周官武
我和戴增钧是老朋友。十多年时间里，我几乎见证了他的整个创作发展过程，从抽象到具象，从稚嫩到成熟。其间绘画语言转换和技术成熟所带来的画面效果的提升是显而易见的，这也是戴增钧的作品逐渐引起重视的重要因素之一。但我对此倒并不太在意，身处一个影像泛滥的时代，任何单纯的、无论精致或粗砺的视觉冲击不过是引人疲劳的无数视觉刺激中的“又一个”罢了。我看重戴增钧的作品，是因为我在他的作品中看到一种难得的视角：关注当下，以及他对当下的独特注解方式。
“关注当下”曾经是被崇奉的艺术信条，也曾因被等同于“再现”而钩织了束缚性的意义牢笼，从而一度声誉扫地。二十世纪现代主义兴起，其深层动力有一部分就来自挣脱“再现”牢笼的强烈冲动。现实的归现实，艺术的归艺术，当代艺术共同体在现代主义终成殿堂经典的语境下重构新的盟约。
然而，艺术并不是真空中的抽象存在，它不得不置身当下，接受当下的约束。如果我们认为艺术的意义或价值还是一个有意义、有价值的问题，那么，作为能指的艺术的意义或价值唯有在与作为所指的当下的复杂关系下才能被理解。剥离掉当下，艺术就成了干巴巴的残缺的符号。回避当下的结果，无非是由主动关注当下转为被动地接受当下的约束，当代艺术却因此日益退化为小圈子的孤芳自赏，最终沦为消费文化无足轻重的附庸。当下视野的消失意味着艺术失去必要的人文关怀，艺术家试图构造一个为艺术而艺术的独立“世界3”，却造成艺术与当代的脱离，并日复一日、年复一年地使当代艺术沦为搞怪、怪搞充斥的平庸表演。于是有了鲍德里亚的冷嘲：当代艺术只与它自己当代了。当代艺术对当代的抽象建构注定了它在当代的边缘化命运。
“关注当下”与“再现”的历史同盟早已灰飞烟灭，对于当代艺术，“关注当下”所构造的意义牢笼只存在于想象之中。当“关注当下”已不再妨碍艺术创作和艺术表现的自由，它的意义应该得到重新表述：“关注当下”不是可有可无的视角或姿态，而是艺术之为艺术的前提（或游戏规则）。即便仅仅是为了挽救当代艺术岌岌可危的命运，回归前提也是必须做出的选择罢。
我相信，当戴增钧经历了迷恋抽象绘画的创作青涩期，转而把目光投向那个无比复杂的当下的时候，大概也有这么一份思索吧。
戴增钧近期的绘画作品充斥着暧昧，甚至有些荒诞的意象，痴肥臃肿的男人、突兀的动物、渺茫的荒野，这一切经常纠结于触目的上下二分构图。然而这些意象并非要构造超现实主义的梦呓图景，它们最后组合成一个精心谋划的叙事结构，讲述着一个个并不离奇的故事。正是通过这些故事，戴增钧完成了自己对当下的意义投射。因为这些故事无一例外关乎当下、当下的人，它们的主题只有一个：置身当下的人的逃离。
是的，逃离，从钢筋混凝土丛林中逃离，从利益交织的无形之网中逃离。每一个置身当下的人，当他在现实面前身心俱疲的时候，只怕隐约都会有这样一份渴望吧。正是从这个角度，戴增钧为我们展示了当下社会中人的精神状态和生存状态。
几乎在戴增钧每一幅作品中都会出现的那些男人是谁？不同于经典叙事性作品中的主角，他们是如此的平庸，如此的孤独，那缺乏锻炼的肥胖肉体赤裸着，足以挑战人们对主角的一切想象。然而，如果你能跳出宏大叙事和华美修辞所营造的话语体系，就会发现，他们确乎是艺术该呈现的唯一主角，因为，他就是你，就是我，就是我们——这些当下的活生生的人。那绝对缺乏美感的肉体，萎顿乃至猥琐的神态，不正是我们朝九晚五、东奔西突辛苦培育的结果么？
这些男人本该坐在办公室里对着电脑发呆，或者，瘫坐在电视机前的沙发上大嚼爆米花或薯片，一遍又一遍地观看着没有营养的肥皂剧。然而，他逃离了。他骑上自行车在草丛里撒欢，打开手电贼兮兮地寻觅树上的鸟禽，跟驴子一起打滚，扬起漫天尘土。戴增钧给我们带来的是一系列的错置影像，叠置着兴奋与怠惰、野性与驯化、平庸与不凡、滞重与跳脱、丑陋与优美，形象与行为、环境风马牛不相及地错位着，于是，一场场小小的、却足以令人张口结舌的乌托邦事件发生了。没有那般轰轰烈烈，不过是肆意的张扬一下，于当下的人却已是近乎乌托邦的渴望，这就是当下的尴尬与局促。
这份尴尬与局促在当代艺术中不乏表现，由于中国社会急剧转型所造成的不调适，表现这种状态在中国当代艺术中可谓显学，但上世纪新启蒙以来形成的思维惯性却给一切染上了浓浓的意识形态色彩，以致我们所能看到的作品大多被赋予乖张的政治波普样貌，意识形态的过度执着以及由此导致的宏大叙事的空洞嘶吼不仅没能提供灵魂的庇护所，反而屡屡陷入脸谱化、符号化的困境。
值得庆幸的是，流行的政治波普图式没有为戴增钧所选择，他明智地回避着意识形态化的声嘶力竭表达方式，用平和的笔触展现当代人的尴尬与局促，从而保留了对于艺术作品极为宝贵的那些品质——丰富性、多元性和微妙感。他描绘着庸常的人，不漂亮，但快乐，有些恣意，又有些拘束，从中看不到冷嘲热讽和丝毫的调侃意味，他的视角是平视的而非居高临下的。他同情着、感同身受着这些小人物的挣扎，仿佛他们就是他的朋友、亲人、身边的每一个人乃至他自己。没有批判，他们是小人物，既没有为非作歹，也没有什么显微镜下才见的劣根性，本不该受到批判；也不准备拯救，他们活的好好的，只是受了现代性的束缚，有那么一点小小的纠结，渴望片刻间的逃离，一点点的放纵，有什么要拯救的？从云端的救世主到地上的观察者、参与者，角色的转变已经成为当代人文研究的共识，对于当代艺术，这种转变又何尝不是必须的。
戴增钧讲述的并不是新编“寄情山林”的故事。这些故事的主角没有那种高贤大隐的飘逸优雅，形象谈不上什么美感，甚至有些猥琐，他们带着浓郁的烟火味。然而，当这些烟火味散布于水塘、草丛、原野，混杂着鸡飞狗跳、驴嘶鸟鸣，那刻意的乌托邦情景反而衬托着现实的粗砺质感几乎要溢出画面之外了。戴增钧的故事无关出世，更象是现世的一个小事故，偶然的空白，瞬间的宕机，事故过后，一切还将回归正常。而这，也没什么可悲哀的。逃离，于当下的人，并不是永久的离去，不过是突如其来的意气飞扬、不期而至的灵魂出窍，是“另一种”生活的希望。“另一种”生活的价值不在于实现，而在于它作为希望仍然被当下的人们期望着。
面对戴增钧的作品，我经常有一种温暖的感觉。不晦涩，不故作高深，不悲天悯人，不怨天尤人，不声色俱厉，戴增钧讲述的小故事平静如斯、坦白如斯，仿如一个久熟的医生朋友在描述你并不严重的病况。他的作品更像一种关心的记录，而不是某种处心积虑的表达，他关切地记录着当下人们的生存状态与渴望，却不试图教导人们该如何生存于这个世界。这是戴增钧给我们贡献的另外一种关注当下的方式，没有政治波普的干涩感觉，象极了口头叙事，生动、鲜活。我会因他讲述的小故事会心一笑，也会同情他笔下那些小人物的命运，但每每回过神来，却难免自嘲：那些人不就是我自己嘛。谁不渴望一个逃离的机会，可是，谁又能真正摆脱那份尴尬与局促？
好在，我们还有艺术。
2012年9月16日 于石家庄铁道大学
