早在1998年，当杨冕完成了最早的“标准”作品时，美术史家和理论家易英就在他的《流行文化与个人话语从杨冕的创作谈起》中提醒中国当代艺术领域里关于波普艺术的不同阶段的区别：现成形象对抽象形象的取代，以及对现成形象改造后的利用。这是一个艺术史问题。正如易英所提示的：作为波普艺术，已经在中国流行了很长时间，他撇开了“**艺术”阶段对形象的倾向性，而是从当代艺术的角度来强调中国艺术家对波普艺术语言的利用已经在80年代中期就开始了。这其实是针对不断出现的看上去类似“波普”的艺术现象应如何理解与判断的提醒与提示。

　　基本的历史背景是：在上个世纪80年代，中国年轻的艺术家已经熟悉了类似汉米尔顿 （Richard Hamilton）、沃霍尔（Andy Warhol）这样的名字，他们在1985年在中国美术馆里举办的“劳申伯格(Robert Rauschenberg )展览”中也亲眼感受到了现成品与对现成品的改造和利用。大量的印刷品帮助他们了解了西方现当代艺术的状况，潜移默化的影响逐渐扩散。不过，检查80年代的中国现代主义运动，人们看到最多的便是表现主义、超现实主义、抽象主义的倾向，而波普艺术风格的作品即便出现，也是偶然并形式主义的。事实上，作为发生在中国的波普艺术的实验开始于1991年左右，那时，在武汉的艺术家们几乎是集体性地进行着“波普”艺术的实验，从他们的嘴里经常能够听到沃霍尔的名字，直至1992年“广州双年展”，中国的“波普艺术”以“文化波普”这类概念形成了影响。很快，鉴于王广义、李山、于友涵这类波普艺术家在作品中所隐射的政治意识与形态等因素，批评家栗宪庭用“政治波普”这个术语重新归纳了发生在90年代初的波普现象。这个现象与同时发生在北京的“玩世现实主义”共同构成了90年代最重要的艺术现象。

　　也是在分析杨冕的艺术的时候，更为年轻的批评家皮力在他于1999年写的《美好标准》一文中提醒在1989年之后中国出现的以流行文化为表现媒材的政治波普和艳俗艺术似乎与人们了解杨冕的艺术背景有关，他相信：“政治波普的落脚点是政治，其典型特点是流行文化符号和政治符号的对应与并列，而艳俗艺术则是对政治和通俗文化图示的双向篡改，其落脚点仍是政治，不过这种政治中掺杂了更多个人记忆的成份。无论如何两种风格所针对的是意识形态，流行文化实际上只是他们所使用的媒材，而不是他们所关注的焦点。或者说他们关注的是对主流意识形态的消解，流行文化只是一个符号。”皮力想说的是，接受西方波普影响的中国当代艺术家因为年龄和知识背景的不同，而出现了变异，观看更为年轻的艺术家的艺术，需要我们更为敏感的认识。那么，如果抛开标签式的判断之后，对于那些司空见惯的形象与符号的复制与利用，该如何去认识和判断呢？这的确是一个艺术史的问题。

　　1970年，杨冕出生于四川成都，1993年，他进入了四川美术学院油画系学习。这正是中国现代主义已经明显地转向当代艺术的阶段，在2006年的一次采访记录（“与中国当代社会同步的有‘标准’的审美---杨冕访谈录”）里，杨冕承认：“93年到97年这个时候，实际上是中国当代艺术最开始活跃和多元的历史时期，这个时期里面其实我很幸运的。93年底的时候我就和晓刚、叶帅、王林这些人在一起，我那时候当学生，他们是四川美院最有意思的艺术家。”这时的张晓刚正在开始从他的表现主义绘画彻底脱离开来，“大家庭”系列即将产生，画面已经从骚乱转向平静；而同样来自昆明“新具像”团体的老师叶永青已经在之前的一年里完成了波普风格的“大字报”，尽管“叶帅”的作品里保留着表现主义和意识形态的痕迹，但是显然，这些年轻教师的艺术正在发生明显的转向。王林是四川美术学院教授美术批评的教师，是现代主义艺术的呐喊者，他是那年在成都举办的“中国经验”的策展人，在这个展览中，策展人强调了“中国经验”的重要性，但是作为一个艺术时期，生活在西南城市的艺术家仍然在审慎地思考转型的特殊性问题。但是无论如何，四川美术学院是一所自由空气弥漫的学校，这种自由性不仅体现在刚刚留校任教的年轻教师身上，也体现在那些更为年长的教师那里。杨冕的老师王大同是70年代后期完成《雨过天晴》的作者，观众对作品中的水珠留下了深刻的印象。这样的绘画是“**”向改革开放过渡时期的作品，绘画的空间已经开始宽松，“***”被打倒了，“**”结束了，画家告诉人们：“雨过天晴”了。从“**”过来的人们当然接受这样的态度与心情。可以想象，杨冕不会受到老师王大同的任何强制--当然导师对学生的艺术方法与思想的强制性影响在不少美术学院至今仍然继续存在着。当时杨冕所处的环境是老师与学生没有森严壁垒的界限，他们“老在一起吃饭，聊天”，对创作没有任何要求，学生处在自由思考与选择的环境中，即便是毕业创作也是如此。

　　杨冕对绘画产生兴趣的最早的影响来自于父亲。尽管父亲于1990年去世，可是喜欢画画的父亲在杨冕小的时候在床头张贴的列宾的《伏尔加河上的纤夫》给他留下了深刻的印象与记忆，以致在很多年后的绘画中，杨冕将这幅画放进了他创作的第三阶段“来中国，****”系列（作品为《来中国－伏尔加河上的纤夫》）。可以想象，父亲的过早去世迫使杨冕必须能够独立的来决定未来的一切，杨冕回忆说：

　　所以基本上从20岁开始，我就面临一个自我教育的生活，不受任何人的影响，所做的任何判断都是自己的判断。包括怎么样去交朋友，怎么样去做事情，怎么样去保护自己，怎么样去赚钱等等……反正这一切的事情都必须由自己做决定。从这个角度讲，我觉得自己也是比较特殊的，同时这种凭自己的判断做事也成为我的一个特点。我是蛮典型的金牛座，相比很多人来说我更独立。（“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　按照杨冕自己的说法，针对“中国经验”展览，在大学三年级的时候，杨冕于他的同学张小涛、廖一百在学校也策划了一个“个人经验”的展览。但是，从那时他参加展览的作品风格来看，这个时候的杨冕更多地是接受老师们的影响，因为他表现荷花的方式是表现主义的：

　　当时比如叶永青等对我们影响其实很大的，包括张晓刚在“中国经验”展览里的那些作品，其实都带有很强的表现主义，后面他的“大家庭”系列有一些变化，但大家庭之前的作品我觉得是很受表现主义影响的。（“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　那是一个接近祭奠性质的空间，杨冕将自己完成的绘画环绕在三面墙上，并且在地面放上了用于祭奠的白色纸花。在父亲住院期间，杨冕经常陪同他在医院荷塘周边散步，这个经历成为一个抹不掉的记忆，他的内心需要呼唤着对这个记忆的表现。于是，荷花成为一个象征，成为自己必须去解决的一个问题。不过，这个路线与老师们的感觉逻辑有显而易见的联系--内心感受、灵魂寄托、并不刻意的表现方式以及一丝丝温情。他将作品命名为《荷的祭奠－死亡对美好生命的祭奠》，在池塘里很容易见到的那些残荷成为很好地利用表现主义方法的载体。当然，实物的放置以及空间的占有，多少表明了杨冕对90年代开始的装置艺术的敏感，至于个人经验问题，在他之前，赵能智、陈文波等几个学长已经通过举办“切片”展览表达了这个倾向，且使用了实物装置，只是杨冕将更为个人化的经历以及感受放大为对一个空间的占有，他几乎是本能地想放大自己的感受，至少这样的安排能够更好地满足其记忆展示的需要。

