Charles Merewether: I should like to begin by asking you about the formation of the Northern Art Group in Harbin in 1985 of which you were a member. What was its philosophy and reason for its formation?

　　Wang Guangyi: I 985 was a year in which cultural and artistic spheres were especially dynamic. In the field of Fine Arts, this dynamism was embodied by the students who had just graduated from the art academies and who wanted to create or pursue new artistic forms and styles. They often appeared in the form of an organization. Of all the organizations that formed across the country at the time, the Northern Art Group was the first. At the time our reason for forming the group had to do with the fact that we had all just graduated and were back home in the Northeast. We got together often to talk about issues of culture and art. And, we felt we might better discuss such issues if we formed a group.

　　CM: If you look back, 17 years later, what significance do you give to this group and the period around 1985?

　　WGY: When I think back to this group now, it was significant not only for me personally, but, as far as I'm concerned, the overall development of Chinese art. It helped establish my approach to artistic creation, namely that one should base his/her art on his/her living environment. It allowed me to instinctually come to realize that the primary reason for creation had to do with forging a link between one's life and one's environment Of course, as I look back on our thinking of the time, I can see that it was rather simple. But, it was still important in as much as it was a foundation for the future. In fact, the group was disbanded in 1989, so it was very much transitional in nature. Still, in terms of Chinese art in general and in terms of artists at the time who formed organizations, it laid down an important stepping-stone for modern art in China.

　　CM: Do you think the debates that followed the 1983 Anti-Spiritual Pollution campaign had an impact on the way of thinking and discussions in which you were involved? That is, were you aware of these debates, especially those about humanism, alienation and spirituality and the opening of China's doors to the West brought about through Deng Xiaoping's economic reform movement?

　　WGY: Of course, these questions had an impact on me. In 1985, large amounts of [information] on western culture, western philosophy and western art literally poured into China. For Chinese artists at the time, this [information] left us faced with any of a number of quandaries: how could we develop our art? By looking to our own cultural heritage or by absorbing elements of foreign cultures? For artists at the time, including me, we were constantly seeking a relationship, a way to form a balance, the possibility of bringing together all the elements, this was a question that we mentally wrestled with.

　　CM: When I look at your painting of this period such as the 'Frozen North Wasteland' series (1985) or 'Post-Classical' series, notably your Death of Marat (1986) or 'Black (rationality' group of paintings (1987), one of the things I find striking is the way your 'style' resists any form of expressiveness, as if representing not only a critique of Western painting but an expression of the alienation of the subject vis-a-vis subjectivity. Or is it a critique of what has been called 'instrumental reason'? Is this related to your call in 1988 for the liquidation of 'humanist enthusiasm'?

　　WGY: Under the circumstances of the time, critics and artists, departed far from questions of art in the way they tried to explain or introduce their works. Often, much was made of a work's humanist content or other such metaphysical subject matter, which really had little or nothing to do with questions of social reality. To me, this was dangerous. I'm speaking of the art world at the time. Under those circumstances what I meant by ridding ourselves of humanist fervor was that the question of art should be brought back to that of its relationship with social reality.

　　CM: You have spoken in an interview (republished here) of the 'Great Criticism' series in terms of a 'cultural antagonism' between two different systems, i.e. China and the West. That is two different systems, images of Mao and Chinese images on the one hand and, on the other, pop and consumer images from the West. You also mentioned the idea of deconstruction and of deconstructing these two systems through ironic play. It would therefore appear that you are making a comment about a larger issue, China and the West. In other word, this series was also a way you position that there was too much philosophy, too much humanism or metaphysics in the art of the time insofar as it failed to address the real social tensions of the period.

　　WGY: I suppose there are two issues here. When I suggested that we rid

　　ourselves of humanist fervor, sometime late in the 80s, the point I was trying to make was aimed specifically at art and issues of art. I then began painting "the Great Criticism" series in the early 90s. I think we can safely say that the questions that art faced in the 90s were vastly different from those it faced in the 80s. In the 90s, everyone's concern was with issues of what constituted contemporary art. Perhaps due to the different cultural realities from which they sprang, the meanings of the questions and issues from both periods underwent a change. This is the first issue. The second issue had to due with the fact that China's politics, economy and culture had in fact undergone a very big change from the 80s to the 90s. In my view, the central point I want to express in 'the Great Criticism' series is the ideological antagonism that exists between western culture and socialist ideology. And, true, the significance of this antagonism has more to do with issues in cultural studies than simply art in and of itself.

