of-place. By shifting the books in our minds, or removing one from the carefully defined stacks, the entire composition would tumble to the ground. It is this element of suppressed chaos that is key to these paintings and gives them a vitality and vigour. For the artist, these paintings represent a conquest over the many distractions and anxieties he experiences in the process of making the works. For us, the viewers, we can allow these paintings to help us review the distractions in our own lives and bring us back to a perilous sense of order.
It would be easy to read in a meaning to this work, especially at a time when so many of us are dealing with a deluge of information. Another artist might have been referring precisely to such media overload with this work or mourning the demise of printed matter. Or another artist 9
平衡·書 Barbara Pollack
我們所生活的信息時代，是一個被電子媒體 所充斥的時代。相比之下，書籍和報紙這類 的媒介則顯得老舊而過時。來自微博、微信 和博客之類的社交媒體以及電視上的商業 信息讓我們應接不暇。現代的讀者們不得不 自己在信息的洪流裡辨識真偽，在擁擠忙碌 的生活中尋找散落在微小角落裡的點點美 麗。彭劍的作品所關注的正是這些細小的美 麗。他作品中有對室內靜物的描繪，也有以 書籍，書架，桌子和魔方組成的風景地貌。 這些構圖看似簡單直白，但其中構建出的整 體平衡卻是十分精妙複雜的，牽一髮而動全 身。只要微微改動一處，整幅圖畫的結構便 會分崩離析。 彭劍的作品不單單是對平衡的描繪，更是一 種對平衡狀態內化的結果。中西兩種藝術文 化風格在彭劍的身上達到了完美的融合。歷 史悠久的中國繪畫藝術和近現代的西方抽象 藝術在他的作品中交相輝映。要讓這兩種如 此不同的文化內核合而為一並不是一件容易 的事。因為國畫和西畫的風格是如此不同， 在某些方面甚至是相向而行的。彭劍的這一 創舉讓他在新興的當代水墨藝術領域享有獨 特的地位。他所做的絕不是簡單的中西畫法 的疊加，而是從對二者的巧妙融合中自成一 派。 彭劍生於1982年。他扎實的藝術功底令他 能夠自如地融合不同派別的繪畫技巧。他在 中國美術學院完成了自己本科和碩士的學 習。他對於國畫的研究不單單局限於對手 法技巧的學習，更是對其中所蘊含的歷朝歷 代積累演化的深厚哲學理念的思考。與此同 時，他也花了很長時間在國美的圖書館中博 覽西方美術大師的作品，尤其是那些劃時 代的抽象派畫家，比如皮特·蒙德里安(Piet Mondrian)和卡濟米爾·馬列維奇(Kazimir Malevich)。彭劍在兩種傳統之間自由轉化， 如乘坐時光穿梭機一般。他對這些傳統的學 習已突破了純粹的對技巧的掌握，而是在瞭 解它們形成時期的歷史文化背景的基礎上， 將它們內化成為自己獨有的世界觀。 融匯貫通的文化背景和個人思考造就了彭劍 獨特的風格。他並沒有單一地只選擇歷史悠 10
久的文人畫，或是書法表現藝術，而是選擇 採用界畫的手法。界畫源自南宋(1127-1279)， 是一種使用尺子和水墨的繪畫技巧。它最初 被應用於建築繪畫，是國畫中唯一一種非徒 手繪畫的風格。作畫時，界畫畫家需要用一 種特製的畫筆，對應尺子上的凹槽，以此畫 出標準的直線。依照這一傳統，彭劍藉助尺 子來描繪作品的幾何構圖。但這並不僅僅是 為了懷舊。他將這一傳統技法與20世紀抽象 派的至上主義與新造型主義的實驗創新結合 起來。這種手法所表現出的寫實與抽象之間 的張力與界畫的表現手法相似。同樣的，界 畫也拒絕寫實的手法，而是用建築和抽象的 表現形式來描繪山水。由此，彭劍將兩種看 似截然不同的藝術手法結合起來，讓觀者得 以在觀賞寫實的元素的時候也體會到畫作整 體上的抽象的幾何構圖。 而這種複雜的美學感受正是彭劍所追求的。 他曾說：「我在有限的空間裡定義不同的物 體，而非簡單的描述。我想用這種有節制的 象徵主義來表達一種潛在的深遠含義。」儘 管他作品的構圖蘊含了豐富的信息，但彭劍 強調自己的作品追求的是極簡主義，致力將 觀者的注意力轉移至畫家的沉思和重複的動 作上。作品的表現形式不一定蘊含深意。比 如說，作品中的書籍上並沒有標題或作者的 名字。畫家並不希望觀者去閱讀畫中的書 籍，而是去感受書與書之間的關係，去反思 它們所呈現的微妙的平衡，一種在當代生活 中難以實現的平靜。 儘管彭劍的作品所運用的手法很大程度上來 源於界畫，他總體的構圖思想則呼應了西方 繪畫中對於網格邊界的處理和鑒賞。從20世 紀起，這種棋盤式的構圖，在現代藝術對於 抽象空間的理解中一直佔據統治地位。正如 知名藝術史學家羅薩琳德·克勞斯(Rosalind Krauss)所言，網格是一種「展現現代主義 雄心的結構」。這種重複出現的圖像框架結 構，近似於相機的取景器，一方面是被觀察 的物品，一方面也可以被用於組織其他的表 現形式。「網格有一種神秘的力量」，克勞 斯說：「一方面它提供了一種唯物主義（或 者說科學或邏輯學）的視角；另一方面，它 也給了我們信念的釋放（或者說是幻想和虛
構的）。」 彭劍對自己作品的評價與克勞斯的看法相 似。他形容自己的作品是極簡主義風格： 「我之所以採用這種機械化和人為刻意的手 法來構圖，是因為我覺得通過這種方式，藝 術家可以更加直接地傳達自己想法。」他還 補充說：「這就好像在明代的家具是根據一 種特定的模式設計的，你一定也可以在那種 設計中找到西方現代抽象主義的影子。」彭 劍的獨具慧眼就在於他可以洞察明代家具設 計與西方現代抽象主義之間的、難以被察覺 的潛在關聯。他關注的不是這些傳統之間設 計層面的溝壑之分，而是它們在哲學層面的 相連性，一種深藏於簡單幾何構成之中的世 界觀。 儘管如此，彭劍的作品一眼望去並不像是極 簡主義風格。比如他2013年的作品《無名之 書》(Books in Search of an Author)，一 摞書籍堆得高高的，與其後面的三角形墻紙 形成強烈對比。每一本書，或是書脊上有一 些磨損痕跡，或是書頁間有些隱約的污漬， 每一本書也因此都與眾不同，各有特色。一 對藍色的盒裝書將這座「書塔」本身的平衡 打破，並將圖畫的重心移到了畫的左邊。整 幅畫顯得搖搖欲墜。雖然如此，畫面中物體 之間精確的協調讓這幅畫不會顯得笨拙。這 和他2016年的作品《疊翠》(Pinnacle)呈鮮 明對比。在《疊翠》中，儘管橙色的盒子使 得放在上面堆積成山的雜誌和手冊以及「山 頂」上的兒童幾何玩具看上去好像是浮在空 中一般，這一主題部分在鮮亮綠色的背景裡 呼之欲出。在這幅作品里，書籍並不是靜止 的，而是一本疊一本，搖搖欲墜地穿越時 空。 《山外山》( Mirror Mountain ) 創作於2016 年，是一幅由書籍組成的風景畫，其實特別 突出的是一座書籍構成的摩天大樓。其他鍾 愛國畫的藝術家都傾向於描繪學者們的書 房，主題大多是怪石嶙峋，或是茶藝用具， 以追求一種靜謐的效果。然而彭劍的作品呈 現給我們的卻是書房主人成堆的書籍藏品， 並沒有一個整齊劃一的模式。觀者要親自從 這些書籍中建構一個模式，在混亂中尋找規
律。構圖中將這一片混亂聚攏在一處的，是 作品上方的一條明亮的藍色色塊，以及下方 的黃色粗線條。 這樣的風格讓人自然聯想起藝術家皮特·蒙德 里安 (Piet Mondrian)。蒙德里安的幾何構圖 顛覆了以往的表現手法，與此同時又展現了 現代都市的力量與活力。紐約現代藝術博物 館館長漢斯·傑森 (Hans Jannsen)，在他一 篇為蒙德里安回顧展覽而寫的開創性文章中 如此評價這位藝術家：「在蒙德里安的思維 模式中，垂直的直線和單一的色塊是最完美 和純粹的平衡，因此，他也認定這應該是視 覺藝術在尋求突破自我的表達方式中不二的 突破點。他將這種系統化的線面組合視為一 種對普世和諧的表現。」借用蒙德里安自己 的話，這種最本質的關係中「最為疏遠的個 體與他者之間的關係達到了最完美的平衡， 並由此包容了其它所有關係。」彭劍在其作 品中所追尋的與蒙德里安所謂的和諧的匯集 十分相似。他們所追求的，都是一種高度的 精神集中，對於作畫的藝術家和欣賞作品的 觀者都一樣。這種專注在紛繁世事中給我們 所帶來一絲寧靜。
Played Out 奏 (2016)
彭劍從不畏懼嘗試具有挑戰性的構圖，以描 繪不平衡的物體。他2016年的作品《奏》 ( Played Out ) 就是一個很好的例子。在這 幅作品裡，一個魔方搖搖欲墜地立在一邊的 對角線。下面是一本厚厚的藍色的書，可能 是一本字典。背景是濃厚的金色。而兩個物 體被一圈不整齊的黑色陰影包圍。這些陰影 部分過於平面，以至於並不能為構圖增加立 體感，卻給畫作帶來一種戲劇性的衝突。畫 中的三個獨立而平等的元素，書籍，方塊， 和陰影，共同構建出一個荒謬的「非現實」 (non-reality)。另外一個同樣具有挑戰性的 作品是彭劍2016年的 《均勢》 (Balance of Power)，畫中呈現的是一對盒子，一藍一 綠，每個盒子各自有一摞書。畫作整體的構 圖顛覆了傳統的透視畫法。黑色的陰影也同 樣製造出包裹物體的效果。這是一種非常現 代的手法，挑戰了網格的權威。空間感被平 面化取代，從而實現了一種只有在繪畫中才 可能達成的結構組合。它給觀者傳達的訊息 是：不要誤以為自己在看的是一幅關於書籍 11
的繪畫，這其實是一幅是關於繪畫本身的作 品，而非一張書房或圖書館的照片。 儘管主旨各異，但彭劍這一系列的作品展現 出和西方當代藝術千絲萬縷的聯繫。比如 說，書籍這種老舊卻又依然備受珍視的媒介 是他畫作中常見的主題。這與愛爾蘭藝術 家邁克爾·克雷格·馬丁（Michael CraigMartin ）對於老舊物件的鍾愛有異曲同工之 妙。馬丁擅長使用簡化的線條和明亮的色彩 來淡化作品中激烈的情感表達。他對於舊手 機，電腦和CD播放器大量的描繪更是他對於 過時科技近乎於哀悼的執著。 除此之外，彭劍作品中對於關係的強調也與 美國藝術家彼得·哈雷 (Peter Halley) 的新幾 何主義 (Neo-Geo) 畫風不謀而合。哈雷善 於運用方形框架與日光螢光色塊來構圖，並 以此種組合來象徵當代生活的社會結構。他 將這種構圖稱為是「監獄」或是「牢房」。他 用線條來連結方塊，以模仿電路集成板的構 造。這種構圖也可以被理解為是對當代大城 市給人們帶來的幽閉恐懼的詮釋。同樣的， 對彭劍的作品的解讀也不應局限於其所描繪 的物品本身，而應當著眼於構圖中幾何體之 間的關係。在彭劍的作品中，桌面上的靜物 可以被看成是對城市景觀的遠景描繪，是畫 家對於空間的深思熟慮的結果。他的作品在 將人從當代社會生活空間之中抽離出來的同 時，在兩者之間建立新的聯繫。 彭劍驚人的才華在他2017年最新的作品《靜 置》(Standing in Line) 中登峰造極。在這個 三幅一聯的作品中，每一幅又分六格。每一 格中各有從不同角度和距離描繪的一摞書。 在左邊作品下角的格中有五本彩色的書，書 後面是一個兒童樂高玩具。中間那一幅作 品中，下面的格被一摞雜誌擠得滿滿的，而 且還被上面一格的書籍重重的壓著。在右邊 有四本很厚的書，最上面一本的封面是藍綠 色的。從近距離觀看，整組作品好像一堆雜 亂的圖形，矩形連著正方形。畫面構圖很平 面，沒有什麼立體感。然後從遠處欣賞就會 發現，這幅作品是對不同視覺角度的探索， 為的是讓觀者可以從多個角度對比感受類似 相似的物體。 12
生活在如今這樣一個信息泛濫的時代，我們 不難領悟彭劍作品中的深意。其他的畫家也 許已經在類似的作品中提及過這種媒體過剩 的問題，或是哀悼過印刷行業的衰微，亦或 者也已經嘗試過將書本當做是人類活動的象 徵，例如擁擠城市將人類像細胞一樣分割開 來。但對於彭劍而言，其作品的意義還在於 繪畫製作的過程。這種幾何的構圖需要絕對 的專注，用尺子勾勒出線條，再用色彩賦予 線條以生機。他將觀者帶入到自己的繪畫過 程，並由此向他們分享自己對上述問題的解 決方式。他在人為刻意的構圖中嵌入了一種 寧靜。然而在寧靜的表面下，暗流湧動著的 是離奇，焦慮，甚至是暴力的感官。 或許，「閱讀」彭劍作品的最好方式是想 象。觀者需要想象若是構圖中某一元素突然 移位會帶來的效果。當我們在心中移動那些 精心規劃設計的靜物時，整幅構圖的平衡就 會分崩離析。作品力量的來源是一種充滿生 氣的抑制混亂的力量。對於藝術家而言，那 是他抗擊作畫過程中的紛擾和焦慮的戰利 品；對於觀者而言，彭劍的作品幫助我們重 新審視存在於生活中的干擾，並引導我們再 次找回那種岌岌可危的秩序感。
13
Pinnacle 疊翠 2016 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 212 x 121 cm
14
15
16
