文/何桂彦
绘画，对于庹光焰而言，在绝大多数时候，是作为现实与心灵的镜像而存在的。现实与心灵，一个是客体，一个是主体，彼此既相对的独立，也可以密切维系。在庹光焰的作品中，现实是意义生效的起点，但艺术家并不希望作品仅仅停留在现实的表层，因为一旦现实成为画面的绝对主体，那么艺术的价值就会丧失。同样，艺术家也不希望自己的作品去构筑一个精神的乌托邦，一个形而上的世界，因为在他看来，一旦脱离了现实，绘画自然会走向虚无。庹光焰希望在现实与精神，抑或说表象世界与心灵世界之间，找到一个临界点，建立一个通道。实际上，庹光焰是一个十分迷恋绘画的艺术家，这种迷恋不只是因为源于绘画的各种技巧，而是每一次的绘画创作都是对自我的剥离，是与心灵的对话，更重要的是自我在场的证明。从这个意义上讲，现实是创作的起点，而绘画的归宿则是自我的心灵，而之间的过程，则是不断的劳作与精神的磨砺。
Most of the time, painting is like the mirror of reality and spirit for Guangyan Tuo. Reality and spirit, one is object with another is subject, they are relatively independent while closely connected. Among the works of Guangyan Tuo, reality is the initiative but an artist doesn’t want their works only to stay on the surface, because once reality became the subject the value of art would be lost. At the same time, an artist wouldn’t hope to use their works to build a spirit of Utopia, a formal world. As in his eyes painting will lose its meaning once they divorce reality. Guangyan Tuo hopes to find a critical point, build a bridge between reality and spirit or the idea world and spirit world. In fact, Guangyan Tuo is an artist who has been obsessed into painting. This obsession is not only about all kinds of techniques, but every creation is a conversation with his inner heart, the journey of sublimation, more importantly it is a proof of self-attendance. On this level, reality is the foundation of creation but the purpose of painting is his soul and the process is the combination of continually work and spirit evaluation.
2000年以来，尽管庹光焰的作品在题材上出现过几次较大的变化，但大致可以将其分为两个阶段。以2010年为界，前期的作品立足于都市文化与消费时代的语境，注重对现实生存境遇的关注；后一个阶段的作品主要围绕“风景”展开。90年代中后期，“都市题材”在中国当代绘画领域曾掀起一股新的潮流。庹光焰的《城市•面孔》系列显然与这一潮流是有内在关联的。从一开始，艺术家并不追求对“城市”进行真实的视觉再现，而是用一种主观的、多少有些超现实的手法呈现出当代都市的景观化特征。为了突出“景观化”的特点，艺术家以挪用与并置的手法相结合，将各种与都市相关的、片段的场景作为画面的主体。而在“面孔”的背后，我们则看到了生活在都市之中的芸芸众生。即便我们不知道他/她们的身份、职业、阶层，但生存的境况却是共同的，均被都市森林所围困。没有重心的构图让画面传递出一种失衡感——那是一种凌乱、无序、充满焦虑的生活；那些错位、碎片化的都市景观则让画面形成了一种巨大的张力，不仅让人感到压抑，而且会产生莫名的荒诞。由于放弃了“再现”，所以，画面的叙事是非线性的、断裂的，它们既在我们的经验之内，又似乎在经验之外，最终在介于现实与超现实之间，艺术家表达了当代都市人那种独特的生存感受。注重符号化的表达，利用“波普化”的视觉经验，同时，艺术家在表现与具像之间所做的调和，让这一系列作品在语言上有了个人化的特点。多少有些遗憾的是，《城市•面孔》系列并没有在后来的创作中予以推进，直到2010年，与“城市”相关的创作才重新回到艺术家的视野。
Since 2000, Guangyan Tuo’s works could be roughly divided into two phases even though the topics went through several major changes. Divided by 2010, his former works are based on city culture and consumption discourse, focused on real survival environment. The works of later phase are mainly surround “landscape”. In late 90s, “urban topic” has set off a fresh trend. His series of City.Face was clearly connected to this trend. Ever since the beginning, artists didn’t pursue the real visual expression of “cities”; they used a subjective and surreal technique to show us the character of scenery. In order to emphasize “scenery”, artists use methods of borrow and apposition, put all kinds of city pictures and scenery fractions as paintings core body. But under the “Face”, we see all living things in the city. Even though we don’t know their IDs, occupations, level, but the circumstances are the same, are trapped by the urban jungles. Compositions without core would express a statement of losing balance——which is a life of chaos, disorder and full of anxieties; That malposition, fraction image of cities would give the painting a huge tension which will make people feel not only depression but also inexplicable absurd. Since giving up “representation” the plot of the painting is nonlinear, cracked. They are living in our experience or stay out of it. Finally, between reality and surreal artists showed us the unique living experience of contemporary city dwellers. Lay emphasize on symbolism, using “popularize” experience as well as blending expression and appearance, all of these made this series full of personal characteristic. Sadly on one aspect, City.Face series weren’t promoted in later creation, up until 2010, works related “city” has returned to the field of art.