　　当然，将杨冕在学生时期的创作简单地理解为向老师的学习是很不准确的。事实上，整个展览已经呈现出杨冕个人的气质与作风。他不仅刻意地将实物放置在了展览空间，他甚至选择了传统绘画中的关于荷花的复制品，并且也绘制了自己理解的荷花。在展厅的正中间，他用鲜艳的色彩绘制了充满生气的荷花，他说：“这是一个象征，象征生命，而那些残荷则意味着死亡。”这类象征寓意性的思维逻辑很容易让人理解，不过，值得注意的是，即便在老师们强烈的影响下，杨冕也表现出对艺术的观念性理解。他没有放任表现性的心理，而是通过不同的处理甚至用实物去消解绘画，他想让那些扰乱的符号说话，最重要的迹象是：他通过不同时期不同方法的荷花的表现与归纳，是想表述关于绘画在他内心的状况：绘画如果失去观念性的利用，还会有什么可能性？这样的问题也许是潜意识的，但是，很快，我们就看到了杨冕的观念绘画的产生，之后，他再也没有回头。

　　显然，杨冕摆脱了对绘画性的纠缠，当他开始创作毕业作品的时候，他毅然采用了波普艺术的逻辑。从现成的图像开始，即将唐代画家张萱的《簪花仕女图》作为出发点，将古代贵族妇女的形象改造为今天的时尚女人。艺术家根据《簪花仕女图》中人物的动态与位置，重新拍摄出一个个时尚女性，将原作的人物替换，以呈现出今天的景象。杨冕将作品的题目改为《街头时尚忆》，于是，一个与此时的社会形象相关联的变体出现了。最初，杨冕企图让观众在意幅图中看到不同的图像：在时尚女性的图像上，他用荧光笔在上面画出一个个仕女形象，这样，如果使用紫光灯照射，就可以呈现出这些仕女的轮廓。尽管艺术家最后仍然放弃了这个设想，但是这个思考的过程表明了杨冕将工作的重点放在了他要表达的问题上，而不是画面本身的绘画性问题，而是图像的选择与安排，他的目的是希望对每天看到的形象--主要是时尚女性--给予一个呈现。这时，杨冕一定在考虑从几年前的政治波普和玩世现实主义衍生出来的艳俗艺术的特质：浮华、现世以及对意识形态的忽视。1996年，艳俗艺术的展览“大众样板”、“艳妆生活”已经呈现出了充分的样式，杨卫、徐一晖、胡向东、俸正杰、常徐功、祁志龙、李路明、孙平、刘力国、罗氏三兄弟（罗卫东、罗卫国 、罗卫兵）、王庆松以及刘峥的作品呈现出丰富的艳俗形态。在最近的环境里，学长俸正杰早在1994年就开始了他的对“溃烂”的表现（《皮肤的陈述》），很快，以婚纱形象为题材的作品成为艳俗典型。对于敏感的杨冕来说，他肯定熟悉这些艺术现象，并对这样的观念绘画的路径开始着迷，他在大量的当代绘画中找到观念性之于平面的合法性。

　　艺术家具有排斥相似性的本能，杨冕当然要思考自己的艺术将向何处发展。从90年代中期开始，“观念艺术”一词逐渐流行，无论批评家们是否将“观念”作为当代艺术的尺度，至少，在摄影、装置、影像方面的实践对从事绘画的艺术家产生了明显的影响。无论如何，杨冕决定选择时尚女性作为他绘画的主要对象。但是，他渐渐明确了，选择时尚女性不是为了画出漂亮的形象，而是将社会提供的形象或符号强加固定在自己的作品中，因为他越来越清楚地发现：那些被认为是“美”的形象来自一种新的权力操纵。在那些“美”的形象的后面，或者说导致这些“美”的形象的出场背景因素具有一种势不可挡的力量。作为本质主义的美并不存在，存在的仅仅是不断发生变化的“美”的标准。所谓关于美的梦想都在这样一种背景下被确认。而“美”作为一个常识性的感性表述和作为美学理论的关键字就这样成为一个被控制的对象，成为一个扰乱人心的问题。按照艺术家自己的说法：“在1996年之后，我就有很长的时间在思考一些问题，这个思考最终体现在我的毕业作品上，也是我‘美丽标准’系列开始的一个前凑。” （“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　关于“美的标准”的系列开始了。1997年，也就是杨冕从四川美术学学院毕业的这年，他以“家庭”、“姐妹”和“青春”这样的标题，制作了几张“标准”画。艺术家利用广告，用一种接近模糊照片的方式将广告上的形象复制在画布上。在效果上，让人联想到曝光不足的照片，至少在画面的这个特征上，杨冕显然希望与流行的波普艺术中的“形象清晰”拉开距离。他非常明确地选择流行广告的形象来自对广告图像的思考和质疑，不过，与艳俗艺术家对广告所带来的视觉刺激和情绪的关注不同，杨冕想到的是产生这些形象本身的具体原因。当一个产品通过一个被认为美的形象来作代言的时候，是什么“标准”决定了代言形象对公众产生影响的基本性质？那些代言形象究竟与产品之间具有什么样的逻辑关系以致于成为这一个而不是那一种产品的代言人？这种来自广告创意公司的“美”的设定真的是具有普遍性的本质吗？代言人的形象真的能够起到使公众产生对产品本身发生兴趣的作用吗？艺术家越来越清楚地意识到真实的人与作为代言人的形象之间存在着明显的差异，那些不再轻易地使用在美术学院习惯了的明暗轮廓分明的形象，几乎泛之以正面光线照射以致呈现为“白脸”的广告形象让杨冕意识到：即便是通过照片获得的“真实”也是相当值得质疑的，他进一步意识到了正是由于大众形象是一个被形象的推出者改造过的形象，才使得消费者能够感受到不同程度的期待和超越现实梦想的可能。杨冕并没有去深究广告创意的生成程序，因为仅仅是这样强制性“标准”的推出就足以让他产生好奇心：难道社会的态度就是这样被给出的“标准”所左右的吗？无论如何，杨冕决定将那些出现在产品广告和流行杂志上的形象作为他设定的“标准”形象，他认为那些广告商给社会和消费者设定的“标准”既然如此有效，那艺术家完全可以将这样的“标准形象”进行改造，而成为自己对“公共标准”的再改造。艺术家从现成图像中直接截取形象--尽管他省掉了那些广告图像中出现的环境或者背景，但是他刻意地将这些图像淡化，使得观众一眼就可以看出那些原本清晰的形象已经经过了艺术家的改造，转化为艺术家意图呈现的一个载体。

　　看上去，杨冕在尽可能地消除人工的痕迹，艺术家甚至觉得自己不是刻意地在回避绘画性，而是他要呈现的问题本身已经对绘画性的放弃提供了机会与可能。当那些浅色的形象完成之后，是什么因素可以提醒观众注意到问题的存在呢？从1997年开始创作“标准”的第一幅画，艺术家就几乎是下意识地在构图偏中间的部位留下了“偶然性的”一笔，这一笔一开始所呈现出来一种莫名态度，从效果上看，这个态度显然是不满的、破坏性的甚至是具有否定性的。之后，艺术家解释说：他希望通过这个看上去不协调和偶然的一笔，构成一个可以目见的问题，在很大程度上，是对现成标准的最后否定。不过，对于那些有美术史视觉经验的人来说，这一笔具有对绘画性依依不舍的情绪，在1997年完成的不同的“标准”中，艺术家使用了紫色与黄色，观众看到，在什么情况下使用紫色与黄色，是依据所选择图像的色彩关系来确定的。