Standing in Line 靜置 2017 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 142 x 360 cm
Balance of Power 均勢 2016 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 141 x 118 cm
18
19
No Rules Apply 不規則遊戲 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 121 x 113 cm
20
21
22
Ordered 就位 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣纸水墨設色 124 x 58 cm
Spyhole 窺 2016 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 99 x 82 cm
24
25
No Comment 置否 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 75 x 71 cm
Slight 輕微 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 79 x 69 cm
28
Mirror Mountain 山外山 2016 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 220 x 109 cm
Books in Search of an Author 無名之書 2013 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 99 x 97.5 cm
30
31
The Evolving Perception of Objects Xu Lei
The boundary of a painting is vital. The first thing a confident artist does, when looking at a canvas or paper, is to adjudicate that field of emptiness. Starting off from the centre, where to stop... the tiniest change has an enormous impact. To a painter, to a work, limitation also means restriction; and to organize the space appropriately necessitates the involvement of imagination, coherence and tension. Peng’s paintings visualize books in latitude and longitude, creating lines, volume, combination and intersection. This supposedly monotonous visualization turns into an undulating playfulness, a distinctive style, different from other contemporary Chinese gongbi paintings. Nevertheless, on concluding the painting, the artist encounters a moderate difficulty: a problem of the boundary, where a painting must engage in diplomatic relations with its surroundings. In short, how to frame such a painting? While this might sound like an insignificant matter, it is actually quite the opposite. A frame is not only the end/cessation of work, but also the beginning of the show. If the choice of the frame is erroneous, the painting may appear disruptive – past models do not seem to be helpful for the question of framing Peng’s work. The full stop of a painting is its frame. It is also the frontier guard of the boundary between the painting and its surroundings, simultaneously emphasizing the illusory sovereignty of the content of the painting and protecting its spirit. Western paintings, especially before the twentieth century, were often scenes of religious meaning. They were divinely framed in a “window,” with the audience peeking and observing 32
from the outside. The frames thus naturally turned into the decoration of the windows, and paintings became mirrors of the exterior. Conversely, Chinese traditional painting is accustomed to offering multiple points of entry and a rolling perspective, allowing eyes to wander freely through the image. The mounting methods of the vertical hanging scroll or hand scroll were therefore invented, allowing a continuous visual imagination without the disruption of excessive decoration. The empty space of the painting and its surroundings merge, stretch and spread out seamlessly: no longer a simple object in a mirror, but a realm of mirage. These are two different types of presentation; strictly speaking, neither of these approaches to framing fit Peng’s artworks perfectly. Peng’s books may be described as still life. The single perspective, also known as “focus perspective,” like looking at each other across a window, is often applied in this genre. However, Peng’s structural presentation is different. He abandoned the perspective of western still life paintings, and directly borrowed the traditional Chinese painting perspective (the 45 degree angle). The characteristics of this method are the aerial viewpoint, the flattened diagonals of objects and the drift from the centre, extending infinitely to both sides. The vanishing point is on the outside rather on the inside. On recognizing this Chinese influence, it becomes almost impossible to put Peng’s works and the western perspective in the same category, therefore, applying an ordinary framing approach to Peng’s work will only seem out of place. Of course, for Peng’s early works, this is not
a problem. At the beginning, the window formed the thrust of the painting, whether as foreground or background; and the books were only a supporting act resting in a corner. Later, the windows vanished, the Chinese traditional perspective was diligently applied, and the books were promoted in importance, becoming a bookish landscape of mountain and sea. This is not common in literati painting, but was often a feature of larger, decorative scrolls in ancient times. Hence, although Peng uses the compositional methods of traditional painting, he does not follow its subject matter. There is nothing novel about Peng doing still life painting (which was common in the past, particularly in the Qing dynasty), but he does not seek its associations with nature, life and aspirations of humanity, focusing instead on the physical shapes. Peng has subverted traditional Chinese still life paintings. He eliminates the original meaning of the book, draws all the attention to its form, presenting a rhythm composed of its decorative qualities, varying density and spines. Therefore, Peng’s still life painting is not purely symbolic, nor an exact depiction of reality, but a celebration of the object itself, and the physical order. In a fundamental deviation from the past, Peng has energized those beautiful lines of traditional painting. Employing aspects of the meticulous technique of jiehua, Peng makes the structure tough and uncompromising. Peng has avoided the rhetorical thrust of literati painting, and all the subject matter is unrelated to classical inspiration and symbolism. In other words, Peng’s works are no longer those poetic still life paintings we are used to.