以2000年前后的《粉色》，到2007—2008年的《Pose》系列，呈现出庹光焰另一条创作轨迹。《粉色》画的是一些女性裸体，在手法上注重意象与表现。在这一系列作品中，艺术家并没有过多去强调性别的指向性，而是让作品围绕“身体”话语而展开。那么，“身体”是如何在场的呢？艺术家没有描绘一个所谓“自在”的身体，反而使其处于一种扭动、纠结的状态。同时，这也是一些性别模糊，被欲望所支配的身体，暧昧、异化是它们的共同症候。“粉色”在这一系列作品中，也不再是视觉上的，或色调意义上的表达，反而更像是一种暗示，因为画面从一开始就充斥着情色话语。《Pose》系列是《粉色》系列的延续。与此前的作品比较，一个重要的变化，是艺术家强化了“身体”的那种不适感。身体再也无法承载过多的欲望，它们开始挣扎，它们感到颤栗。由于外部世界带给身体的伤害，在这种景况下，身体也不再纯粹，更不是赤裸的肉身。在《Pose之四》《Pose之五》中，我们看到了艺术家力图将身体的“伤害”视觉化的努力。
From Pink around 200 to Pose series between 2007-2008, Guangyan Tuo has showed us another creation track. Pink was about some female nudity which he focused on idea and expressions. In this series, the artist didn’t pay much attention on the gender aspect, but on “body” language. So how does the “body” present? He didn’t describe a so-called “free” body but in a twisted and struggled statement. Meanwhile, they are some bodies which have been trapped in gender confusion and desires, ambiguity and alienation are their common symptom. In this series, Pink is not about visual or color, it is an imply because it full of erotic expressions. Pose is an extension of Pink. Compare to former works, one important change was he strengthens the uncomfortable feeling of “body”. The bodies are no long undertake excessive desires, they start to struggle, trembling. Due to injuries from outside world, at this situation, the body isn’t just a pure or nude flesh. In Pose IV and Pink V, we saw he tried to visualize the “injures” of the body.
《城市•面孔》《粉色》《Pose》从题材上看尽管有很大的差异，但在艺术家创作观念的生成中，却有内在的一致性：它们源于对现实的关照，也与个体的生存境遇有关，与当下充斥着整个社会的消费话语有关。从这个角度讲，《粉色》《Pose》中的身体，也是一种被“男性”凝视和消费的身体。再后来，消费话语在《玩偶秀》《秀系列》中有了更进一步的呈现。当西方社会进入工业与消费时代不久，马克思就创造了一个新的概念——商品拜物教。“拜物教”（Fetish）这个词汇原本是法国哲学家布罗斯（Charles De Brosses）于1757年创造的。而对商品拜物教最简单的理解，也就是在消费社会的背景下，商品开始被赋予了各种象征性的价值，使其具有了某种神秘的诱惑力，驱使着人们去迷恋它、崇拜它。《秀系列》并没有着重对内衣进行表现，而是去揭示，那些被时尚、审美等话语所包裹的消费欲望。因此，在《秀系列》的背后，人们不仅将内衣看作是时尚之物，而与此同时，人们在观看、欣赏这些内衣时，实质隐藏了对模特身体的消费。同理，“玩偶”不仅仅只是物理意义上的“物品”，它们的存在同样被各种消费话语所支配。实际上，从《粉色》以来，在庹光焰的作品中，青春与残酷、身体与欲望、消费与伤害始终是溶于一体的，艺术家以个人化的方式，去言说这个社会带给自己的生存感受，也呈现出对当代过度物欲化生活的反思。
City.Face, Pink and Pose have big differences topic-wise, but from the creation concept they share the same root: they are all originated from realities, as well as related to living circumstances and contemporary consumption discourse. From this point, bodies in Pink and Pose are the ones that’s been staring and consuming by “males”. Later then consumption discourse got further exhibit in Puppet Show and Show Series. Soon after western society entered industry and consuming era, Marx created a new concept——commodity fetishism. “Commodity fetishism” was created by French philosopher Charles De Brosses in 1757. The simple understanding of commodity fetishism is under the background of consuming society, commodities have been given all kinds of symbolism which would give them some mysterious attraction that would drive people to abscessed into it, worship it. Show Series uncovers the consuming desires which were wrapped by fashionable, aesthetic word instead of emphasizing the expression of underwear. Therefore in the Show Series people not only see underwear as fashion items but also when they enjoy these underwear they actually hide the consumption of the bodies. In the same way, “Puppet” is not only the actually “objects”, they are also dominated by kinds of consumption discourse. In fact, ever since Pink, in Guangyan Tuo’s works, youth and cruelty, bodies and desires, consumption and injure are all merged together, he uses his personal way to explain the feelings of this society, as well as the reflection of the overly physical life.