　　在1997年的作品里，杨冕在他的“标准”制作中表现出初期的实验结果，尽管他形象画得比视觉观看通常需要的饱和度要明显模糊和清淡得多，但是，他在画面里仍然呈现了清晰的轮廓与形象--那种将人的形象与背景融为一个整体的灰色画面是在1998年以后才完成的。艺术家相信，他与那些同时和同龄艺术家的风格与趣味有了越来越明显的区别。

　　我就觉得我应该创造一个不一样的价值观，这个价值观当然不是指人生的价值观，是指自己的作品它必须要独树一帜。那个时候年轻的我就认为作品的风格如果雷同是很可耻的。所以到后来我发现很多人都在画这种很浅的，漂亮的颜色的时候，我就想放弃了。因为我觉得我已经不再是一个独立的形象了，我必须得改变。所以那个时候我的想法就是要画一个不一样的，越是我熟悉的形象或是那种惯用的画面技术和处理我就越不让它出现。但是在这个转变的过程中，我觉得今天对我来说，特别重要的方面是价值观的不从众。比如说那个时候我画完了以后，我就在那个画面上画了一笔。当时很多人私下讨论给我的建议是：“杨冕，你画面上的那一笔是不是多余了，有点破坏画面。”可是从我1998年毕业后，我的那一笔就越来越明显了，而且从1999年开始画面上的形象变得越来越模糊。（“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　事实上，尽管杨冕的艺术基因具有强烈的观念性的色彩，但他的艺术也还是一个特定语境中的产物。上个世纪90年代，在对西方当代艺术史的持续关注下，在图像信息泛滥的基础上，加之影像技术的广泛应用及发展，使得后来被称之为“影像绘画”的现象非常普遍。关于照片和影像对艺术家的影响是一个复杂而有趣的历史话题，不过在90年代，像里希特（Gerhard Richter）这样的西方艺术家的艺术的确对中国艺术家产生了直接和强烈的影响。接受照片影响的艺术家可以开出一大串名单，而对于杨冕来说，最靠近的例子仍然可以从老师张晓刚，以及同学俸正杰、谢南星、张晓涛等一批70年代艺术家那里看到。这些艺术家以不同的方式利用和展示着他们自己的影像性，并试图从自己的影像性中保留新颖的绘画性，所以，对于杨冕来说，在语言上如何与他们区别开来成为一个重要的课题。所以基本地看，杨冕的“标准”艺术不过是有接近二十年来的中国影像艺术中的一部分。在1997年的作品中，影像的趣味，甚至就是里希特的趣味明显可见。不过很快，杨冕就试图去很小心地避免自己成为这个队伍中的一员，他尽量在画面中避免绘画的痕迹。在他1998年的作品里，人物更加平面化，背景接近消失（当然在《自我制造的“标准”》里还保留着），烘托影像趣味的笔触已经消失。在1999年的作品中，杨冕制作了“青春”、“打电话的姿势”、“封面女郎”、“关怀”、“光彩”、“魅力”、“模特”、“色彩”、“身材”、“照相姿势”等不同的标准，其素材来自于媒体广告，重新制作的“标准”成为艺术家参与社会“标准”制定的一部分。以后，艺术家又选择明星的广告形象作为自己作品的“标准”对象，就这样一直到2006年，艺术家再逐年提出他所理解的“标准”。这样，每个年度的广告形象都成为他的作品中的形象，正如艺术家自己所言，他完成了一个对产品广告形象代言人的历史记录：

　　从1997年到2006年，我大概画这个主题画接近10年的时间。实际上在这个过程中你就可以发现，我的画基本上就是一个产品形象代言人的历史。从我的画面上你可以感受到广告的历史，我们的对人的审美的去基因化的标准的历史，感受到我们是怎么通过影像记录、然后通过PS等的处理，最后让人产生更大的幻觉。（“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　然而，与那些直接呈现和借用图像的波普艺术不同，杨冕的出发点来自对广告本身的根本性的质疑。正因为如此，艺术家才有理由对广告母体进行修改：色彩、背景，甚至仍然保留了表现主义的“一笔”。由于杨冕对广告的分析是个人化的，因此，在他内心一开始提出的那些问题--从1999年开始，我觉得广告在我眼里就叫“错位形象”，就是一个错了的产品，被一个唯美的形象代言了，后来这个产品就有可能变成一个美的产品。其实当时我觉得这个现象很怪，我始终有一个问题：“为什么这个人可以代表那个产品？为什么一个美女可以代表一个汽车？为什么一个美女可以代表一个冰箱？为什么？” （“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）--没有导致艺术成为解决方案，而是引诱出来一种具体的图像制作方式与效果，即便他在形象的选择和修改上消耗了精力，他也尽可能地利用了消费广告的形象资源，可是，要让观众感受到其否定性的态度仍然是困难的。在很大程度上讲，批判性的立场构成了一种艺术观念的假设，构成了作品观念性的依据。艺术家带着质疑甚至批判性的态度去分析和表现消费广告问题，这使得他的艺术与图像与直接挪用图像的“同流合污”的表现拉开了距离。

　　批评家易英在杨冕完成“标准”的一开始，就提醒说：像杨冕这样的70年代出生的艺术家是“８０年代中期进入青少年时代，９０年代中期初登艺术门坎的一代人。如果以８０年代初的彩色电视进入中国城市普通家庭为标志，这一代人正是在日益发达的大众文化中成长起来的。大众图像不仅支配着他们的视觉习惯，甚至已成为他们的思维方式的一部分。”（《流行文化与个人话语从杨冕的创作谈起》1998年）这个分析将这位艺术家与50年代出生的艺术家--例如王广义--借用图像资源的情况区别开来。易英还引用了杨冕的一段话：

　　在这种以商业为目的，高度物化的标准状况下，每个人都受物化的侵蚀，被迫物化，这就是我们的时代，不管你是否接受。（转引自《流行文化与个人话语从杨冕的创作谈起》1998年）

　　也正是在这样的思想下，杨冕很自然地会突破现成图像的制约，而将个人心理因素放进了平面之中，以致现成图像很明显地被加以改造，这就形成了杨冕艺术的基本特征。其实易英早在1998年做出的归纳已经概括了杨冕的“标准”系列的基本特征：

　　在杨冕的观念中，已没有第一代波普风格的误读，后者是把波普风格理解为以现成品为特征的造型手段，而不以大众文化作为表现的对象和主题。杨冕在搬用大众图象的同时，也以大众文化作为他的题材和内容，即背景与对象的统一。从表面上看，杨冕只是在架上绘画中直接把广告形象搬上画面，或者用商业绘画的手段来造型。实质上，杨冕有着明确的指向，即一种文化评论式的主题追求。这种追求反映出“卡通一代”对当代文化的独特理解，对自身生存境遇与个人经验的反省，这恰恰是与“知青一代”，甚至“新生代”的重要区别。

　　波普风格的绘画在视觉上的重要特征是非形式与非个性 ，大众文化以超量的图像轰炸为人们制定了无形的趋同标准，并把人改造为它的标准化产品。杨冕的作品正是对此作出的反应，他的个人话语是建立在对大众图像的解读的基础之上。这种解读包括两方面的策略：一是对大众图像的个人理解；二是对大众图像的个人形式设计。这两点形成他的个人话语方式。（《流行文化与个人话语从杨冕的创作谈起》1998年）