Zhou Guanwu
Mr. Dai and I are close friends. In the past decade, I have witnessed his general artistic development of creation from abstract to concrete, puerile to mature. It is obvious to find the visual image improvement brought out by the change of his painting language and mature skills, which is one of the important reasons why his works are being brought to the fore-front. But this isn’t what impressed me , for living in such an age flooded by images, any simple visual impact, whether delicate or rough, is just “another one” amongst all those that could lead to visual fatigue. What mattered is that I find a precious perspective in Mr. Dai’s work: focusing on the present, and giving his own unique comment.
“Focusing on the present” was once an art creed being worshiped. But later it has been discredited for being equaled to “reproduction”. Parts of the driving forces behind the rise of modernism in the twentieth century came from the excessive urge to get rid of this fetter of “reproduction”. With both art and reality being classified to its own catalogue, modern art is forming its new framework under the context that modernism becomes the classic once again.
Art is not an abstract existence; it has to be put into the present world and accept its rules. If we regard finding the meaning and value of art as a meaningful and valuable question , then only under complicated relations could we really find them. Without the present reality, art becomes defective symbol. The consequence of escaping from reality is to shift from actively focusing on the present reality to passively accept its restraint; at the same time, contemporary art degrades to self-admiration in small society, and ultimately, the attachment to consumerism of little importance. The disappearance of present means that art has lost necessary humanistic care. The artists are trying hard to build an independent “world III” only to find that they are seceding from reality. And day after day, art is decaying into an indifferent performance full of wonky things. Therefore, we have Baudrillard’s fleer: contemporary art could only be contemporizing with itself. Its abstract construction has decided its fate of being marginalized in the present age.
The questions of “focusing on the present” and “reproduction” have already vanished. And for contemporary art itself, the fetter built by “focusing on the present” only exists in imaginary world. While it is no longer the obstacle for artistic creation and expression, it should be re-expressed; focusing on the present is not a dispensable perspective, instead, it is the premise for art to be named art (or the game rule). To be back to these premises is the choice we have to make, even if its sole purpose is to save the life of contemporary art which is now hanging on a thread.