（二）
2010年，《道口》《桥》等作品的出现，预示着庹光焰的作品开始转向。“道口”和“立交桥”在现实生活中都有自己的“原型”，它们位于北京大山子附件，只是不在同一条道路上。庹光焰在黑桥艺术区生活了多年，每次驱车出门，艺术家就会经过其中的一个地方。但是在作品中，这些日常熟悉的景观变得十分陌生，在视觉与心理上都有一种疏离感。与《城市•面孔》呈现出的“错位”与不稳定性比较起来，我们在这些画作中，看不到城市既有的喧嚣与混杂，相反变得异常的宁静。就画面中的日常景观来说，它们既熟悉又陌生，虽近犹远；既源于现实，又多少具有超现实的意味。这种独特的审美体验，在于画面中，“人物”是缺席的。譬如，在《立交桥》这件作品中，观众能感受的仅仅是都市建筑物背后的理性与秩序，以及一个冷冰冰的躯体。作为这些场景的观看者，艺术家本人也是缺席的。不过，之所以画面会弥散出一种疏离感，就在于，艺术家把自己当作是一个局外人，一个旁观者，一个栖息于都市但又期望逃离都市的“他者”。而“他者的眼光”实质发端于艺术家长期对都市生存状态的关注与反思。或许，在这些画面中，唯一富有诗意的便是漂浮在空气中的气球——它们让这冰冷冷的场景有了情感的温度。
In 2010, Crossing and Bridge and etc. indicated Guangyan Tuo’s work has been turned to another direction. “Crossing” and “overpass” have their “prototype” which is located in near Da Shan Zi in Beijing, just not in the same street. Guangyan Tuo has been living in Heiqiao Art Zone for years, every time when he drives out he passes one of them. But in the painting, the familiar scenery become very strange ones, it has an alienation feeling. Compare to the “misplace” and unstable in City.Face, we see unusual peacefulness instead of chaos. As for the daily scene in the painting, they are familiar and strange, close and far, from reality and full of surreal feeling. This unique aesthetic experience is absent to the “people” in the painting. For example, in Overpass, audience only can feel the ration and order behind constructions and a cold body. As to the viewer of the scene, artist himself is absent. But the reason why it shows a sense of alienation is the artist consider himself as an outsider, a spectator, a “the other” who is living in the city but want to escape. And the “view of the other” is actually originated from his long focus and reflection on the living situation of the city. Maybe in these paintings, the only most poetic thing is the floating balloons——they give the cold scene emotions.
毫无疑问，“风景”是庹光焰这一时期创作的重要母体。在我看来，《道口》《桥》《城市》系列在广义的范畴应属于“社会风景”。所谓的“社会风景”，就是自然的风景或景观只是一种现实的表象，一种通道，社会学的叙事则隐藏在表象之下。和这些倾向于外在的、社会学叙事的“风景”比较起来，《公园》《暮光》系列代表着另一种风景类型——即内在的、自我的、充满心理现实主义意味的风景。艺术家将五彩的现实在表现过程中予以语言上的纯化，使其笼罩在单一的色彩氛围中，物理意义上的“褪色”反而强化了视觉心理上的疏离感。对于这一时期的“风景”来说，它们既是现实的，也是想象的；既是视觉的，也是记忆中的。不仅如此，在这些宁静的风景背后，实质隐藏着另一个世界。在《暮光》之五中，表面看，这是一个日常风景的片段，平淡无奇，波澜不惊，然而，当观众仔细打量画面，不禁会发现，里面会散发出一种神秘的气息，场景中好像曾发生过什么，又似乎没有任何头绪。艺术家并没有提供给我们太多的线索，即便如此，画面中那种莫名的焦虑，抑或是惊诧却呼之欲出。在《暮光》之十、《暮光》之十一这两件作品中，画面出现了一些异样的情节，但它们是没有上下文的，没有一个清晰的逻辑，其叙事方式也是断裂的。在平静的外衣下，故事却在悄然的展开，不知道它们从哪里开始，又到哪里结束。显然，画作中的世界既是一个自足的世界，也是一个荒诞的世界。
No doubt, “landscape” is the matrix for Guangyan Tuo’s creation at this phase. For my point of view, Crossing, Bridge and City series are all belong to “society landscape”, which is nature landscape is just the appearance of a reality, sociology has been hidden under it. Compare to these exterior, sociology “landscape”, Park and Twilight series represent another type of landscape——the inner, self-reveal and full of psychological realism. Artist purifies the colorful realities, cover it with single color. Physical “fade” emphasize psychological alienation. For the “landscape” at this phase, they are real and imaginative; visual and memorized. Furthermore, under the quiet landscape, there hide another world. In Twilight V, it’s just a daily fraction on the surface, ordinary, boring and peaceful. However when you look at it closely, you’ll find there is a feeling of mysterious. It looks like something happened but no clue. Artist didn’t give much information, even though the unknown anxiety or surprise is ready to come out. In Twilight Ⅹ and Twilight XI, there is some unusual scenery but they don’t have content and logic and their narrative is fracture. Under the peaceful scene, story is going on. You don’t know where to start and where to stop. Apparently the world in the painting is self-sufficient and absurd.