　　对于“标准”系列的作品特征，批评家皮力是这样评价的：

　　杨冕的绘画是一个奇怪的混合物，它是流行图像、社会评论和学院主义的三者结合。他的绘画并不是直接挪用大众的图像，而是用学院化的油画技法将这些图像雅化，从而实现一种图像上的转换。在这商业文化抚育出来的一代画家身上，学院主义和流行文化的关系就象家庭文化和社会文化一样，后者往往还有着盛于前者的影响力。所以杨冕进行的转换造就了社会批判的双向性，对于学院主义的调侃和商业文化的质疑。（皮力：“美好标准”1999年）

　　从上个世纪90年代初期开始的中国的房地产运动，迅速改变了中国的城市景象。一直以来，人们根据城市建筑与空间的改变来对这个城市的历史与现状给予其历史与文化的判断。然而，这样的判断方式却因为房地产业的爆发性发展而出现相应的改变。当然，更为深刻的改变是人们生活方式与视觉标准的改变。与大多数人一样，杨冕当然注意到了这样的改变。所以在2002年，杨冕将“标准”问题延伸到了城市建筑。他借“居住改变中国”这类由房地产业的广告所引出的问题来提出“改变”的标准。

　　与选择美女“标准”的逻辑相似，杨冕从自己最熟悉的城市成都开始进行形象调查，他以“对中国标准文化的反思--理想的小区建筑标准”为题展开他的工作，而最初的“标准”来自“成都制造”，在用铁皮材料完成的缩小建筑群中，我们能够看到这时的城市规划与建筑是多么地缺少人性与人文的关怀。这是一个标准，但是，这样的标准难道没有问题？2004年，艺术家又选择了北京建筑作为标准--尽管他2005年底才在北京租了工作室，制作了“北京制造”的作品，那些来自欧洲美国建筑风格的趣味与样式的确让人难堪。除了那些建筑装置，杨冕还画了一些建筑模型或规划图，所采用的方法与他绘制美女是一样的，他甚至保留了那表现主义的“一笔”。任何人都理解，这样的方法是为了在视觉判断上与“人物标准”的系列保持趣味上的一致。

　　2006年，杨冕开始长期生活在北京。他开始制作“经典系列”（《来中国，文化的革命》）。他把那些学习美术的人所熟悉的经典作品的图像放进自己的作品中，艺术家告知我们：那些伟大的艺术家尽管从来没有来过中国，可是，他们的作品却对几代中国艺术家产生了巨大的影响。不过，中国的象征是什么呢？杨冕选择了***和上海外滩，对于熟悉中国近现代历史的人们应该知道，这两个象征具有典型意义：政治、经济、历史、文化与时尚，学者们显然可以充分利用这两个具有物理载体的概念从事不同角度的人文历史的研究。当然，杨冕也在自己的作品里装进了时尚形象。与之同时，杨冕还制作了那些对中国人来说非常熟悉的西方明星的雕塑，那些形象与平面绘画形成了呼应。直到2008年，杨冕已经非常清楚地意识到他的艺术方向--对图像进行改造，而改造方案成为他的工作基础。

　　我在2008年以后就没有再做这样的作品。我没有再做的原因就和我不再做“美丽标准”系列的原因一样。其实我一直有这样一个定位，在今天我更明确这个定位，那就是我要成为一个方案艺术家。我所有的作品系列我都是做几年就不再做了，然后再做新的，包括我现在的“CMYK”系列。（“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）

　　按照艺术家自己的声明，“CMYK”系列的作品同样是来自对图像的可靠性的质疑。不过，“CMYK”系列所呈现的问题不是针对图像本身的象征性，而是图像生成的过程中出现的秘密。“CYMK”，是今天印刷技术使用的色彩模式，所有复杂的图像，正是在“C”（青）、“M”（品红）、“Y”（黄）、“K”（黑）的构成中呈现的。由于过去的教育导致的对经典作品的崇拜与敬畏，当杨冕发现仅仅是依靠四种色彩的结合，就能够复制那些人类经典，他感到吃惊--“那些从小到大所接触的这些图像竟然是”CMYK“四个色点构成的”。他再一次地对图像本身的安全性产生深深的质疑。艺术家通过电脑放大找出这四种色彩的分布与排列，简化色彩的密度，呈现出一种对原图发生改变的现象。艺术家揭示说：无论那些经典是如何地具有复杂而神秘的细节，仍然是“CMYK”决定着它们在传播中的面貌与魅力。现在，一个由“CMYK”的内在结构被放大之后呈现在我们的面前，由此产生的图像与效果将改变我们对图像的理解和认识。对杨冕的“CMYK”系列，批评家鲁明军是这样理解的：

　　诚如杨冕自己所说的，从最初的“美的标准”，到近年的“CMYK”，可以说，十余年来他仅只实验过这两个系列，但所针对的却系同一个问题：图像的复制与传播时代，对于图像的生成本身的质疑和反思。如果说前一阶段更接近一种表态的话，那么，在后者“CMYK”系列中，杨冕已然进入图像内部结构，从中深度揭示了机械复制时代的图像及其传播对于我们日常经验的占据和规制。更重要的是，杨冕的创作本身还隐含着一种方法论的自觉，即一种关于“元图像”和视觉考古的实验。（鲁明军 “‘CMYK’：‘元图像’实验与视觉考古”，2011年）

　　有趣的是，杨冕对自己的这次实验最早采用的是新印象派画家修拉（Georges Seurat）的作品《大碗岛上的星期天》。修拉作品的“点彩”经过“CMYK”的过滤，所形成的色点在效果上容易与“点彩”有所混淆，而事实上，杨冕正好希望将不同的色点产生的来源和差异提示出来形成一种比较，即便是纯色点，最后的图像也是有根本的不同。早年，西涅克（Paul Signac）和修拉告诉人们：无需调和，人们就可以从色点的安排中认识和理解这个世界，我们的眼睛将自动调和色彩以复原艺术家转述的世界。今天的印刷术成功地发展了这个原理，并复制出尽可能接近原作的图像。从这个角度上讲，我们完全可以将杨冕的“CMYK”系列看成是对新印象派的当代致敬，只是，“CMYK”系列不是来自对新印象派的简单的视觉分析，而是来自对现代印刷复制的深深质疑，因为事实上，杨冕也非常清楚，“CMYK”系列仅仅是个基本通道，所谓的复原仍然是不可能的。

　　“CMYK”系列的实验包括西方经典与中国古代绘画。由于“CMYK”系列复制的是印刷物，而印刷物本身就是对原作的复制，于是，作为“CMYK”的文本本身的可疑性就更加严重，正因为如此，那文明的传达在多大程度上具有真实性呢？鲁明军说：“如果说印刷本身是一种叙事的话，那么杨冕的‘CMYK’无疑是一种叙事的再叙事。如果再加上原作底本，那么杨冕的‘CMYK’叙事则已是第三重转译的文本。” （鲁明军 “‘CMYK’：‘元图像’实验与视觉考古”，2011年）结果，所谓的“标准”再次成为被怀疑的对象，当艺术家明确了这样一个图像的生成过程，明确了“CMYK”同样是一种“标准”的假设之后，他决定再次地来制定自己所理解的“标准”。这一次，杨冕是从语言的层面进行分析，他完全撇开了图像的社会学或者政治学的含义，而将注意力仅仅放在图像生成的方式上。结果，他完成了一种看上去具有风格意义的语言程序。从工业时代出现的机械复制所产生的问题早就被本雅明（Walter Benjamin）这样一些思想家所揭示，现在，艺术家杨冕借着复制的技术去创造新的图像，这个态度与方法已经祛除了本质主义的焦虑，而表现出一种富于智慧的后现代态度。的确，原作的“精神”与“气质”已经发生了衰减与变异，不过，一种新的图像的产生却是来自那些饱含着“内在性”的图像，它们承接着一种图像生成的上下文逻辑。尽管“CMYK”系列的图像仍然具有感染性，但是，杨冕通过对图像本身的不信任所产生的那些新图像具有方法论的意义，艺术家所要解决的问题仍然不是手工绘画本身的偶然性与趣味性，而是涉及人类文明的一些基本的判断：工具、方法与权力问题。杨冕说：“我今天的作品和我以前的作品， 他们在气质上是一致的，是对图像的安全性做研究。” （“殷嫣与杨冕的对话”2011年）基于这样的立场，杨冕保持了他的艺术的连贯性与逻辑性，无论哪一个阶段，视觉的观念与标准始终是杨冕在解决的课题，并产生出对于中国新绘画有贡献的结果，这使得杨冕的艺术在中国当代艺术中占有特殊的位置。