Thus, in terms of depicting reality and the illusion of vision, Peng’s theme is clear, but his work remains ambiguous. It is hard to define Peng’s work, since his form of painting is familiar yet unfamiliar. This brings us back to the problem of framing that we discussed earlier, and the optimal solution remains unfound. People familiar with the history of art know that, at the beginning of the twentieth century, modern art was influenced by formalist approaches, represented by Malevich’s suprematism and Mondrian’s abstract geometrics; graphic art was no longer aiming for realistic representation, but the interplay of complementary or opposing structures in form and colour. The subject matter became abstract, methodical, and provided the calm reassurance of mathematics. A similar shift took place simultaneously in the field of architecture, and perhaps the uncompromising approach of Le Corbusier most clearly illustrates the idea: seeking the purity and rigour of the machine, capturing the certainty of stillness and precision; meanwhile, rejecting the accidental, impressionistic, or pictorial, and focusing primarily on the abstraction itself.
Hold in Check 牽制 (2015)
Geometrical abstraction is the most characteristic expression of modern art, which brought fundamental changes to all forms of artistic life in the 20th century, including painting. Peng’s works echo the revival of such a style in contemporary art. Nevertheless, he achieves something other than radical abstraction, because of the subtle influence that traditional Chinese aesthetics have had on him. In terms of 33
form, Peng applies the clear, hard edges of representational paintings. In terms of content, he portrays the subject matter as a recognizable abstraction. His paintings are well-balanced between the abstract and the concrete, bringing out the beauty of the corrugated landscape made of books. The spines of each book are carefully composed to form a symphonious whole, while preserving the liveliness of their individuality. Peng’s two-dimensional paintings resemble the way the retina perceives its subject. As with many traditional Chinese paintings, time is represented as part of the structure. Other objects, such as boxes, floor tiles, shadows, and cubes, are occasionally added into the composition. They represent the structural relationship between the subject matter and its environment. The reason for choosing these particular objects is probably not related to actual memories or because of the nature of books themselves. Nevertheless, it is also worth briefly exploring whether the books are a projection of the artist’s own consciousness. Franz Kafka once said that books can never replace the real world and that, in reality, every being has a reason to exist and a duty to perform, which cannot be substituted by anything else. In the works of Peng Jian, if the shadows of books represent the past, boxes indicate the doorway, and cubes point towards the future, the three combined form a system of symbolic meanings. Despite being similar in size, the bright and colouful cube stands out distinctively against the solemnity of books. It represents a continuously re-generative system of lively yet regulated transformation. 34
In other words, the cube is the key to Peng’s work. The undetermined variation is weaved into the established system of books. Here we witness an underlying manifestation of this young artist who, living in the age of digital media, observes this transition of forms with calmness and prudence. In the context of globalization, Peng presents to us his own agenda for the continuing transformation of Chinese painting. His works propose a new method of contemplation which exceeds all existing boundaries, presenting to us a fresh experience of today’s world.
35
格物之變 徐累
一幅畫的邊界極為重要。成竹在胸的畫家面 對布或紙，首先要做的事情，就是裁決這片 空白。從中心出發，到何處止步，牽一發動 全身。對一個畫家，對一幅作品，極限即存 在於有限，如何最為恰當地劃地封疆，意味 著想像、條理和張力。 彭劍的繪畫，以「書本」形態編織出視覺經 緯，羅列、組合、交會，曲直之間，本該單 調的遊戲做得層巒起伏，已然有自己的局 面，也具備一目了然的風格，在當代工筆畫 裡有顯而易見的辨識度。即便如此，當他的 作品完成以後，也遇到了一個不大不小的難 題。這個難題或許與畫幅的邊界有關，屬於 作品的「外交」事件。簡單來說，就是什麼 樣的畫框適合他的作品？貌似不起眼的問 題，卻一點也不多餘。畫框，不僅關係到作 品的休止，也同時意味著展示的開端，倘若 這方面的選項令人躊躇，那就意味著繪畫已 經僭越了什麼，突破了什麼，而以往的舊經 驗暫時還沒有能夠適應這種新局面。 畫框是作品最終完成的句號，在畫面內與畫 面外的現場關係上，它是守戍者，由此強調 畫面內容的虛幻主權，保護其繪畫的精神跡 象。西洋繪畫，尤其是二十世紀之前的繪 畫，假定繪畫就是一個裁截的景觀，它們被 神性地定格在窗內，觀眾在「間離」之外朝 內窺察，畫框理所當然就成為窗戶的外飾， 繪畫就是一個個洞開之「鏡」。中國傳統繪 畫則不然，它的入眼習慣是「散點」，空間 被「時間」拖曳，目光游移不定，故發明出 立軸或手卷的裝裱法，盡量不用過度裝飾隔 斷視覺想像，畫面空白與場所天衣無縫，伸 展開來，漫延出去，羽毛鱗介或尺澤層巒， 便不再是簡單的「鏡」中物，而是「境界」 之幻。 這是兩種喻體不同的代表類型，嚴格說，都 不完全適合彭劍作品的框裱。 從類型上說，彭劍畫的「書」算是靜物。通 常處理這類主題，是以單一視角寫生，也就 是現場「焦點透視」，就像隔窗相望那樣。 但是，彭劍的呈現結構卻不同。他摒棄了靜 物畫的西洋觀點，直接借用了中國傳統繪畫 36
的透視模件，那就是「45度」空間擬示法。 這種方法的特點完全來自俯視，物體程式化 地平仄斜切，重心飄移，向兩側無限延長， 透視滅點不在內而在外。僅憑這一固定模 式，就無法將彭劍的作品與西洋視點疊合， 因此用窗式畫框籠罩他的作品，會顯得格格 不入。 當然，對於彭劍的早期作品，這並不是什麼 問題。這批作品的初始，畫面主體就是窗 戶，或為背景，或為前置，書本僅僅作為配 角而偏處一隅。後來，窗戶不翼而飛，書冊 上位，徹底套用中國傳統透視模件，而且是 集錦式的書山冊海。這種方式在文人畫中比 較鮮見，倒是在另一種傳統裝飾性繪畫中似 曾相識，如「貼落」。「貼落」作為室內裝 潢樣式，一般尺寸較大，像壁畫似地直接貼 上牆，好些內容就是描繪的「書」，「橫陳 圖史常千架」，給人以身如其境的幻覺。 所以，彭劍以傳統繪畫模件構造畫面，卻沒 有採納中國主流繪畫旨趣。他畫靜物，這本 身並沒有什麼新奇，中國傳統藝術中不乏靜 物畫，如「歲朝清供」，不過這種題材仍然 是對自然和生命的懷想，賦予了人文趣識與 願望。彭劍顛覆了這種表現，他抽空了與 「書本」有關的原有喻意，所有的注意力放 在了「書」的表皮，各種裝飾，各種密度， 各種「書脊」線面組成的節奏，因此，彭劍 的靜物不是「意識」的象徵，不是藉物觀 照，它就是「物」本身，或者就是「物理」 秩序。一種根本的背離，在於傳統繪畫中那 些優美的曲線，完全被彭劍捋直了，借鑒 「界畫」的工致，他冷若冰霜，架構做得硬 朗而極端。顯而易見，彭劍將文人畫習性中 的「詞藻」化為烏有，所有的「標的物」與 氣質、靈感、象徵無涉，或者說，彭劍的作 品，不再是我們熟悉的詩情畫意了。 因此，在現實的「截面」和視覺的「幻象」 方面，彭劍主旨清晰，屬性卻模棱兩可，繪 畫形態因「似與不似」而無法定位，這就是 文中開始所議論的「框裱」問題，至少目前 還沒有找到最佳方案。 熟悉藝術史的人都知道，二十世紀初期，現
代藝術發生了影響至今的形式主義運動，以 馬列維奇「至上主義」，蒙德里安「新造型 主義」為代表，平面繪畫不再模擬現實幻 景，而是表現為形式和色彩的架構，內容抽 象，有條不紊，如數學一樣冷靜、確定、平 衡。這場運動同時發生在建築領域，也許柯 布西埃的「純粹主義」觀點更清晰地說明了 其中的趨念，「像機器一樣純粹和嚴謹，不 是偶然的、意外的、印象主義的、無機的、 畫意的，而是一般的、靜止的、表達自然中 的不變因素。明朗，精確，忠實於概念。」 藝術的現代性方面，幾何抽象形式最具時代 表徵，從此，二十世紀的日常景觀開始了根 本性的改變，更不消說對繪畫的深刻影響。 對當代藝術來說，這一風格再度回潮，包括 體現在彭劍的實踐中。不過，他最終沒有走 上一條徹底的抽象道路。究其原因，或許中 國人傳統美學教義對他有潛移默化的影響。 彭劍的「抽象化」僅僅引用了幾何硬邊模 式，而內容上仍保留具體「意象」，擬定一 種可辨識的形象系統，平面化地經營書山的 皺摺之美，以求達到抽象與具像的平衡。為 了豐富畫面的質感，彭劍尤其注意到書脊樣 式的活潑任性，像管弦樂譜一樣跳躍個別表 情，但很快又收伏在絕對的紀律之中。
塊形制與書的體量相近外，它的屢屢出現幾 乎是突兀的。在書本的一片沉寂之中，「魔 方」的高調亮相令人意外，以我們所了解的 功能，它顯然代表著活躍、操控以及變化， 直指不斷生成的轉換系統。 這麼說來，「魔方」有可能是彭劍的畫中之 眼，它暗藏了一位年輕藝術家的的自我宣 告，即在當下媒體時代的在線網絡中，由 「書本」體制代表的舊秩序、舊模型，被嵌 入了不確定的未知變數，翻覆靜觀，確立轉 型。在全球化的互動背景下，彭劍遠程呈現 了他對中國畫變革的獨有軸線，這種超出過 去範式之外的「格物窮理」，只能是屬於今 日世界的新經驗。
Puzzle No. 1 迷局 No.1 (2015)
構成彭劍藝術的中樞在於二維空間，他將圖 式處理為視網膜的過程中，像大多數中國傳 統繪畫表現的那樣，並沒有完全忘記「時 間」的表述。圍繞在書籍周邊，其它物體如 套盒、地磚、投影、魔方時有插入，雖然它 們是種種物象與其環境關係的結構描述，但 為什麼選擇了它們，仍然可以視為行為假定 中的「意圖性」。這些物象的在場，沒有重 構歷史記憶的任務，然而，深究起來，是不 是能夠理解為心理狀態對圖像的一次投射 呢？ 卡夫卡說過，「書本代替不了世界。在生活 中，一切都有它存在的意義，都有它的任 務，這任務不可能完全由別的什麼東西來完 成。」彭劍的作品中，如果說書的「投影」 指向了「過去」，「套盒」指向了「通道」， 「魔方」則指向了「未來」，三者形成了畫 面中的象徵機制。尤其「魔方」，除了方 37
Empty Room 空房間 2013 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 158 x 152 cm
38
39
40
Mountain within Mountains 山内山 2014 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 198 x 96 cm
Hollow Land 空岑 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 123 x 99 cm
42
43
Catching a Glimpse 窺中 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 112 x 79 cm
44
45
Puzzle No.1 迷局 No.1 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 62 x 34 cm
46
47
Puzzle No.2 迷局 No.2 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 49 x 40 cm Puzzle No.3 迷局 No.3 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 31 x 41 cm Puzzle No.4 迷局 No.4 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 31 x 41 cm
48
49
Hold in Check 牽制 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 72 x 60 cm
50
51
The Rules and Attractions of Jiehua: The New Jiehua of Peng Jian Chen Yan