在《夜花》与《糜夜》系列中，庹光焰为作品营造了一个由欲望与消费构筑的语境。同样是将熟悉的景观陌生化，同样是在视觉与心理的关照中，为其注入一种疏离感，但和《暮光》系列内部隐藏的荒诞感有较大的区别，《糜夜》更侧重对内心情感世界的挖掘，只不过，内在情感的显现，大多是以隐喻的方式完成的。五彩斑斓的灯光原本会让夜晚的丛林显得熠熠生辉，然而，在画面中，我们却很难捕捉到这样的审美气息。相反，由内向外散发出的是一种莫名的孤独与焦虑。多少充满悖论的是，在一个个五光十色、绚烂之极的景观背后，在精神上却更接近于荒芜，在一个由欲望所支配的消费时代反而更能让人触及到心灵世界的孤独。
In the series of Night Flower and Deep Night, Guangyan Tuo created a situation of desire and consumption for the painting. It’s also about defamiliarization the familiar scene, implant alienation visually and psychologically. But the different from the absurd in Twilight, Deep Night is more focus on the dig of the inner emotions; most of them are expressed implicitly. Colorful lights were supposed to make the nigh sparkling but in the painting we hardly capture this feeling, on the contrary, it’s all about loneliness and anxiety. Most in paradox, under a multicolor and splendid scene, the spirit is almost desolate. People feel more truly loneliness in the desire-dominated society.
（三）
绘画最终成为艺术家游弋于现实与心灵之间的重要媒介，借助这一个通道，在表达现实的时候，艺术家也在不断与内心对话。就作品的表现而言，有必要提及的是艺术家对“光”的把握与控制。而事实上，在庹光焰几乎所有的“风景”作品中，不仅仅是物理意义上，还是对画面的情绪渲染，“光”都扮演着重要的角色。而观众的视线，则追随“光”的足迹，渐渐地进入艺术家所营建的世界。当然，在近年来的创作中，艺术家为什么会如此痴迷“风景”，在我个人看来，不管是从视觉还是精神上的考虑，每一个人的内心都会有一片属于自己的风景。正是在这个意义上，庹光焰也不例外。当然，艺术家自己的解释也许更具说服力，他曾写道， “日常之景总是隐含着另一层真相，平静的表面下似乎总有一种隐隐的骚动，它关于我们内心深处的某种神秘。风景放大了自我内心与外在现实的距离，个人感悟的焦虑和疑惑挥之不去，我试图将熟悉的场景陌生化，所呈现的疏离彰显着关于现实世界的荒诞感悟，它来自风景，更来自于内心，它诉说着世界，更是关于自我的低吟。每个人内心里都有不一样的风景，凝视它与我们内心的距离，玩味这风景之外的风景，或许正是我的应景之道。”
Painting finally became the important media for artists to cruise the reality and soul. By using this channel, artist could constantly communicate with his inner heart when he wants to express himself. As for the works, it is necessary to mention the grasp and control of “light”. In fact, among almost all of Guangyan Tuo’s works, “light” has been play an important role not only physically but also when rendering the emotion in the painting. Audiences could follow the footprint of “light” to enter the world he builds. Of course, in recent creations why he has been so obsessed into “landscape” is, in my opinion, no matter visually or spiritually everyone has his/her own landscape. At this very point of view, Guangyan Tuo is no exception. Of course, his own explanation might be more convincing, he once wrote: “daily landscape always hold another truth, an indistinct turmoil which is about our deep down mystery seems always hide under the peaceful surface. Landscapes have widened the distance between my heart and reality, the anxiety and puzzle never goes away. I tried to unfamiliar the familiar scene which shows the absurd of the real world. It comes from the landscape and my inner heart; it narrates the world, more about the whisper of me. Everyone has their own different landscape and we gaze into the distance from it to our inner heart. Ponder over the landscape might be my path to fit in”.
2014年8月于望京东园
East Wangjing garden
August 2014