　　2011年11月27日星期日

　　Visual Concepts and Standards： The Art of Yang Mian

　　Lü Peng

　　In 1998， when Yang Mian completed his first Standards paintings， art historian and theorist Yi Ying wrote “Popular Culture and Personal Discourse： Beginning with Yang Mian‘s Work” to highlight the differences between stages of Pop within Chinese contemporary art， which included the replacement of ready-made figures with abstract figures， and the use and transformation of those ready-mades. In Yi’s view， this was an art historical question， because， as he noted， Pop Art had already been popular in China for many years. He set aside the figural tendencies of Cultural Revolution art， and emphasized， from a contemporary art perspective， that Chinese artists‘ use of Pop Art styles had started in the mid-1980s. He offered a way to understand and evaluate the numerous artistic phenomena that appear similar to Pop Art.

　　First， allow me to give some basic historical background： In the 1980s， young Chinese artists were already familiar with names like Richard Hamilton and Andy Warhol， but they witnessed ready-mades， as well as their use and transformation， firsthand at “Robert Rauschenberg Modern Art Exhibition，” held at the National Art Museum of China in 1985. Large amounts of printed material helped them to learn about Western modern and contemporary art， so these influences spread gradually and quietly. However， in the 1980s modernist movement in China， expressionist， surrealist， and abstract tendencies were most prominent. Even though works in pop art styles existed， they often happened to be formalist. Pop experiments in China began around 1991. A group of Wuhan artists were collectively experimenting with pop motifs， and I often heard Andy Warhol’s name from them， until Chinese Pop Art took shape as “Cultural Pop，” a key concept for the 1992 Guangzhou Biennial. Not long after that， based on the political consciousness and forms suggested by Pop artists like Wang Guangyi， Li Shan， and Yu Youhan， critic Li Xianting used the term “Political Pop” to summarize the pop phenomenon in the early 1990s. Political Pop and Beijing-based Cynical Realism were the most important artistic phenomena of the 1990s.

　　When analyzing Yang Mian‘s art in his 1999 essay “Ideal Standards，” young critic Pi Li reminded us that Political Pop and Vulgar Art (sometimes called Gaudy Art)， both styles that emerged after 1989 in China and used popular culture as source material， could help people understand Yang’s artistic background. He wrote：

　　Political Pop is founded on politics， and it is characterized by the correspondence and juxtaposition of pop culture and political symbols. Vulgar Art distorts both political and mass culture imagery， and while its foundation is still politics， there are more personal memories mixed into it. Regardless， the two styles are focused on ideology， and popular culture is simply their chosen material， not the focus of their attention. Or they care about the dissolution of mainstream ideology， and popular culture is just a symbol.

　　What Pi Li was trying to say was that the work of Chinese contemporary artists influenced by Pop Art was different because of differences in age and background， and viewing the work of younger artists requires a keener understanding. Then， after we set aside labeling， how should the replication and use of those common figures and symbols be understood or judged？ This is certainly an art historical question.

　　Yang Mian was born in Chengdu， Sichuan， in 1970， and in 1993， he enrolled in the Oil Painting Department at the Sichuan Fine Arts Institute (SFAI). During this period， Chinese modernism was notably shifting toward contemporary art. In a 2006 interview， Yang admitted： “The years from 1993 to 1997 were the most active and diverse historical period in Chinese contemporary art， and I was very lucky to be part of it. At the end of 1993， I was with [Zhang] Xiaogang， ‘Handsome’ Ye [Yongqing]， and Wang Lin. I was a student at the time， and they were the most interesting artists at the Sichuan Fine Arts Institute.”  Around this time， Zhang Xiaogang had fully departed from expressionist painting， and he would soon create his Big Family series， with his imagery shifting from chaotic to calm. Ye Yongqing， an instructor from the New Figurative Painting group in Kunming， had made pop-inspired big character posters the year before. Ye‘s work retained traces of expressionism and ideology， but the art of these young instructors was undergoing a notable transformation. Wang Lin taught art criticism at the Sichuan Fine Arts Institute and was an advocate for modernist art. He was also a curator of “Chinese Experience” in Chengdu， and in this exhibition， he emphasized the importance of Chinese experience， but in that artistic era， artists living in a southwestern city were still cautiously considering the distinct issues associated with the shift in art. Regardless， the Sichuan Fine Arts Institute was a more free-wheeling school， and this freedom was embodied by the young instructors who had recently joined， as well as many of the older professors. Wang Datong， Yang Mian’s teacher， had painted Clear Skies After the Rain in the late 1970s， and the beads of water in the work left a profound impression on viewers. This kind of painting was made during the transition from the Cultural Revolution to Reform and Opening， when painters were gaining more freedom in their work. The Gang of Four had been toppled， the Cultural Revolution had ended， and painters were telling the people that the storm had passed. Those who had experienced the Cultural Revolution naturally welcomed this attitude and mood. I can imagine that Wang Datong did not force anything on Yang Mian-though， of course， instructors have a compelling influence on students‘ artistic methods and ideas at many art academies even today. In that environment， there were no sharp divisions between students and teachers； they always ate together and talked， without any requirements placed on their work. The freedom of thought and choice that the students experienced extended to their graduation pieces.

　　Yang Mian’s father was the first person to shape his interest in painting. Even though his father passed away in 1990， when Yang was a child， his painting-loving father pinned a copy of Ilya Repin‘s Barge Haulers on the Volga over his bed， so the painting holds profound impressions and memories for him. In his own paintings many years later， Yang placed this work in his third-phase series Come to China： The Revolution in Culture， in a piece called Come to China： Barge Haulers on the Volga. I can imagine that his father’s death forced him to decide everything about his future by himself. As Yang recalls：

　　Basically， from the age of twenty， I confronted my life as an autodidact. I was not influenced by anyone， and all of the decisions I had made were my own， including how I made friends， how I did things， how I protected myself， and how I made money… Anyway， I had to make my own decisions about all of this. From this perspective， I think that I‘m rather unique， and relying on my own judgment in things became something I’m known for. I‘m a typical Taurus， so I’m more independent than most people.

　　According to Yang Mian， in response to “Chinese Experience，” he and his classmates Zhang Xiaotao and Liao Yibai planned an exhibition entitled “Personal Experience” at SFAI when he was in his third year of university. However， from the style of the works he showed， the expressionistic way Yang depicted the lotus flowers showed the influence his teachers had had on him： “Ye Yongqing and others had a huge influence on us， including Zhang Xiaogang‘s work from the ’Chinese Experience‘ show， which had a strong expressionist sensibility. This changed in his later Big Family series， but I think his work prior to that series was greatly influenced by expressionism.”