One Art is amorphous; each artist has their own peculiarity. Some of them burn with passionate intensity: they are enthusiastic, sometimes self destructive, driven by a messianic mission to create art. They may be influenced by the passions of the western Romantics. This is their desired form of autobiography. However, some artists are calm and gentle: they are contemplative, they have an ability to preserve an analytical distance from their creations, and they adhere to the rules laid out by craftsmen, pursuing their interest in traditional painting. They represent a continuation of art history. As a young artist, classically trained in the meticulous principles of ink, Peng Jian belongs to this category. Therefore, we do not require much in the way of colourful description to illuminate Peng Jian. He lives among us rationally and with restraint; he shares in our experience of this bustling and desolate era; we can talk to him face to face about art, about life, about anything we are interested in. His calm character, keen perceptions and clear thinking help him expound his artistic ideas with ease. But when we face his artworks, we are forced to acknowledge the divine inspiration in his work, and acknowledge to what extent his artistic talent sees him rise above the everyday. We perceive the reflection of his tranquillity and wisdom in the prism of the paper on which he works. Two The majority living in today’s world regard innovation as the single virtue to be prized above all others, and rebellion as the primary selling point. Most artists seek to be in fashion, or anticipate an incoming trend. However, Peng Jian has a more considered 52
philosophy when it comes to art and the passing of time. As a graduate from the China Academy of Art, the questions he is addressing are: what is the role and destiny of our artistic heritage? Will the crazy growth of contemporary art find any nourishment in traditional art? Following his natural inclination, he selected jiechi (rulers) as his weapon of choice from the rich arsenal of Chinese painting. Peng Jian therefore uses jiehua as the means of presenting his philosophy. Did this choice mean he had to confront the real inner force of Chinese painting? After the Ming and Qing dynasty, the theory of wenrenhua (literati paintings) became popular: the concept of painting with heavy ink, light colours, more freehand, and less fine brushwork increased in popularity. At this time, literati painting seemed to represent the essence of Chinese painting. From the earliest comparisons of Chinese painting with western art, radicals have lamented that traditional Chinese painting lacks scientific rigour, and that it has spirit without realism. Traditionalists have always claimed that Chinese and western paintings are different in nature. For them, xieyi represents art at its conceptual, experimental best. In this digital era, it seems we are on an infinite plaza, with everyone holding a loud-speaker in their hand, shouting out endless new concepts and ideas. As jiehua has little to do with xieyi and conceptual art, it seems overlooked. Conversely, in the discipline of Chinese painting, there is no ranking system of the merits of different styles. Generally, art has been divided into subjects, as underlined by this quotation from Tang Hou in Huajian (On the Categorization of Paintings) from the Yuan dynasty: “Art critics always say that paintings could
be categorized by 13 different subjects, with shanshui ranked at the top, and jiehua ranked bottom. Therefore, people have assumed that jiehua is more simple. They just haven’t understood the difficulty of the rules of jiehua. The artist has to develop an idea with rulers and brushes, and be capable of presenting relative positions of objects; rises and falls; circumferences; curved and straight lines; far and near distance; delicacy and vulgarity. Carpenters and craftsmen may not be able to reach these heights.” Later generations always followed this theory: Tang Hou’s analysis that “Jiehua comes last” doesn’t mean jiehua is low in status. To say the least, the 13 subjects theory defined by art critics does not represent a final conclusion. Tao Zongyi (writing in the Yuan dynasty) listed in his book Nan Cun Zhui Geng Lu (Volume 28) the 13 subjects of painting: “Portraits of Bodhisattvas and Buddhas, portraits of emperors, Buddha’s warrior attendants, arhats and monks, celebrities, ancestors, landscapes, plants, animals, tools, jiehua and architecture, beasts, crops and textiles, and blue and green outlining.” Landscape does not come first – and jiehua does not come last. Other books also discuss the 13 subjects, including Huayuan Bu Yi, Huazhi by Dong Qichang and Suyangju Huaxue Gou Sheng by Dong Qi (Qing Dynasty). They offer a similar point of view to Tang Hou’s, albeit a less detailed one. In Wen Zhengheng’s Zhangwuzhi, he describes landscape painting as the best; depictions of bamboo, trees, orchids and stones in second place; small paintings of human beings, birds and animals and architecture take third place, while larger paintings of the same subjects come last. This approach to classification is totally different from Tao Zongyi’s, so we may infer that there is another version of the “13 subjects” used by painters. And the jiehua of Peng Jian should be included under this
classification method. Jiehua was popular in the Song dynasty, when the trend was to focus on discipline and delicate styles. The leader of literati painting from the Yuan dynasty, Zhao Mengfu, used to teach his son Zhao Yong: “You can always apply your own imagination and understanding to most paintings, but for jiehua, you have to follow its own discipline.” As Tang Hou also said: “People just haven’t understood the difficulty of the rules of jiehua.” Li Zhi from the Song dynasty wrote in his book Deyuzhai Hua Ping: “It is not acceptable to ignore the disciplines of jiehua.” The rules are not just the literati’s requirement towards jiehua. They also represent criteria to use when appreciating the works. When Peng Jian focuses on jiehua, he is also posing the question: “What role do rules play in the creation of contemporary art?”
Twin Peaks 巒嶂 (2014)
All creative ideas require an understanding of the past. Peng Jian has thought deeply about this subject of painting. As a painter, he applies his ideas with his own hands. The first rule to implement is to keep the tradition of jie chi ying xian (using ruler to draw straight lines). This method sounds simple, but a small mistake will make a big difference. As Tang Hou said: “Jiehua is hugely difficult.” Peng Jian is very patient; he enjoys the repetitive process of artistic creation. It is said that he continuously worked on one painting for two months and never felt tired. Because of his seriousness, he does not produce in quantities. He tries to maximize the effect of jie chi ying xian in each painting, so there are no curvy lines in his paintings: all lines are straight. In his painting, we can see countless repetitive outlinings, superpositions, layers of colours, creating an ordered texture. As Peng Jian said: “In such a process, through repetitive drawing, we keep the hustle and bustle 53
under a certain control.” It’s at this point that Shen Zongqian (Qing dynasty) raised the theory of the beauty of rules when appreciating paintings: “Although it is formally structured, we can still see the skillful brush-craft in it. This is very precious.”
