它一路飞行,跨越大洲

2017年01月13日 18:26 新浪收藏 微博
微博 微信 空间 分享 添加喜爱

  第三届南京国际美术展拥有来自五大洲的52个国家和地区的艺术家参与,在总结前两届经验的基础上,尊重行业规则,专注于专业性、学术性、国际化的提升。开幕至今已有40多天,不仅吸引了社会各界人士的目光,也受到了国内外参展艺术家的青睐。

展览现场图展览现场图

  在百家湖美术馆的一层,Dimitri Kosiré的装置系列《射穿》、《毁灭》、《焚烧》吸引了众多观者的驻足。美术馆的公共收藏是对社会最好的回馈,在Dimitri Kosiré看来,第三届南京国际美术展的主题“HISTORICODE:萧条与供给”和他的作品是融为一体的,他认为百家湖美术馆才是它们最好的归宿。同时,这也是百家湖美术馆自11月12日开馆之后所收到的第一件捐赠作品,这是一个很好的开始。美术馆通过不断丰富的馆藏作品为观众设计一个活态的中国当代艺术史的语境,使得参观过长期馆藏陈列展的观众能在最短的时间读懂当下的艺术,这是拉进观众与“艺术”距离、改变“曲高和寡”状态的最佳捷径。

  我们很荣幸的收到来自法国的艺术家Dimitri Kosiré的捐赠,这一系列优秀作品将被百家湖美术馆永久收藏。

  Dimitri Kosiré:

  1968年生于巴黎,学习戏剧、视觉艺术和人文学科,现工作生活于法国布伦。

  Dimitri Kosiré:

  “生存还是毁灭,这是个问题…去死,去睡,去睡!也许会做梦。。。。。。” , 威廉·莎士比亚戏剧中哈姆雷特的独白我们反映了我们作为凡人的境遇。。。但是艺术品的境遇又是如何?

  我可以想象,沉睡数年后的它走出巢穴,重拾其古老的吸引力,恢复活力,准备再次迎接光明,架起尤金·德拉克洛瓦所诠释的“连接艺术品与欣赏者之间的神秘桥梁。”

  这便是艺术作品的真谛。。。传达思想、表诉概念、呈递情感、推动技术创新,以及提出命题…如果作品找不到它的位置,它的定位,所有的这一切也只是枉然。“暴力美学”这一系列装置作品在“HISTORICODE:萧条与供给”展览之际完成,该展览活动也是这一事业的滥觞。仿佛这组作品便是为此冥冥注定的相遇而诞生。它早已存在,好像大脑迷宫中虚无的梦境,它不在哈姆雷特的梦里,却在我的梦乡。尽管如此,它仍然需要召唤。终于它被装好箱,一路飞行,跨越大洲,在南京呈现……这就是它的历史……它顺理成章地在南京国际美术展的收藏中找到了自己的位置。

  某个清晨,网上浏览报纸新闻,我的目光被一个战争报告中的照片所吸引。我的双眼好比视觉艺术家,它们前一天大量工作,此刻尚还清醒,却也惴惴不安,它们不禁被这一图片深深吸引,从中寻找一种罕见的视觉力量,近乎催眠般的力量。我并不能完全明白它所代表的含义;它一直保持抽象,直到我能够将它与现实连接的那一刻。突然,潜意识中的抑制力出现,我的道德意识阻止我、禁止我就此被迷住。当然这种禁止是有道理的,因为这张绝妙图片的背后,是可怕的、恐怖的、噩梦般的现实。。。难以言状。

  因此,这种审美体验是觉醒的来源,而不是反思…随之而来的是这种视觉工作的概念,我称之为:“暴力美学”。

  这些图片传达了什么样的审美?为什么将它们每天展示给我们看?最重要的是,我们为什么要看它们?他们是否对我们施加力量?