　　Yang created a sacrificial space， with his paintings on three walls and white paper flowers used for sacrifices on the floor. While his father was in the hospital， they often walked together around the lotus pond at the garden. This experience became an indelible memory， and his soul needed to express this memory. Therefore， lotuses became a symbol for him， something he had to resolve. However， this path had an obvious connection to his teachers’ perceptual logic-inner feelings， the baring of the soul， more casual expressive methods， and a whiff of sentimentality. He named the work Sacrifice to the Lotus： Death‘s Sacrifice to a Beautiful Life， and the wilting lotuses in the pond became excellent vehicles for expressionist methods. Of course， the placement of the objects and the occupation of the space generally indicated Yang’s growing sensitivity to installation art in the 1990s. Prior to Yang‘s show， Zhao Nengzhi， Chen Wenbo， and several other fellow students had engaged with personal experience and used physical installations in their exhibition “Slices.” Yang Mian simply magnified more personalized experiences and feelings to occupy a space. He almost instinctively wanted to amplify his feelings， and at the very least， this exhibition fulfilled his need to share his memories.

　　Of course， it would be highly inaccurate to characterize Yang Mian’s student work as simply learned from his teachers. In fact， his temperament and working methods permeated the entire exhibition. He carefully placed physical objects in the exhibition space， and he even chose replicas of lotuses in traditional painting， as well as painting lotus flowers as he saw them. In the center of the exhibition hall， he painted vibrant lotuses in bright colors. He remembered that this was a symbol of life， and the fragmented lotuses signified death. The logic of this symbolic allusion was easy to understand， and despite the strong influence of his teachers， Yang expressed a conceptual understanding of art. He did not ignore the expressionist mentality； he departed from painting using different treatments and even objects. The most important sign that he wanted to disrupt symbolic formulations was that he wanted to express painting‘s significance for him through lotuses depicted at different periods and in different ways. If painting had lost its conceptual function， what other possibilities were there？ This question may have been subconscious， but not long after that， Yang started producing conceptual paintings， and he never looked back.

　　Evidently， Yang Mian was able to extract himself from the entanglements of painterliness. When he started making his graduation work， he resolutely chose to employ the logic of Pop Art. He began with ready-made images， and he would soon use Court Ladies Adorning Their Hair with Flowers by Tang painter Zhang Xuan， transforming the noblewomen of antiquity into fashionable women of his own time. Based on the poses and locations of the figures in Court Ladies Adorning Their Hair with Flowers， he photographed fashionable women and replaced the figures in the original work with them to create a contemporary tableau. Yang changed the name of the work to Memories of Street Fashion， creating a version with strong connections to social phenomena in his own time. Initially， Yang wanted viewers to carefully examine the different parts of the image： He drew a series of court ladies in fluorescent pen on top of the images of modern fashionable women. When illuminated with ultraviolet light， the contours of those court ladies would appear. He eventually abandoned this idea， but this thought process showed that he focused his work on the issues he wanted to express. However， he was more concerned with the selection and arrangement of pictures， not issues of painterliness. His goal was to present figures he saw every day， primarily fashionable women. Yang Mian was certainly contemplating the characteristics of Vulgar Art， which had been derived from Political Pop and Cynical Realism a few years before； its hallmarks were ostentation， worldliness， and an indifference to ideology. In 1996， the Vulgar Art exhibitions “Mass Models” and “Gaudy Life” presented this style in its full form. The work of Yang Wei， Xu Yihui， Hu Xiangdong， Feng Zhengjie， Chang Xugong， Qi Zhilong， Li Luming， Sun Ping， Liu Liguo， the Luo Brothers (Luo Weidong， Luo Weiguo， and Luo Weibing)， Wang Qingsong， and Liu Zheng had a distinctly vulgar or gaudy sensibility. In that environment， Yang’s SFAI classmate Feng Zhengjie started his “festering” work (A Statement of Skin) in 1994. Before long， wedding dresses became a trope of Vulgar Art. A sensitive person like Yang Mian was certainly familiar with these artistic trends and he was starting to become interested in this kind of conceptual painting. In many contemporary paintings， he found the legitimation of a concept on a two-dimensional surface.

　　Certain artists instinctively reject resemblance， and Yang Mian had to think about how his art should develop. In the mid-1990s， the term “conceptual art” became popular， and whether or not the critics considered concept to be the measure of contemporary art， conceptual practices in photography， installation， and video had a marked influence on painters. Regardless， Yang Mian chose fashionable women as the primary subjects in his paintings. However， he gradually ascertained that he had not chosen fashionable women so that he could paint pretty pictures； he wanted to impose or freeze the figures or symbols that society provided in his work， because he realized with increasing clarity that figures considered beautiful came from a new controlling power-an unstoppable power behind those beautiful figures or the underlying reasons that caused these beautiful figures to emerge. An essentialist definition of beauty did not exist； all that existed was a set of ever-changing beauty standards， which confirmed our dreams of beauty. Beauty was a common way of describing a perception or a key term in aesthetic theory， and as such， it became controlled and unsettling. As Yang said， “After 1996， I spent a long time thinking over these issues， the results of which I presented in my graduation work， which was in turn a prelude to Beauty Standards.”

　　I want to offer a few words about how Beauty Standards began. In 1997， the year that Yang Mian graduated from the Sichuan Fine Arts Institute， he painted several Standards paintings like Family， Sisters， and Youth. He replicated the figures from the advertisements on canvas in an almost blurry way. The effect was reminiscent of underexposed photographs. At the very least， this characteristic of the paintings showed that Yang wanted to distance himself from the clear lines of pop art. He explicitly contemplated and questioned figures taken from popular advertising， but in contrast to the visual stimulation and emotion of the Vulgar Art approach to advertising， Yang wanted to know precisely why these figures existed. When a person who is considered beautiful is a spokesperson for a product， what standards determine the essential nature of the influence the spokesperson has on the public？ What kind of logical relationship exists between the spokespeople and the product， such that a spokesperson represents one kind of product but not another？ Is the definition of beauty set by an advertising agency really universal？ Can spokespeople really make viewers interested in the product？ It became increasingly clear to him that there was an obvious difference between real people and spokespeople. He could no longer easily use the figures， depicted using clear lines and shadows， to which he had been accustomed at the art academy. From the figures in the advertisements， lit so strongly from the front that their faces almost turned white， Yang realized that even if the truth obtained from photographs was questionable， he discovered that because a mass culture figure had been molded by the people who distributed it， consumers experienced different degrees of anticipation and possible ways of transcending realities and dreams. Yang did not explore the process of generating advertising， because the mere presentation of these mandatory standards made him curious： Aren‘t society’s attitudes controlled by the standards that are provided？ In any event， Yang decided to use figures from product advertisements and popular magazines as “standards.” He believed that the standards set by advertising agencies for society and consumers were valid， but that artists could transform these standard figures， remaking public standards as they saw fit. Yang directly extracted figures from ready-made images-he removed the environments or backgrounds that appeared in those advertising photographs， but he carefully attenuated those images so that viewers could immediately see that he had changed those once-clear figures， transforming them into vehicles for his intentions.

　　It seems that Yang Mian tried as much as possible to remove any trace of the human hand， and he even felt that he was not painstakingly avoiding painterliness； the issues he wanted to present already offered the opportunity to abandon painterliness. After finishing those pale-colored figures， what elements could prompt viewers to engage with this issue？ Beginning with his first Standards painting in 1997， he almost subconsciously left a “random” brushstroke near the middle of the composition. The initially ambiguous attitude of that stroke seemed dissatisfied， destructive， and even negative in effect. Later， he explained that he wanted this issue to be visible through this seemingly dissonant， random stroke. To a large extent， this was his final repudiation of existing standards. However， to those with a visual experience of art history， this stroke still seemed tied to painterliness. In the different Standards paintings he made in 1997， he used purple and yellow， and the circumstances in which he used one color or the other were determined by the colors in the picture he chose.

