難道又是一個藝術檢查的例子嗎?

廣告

廣告

編按:西九餘波,換來各大商場的怱然藝術。表面上是擴大了藝術和言論的發表空間,但實際上這些作為點綴與旺場的公關技倆,到底有沒有把商場轉化成公共空間?藝術家文晶瑩便在這途中碰了壁,撞了板!除了政治對言論自由的直接干預,商業與市場會否是另一個更大的審查黑手?

藝術圈的審查事件時有聽聞,大家口耳相傳過後便不了了之的不勝其數。不要以為你不是藝術家便不干你的事!不若藉文晶瑩事件,大家都來翻翻藝術審查的舊帳。那些是水平未達標?那些是真的技術性困難?到底點樣劃分?甚至是商場中人,你又有沒有另一些左右為難的考慮? ─梁寶

[文:文晶瑩] 我有幸被邀請參與夏利豪基金會(夏會)策劃,早前在時代廣場舉行的檸檬騷。然而我遞過一個反商品化反消費反名牌的作品建議書後,便石沉大海,不被邀請展出。若是因為藝術品的意識而遭否出局,這便是一個藝術檢查的例子。但當然策展人並沒有說我的作品意識有何問題,總有行政理由,不方便展出我的作品。本文無意作出任何指責,只想探討一下策展的方法,在這個策展人當道的時刻。

剛收到邀請時,本打算做一些漂亮好玩的作品。因為夏會說將有一百個檸檬任玩,我許久也沒有做過一些轉化造型的作品了,很想慢慢試驗創作。後來收到展覽細則才知道原來檸檬要到裝展時才提供,要等商場關閉時才可以裝置作品,並於幾小時內完成裝置,即是要即做即展。這樣的安排反映策展人只著重作品的展示,而忽略創作的需要。這樣沒有可能做一些複雜裝置,只能做一些保守安全又快捷的裝置,又不能做實驗,推敲造型,於是我唯有選擇做一些概念性的作品。

展覽在商場,展覽的簡介說要和消費購物有關,於是想到做一些作品來回應商品文化。想起Guy Debord (基•廸波)在<景觀社會>裏說我們的世界已高度商品化,商品有時甚至定義一個人的價值和人與人之間的關係。我們的慾念被廣告內化,無可避免地成為商品的奴隸。他的說法相當富啟發性,但我仍相信人有自主性,只要我們不盲目追求名牌,不以金錢掛帥,有自己的生活和消費模式,我們仍可選擇不做商品的奴隸。作品方面,我選擇回應安迪•華荷的<Brillo盒>作品(圖左),在商品紙盒上鑲進檸檬(圖右)。安迪•華荷最愛購物並將商品變成藝術,我想把他的作品伸延,把千篇一律的承載商品的紙盒個人化,加入檸檬味,並邀請觀眾參與,拿掉檸檬,換上觀眾自己的物件,將商品個人化。

其實被商場邀請作藝術品,不幫忙做商場推廣,反而大談反商品文化並不是新鮮罕有的做法。完成展覽建議書後一段時間,無意中到過朗豪坊看「香港•箱中作業」展,其中李慧嫻的紙紥名牌作品就是針對濫製濫買的購物文化;Greg Pearce提醒人們不要盲目追求新科技,隨意丟棄舊手提電話的作品,就處於一間手提電話商店的門前。大概是朗豪坊對這類反商品意識的作品並不敏感,所以藝術家能避過檢查。我問同行友人對這些「倒米」之作的意見。她說感覺蠻好的,沒有「倒米」反而是「助慶」,夠cool,喜見商場能接納不同人士的意見,加添了自由氣氛。

可惜朗豪坊不是對所有作品全開綠燈,曾建華的作品因有粗口字眼、夏永康的作品因有裸露成份,而被朗豪坊拒絕展出。前的作品遠看像華麗的牆紙,細看才見粗口字,比喻居住環境的隱藏暴力;後的作品裸露程度不及我們四周看見的雜誌廣告,後來夏改動作品才能展出。

久不久有些藝術走入生活走入商場的展覽,時有聽聞藝術品的內容/形象和商店/商場不配合而遭革走,多些溝通是需要的。商舖對那些具批判性的當代作品也不用敬而遠之,接納反而更顯胸襟和獨特性,遇到題材敏感的作品,不應一刀切,有時或許可以引起有意義的討論。