　　CM: Is the change that happens in the 1990s also to do with the change in perspective on socialism?

　　WGY: Of course.

　　CM: During the time you were continuing paint the 'Great Criticism series, you began to produce around 1993 more and more installation work, notably works such as 'Visa (1993),' Blood Test - Everyone is a Potential Virus Carrier (1995) 'Quarantine - All Food Products Might be Poisonous' (1997), The Deterioration Process of Food over 24 Hours (1997)' and Origin of Species (1997). Within this period of the mid 1990's, do you see a change in your status and your role as an artist or that art changed its role in the public sphere?

　　WGY: I feel I have changed. For me personally, as an artist living and working now, I have made my position perfectly clear, that my role as an artist now is that of a social critic. In the eighties I did not function very well as a social critic. At the time, you might say, I was still searching for a certain relationship. As far as I am concerned, I have now found this type of relationship. I also found my role as an artist within society at large. This role continues to be my role today.

　　CM: Would this explain why you have moved to doing more and more installation work Insofar as it can more directly engage with the real?

　　WGY: Yes.

　　CM: Perhaps you talk a little bit about why one of the principle points of focus of this body of work during this period of the mid 1990's had to do with issues of health and education?

　　WGY: In my view, these two issues are most closely related to the relationship between society and individual lives. On the surface, it might seem like a question that impacts on the individual, but in fact, at least in my work, "Quarantine - All Food Products Might be Poisonous," the reality is that the work links issues of personal well-being with those of social structures, in as much as social structures are comprised of things like laws that govern health and sanitation, as well as food freshness. My work touches on all of these issues. In fact, I wanted to reveal that each of us as individuals within the social structure we inhabit, are in a precarious position and that this sense of precariousness is something that society injects into our lives.

　　CM: Do you view this issue of the precariousness and what you have described elsewhere as a lack of knowledge on the part of the individual a Chinese problem or a problem anywhere in the world?

　　WGY: This problem is the same wherever one is. Because I live in China, I suppose I'm more sensitive to such issues in China. The work I did in 1997 titled, "The Differences and Similarities of What Constitutes Food Quality in Two Different Political Systems," and the work I did in Singapore titled, "The Process of Food Degradation over a 24 Hour Period," along with other such works, all involved this question you brought up a minute ago. The west has a certain regime of laws governing food and sanitation, which is vastly different from that of China. In as much as I did the work in Basel Switzerland, I was interested in exploring the relationship between personal health and social systems in different societies. From the point of view of an artist, my position was dually critical. The West has certain standards for freshness and they might be different from those of China. I am hardly in a position to judge whether Western standards are most suited to man's health in general or if China's standards are actually

　　more in line with the good health and well-being of man. In fact, there are a number of problems that are inherent in both systems. What are those problems? How can we solve them? These are not the concern of an artist. Artists can only raise such questions.

　　CM: Was any of this work about food, health and education done in and for China and therefore perhaps with a view to addressing a local and specific audience and set of problems?

　　WGY: "Quarantine" was made in China. In as much as it was made in China, it is perhaps more concerned with the way things are in China whereas the works I did abroad put a heavier emphasis on the different relationships of different systems. The other issue is that of education. As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to education and issues related to education, I am perhaps more concerned with the influence of personal experience on an individual within the country in which he/she lives. This kind of personal experience is in fact an educational process of sorts. Different countries and different educational backgrounds lead to different ways of looking at the world. Take for example my work titled, "Elementary Education" (2001) The whole work grew out of my experience growing up and the educational experience I got from living in this society. From a very small age, almost as soon as I really started to become aware of my surroundings, the world was caught up in the cold war, this unique milieu in which there existed a kind of "us against them," binary, antagonistic mentality. This mentality had an enormous impact on the way I thought. Take for example the pictures I used in this work. They were anti-war photos taken and published in China in 1967- 68. If war comes to China, what would one do? If the enemy employs chemical weapons, what can one do to protect himself In this particular work, I wanted to explore the different ways one might look at the world given a different education or educational background.

　　CM: Apropos of the installation 'Elementary Education,' what's the relationship between those elements represented in the framed photographs of the 1960's and the tools such as spades that you placed in front of them?

　　WGY: These things are related to my experience when I was young. They bring back memories of my youth. People were digging trenches, digging bunkers with these tools. When we rested or took a break from work, we looked at pictures like this. You had the feeling that war was imminent. We would get half hour, sometimes even hour-long breaks in between work before having to get back to work. In reality, I guess I wanted to revisit the site where I came to know hard labor.