One Metre Away 一米以外 (2010)
On the subject of colours, he insisted on choosing the traditional pigments of Chinese painting. His early works use grey and cold tones, resembling the mistshrouded towns near the Southern Yangtze river. The current works are much more colourful, resembling flowers. We can see Peng Jian’s exquisite technical knowledge of gongbi (fine brushwork) paintings, with colour spread evenly within the outlines. It creates a stable and even effect after multiple layers of colouring. In larger pieces, such as Twin Peaks and Mountain within Mountains, some of the lines are as thin as gossamer, but none of the strokes are inaccurate. More importantly, he embraces the pursuit of expressing the airy feeling of colour and paper while prizing the combination of colours that resound like a symphony. This pursuit involved the naturally mysterious atmosphere in the disciplined gongbi paintings, and mottled effects similar to the ancient murals from the Song and Tang dynasty. It is a visual effect that the artist created on purpose: after finishing the first draft, he used the cunfa method to wipe and peel the painting. The effect and texture created by the cunfa method complement the content of the painting, creating the aesthetic contrast of age and newness. On the subject of age and beauty, art historian Erwin Panofsky commented: “When abandoning ourselves to the impression of the weathered sculptures of Chartres, we cannot help enjoying their lovely mellowness and patina as an aesthetic value; but this value, which implies both the sensual pleasure in a peculiar play of light
54
and colour, and the more sentimental delight in age and genuineness, has nothing to do with the objective, or artistic, value with which the sculptures were invested by their makers.” The separation of the effect of age from the original intention of the artist was the challenge. This aesthetic theory raised by Panofsky is the meditation on the past by which poets have always been fascinated. Peng Jian approaches this age-old question with his phlegmatic brush strokes. The melancholy of the past and the disturbances of the present constitute a mysterious, surreal atmosphere in Peng Jian’s artworks. So, we will find ourselves in an entirely new world when looking at Peng Jian’s jiehua. When he obeys the traditional rules of jiehua, he tries to create a realm outside of the boundary of the beauty of rules. Three There is clearly a passionate interest by the artist in his subject. Peng Jian loves the tools of his art, remarking: “Jiechi is a fascinating way to paint.” If we glimpse his Window series from 2009, we can see his interest in jiechi extended to his unique preference for the tiny squares of the screen windows. Peng Jian might just be following his artistic intuition. The grid he is applying is, nevertheless, an important topic in western art history. For example, the artist Saul Steinberg created two similar works based on even-size gridding in the Passport series: one painting is a cat in the cage, the other piece is a giant skyscraper. The art historian Ernst Gombrich said in Art and Illusion that Steinberg’s adroit paintings reminded people in a humorous way that it’s not the objects that can be reproduced, but objects only become familiar when separated
by space. Therefore, it’s not important if the city view behind Peng Jian’s screen window is realistic or recognizable: the value comes when we switch our focus from clear screen windows to vague buildings. The contrast of spaces creates the attraction. This transformation between the close view and distant view was only made possible by the application of the grid, which had a revolutionary effect on the technique of paintings. During the Renaissance, there was a popular drawing technique among western artists: they drew a square with a grid in it on a piece of glass and looked through the square as through an imaginary frame. They would then transfer what they saw in the grid onto the canvas which was on the same scale as the square. By doing so, they would be able to draw whatever was captured by the square with a high level of accuracy. This is an example of a perfect representation of the three-dimensional object in two dimensions. This may be seen as a kind of pre-cursor to the camera in artistic terms. Albrecht Dürer invented many other types of equipment in order to achieve this effect which later became known as perspective. However, even at its most mature stage in the Song dynasty, jiehua as a drawing technique had never harnessed the science of perspective. There are differences between the western and Chinese ways of transferring three dimensions into two. The comparison between them has been a heated topic in the study of aesthetics and art history. One straightforward yardstick of comparison is to apply the “unit cube” to represent the basic structure of both western perspective and Chinese jiehua. For the former, the most common form is the one-point perspective (or more precisely, according to Rudolf Arnheim, the front-side perspective). When facing one side of the
cube, for the viewer, the front side is vertical. All other sides connecting to this side are perpendicular to it. In the perception of the viewer, the four sides would eventually intersect with one another at the same point. Therefore, the back should appear slightly smaller compared to the front side. Furthermore, apart from the two vertical sides, all four sides are trapeziforms rather than squares. However, in Chinese jiehua, the four sides deform into parallelograms. Arnheim named this the “positive isometric perspective,” where the acute angles of the parallelograms are around 45 degrees. Peng Jian, in his artworks, presents a clear representation of this complicated perception. The Rubik’s Cube is the archetypal cubic object and has become common in Peng Jian’s recent artworks. Invented by a professor of architecture, this modern educational toy is regarded by many people as the defining engager of human spatial thinking ability. When comparing several artworks of Peng Jian, the viewer will realize that the Rubik’s Cubes are arranged according to the positive isometric perspective of Chinese jiehua, rather than the western front-side perspective. The four sides are parallelograms with 45-degree acute angles instead of trapeziforms. Peng Jian is fascinated by the way jiehua reconstructs daily life. The contradictory feature of such perspective becomes the key attraction of his art. Playing on the fluidity of the third dimension in visual representation is not unique to Peng Jian. Plato once said: “The same object would appear differently beneath and above water; likewise, the variation in colour shade may lead to the distortion of its shape. Similarly, our psychology may also result in false illusions.” Nevertheless, one of the critical highlights of modern arts 55
is the cubism of George Braque and Pablo Picasso. Gombrich argues that “Cubism is the most radical attempt to stamp out ambiguity and to enforce one reading of the picture – that of a man-made construction, a coloured canvas.”
Accidental Discovery 意外(2014)
The Cubists challenged the traditional western perspective. Peng Jian, however, is a young Chinese ink artist with training in western traditions. What we can see in his artworks is a voluntary exploration into the new possibility of visual representation. Apart from Rubik’s Cubes, there are more trompe l’oeil elements in his works that play on such fluidity. The viewer would assume the floor to be flat and all the tiles to be of the same pattern. As the tiles become smaller and smaller in size, they seem to be getting further and further away from the viewer. It was common practice for Renaissance artists to use colourful floor tiles to indicate the depth of the room. In Life Lesson, however, the floor tiles are in black and white. Moreover, Peng Jian applies more than one vanishing point. When tracing the tile edges, the viewer realizes that the floor, on which the piles of books are situated in an illusory manner, is not even. Another example is Peng Jian’s painting, Divine Will. The wall tiles remind the viewers of the mosaic from Antioch. He applies a reversible cube. Lighted from above, it is a solid cube. When lighted from beneath, it becomes a hollow cube. Presented with such a cube among many, plus a Rubik’s Cube, the viewer notices the incongruity in their spatial relationship. This incongruity can only be understood in a complicated combination of spatial dimensions. Four There are specific rules for both the western perspective and Chinese jiehua. The
56
former develops a system of a vanishing point based on the centre perspective; the latter uses isometric perspective to create a system of parallel lines. Both traditions, in their own ways, capture the distinctive attractions of nature. The former attempts to condense the whole universe into a small space. Instead of representing vastness with microforms, western perspective indicates the depth of space using vanishing points. This creates a sense of anxiety for the viewers as if they are personally on the scene. This is a visual representation that encourages participation. Chinese jiehua, on the other hand, aims at creating a boundless space with parallel lines. The viewer, instead of focusing on one vanishing point, has to consciously switch among several points to experience unlimited possibilities. Such consciousness, which is most visible in Chinese landscape paintings and the jiehua tradition, brings the viewer away from the physical world to turn inwards. Peng Jian applies profound thoughts on spatial relationship into his artworks. In a sense, it can be regarded as “New Jiehua.” Peng Jian raises a lot of topics in his artworks, such as the transformation of theme and style. Such profundity is essential for a pioneering artist. The above discussion on rules and attractions is my reflection on Peng Jian’s artwork. Nevertheless, I believe that it is improper to give too comprehensive a summary for an emerging artist. Half of the attraction of an artwork comes from the viewer’s interpretation, as with the works of Peng Jian. As to the question of how far jiehua as an art form will develop, and how to integrate the tradition with the attractions of the contemporary landscape, we shall only find answers in future experiments.