我懷疑是否我的作品批判性還未夠強而不被接納。開幕那天看過時代廣場的展覽後, 發覺並無回應商品文化和藝術史的作品,所以應該不是有更好的同類作品而被否。

其實一個好的策展人應該讓展覽有多元化的表現,接納不同取向的作品,而不只是選用一些裝飾性和幽默的作品。後來問夏會的聯絡人被否的原因,她說因為我的作品的互動環節有技術困難而被否,檸檬都噴過防腐劑,不能被觀眾拿走。於是我即時表示可以刪掉互動環節,作品只是一個象徵,對作品內容的影不算很大。她又指時間過急,可能宣傳趕不及安排。然後又補充其實另一個作品也有互動的環節,只安排在開幕的兩小時內進行。這樣子好像告訴我,其實作品的互動部分不是真正的問題。那問題在那?

無論如何,再問下去也不會知道那一個才是真正的理由。又或許真的是行政上不方便,不能安排我的作品展出。我倒沒所謂,我還相信香港有某程度上的言論自由,相信應該還可找到發表這件作品的空間。換過形式,寫文章發表也是一種發表。

而在香港推廣當代藝術並不容易,難得時代廣場不用明星,用檸檬藝術作推廣,夏利豪基金會將香港藝術家的作品帶入商場皆是十分值得支持的做法,只是策劃方面或許有改善的空間。

一般市民或許不明白當代藝術為何時常那樣不平易近人,策展人其實要擔當橋樑的角色,說明容納異見、維護表達自由正正是當代藝術的精神所在,藝術有時重視概念,不是一味討好,用作裝飾。而藝術常常破舊立新,生產方法日新月異,藝術行政人員應更有彈性地配合當代藝術的產生方法,去推進當代藝術的發展,而不是以藝術來遷就行政,禁制藝術,說這樣不能那樣不准。做策展人不只是行政安排,而是需要有創意、膽識和洞見。
信報 (2005- 8-25)

#信報的題目是:策展人為甚麼說不?

回應

What is modern art...

Have read about the use of a head of
a 7 month old foetus (supposingly a girl) in a piece of 'Modern Art' in
China. Don't know who can or can't judge it, but what is 'modern
art'? Or, should I say, what is art?

-- Frostig 於 August 27, 2005 03:44 AM

(按此看回應全文)
A reflection of culture

I also felt surprise when I first see
them to use dead bodies to make art. An artist even ate dead babies.
They want controversy, so as to arouse more discussion. Some artists
are proud of doing something that western artists are not dare to do
and do not do it through. Some artists claimed that it is an inner
need. They have a lot of suppression. I think it is kind of reflection
of culture. It is illegal in Hong Kong to mal-treat dead bodies. It is
very easy in mainland China to get dead bodies. A lot of badies are
killed because of single child policy. The eating babies project means
something, although I do not like these works.

-- 晶瑩 於 August 27, 2005 10:35 AM

(按此看回應全文)
That's true

The artist who made it has explained her meanings, kind of, which I may write an article to discuss about later.

In fact, my question is, who decides what is art and what isn't?
The artists? Because we common people can't understand modern art? If
arts doesn't help communication between the artists and us non-artists,
what is the meaning of it? Has it become a special language of just a
few privileged ones?

I am not complaining, sorry! I am just
thinking it is too difficult for outsiders to start understanding all
these and to get involved. In this case, things can get more and more
extreme......

-- Frostig 於 August 27, 2005 02:19 PM

(按此看回應全文)
you decide what is art

Contemporary art is open and liberal.
Everything can be art. Everyone can decide what is art. If it is a
monkey's picture, other people can help it to say its picture is art.
The idea changed. The technique of making art is not only about
crafting, it is also about choosing. Since everything can be art, it is
more interesting to know what is good art, how to make arts better.

Since we can use different standard to evaluate a piece of art, it
makes people feel art is not accessible. How can I know all the
standard? I am an artist, even I sometimes feel difficult to read some
artworks. However, I think it is the cost, if we want art to be more
open and liberal.

We also need to respect something we do
not know well. At the same time, we also have the right to be
indifferent to some art works which are not interested to communicate
with others.
I think only those art works which have feedback can remain in art history.

-- 晶瑩 於 August 27, 2005 08:04 PM

(按此看回應全文)
Thanks!

Still, it seems that modern art is
not approachable. Too difficult to understand, too difficult to feel.
It may be a pity, but it is just going further and further from the
general public, and getting more and more extreme.

By the way, I agree, only those who can express themselves well and clearly stay behind, like in nearly every domain...

-- Frostig 於 August 28, 2005 12:25 AM

(按此看回應全文)

廣告