　　CM: 'Elementary Education' was exhibited in 2001. What is your view of this period which belongs to that of the Cultural Revolution? Is there a difference between how you remember your life then and how you view the effect and legacy of the Cultural Revolution? If this is about basic education from the Cold War about knowing one's enemy and preparing for war, what does it mean to make this work now?

　　WGY: On the one hand, it was my recollection of personal experience because at the time in 2001, the situation had changed completely. The Cold War was over. In fact, I suppose I wanted to express how people like myself, who were subjected to such an education, now viewed the world and its state of affairs.

　　CM: When these photographs were made in 1967, you were 10 years old. Is your memory of the CR a good memory or a bad memory?

　　WGY: I don't know about others, but for me, I like to use another word for it. My memories from this period aren't "bad" or "good," but more "meaningful." The word "meaningful" seems more accurate for me.

　　CM: Is it meant to be a critical reflection of the Cultural Revolution?

　　WGY: Interestingly, this was not intended as a critical view of the past, but more a foreboding of things to come, a foreboding that sprang purely from my imagination and yet, not long after I finished the work, the September 11 Incident took place, my sense of foreboding was in a sense born out in reality. Because I made this work inside a German museum, a German reporter interviewed me about the work and, in an almost joking manner, asked me if I thought I could sense that war would explode again soon? I said that I really wasn't sure, but in fact isn't today's world in a perpetual state of war. This state of war has a lot to do with the education that each of us receives growing up as a child. The fact remains that our view of the world as adults is very much shaped by our education

　　as children. It is hard for us as adults to alter the things we learned when we were young. I think this is true of people around the world.

　　CM: With a view to a work such as 'Elementary Education', what do you see as the relationship of the artist to history? Is the role of the artist to take on a critical role toward history or to reflect on history in a critical way or to simply re-create history?

　　WGY: I feel that one's role should not be purely that of the critic. What's important for me is to dig deep into the meanings contained in history as they are relevant to me in my role today.

　　CM: What then do you see as the meaning of the Cultural Revolution in China today?

　　WGY: I guess it depends on the angle from which you view it. From my perspective as an artist, the Cultural Revolution would be different for me than for the ordinary person as he might see things from his point of view. The significance of the Cultural Revolution in terms of political or economic development is different for both of us. For an artist, it provided a visual modality forged from the socialist experience of a certain time period. This modality was very important from my point of view as an artist. From an ordinary person's point of view, however, the Cultural Revolution must seem more negative in as much as it had a negative impact on the political and social development of the country. So, it varies from person to person.

　　CM: So, you're saying that this work allows for two positions, that is two kinds of relationships with the Cultural Revolution. What happens then to the point of view of the artist? If there are two positions, is it a choice that you want people to make? What is the relationship between the two positions?

　　WGY: The average person is perhaps more concerned with the consequences that an historical event might have on reality. The artist on the other hand, is likely to be concerned with complexities associated with seeing at that time, within the visual modalities of that period. In seeking to reveal such complexities, the artist must achieve a transformation of sorts, a switching of places, if you will.

　　CM: Could you say more about your notion of 'visual complexity.’ What do you see as the visual complexity of the work?

　　WGY: One should understand the term visual complexity in this way. When a person is confronted with an image, that image evokes certain memories from an earlier experience. For the viewer then, the earlier experience has the effect of psychologically coloring what we see, not in the sense that it necessarily leads us to judge if something is good or bad. Rather, it remains a lasting and influencing force in our psychological make-up. This kind of lasting influence or force then potentially forms a kind of subconscious drive for future development of one kind or another.

　　CM: But is this to be seen positively? What kind of reflection do you want the audience or common people to go away with, once they see the work?

　　WGY: Just as two cultures might be different, so the way they view things is also different. For someone who has grown up in a society like China, one is likely to see things in a binary, black and white, "us versus them" way. The existence of such a mentality is, in my view, neither a good nor bad thing. I want to remind the audience of the possibility that there may exist away of thinking and seeing that we have perhaps forgotten or let fade away. Such a mode of seeing or thinking, if you will, would also represent a different system of values.

　　CM: Do you think of history dialectically?

　　WGY: Of course.

　　CM: Can we now talk a little about a recent installation entitled "The History of the Newspaper." (2002) Specifically, were you using a specific or referring to a particular newspaper that was published in the post 1949 period and therefore relates to the inscription of dates on the mailboxes?