57
法度與趣味——彭劍的新界畫 陳研
一 藝術難以名狀，藝術家們的特質也各不相 同，有些藝術家性格異常激烈，他們熱情有 餘，甚至燃燒生命去進行帶有神性的創作， 這種觀念經過浪漫主義的渲染，往往成為撰 寫藝術家傳記的常用模板。但也有些藝術家 冷靜而溫和，他們更善於思考，在創作時如 遠觀者般審視自己的作品，他們秉持匠人的 法度，追尋獨到的趣味，他們在藝術史中有 著不可替代的位置。作為一位經過嚴格傳統 訓練的青年藝術家，彭劍屬於後者。 因此，對彭劍的描述不需要過多的渲染與形 容，他克制而理性地生活在我們中間，一同 體味著這個時代的繁華與落寞，我們可以與 他交流藝術，閒聊生活，面對面地了解我們 所感興趣的一切，而他冷靜的性情、敏銳的 感受與清晰的思維也讓他能輕鬆地將藝術的 想法一一陳述。但當我們面對他的作品時， 我們又不得不嫉妒藝術女神對他的垂青，藝 術的才能使他從常人中脫穎而出，他的冷靜 與善思通過畫布折射出迷人的藝術之光。 二 身處在如今這個以創新為最高評判標準，以 反叛為首要原則的時代中，大部分藝術家都 在關注著藝術的時尚，對下一個流行浪潮捕 風捉影，彭劍則對藝術和時代有著更多的思 考與反問。作為從中國美術學院走出來的他 所要面對的問題是：藝術傳統在今天是怎樣 的命運？它是否還能夠為當代藝術這樣的野 蠻生長提供足夠的養分？出於性情，他在中 國繪畫的寶庫中選取了「界尺」作為他的稱 手兵器，以「界畫」作為表現心中所想的藝 術手法。 這樣的選擇首先要面對的便是在「中國畫」 內部的情境壓力。明清以降，文人畫理論大 行於世，重水墨、輕彩繪，尚寫意、抑工謹 的觀念蔚然成風，以至於富有文人氣質的水 墨寫意畫彷彿成為「中國畫」這一稱謂下的 理所當然的對應物。近代以來，當中國畫面 臨西方藝術的挑戰時，激進派痛陳國畫缺乏 58
科學性，是毫無寫實能力的原始繪畫；而傳 統派則聲稱中國畫與西畫在本質上的不同， 把「寫意」作為擋箭牌。到了信息時代的今 天，我們彷彿站在無限大的廣場上，每個人 都握著擴音器，觀念與概念的新術語不絕於 耳，與「寫意」和「觀念」關係並不親密的 界畫似乎無人搭理。 但實際上在中國的繪畫史體系內，對繪畫的 風格和題材並沒有什麼「一刀切」的高下之 分，只有出自各家眼中的難易之別，若是籠 統而論，往往用科目劃分。如元代湯垕《畫 鑑》中所言：
世俗論畫者，必曰畫有十三科，山水打頭， 界畫打底，故人以界畫為易事。不知高下低 昂、方圓曲直、遠近凹凸、巧拙纖粗，梓人 匠氏又不能盡其妙者，況筆墨規尺，運思於 箋楮之上，求合其法度準繩，此為至難。 後人大多沿用此論，湯垕在文中已據理分析 「界畫打底」並不意味著界畫的地位卑微。 退一步說，「世俗論畫者」的「畫有十三 科」也不是定論，元代陶宗儀《南村輟耕 錄》卷二十八「畫家十三科」雲：「佛菩薩 相，玉帝君王道相，金剛神鬼羅漢聖僧，風 雲龍虎，宿世人物，全境山水，花竹翎毛， 野騾走獸，人間動用，界畫樓台，一切傍 生，耕種機織，雕青嵌綠。」其中打頭的既 非山水，打底的又非界畫，如「雕青嵌綠」 等似乎是對工匠而言。參考《畫苑補益》、 董其昌《畫旨》、及清代董棨《養素居畫學 鉤深》也都說到十三科，與湯垕所說大致相 符，但並不詳備。而文震亨《長物誌》中 說：「山水第一，竹樹蘭石次之，人物鳥 獸，樓殿屋木，小者次之，大者又次之。」 此論與陶宗儀迥然不同，推知元、明以來可 能是另有一個文人畫家專用的「十三科」。 彭劍所謂「界畫」當歸於此種分科之中。 界畫在注重理法又倡導「精麗巧整之風」的 宋代盛極一時，而之後的文人則更愛以「法 度」品評。元代文人畫的領袖趙孟頫曾教導 其子趙雍作界畫如是說：「諸畫或可杜撰瞞 人，至界畫，未有不用工合法度者。」湯垕 也雲：「梓人匠氏又不能盡其妙者，況筆墨
規尺，運思於箋楮之上，求合其法度準繩， 此為至難。」宋代李廌《德隅齋畫品》中 說：「非至詳至悉委曲於法度之內者，不能 也。」法度既是文人對界畫的技法要求，也 是在欣賞時捉摸的要義。彭劍將目光投向 「十三科」中的界畫時，也在向自己發問： 「法度」在當代藝術的創作中應該發揮怎樣 的作用？ 任何創意都包含著對傳統的理解，彭劍在回 溯傳統的同時對這一畫種進行了深入的思 考。作為畫家，他沒有宣之於口，而是用手 在製作中實踐。貫徹法度首要便是保留「界 尺引線」的法則，這種手法聽起來簡單，但 實則差之毫釐，便失之千里，如湯垕所言 「此為至難」。而彭劍卻甚有耐心，對藝術 創作中的「枯燥」甘之若飴，聽聞他為成一 幅畫連續工作一兩月而不知疲。這種真畫者 的態度使他並不高產，但在每幅作品中他都 試圖將「界尺引線」發揮到極致，於是我們 便在他的作品中竟找不到一根曲線，所有的 線條都是「直來直往」。早期的「窗」系列 作品更是在紗窗和重樓疊閣間把繩墨之法用 至極致，方寸之間，向背分明，簷連栱接， 路徑參差，無一犯重處。從他的畫作中，我 們能夠看見線條無計其次的反覆勾勒、疊 加、渲染，一層又一層，產生了一種類似器 物經過「打磨」的質感。用他自己的話說： 「在這樣的過程中，通過繁複地繪製，兩者 揉捏融合將喧囂的外在歸納於某種控制之 下。」也正是於此產生了清代沈宗騫在論界 畫時所推崇的那種「雖是極板之物，仍不失 用筆之道，是以可貴」的法度之美。 而關於顏色，他堅持選擇中國傳統紙本繪畫 的顏料，早期的作品色調偏冷偏灰，如江南 煙雨氤氳，近些年的創作則煥然一片五彩斑 斕，如落英繽紛。彭劍覆色時展示出精湛的 傳統工筆基礎，在輪廓線內部以平塗為主， 反覆渲染後達到一種穩定而均勻的效果。在 如《巒嶂》、《山內山》等大幅作品中，有 的色線細若游絲，但仍未有一筆失準。更重 要的是，他在追求色彩如交響樂般此起彼伏 的和諧同時，還懷抱著表現顏料與紙張本身 透氣感的追求。這種追求使得工謹的彩墨中 融入了一些自然的神秘氛圍，或者說是如宋
唐古壁畫般的斑駁感。它是畫家刻意營造的 一種視覺意趣，在首稿達到完滿的效果之後 再經過皴擦，使某些部分剝落，某些部分與 底色混合。剝落法所造成的肌理效果與畫面 的內容相得益彰，共同呈現出一種人工所 製，又經歲月洗刷的美感。 對於這種美，藝術史家潘諾夫斯基曾論述 道：「當我們陶醉於沙特爾教堂中風雨剝蝕 的塑像時，我們情不自禁地把這些塑像的斑 駁銅鏽和嫻熟的塑造手法同樣地當作審美價 值。但是，這種價值與客觀的或藝術的價值 毫無關係。前者含蓄地暗示了光線和色彩的 特殊作用所引起的感官快感與對「古色古 香」和「樸拙」產生的情趣，後者則是塑像 作者的創作意圖所在。」潘氏所論述的這種 審美情趣是詩人常常沉醉其間的一種懷古之 思，在彭劍冷峻的畫筆下則呈現出對這種情 愫的再思考，因為鮮豔的顏色與畫面中的書 籍、紗窗和魔方等當代之物都在提醒觀者這 並不是一處遺跡或往昔的古物。
Enlightenment 啟示 (2011)
而正是往昔的惆悵與當下的不安構成了彭劍 作品中的神秘、超現實的氣氛，完全以直線 構成的畫面和跳動的色彩使這種超現實感愈 發強烈。因此我們會覺得彭劍的界畫令人耳 目一新，感到他在謹遵中國界畫的傳統法度 同時，在試圖創造一種法度之美以外的境 界。 三 或許用境界來表述這種審美的愉悅略顯空 泛，我們不妨換作趣味來討論，如果從藝術 家的角度來說，這種趣味首先存在於他的創 作過程。彭劍喜愛工具，曾坦言：「界尺是 有趣的作畫方式。」 如果我們一瞥他始於2009年的「窗」系列 作品，會發現他對界尺的趣味延伸到了對於 紗窗上的小方格的獨特偏愛，或許他本人只 是跟隨藝術的直覺，但網格在西方藝術史中 卻是一個頗受青睞的話題。先舉一個小例 子，當代的幽默藝術家索爾·斯坦伯格（Saul Steinberg）在《護照》（The Passport） 59
系列小品中有兩幅基於同樣大小網格的作 品，一幅是籠中之貓，一幅是巨大的摩天 大樓。精通再現哲學的藝術史家貢布里希在 《藝術與錯覺》中說：「斯坦伯格靈巧的畫 可喜地提醒人們，得到再現的決不是空間， 而是在一定的情境中為人們所熟知的一些事 物。」彭劍畫的紗窗後的城市景觀是否是寫 實的再現並不重要，可以說我們既熟悉又不 熟悉，尤其以《啟示》一幅為代表，其欣賞 價值在於當我們的視覺在清晰的紗窗與模糊 的樓宇間切換時，空間轉換的趣味便產生 了。 這種依附於網格的遠近景間轉換的趣味曾給 繪畫帶來革命性的發展。文藝復興時代，西 方畫家流行著這樣一種作畫方式：他們透過 玻璃板製作一個方框，在上面均勻地打上黑 線網格，作為想像中的畫框，然後透過這個 框架把所見到的景物的輪廓照樣畫在以相同 比例劃上格子的畫布上，這樣就在畫布上獲 得了與取景框上見到的景物幾乎完全相似的 絕妙圖像。用二維平面準確地再現了三維空 間的景物，這在攝影術發明之前無疑是一個 奇蹟，丟勒等畫家還為這種畫法製作了各種 作圖器械，而專門研究這種平面成像規律的 科學便是透視學。 然而中國的界畫就算是在最成熟的宋代也沒 有走到透視學這一步，於是關於中西方如何 正確地把三維建築物描繪在二維平面上，這 個基本問題成了美學或藝術史討論中熱衷的 話題。簡單地說，可以用最基本的單位立方 體來比較西方透視與中國界畫基本結構。在 最常見的單滅點平行透視法中（按阿恩海姆 的意見，更確切地說應當稱之為正面透視 法），立方體的一個面處於直立的正面，所 有與這個正立面垂直的第三維邊線都與這個 正面成一定傾斜角度相交，這些邊線的延長 線相交於一點。因此，除了與正面相對的背 面是縮小了的正方形以外，其餘四個面都畸 變成梯形。而在中國界畫中，這個立方體的 所有第三維邊線始終保持平行，其餘四個面 都畸變成平行四邊形。阿恩海姆稱這種方法 為正面等角透視法，在這個立方體的平面圖 像中，各平行四邊形的銳角大多在四十五度 左右。這是一個複雜的問題，但在彭劍的作 60