I believe Mr. Dai must have such a thought himself. After going through a juvenile production period, when he was obsessed with abstract painting, he is now gazing at the complicated present.
Dai Zengjun’s recent works are flooded with ambiguity, and even some ridiculous images such as a bloated man, peculiar animals and remote wilderness. All these images are settled in an eye-catching dichotomy composition. Whereas these images are not made to create super-natural pictures, they form a well planned narration, and tell stories that are not peculiar. And it is through such stories that Mr. Dai has accomplished projecting his own implication towards the present, for all these stories are about the present; they share a common theme: people’s escape from the present.
Yes, to escape from the concrete jungle and from an invisible net of benefits. Maybe each one of us has such a desire to escape when we are exhausted. It is from this perspective that Mr. Dai Zengjun demonstrates the mental and living states of modern people.
Who are the guys that appear in almost every piece of work of Dai? Different from those in the classic narrative works, they appeared to be so ordinary, lonely, and are fat, naked and unfit, they are challenging our imagination towards the characters. However, if you could jump out of the utterance system created by great narration and magnificent rhetoric, you’ll find that they are surely the only characters to be presented by this art. Because they are people just like you and me – people living in reality. The body that is “aestethically challenged”, and the exhausted, even dreadful expressions are just the vivid portraits brought out by these hard nine-to-five lives.
Originally, these men should just be sitting in the office, staring at the computers, or just watching senseless soap operas with their mouths filled with popcorn and potato chips. Nevertheless, they run away. Riding on their bikes, they are burning their energies outdoor: catching birds with their flashlights, rolling on the ground with donkeys, and raising all the dust. Dai gives us a series of misplaced images together with excitement and idleness, wildness and domestication, ordinary and extraordinary, stagnation and liveliness, ugliness and beauty, static image and action etc. Therefore, a small but shocking utopian thing happened. Even a single mention of it has aroused our desire towards the utopian, and that is just the awkward situation of the present.
There are frequent mentions of this awkwardness in contemporary art. And the rapid social transformation has made it obvious in Chinese contemporary art, whereas the inertia of thinking, started from last century’s new enlightenment, covers everything with thick ideology, and that is also why we could see everything being endowed with political complexion. Over-emphasis on ideology and consequent hollow great narration couldn’t give our souls a shelter, while they have been trapped into the dilemma of lacking individualization and symbolization.
But the good news is that Dai didn’t choose such prevalent political ideology. He wisely avoids expressing his ideas through ideological means; instead, he tries to display the awkwardness of modern people through his gentle brushstroke, therefore, protecting those precious qualities of art---richness, diversity and subtleness. He depicts the common people who are not beautiful but happy, with a sense of restrained recklessness. We could not sense a bit of irony or scoff, for he holds a perspective that is not patronizing. He offers his sympathy towards these characters as if they were his friends, relatives, or even himself. There is no criticism for they are nobodies, neither have they done evil things nor do they have any deep-rooted bad habits. There is no rescue for they all live their lives, and just being constrained by modernism; therefore, having little confusions, hoping to have a moment away and enjoying themselves. It is universally acknowledged that in contemporary human research, we should change from the savior in the cloud to inspectors, participator on the ground. Isn’t such change also necessary for contemporary arts?
What Dai has portrayed is not secluded and free from care. Those characters in his paintings are not very elegant, neither do they have beautiful images, they all carry senses of worldly flavor. Whereas, when all those worldly senses are being scattered among the ponds, grass, the field with hens flying and dogs flying, donkey hissing and birds singing, the rough sense of reality is almost going to spill over the picture under the contrast of the deliberate utopian spot. Dai’s story is not about detachment, it is more like a little accident in the current world, accidental blankness, instant turnoff, and after that, everything will be back on the track. And it is not a grief at all. For people living in this world, to escape doesn’t mean to run away forever, it is just that your soul unexpectedly freed itself from the body, it is just a hope for “another” kind of life. What matters for this another kind of life is not realization, but the hope itself.
Enjoying Dai’s works always gives me a sense of warmth. It is not obscure, not pretend to be profound, it doesn’t lament the state of the universe and pity the fate of mankind, and it is not complaining. It just narrates the whole little story thus peacefully and honestly like well acquainted friends describing a minor ailment. His works are more like a record out of concern than deliberate expression, in which he tries to record people’s living states and desires, but does not try to instruct people how to survive. Without dreadful political ideology, he contributes to focusing on the present; it is just like an oral narration, vivid and lively. I may smile understandingly because of the story and I may feel sympathetic towards those characters, but each time I recover from such feelings, I become self-deprecating: aren’t these characters just vivid description of myself? Is there anyone who doesn’t desire a chance to escape? But who on earth could really get rid of this awkwardness and constrain?
Fortunately, we still have the art.
Sept. 16th, 2012 at Shijiazhuang Tiedao University
皖公网安备 34010402700602号