　　In his 1997 work， Yang Mian showed the first results of his early experiments with Standards. The figures in his paintings were much blurrier and less saturated than usual， but his paintings still contained clear contours and forms. He did not make the paintings in which the figure and the background merge into a single expanse of grey until after 1998. He believed that there was an increasingly obvious difference between his style and taste and those of his contemporaries：

　　I thought that I should create a different values system. Of course， I don‘t mean values for life. I mean that I wanted chart my own course in my work. I was young and I thought that any duplication of style was shameful. Later， when I discovered that many people were painting with these light， pretty colors， I wanted to abandon painting. Because I thought that I was no longer unique， I had to change. I wanted to paint something different， and the more familiar I became with a figure or a certain painting technique or treatment， the less I wanted to use it. However， in this process of transformation， I think that， looking back today， it was more important to have my own values. At that time， I added a brushstroke to a painting after I finished it. Many people asked me privately： “Yang Mian， isn’t that stroke a bit superfluous？ It kind of ruins the image.” But after I graduated in 1998， those single brushstrokes became increasingly obvious， and beginning in 1999， the figures became even blurrier.

　　Although there was a strong conceptual sensibility to Yang Mian‘s artistic DNA， his work was still a product of a specific context. In the 1990s， the sustained interest in contemporary Western art history， the glut of pictorial information， and the widespread use and development of photo and video technologies coalesced into the common phenomenon of photo-based paintings. The influence of photography and moving images on artists is a complex and interesting subject. In the 1990s， the work of Western artists like Gerhard Richter had a direct and profound influence on Chinese artists. A great many artists were inspired by photographs， and for Yang Mian， the nearest examples were teachers like Zhang Xiaogang and classmates also born in the 1970s like Feng Zhengjie， Xie Nanxing， and Zhang Xiaotao. These artists used and revealed their interest in photos in different ways and attempted to preserve a fresh painterliness within that interest. Yang considered it important to differentiate himself from them stylistically. In essence， Yang Mian’s Standards series was part of nearly twenty years of Chinese photo-based art. An interest in photographs， and even an interest in Richter himself， was evident in his 1997 paintings. However， Yang was careful to avoid becoming part of that group， just as he tried to avoid any trace of the act of painting in his work. In his 1998 paintings， the figures were even flatter， and the backgrounds had almost entirely disappeared-with Standards I Made as a notable exception. The brushwork that highlighted that photo-based aesthetic had almost entirely disappeared. In 1999， he created different standards for Youth， Posing on the Phone， Cover Girls， Care， Glory， Glamor， Models， Colors， Body Types， and Posing for Photographs， all drawn from advertising. Reproducing these standards became Yang‘s way of participating in their formulation. Later， he chose advertisements featuring celebrities as the subjects of his Standards， and every year until 2006， he made standards as he understood them. In this way， figures from advertisements from every year appeared in his work， and as Yang put it， he had created a historical record of advertising spokespeople：

　　I painted this subject for nearly ten years， from 1997 to 2006. In this process， I discovered that my paintings were histories of product spokespeople. From my paintings， you learned about the history of advertising， our history of neutralized aesthetic standards for people， and how we recorded it in photographs. Finally， after a bit of Photoshop， a greater fantasy was created.

　　However， in contrast to the strain of Pop Art that directly presented or utilized pictures， Yang started by fundamentally questioning the advertisements themselves. As a result， he had a reason to change the motifs in the advertisements， including the colors and the backgrounds， even if he retained that single expressionistic brushstroke. Because his analysis of these advertisements was personal， he began asking himself a series of questions：

　　Since 1999， I think that I have seen advertisements as dislocated figures. A mistake of a product， when represented by an aesthetic figure， becomes a beautiful product. I found this phenomenon very strange， and I always wanted to know “Why can this person represent that product？ Why can a beautiful woman represent a car？ Why can a beautiful woman represent a refrigerator？ Why？”

　　However， art was not the solution here； it drew out a specific pictorial production method and effect. Even if Yang invested energy in choosing and changing these figures， he also used these figures as resources as much as possible. However， he wanted viewers to understand that his negative attitude was still difficult. To a significant extent， a critical attitude was an assumption in conceptual art and important foundation for the concept in a work. Yang approached the issue of analyzing and depicting consumer advertising in a questioning and even critical way， which created some distance between his art and the direct appropriation of pictures.

　　When Yang first finished Standards， critic Yi Ying noted that artists born in the 1970s like Yang Mian had：

　　…entered adolescence in the mid-1980s， and they arrived on the art scene in the mid-1990s. If the entrance of color television into ordinary urban Chinese households in the early 1980s served as a milestone， this generation grew up with an increasingly developed mass culture. Mass images dominated their visual habits， and even became part of their ways of thinking.

　　This analysis offered an important distinction related to the use of pictorial resources between artists born in the 1970s and those born in the 1950s， such as Wang Guangyi. In support of this point， Yi quoted Yang： “With these commercially oriented， highly materialistic standards， everyone has been corroded by materialism， forced into materialism. This is the nature of our times， whether we accept it or not.”

　　With these ideas， Yang very naturally shook off the constraints of ready-made pictures， and placed his own ideas onto the two-dimensional surface， in order to notably change those ready-made pictures-this became the basic characteristic of his art. In 1998， Yi offered a summary that could apply to Standards：

　　In Yang Mian’s mind， there was no first-generation misreading of the Pop style. Later， Pop Art was characterized by ready-mades as form， rather than taking mass culture as a subject to be expressed. While he appropriated mass imagery， Yang used mass culture as his source material and content， resulting in a unity of the background and the subject. On the surface， he directly transported figures from advertisements onto his own canvases or painted forms using commercial painting techniques. Yang had a clear direction： cultural commentary. This pursuit reflects the Cartoon Generation‘s distinctive understanding of contemporary culture and reflection on their own circumstances and personal experiences-an important difference from the Educated Youth Generation， or even the New Generation.

　　An important visual characteristic of the pop style of painting was the absence of form and personality； the pictorial overload of mass culture shaped intangible yet increasingly uniform standards and remolded people as standardized products. Yang Mian’s work was a response to all of this， and his own discourse was founded on the interpretation of mass images， which contained two strategies： a personal understanding of mass images and a personal way of re-designing those mass images. These two characteristics shaped his own discourse.  Pi Li offered this commentary on Standards series：

　　Yang Mian‘s paintings were strange hybrids that brought together popular images， social commentary， and academicism. His paintings did not directly incorporate popular images； instead， he refined these images using academic oil painting techniques， thereby transforming the images. For a generation of painters nurtured by commercial culture， the relationship between academicism and popular culture was like the connection between family and society； the latter was often more influential than the former. Yang’s transformations offered criticism in both directions： ridiculing academicism and questioning consumer culture.

　　In the early 1990s， the property market quickly changed China‘s urban landscape. People had always based their historical and cultural judgments about a city’s past and present on changes in urban architecture and space. However， this methodology changed due to the explosive growth of the property industry. Of course， the most profound changes were to people‘s lifestyles and visual standards. Like the majority of people， Yang Mian noticed the change. In 2002， he applied the idea of standards to urban architecture. Drawing on the questions that resulted from property advertisements about “Housing Changing China，” he proposed some standards for that change.