  从这些图片中提取视觉特质,去定义实际上是他们的基础的那些词汇:《射穿》《毁灭》《焚烧》,将其视觉元素最小化,目的在于更好地感知它们传达的美学。 正是这样的探索,这样的强调,推进了该装置作品的实现。

  我属于1991年直接“直播”听完第一场战争的一代,像一场电视真人秀,在这场真人秀中,“沙漠风暴”行动推翻萨达姆·侯赛因。当SKUD导弹针对伊拉克开始启动时,我舒适地坐着,面朝屏幕。我有点害怕,当然,因为这是一场战争,自1945年以来西方最大的一场战争。但是很快,我又放心了,因为它并不是那么可怕:发光的炮弹被送入天空,记者直接从酒店屋顶发回报道。我们在观看一个电视事件。。。有事在发生,毫无疑问还是很严重的事情,最终,和虚构的电影或者最多是游戏一样,它同样不具备真实性。现实和虚拟世界之间的边界变得非常模糊。一旦将某一事件拍摄下来,它变成了一个图片(像素化),并响应美学原则。不管我们是否有意为之,我们每天都在消费着这些暴力、破坏、战争的图片,它们回应着美学:“暴力美学”。强调其视觉诉求,像这样将它们展示出来,成为承认他们力量、并且影响我们的一种行为。

  作者:Dimitri Kosiré

  经Ann Cremin译为英文

作品现场图作品现场图

  “ To be or not to be, that is the question…To die…to sleep, to sleep! Perchance to dream … ”Hamlet’s monologue in William Shakespeare’s play thus reflecting our condition as simple mortals…but what of a work of art?

  I can imagine it emerging from its nest after a few years’ sleep and recovering its ancient appeal, coming back to life, ready once more to welcome the light, and to establish “that mysterious bridge which exists between an artwork and those who look at it” to paraphrase Eugène Delacroix。

  That is the whole purpose of a work of art …to convey ideas, concepts, emotions, technical innovations, as well as issues …。but all of that is nothing if a work does not find its place, a location。 The installation “ Aesthetic of Violence” was carried out on the occasion of the exhibition “HISTORICODE:Scarcity and Supply” and that event was the originator of its undertaking。 That installation might never have seen the light of day without that potential appointment。 It already existed, like the vague stuff of dreams in the maze of a brain, not that of Hamlet but my own。 It nonetheless needed to be summoned, then once undertaken, it needed to be invited。 Then it found its packing case and thanks to the airways, it travelled over the continents to finally be shown in Nanjing…。such is its history…it was therefore very naturally that it found its place in the collection of the Nanjing International Art Festival。

  One morning, glancing through the newspaper on internet, my eye remained fixed on a photograph in a war report。 My eye as a visual artist, which had worked a great deal the day before, was still wide awake, on edge, and it could not help but be caught up by that image, to find in it a rare visual power, almost hypnotizing。 I did not fully grasp what it represented; it remained abstract until the moment where I was able to link it up to a reality。  Immediately a censorship was set up, and my ethical sense prevented me, forbade me, to remain thus captivated。 Quite rightly of course, since behind that stunning image there was a horrible, ghastly, nightmarish reality… indescribable。

  That aesthetic experience was thus the source of awareness, rather than of a reflection。 … Thus was born the notion of that visual work which I named:“the aesthetics of violence”。

  What aestheticism do these images transmit?  Why are they shown us daily and above all, why do we look at them? Do they exercise power over us?

  To extract from these images a visual quality, to define what is in fact their basic vocabulary: ? Bulleted ? ? Destroyed ? ? Combusted ?, to minimize its visual elements in order to become aware of the aestheticism they convey。 It was that research, that highlighting, which motivated the carrying out of that installation。

  I belong to that generation which, in 1991, sat through the first war directly ? live ?, like a TV reality show when the operation ?Desert storm? took place to overturn Saddam Hussein。 I was seated comfortably, facing the screen, when the SKUD missiles began to be launched against Iraq。 A bit terrified, of course, because it was a war, the first of that amplitude in the West since 1945。  But very soon, I was rather reassured because it was not so terrifying: luminous projectiles sent into the skies, journalists reporting directly from hotel roofs。 We were watching a televisual event… something was happening, undoubtedly something very serious, but finally it had no more reality than the virtuality of a movie or at most of a video game。 The frontier between Reality and Virtuality was becoming very hazy。 As soon as an event is filmed, it becomes an image (pixilated) and responds to aesthetic principles。 Those images of violence, destruction, wars, which, deliberately or not, we consume every day, answer that aesthetics: ?aesthetics of violence ?。 Underlining its visual resorts, exhibiting them as such, becomes a way of acknowledging their power and of the action they exercise over us。  

扫描下载库拍APP

扫描关注带你看展览

扫描关注新浪收藏

推荐阅读
关闭评论
高清大图+ 更多