　　WGY: The Beijing Youth Daily newspaper was founded in 1949 when the People's Republic was established. After it's founding, it followed China's politics. Sometimes, its publication would stop. If it didn't arrive, then it meant it had been stopped. By following the founding, stoppage and resuming of this newspaper as a publication, we get a sense of the political history of this unique time in China.

　　CM: Is the point of the work to provoke the question: why was the newspaper stopped during those specific years? Is it a way of opening up a political and cultural history of those years?

　　WGY: Right! When it stopped publishing, it meant political change, as well as the myriad social reactions that such change might bring about.

　　CM: What years did it stop?

　　WGY: After it's founding in 1949, it continued through '50 and '5 I. In 1952, '53, '54, it stopped publishing. If you're familiar with Chinese history, you would recognize immediately what happened in those three years, namely the collapse of the Chinese economy, the instability of the political situation, the problems associated with the new power structures. This was an official newspaper. So, it was immediately apparent what was happening. Only with the political reforms of the early Sixties did it resume publishing. The economy started to show signs of picking up, but freedom of expression then became very controlled and again it stopped publishing. I mean anyone familiar with Chinese history would understand the link between the newspaper and political history. Art like this is really the product of sociology, history and politics all rolled into one.

　　CM: Why did you choose the Beijing Youth Daily and not the People's Daily?

　　WGY: Because "The People's Daily" has never stopped publishing. It was and is an official newspaper in every sense of the word official, it will never stop publishing. From an art perspective, this is also interesting, but less so in that it is not multi-dimensional. The Beijing Youth Daily Newspaper also represents the official media, but its existence I think better reflects the political changes over time. It is especially sensitive, perhaps because it expresses relatively new ideas and opinions. So, it can perhaps better reflect the changes of the times. It stops publishing as soon as there are any political changes, almost immediately.

　　CM: Recently, you have resumed painting and begun a new series that seems based on your 'Great Criticism' series often years ago. Could you speak about this?g Do you see the paintings as a continuation of the earlier series? Or, have you come back to paint these paintings and if so, why did you feel the need to come back to the 'Great Criticism' series?

　　WGY: The simple answer is this: Because up until just recently, 'The Great Criticism' series looked critically at things that were highly socialized, for example Marlboro, Coca Cola, etc.. Everyone knew these brands. So, central to these works was the issue of extreme popularization. Today, the subject matter of 'Great Criticism' series has undergone a change. I am moving from subject matter that is highly socialized to subject matter that is inherently about a kind of art. While this would not have much meaning for most people, for the art world, [this kind of art] looms very large. This is why I have turned my focus to this question. Beuys and Warhol had an enormous impact on the art world, including me. Of course, I am looking at this question from the point of view of art only.

　　CM: So, in a certain sense we can see them as a reflection on your earlier work I want to conclude by asking you about a recently completed work: 'Materialist' (2001) which you have chosen for the cover as distinct from, for example of the paintings from the 'Great Criticism series. What meaning does the word have for you, why did you choose this title?

　　WGY: Because materialism in China carries enormous significance. Because the term is almost revolutionary, at least in China. From as far back as I can remember, materialism and idealism were opposites, antonyms, even antognistic. I have always maintained that I am a materialist with all of the revolutionary connotations this entails and all of the critical capacities that in and of themselves are the opposite of those of an idealist. Of course, when I titled this work 'Materialist,' I intended it to contain all of the connotations I just mentioned. But, at the same time, when I create such works, while there may be similarities, in terms of form or style, with 'The Great Criticism' series, still the two series remain different in one regard: they don't contain their opposites. They are as they were. I want them to bring back the socialist spirit. That is to say, I don't wish to create an oppositional or antagonistic relationship in these works, but rather to present the images on their own as something that can represent both the simple and the complex within the socialist visual experience. That's what I want to express in these works. The force that these images possess, as a visual tradition, in and of themselves. An American would never paint something like this or see the world as I do. Only someone with a socialist visual experience would paint something like this.

　　CM: If this work is a visual key to the concept of Socialist spiritualism, where visually may we locate the concept of 'socialist spirit' as you define it?

　　WGY: In their torsos and appendages, in their movements, including in their expressions. They are covered with millet, too. Of course, millet as a material is important in as much as it has certain revolutionary qualities. To understand this, you really need to enter into Chinese culture. Take for example Beuys work 'Felt Adhesive' and all of its cultural connotations and European spirit. For someone not familiar with European culture, the work might be unintelligible, if not ridiculous. I mean 'Felt Adhesive' is after all a strip of "felt adhesive," that's all. Now turn it all around, if you didn't understand Chinese culture, my "millet" would simply be millet, that's all.