　　Much like the standards by which he chose beautiful women， Yang Mian started his survey in Chengdu， the city most familiar to him. He called the project “A Reflection on the Culture of Standards in China： Standards for Ideal Community Architecture.” Some of his first House Standards works were Made in Chengdu， a miniature group of buildings constructed from iron sheet. We can see how little humanity and humanism went into urban planning and architecture at the time. This was the standard， but were those standards problematic？ In 2004， he chose Beijing buildings as the standards. Even though he would not rent a studio in Beijing until late 2005， he produced Made in Beijing； the taste and style of those buildings from Europe and the United States were certainly embarrassing. In addition to those architectural installations， Yang painted architectural models or planning drawings， using a technique very similar to the one he employed in his paintings of beautiful women. He even retained that single expressionistic brushstroke. Anyone could understand it， and this method allowed him to maintain a consistency of visual taste.

　　In 2006， Yang Mian settled in Beijing for the long term， and he started making his Classics (Come to China： The Revolution in Culture). When he placed images of classic works familiar to those who studied art， he tells us that， even though these artists never visited China， their work had a massive influence on several generations of Chinese artists. However， what are symbols of China？ Yang chose Tian’anmen Square and the Bund， to those familiar with modern Chinese history， these two places have a symbolic position in politics， the economy， history， culture， and fashion. Scholars have used these two physical places imbued with conceptual import to study culture and history from different perspectives. Of course， Yang also placed fashionable figures in his work， and he made sculptures of Western celebrities familiar to Chinese people， which echoed the paintings. By 2008， Yang clearly understood his artistic direction-he transformed pictures-and these plans for transformation became foundational to his work.

　　According to Yang， “After 2008， I no longer made that kind of art. I stopped for the same reason I stopped working on Beauty Standards. That has always been my strategy， and that is even clearer for me now： I wanted to become a plan-based artist. After a few years， I stop making all of my series and move on to something else-this includes my current CMYK series.”

　　Yang‘s CMYK series also stemmed from doubts about the reliability of pictures， even if the series presented the secrets that arose from the image generation process， rather than the symbolism of the images themselves. CMYK is the color system used in printing today. All of those complex images are comprised of cyan (C)， magenta (M)， yellow (Y)， and black (K). Because his past education had encouraged a reverence for classic works of art， when Yang discovered that he could replicate those classics of art through the combination of just four colors， he was shocked-“all of the images we have encountered since we were small are comprised of four colors： CMYK.”  He once again felt deeply uncertain about the safety of pictures. By enlarging them on a computer， he uncovered the distribution and arrangement of these four colors； the density of these simple colors presented a phenomenon that changed the original image. Yang reminded us that， regardless of how complex or mysterious the details of these classic paintings may be， CMYK still determined their appearance and charm when disseminated. Now， if he enlarged the internal structure of a CMYK image and presented it to us， the resulting effect would change our understanding of the picture. Critic Lu Mingjun articulated the following understanding of Yang’s CMYK：

　　As Yang himself has noted， for the last decade， from his early Beauty Standards to his more recent CMYK， he has only experimented with these two series， but they grapple with the same issue： the questioning of and reflection on the generation of images in an era of pictorial replication and dissemination. If the former series was more declarative， then in his later CMYK series， Yang delved into the internal structures of pictures， revealing from their depths how images and their dissemination in the age of mechanical reproduction occupy and regulate our everyday experiences. More importantly， Yang‘s work also conceals an awareness of methodology， namely， an experimentation with metapictures and visual archeology.

　　Interestingly， the first work that Yang Mian incorporated into this experimentation was A Sunday on La Grande Jatte， the Neo-Impressionist masterpiece by Georges Seurat. When Seurat’s Pointillist work was placed through a CMYK filter， it was easy to confuse the effect of Seurat‘s points with the CMYK colored dots， and in fact， Yang wanted to compare the sources of and differences between these sets of colored dots. Even though both the Pointillist work and the CMYK version were comprised of dots of pure color， the final images were fundamentally different. Early on， Paul Signac and Georges Seurat told people that there was no need to mix colors， that people could understand the world they depicted from the arrangement of the colored dots， because their eyes naturally mixed colors to recover the world that the artist depicted. Modern printing technologies successfully developed this principle to replicate an original picture as closely as possible. From this perspective， Yang Mian’s CMYK series was a contemporary homage to Neo-Impressionism. However， CMYK did not stem from the mere visual analysis of Neo-Impressionism； it came from the deeper interrogation of modern printing and replication， because Yang was very clear that CMYK was just a tool and perfect restoration was impossible.

　　The experiments within CMYK included Western classics and antique Chinese paintings. Because Yang replicated printed pictures in CMYK， and the pictures were themselves replicas of original oil paintings， the questioning of the text of CMYK ran even deeper. To what extent is the culture that is conveyed to us authentic？ Lu Mingjun wrote， “If the printed picture of the painting is a narrative， then Yang‘s CMYK is undoubtedly the re-telling of that story. If we add the original painting to the equation， then the narrative in CMYK is a text that has been translated three times over.”  As a result， standards once again became the subject of doubt， and after Yang explicitly used this image generation process and determined that CMYK also set a standard， he decided once again to formulate his own standards. Here， Yang performs a stylistic analysis， entirely bypassing the sociological or political significance of the images and focusing solely on the ways the images were generated. As a result， he completed a linguistic procedure that seemed to have stylistic meaning. Thinkers like Walter Benjamin highlighted the issues caused by the mechanical reproduction that emerged in the industrial era， but Yang Mian is now using technologies of replication to create new images， and this attitude and method already sets aside the anxiety of essentialism and expresses an intelligent postmodern attitude. Indeed， the spirit and temperament of the original work has already become withered or distorted， but the production of a new image comes from images with internality， which convey the contextual logic for generating the image. The images Yang uses in CMYK are influential， but the new images that result from his distrust of those pictures have methodological significance， and the issues that the artist must resolve are unrelated to the spontaneity and taste of painting by hand； they are related to some basic aspects of human civilization： tools， methods， and power dynamics. He once said， “In temperament， my present and past work is consistent； I study the safety of images.”  From this perspective， Yang has maintained the continuity and logic of his art. At every stage， Yang Mian has always attempted to resolve the problem of visual concepts and standards， and he has contributed to new painting in China， which gives his art a special place in Chinese contemporary art.

　　Monday， November 27， 2011

　　References

　　Lu， Mingjun. “CMYK： Experiments in Metapictures and Visual Archeology.” Translated by Bridget Noetzel， 2011， https：//www.yangmian.net/2011-lu- mingjun-cmyk-experiments-in-metapictures-and-visual-archeology.html.

　　Pi， Li. “Meihao Biaozhun” (Ideal Standards)， 1999， https：//www.yangmian.net/1999- 303821228821147--32654229092663120934.html.

　　Yang， Mian， Li Wei， and Han Weihua. “Yu Zhongguo Dangdai Shehui Tongbu de you ’Biaozhun‘ de Shenmei---Yang Mian Fangtanlu” (A Standardized Aesthetic in Keeping with Chinese Contemporary Society： An Interview with Yang Mian). March 2， 2006， https：//www.yangmian.net/2006-19982200132226924403201 95310382025021516274933034026377ldquo2663120934rdquo30340234573 2654-------2647220885357753584824405.html

　　Yang， Mian， and Yin Yan. “Yin Yan yu Yang Mian de Duihua” (A Conversation between Yin Yan and Yang Mian)， 2011， https：//www.yangmian.net/2011-275 752326719982264722088530340235453580 5.html.

　　Yi， Ying. “Liuxing Wenhua yu Geren Huayu： Cong Yang Mian de Chuangzuo Tanqi” (Popular Culture and Personal Discourse： Beginning with Yang Mian’s Work)， 1998， https：//www.yangmian.net/1998-26131-33521--2796934892259912127 019982200102015435805358212017426472208853034021019203163584836215.html