品中又得到了清晰直觀的解答。 在彭劍近兩年的畫作中，常常出現一個典型 的立方體——魔方，這個由建築學教授發明 的現代玩具在藝術作品中往往被視為人類空 間思維的象徵。如果觀者有機會將彭劍的幾 幅作品放在一起比較，便會發現其中的魔方 或立方體都是按照中國界畫的等角透視而非 西方的正面透視法繪成，魔方的側面都是四 十五度角的平行四邊形而非邊線相交於一點 的梯形。彭劍顯然醉心於用中國界畫的手法 重建日常生活中的三維場景，在重建過程中 與透視法的矛盾構成了他畫面中的核心趣 味。 視覺中第三維的多義性作為一種趣味並不罕 見，柏拉圖也曾有過論述，他說：「同樣的 東西，在水裡看和在水上看曲直是不同的， 或者由於對顏色所產生的同樣的視覺錯誤， 同樣的東西看起來凹凸也是不同的。並且顯 然在我們的心裡也常常有這種混亂。」而在 現代藝術中最典型的便是如布拉克和畢加索 的立體主義，貢布里希認為：「立體主義 是根除多義性來推行一種對繪畫的讀解—— 對一種人工構成物、一塊著色的畫布的讀 解——的最激進的嘗試。」 立體主義者挑釁的對象是西方再現傳統中的 透視法，而在彭劍的作品中，我們看到的是 一個接受過西方藝術訓練的中國國畫青年藝 術家發自本心的視覺探索。除了魔方以外， 我們還可以舉出兩個用視覺多義的手段來戲 弄眼睛的例子。如《生像》一幅中的黑白地 磚，文藝復興時期的畫家就喜歡通過描繪花 磚地面以暗示深度，我們會習慣性地設想地 面是平的，花磚都是完全相同的，所以我們 只能把它們的逐漸縮小讀解為一一向縱深而 去，但實際上彭劍在這裡卻安排了不止一個 滅點，當你順著線條望向遠處時便會發現這 似乎並不是一塊平的地面。而地磚上的書 也以一種不可思議的方式堆放在這片地磚 上。又如《意外》一幅上的牆磚，讓人想到 安提俄克的地面鑲嵌畫，這種兩可立方體 （reversible cube）既可以被讀解為從上方 照明的實心立方體，也可以被讀解為從下方 照明的空心立方體。而如果與中心的立方體
堆和魔方結合時，你會發現它們在空間上不 具有一致性，只有在交替讀解中才能存在。 四 西方透視和中國界畫各有自己的視覺「法 度」，前者建立在中心透視法之上，在畫中 試圖創造出一個向某一焦點集聚的射線系 統，後者建立在等角透視法之上，在畫中試 圖創造出一個平行線系統。二者分別反映了 東西方傳統繪畫中兩種不同的對自然的「趣 味」。西洋透視企圖在一個小小的空間內容 納整個宇宙，然而它不是採用以大觀小的宏 觀的方式，而是採用由近及遠以至無限遠的 一點的方法。因此西洋透視使畫面具有一種 身臨其境的內在的緊張，反映了一種參與型 的視覺方式。而中國界畫，試圖在畫中用許 多平行線表現出一個無限的空間，給人一種 俯仰流盼以遊無窮的宏觀的空間意識，這在 中國的傳統山水畫和界畫中得到了最充分的 體現，可以說是一種超脫型的視覺方式。在 這點上，彭劍通過創作中的思考作出了一些 十分有意義的探索，在一定程度上稱其為 「新界畫」並無不可。 彭劍的作品拋出了許多話題，如題材、風格 的轉變等等，這正是優秀的藝術作品應該具 備的特質，法度和趣味是筆者得惠於他的作 品而產生的一些瑣碎的想法。面對一位年輕 的藝術家，筆者覺得全面的總結並不合適， 正如彭劍的畫一樣，將藝術的趣味留一半與 觀者分享或許是最好的。至於界畫在當代究 竟能走多遠，如何將傳統與這個時代的趣味 有機融合？一切還是必須在實踐中加以解 答。
61
62
Perfect Symmetry 斑斕 2015 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 240 x 120 cm
Twin Peaks 巒嶂 2014 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 135 x 115 cm
64
65
Life Lesson 生像 2014 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 94 x 80 cm
66
67
Accidental Discovery 意外 2014 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 51 x 50 cm
Performance 表演 2014 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 46 x 45 cm
For the Sound 尋音 2012 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 66 x 63 cm
70
71
Enlightenment 啟示 2011 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 120 x 100 cm
72
73
One Metre Away No.2 一米以外 No.2 2011 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 132 x 118 cm
One Metre Away 一米以外 2010 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 120 x 100 cm
Filtering Scenery 被過濾的風景 2010 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 89 x 59 cm
76
77
78
Limit No.1 止境之一 2010 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 120 x 58 cm
Limit No. 3 止境之三 2010 Ink colour on rice paper 宣紙水墨設色 114 x 60.5 cm
80
81
The classical architectural technique of jiehua is boldly applied, underscoring the link between the bygone and the now. Partnering ordered line with brazen, riotous colour, Peng Jian challenges the audience to assess his works both in the light of the classical and the modern; both in the eastern and the western aesthetic. As Chen Yan muses: “When Peng Jian focuses on jiehua, he is also posing a question as to what role rules play in the creation of contemporary art.” The structured vitality creates an effect which combines the inner balance and calm of the east with the expressive force of the west. As leading contemporary artist Xu Lei commented: “Against the background of globalization, Peng Jian presents his unique strand of the evolution of Chinese paintings. Peng’s study in objects is beyond the old paradigm, and can only belong to the fresh experience of today’s world.”
透過規則的線條和耀目繽紛的色彩，彭劍挑釁觀 賞者以兼具東西方美學，既經典亦現代的角度去 審視作品。如陳硏所思：「彭劍將目光投向界畫 時，也在向自己發問：『法度』在當代藝術創 作中應該發揮怎樣的作用？」生動的畫像結構嚴 密，營造出一種混合著東方美學的恬靜、和諧， 以及西方美學富表現力的效果。當代著名藝術家 徐累評論道：「在全球化的互動背景下，彭劍遠 程呈現了他對中國畫變革的獨有軸線，這種超出 過去範式之外的『格物窮理』，只能是屬於今日 世界的新經驗。」
84
85
About Peng Jian
Peng Jian was born in Yueyang, Hunan Province, China in 1982. Peng graduated with postgraduate degree in 2013 from the Traditional Chinese Painting department of China Academy of Art, Hangzhou, China.
86
Solo Exhibitions
Sydney, Australia 2014 “Moxiang Feichangtai”, Jiangsu 2017 “Ten Miles Away”, Liang Yi Art Museum, Jiangsu, China Museum, Hong Kong, China 2014 “The Ode to Youth-China-Korea 2016 “Facing the Light”, Amy Li Gallery, Young Artists Exhibition”, Hongik Beijing, China Museum of Art, Seoul, South Korea 2015 “Gorgeous”, Hadrien de 2014 “Chinese Contemporary Youth Montferrand Gallery, Beijing, China Ink Yearbook Exhibition “, SZ Art 2014 “The Composition Under Rulers”, Center, Beijing, China Hive Center for Contemporary Art, 2014 “Reform Art-system by Ancient Beijing, China Examples Contemporary Elaborate 2013 “Through the Windows”, Galerie Painting Exhibition”, Today Art Ora-Ora, Hong Kong, China Museum, Beijing, China 2013 “The 8th International Ink Art Biennale of ShenZhen”, Guan Selected Group Exhibitions Shanyue Art Museum, Shenzhen, China 2016 “Nostalgia for Ancient Times”, 2013 “New Ink: Chapter 1”, Hadrien de Museum and Art Gallery of Montferrand Gallery, Beijing, China the University of Hong Kong 2013 “The 3rd Exhibition of Next (UMAG), Hong Kong, China Generation of Artists Superstars”, 2016 “In Ink”, Royal College of Art Tea & Books House, Taipei, Taiwan Gallery, London, United Kingdom 2013 “2013 Art Nova 100 Exhibition “, 2016 “The 10th National Exhibition 798 Art Factory/SZ Art Center/ of Chinese Hue Art Paintings: Phoenix Art Palace Beijing- Hue Art Paintings at Contemporary Espace Art, Beijing, China Era”, National Art Museum of 2013 “New Face, New Art-Chinese China, Beijing, China Emerging Contemporary Artists”, 2015 “Painting 20 ×20”, Poly Art Colorado State University-Pueblo Museum, Beijing, China Fine Art Gallery, Colorado, U.S.A. 2015 “2015 Nanjing International Youth 2013 “Exhibition of Excellent Works Art Biennial”, Jinling Art Museum, of Art of Zhejiang”, Zhejiang Art Nanjing, China Museum, Hangzhou, China 2015 “Nocturnal Friendships”, Lehmann 2013 “New Ink-An Exhibition of Ink Art Maupin Gallery, Hong Kong, China by Post 1970 Artists from the Yi 2015 “Shuimo”, Minsheng Art Museum, Qingzhai Collection”, Sotheby’s Art Beijing, China Space, Hong Kong, China 2015 “New Ink-Hangzhou”, HDM 2013 “Ink in the World”, Galerie Ora-Ora, Gallery, Hangzhou, China Hong Kong, China 2014 “Spring is Coming”, Sanshang Art 2012 “Focus Asia”, Toronto Convention Space, Hangzhou, China Hall, Toronto, Canada 2014 “Contemporary Ink Show: Devotion 2012 “2012 Art Nova 100 Exhibition “, to Ink”, Maritime Museum, Hong Enjoy Art Museum/ SZ Art Center/ Kong, China Arario Gallery, Beijing, China 2014 “China Contemporary Art: In 2012 “The Boat of 2012’AUSSINO CUP Silence”, Sydney Town Hall, Annual Nomination Exhibition for
Students of Contemporary Art Academies”, Today Art Museum, Beijing, China 2012 “The John Moores Painting Prize China Exhibition “, Shanghai Oil Painting Sculpture Museum, Shanghai, China 2011 “2011 Shanghai Youth Biennial: Dazzle”, Shanghai Art Museum, Shanghai, China 2011 “The 4th National Youth Art Exhibition”, National Art Museum of China, Beijing, China 2011 “The 5th Zhejiang Youth Art Exhibition”, Zhejiang Art Museum, Hangzhou, China 2011 “Sketching the Heart-About Scenery”, Beijing Space Gallery, Beijing, China 2009 “The 11th National Art Exhibition”, Shanghai Exhibition Center, Shanghai, China 2009 “The 12th Zhejiang Art Exhibition”, Zhejiang Art Museum, Hangzhou, China 2009 “’The Fair Sex’ Emerging Youth Artist Exhibition”, Hangzhou International Exhibition Center, Hangzhou, China
Collected By Today Art Museum Liu Haisu Art Museum Louis Vuitton Foundation
Awards 2012 2011 2011 2009
“The Boat of 2012’AUSSINO CUP Annual Nomination Exhibition for Students of Contemporary Art Academies” – Bronze Prize “2011 Shanghai Youth Biennial: Dazzle” - Third prize “The 5th Zhejiang Youth Art Exhibition” Excellence award (the highest award) “The 12th Zhejiang Art Exhibition” - Excellence award 87
關於彭劍
彭劍1982年生於中國湖南岳陽。2013年畢業 於中國美術學院國畫系，獲藝術碩士學位。
88
2014 《墨向•非常態—中國當代水墨 邀請展》江蘇美術館 南京 中國 2017 《十里遠》兩依藏博物館 (Liang Yi 2014 《青春禮贊—中韓青年藝術展》 韓國弘益大學現代美術館 首爾 韓國 Museum) 香港 中國 2014 《中國當代青年水墨年鑒展》 2016 《逆光》艾米李畫廊 (Amy Li 聖之空間藝術中心 北京 中國 Gallery) 北京 中國 2014 《托古改制—當代工筆畫展》 2015 《斑斕》Hadrien de Montferrand 今日美術館 北京 中國 Gallery 北京 中國 2014 《規間局》蜂巢當代藝術中心 北京 2013 《第八屆深圳國際水墨雙年展》 關山月美術館 深圳 中國 中國 2013 《新水墨：第一回展》Hadrien 2013 《格物》方由美術 (Galerie Ora- de Montferrand Gallery 北京 Ora) 香港 中國 中國 2013 《墨然回首—第三屆未來大明星 作品展》罐子茶书馆 台北 台灣 群展 2013 《2013青年藝術100》798藝術工廠 北京 中國 2016 《思古—中國當代藝術展》香港 2013 《新面孔、新藝術—中國青年藝 大學美術博物館 香港 中國 術家推薦展》科羅拉多州立美術館 2016 《繪事后素—中國當代藝術展》 科羅拉多州 美國 英國皇家美術學院美術館 倫敦 2013 《浙江風格•時代丹青—浙江省 英國 優秀作品展》浙江美術館 杭州 2016 《工•在當代—第十屆中國工筆 中國 畫作品展》中國美術館 北京 中國 2013 《七十后：新水墨—怡情齋收藏 2015 《繪畫PAINTING—貳拾×20》 展》蘇富比藝術空間 香港 中國 保利藝術博物館 北京 中國 2013 《水墨人世間》方由美術 2015 《南京國際青年藝術雙年展》 (Galerie Ora-Ora) 香港 中國 金陵美術館 南京 中國 2012 《聚焦亞洲》多倫多會展中心 2015 《夜間的友誼》Lehmann Maupin 多倫多 加拿大 Gallery 香港 中國 2012 《2012青年藝術100》悅•美術 2015 《水墨》民生美術館 北京 中國 館、聖之空間、阿拉裡奧畫廊 北京 2015 《新水墨》和維畫廊 杭州 中國 中國 2014 《春天來了》三尚藝術空間 杭州 2012 《2012“之舟”—當代藝術院校 中國 大學生年度提名展》今日美術館 2014 《新水活墨現代水墨展》香港海 北京 中國 事博物館 香港 中國 2012 《英國約翰•莫爾繪畫大賽中國 2014 《靜置—中國當代藝術展》悉尼 作品展》上海油畫雕塑院美術館 市政廳 悉尼 澳大利亞 上海 中國 個展
2011 2011 2011 2011
《炫—2011上海青年美術大展》 上海美術館 上海 中國 《第四屆全國青年美展》中國美 術館 北京 中國 《浙江省第五屆青年美展》浙江 美術館 杭州 中國 《心圖手繪—關於風景》北京空間 北京 中國
2009 《第十一屆全國美展》上海展覽 館 上海 中國 2009 《第十二屆浙江省美展》浙江美 術館 杭州 中國 2009 《紅粉—青年新銳聯展》杭州國 際會議展覽中心 杭州 中國
獎項 2012 2011 2011 2009
《2012“之舟”—當代藝術院校 大學生年度提名展》獲銅獎 《炫—2011上海青年美術大展》 獲三等獎 《浙江省第五屆青年美展》獲優 秀獎 (最高獎) 《第十二屆浙江省美展》獲優秀獎
收藏 今日美術館 劉海粟美術館 Louis Vuitton 基金會
89
Chief Editor 主編
Henrietta Tsui-Leung 梁徐錦熹
Editor 編輯
Stephanie Ding 丁彦之 Nicholas Stephens
Copy Editor 文字編輯
Nga Man Cheng 鄭雅文 Xinyue Zhang 張馨月
Design 設計
Odetti Tse 謝穎君
Publisher 出版人
Ora-Ora International Limited
Address 地址
G/F, 7 Shin Hing Street, Central, Hong Kong 香港中環善慶街7號地下
Telephone 電話
+852 2851 1171
Printed 印刷
Hong Kong, June 2017
ISBN
2017年6月印於香港 978-988-14286-3-9
All rights reserved under Ora-Ora International Limited. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronical or mechanical, including photography, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission from the publisher.