郭承辉四场一体的画展《看山》，展出作品逾百件，均是最近新作，完全突破了我对他的绘画套路的认识，渗透着一种诚然、物哀、“侘寂”（ Wabi-sabi ）感，看这批作品，好像是在复习哲学家九鬼周造（Kuki Shuzo，1888-1941）的美学论文一样，有一种东方文化的深层实在，我感觉看这批画，得整批来看，才有语境（context）感，那种散漫的幽玄，是在那些大张的布面、小张的纸张中漂浮着的，很难一张一张的读，却能够通过整个展览看到艺术家的感觉。

　　我们这些做理论的人，都感觉艺术评论越来越难做，究其原因，倒不是艺术变得越来越复杂导致，而是评论家本身对于应该做什么越来越没有确定性而造成的。从古到今，艺术就没有简单过，评论家有力的时代，是他们有约定俗成的标准去评鉴，一旦这个约定俗成的高度消失了，评论家也就找不着北了。哲学家罗素（Bertrand Russell）、维根斯坦（Ludwig Wittgenstein）、格特罗伯.佛里奇（Gottlob Frege）和穆尔（George Edward "G. E." Moore）都曾经探索过艺术评论的功能是什么，穆尔最后简练的界定了两个工作范畴：挑毛病（fault finding）和价值判断（Judgment of value）。这倒是非常清晰：但是怎么去挑毛病、怎么去判断价值呢？总得有个大家认同的基础吧！艺术批评中“价值学说”（Structure of Value）的重要人物罗伯特.哈特曼（Robert Hartman）认为基础有三方面：有限的内涵系统（finite intentional set）、内在价值（intrinsic value）、外在价值（extrinsic value），所谓有“限的内涵系统”说的是艺术的是非、正确与否，因为过于绝对，非黑即白，往往不为评论家沿用；而艺术品的内在价值、外在价值就成了众多评论家沿用的挑毛病、价值判断的焦点了。内在价值往往和艺术家的心理、伦理有关，而外在价值则受更多社会、文化因素的影响，也就是说内在价值因为涉及心理、伦理，难以量化，而外在价值牵涉社会、文化，则有可能更量化，艺术评论正因为如此才变得语境丰富、而又能够长期有确定性的方向。但是要记住，所有这一切的确定可能性，是我们设定艺术是独一无二的原作（unique）、而艺术圈（artworld）艺术评论的前提，由艺术家、画廊、博览会、策展人、评论家、收藏家、艺术爱好者组成的圈对原作挑毛病、评价艺术品的价值，构成了艺术评论的位置。我之所以说现在艺术评论越来越难做，就是因为自从波普以来，当代艺术出现了非独一无二性、批量生产性，因此我们约定俗成的三大基础被压缩到只有谈内在价值这么一个三分之一的小空间里，批评的语言环境变得极为狭窄了。

　　郭承辉的画从一方面来说，还是“独一无二性”型的，也就是还是沉重的依托于“原作”的承载，因此可以用传统的外在价值去审议，比如这些作品形成的时代背景、文化背景、社会背景、艺术家自己的学术教养和品位高低，这些背景，大家应该很熟悉；而他的作品的内在价值层面，自然和艺术家的心理、伦理观密切相关。郭承辉相信身体先于思辨、放身去做，然后才是动脑思考。这一点和许多艺术家不同，因为多半人总是深思熟虑后再动手，而不太会先做再想。说艺术创作，这样讲很难讲清楚，这件事其实用在两性关系上颇为容易解释，俗气的说，就是“先睡了再想后果”，拿这种方式去画画，就是郭承辉的做法。

　　这些年来，当代艺术的展览也都程式化了，一边叫“反传统”，而整个运动越来越成为新的“传统”，“看山”展在一定程度上是希望突破当代艺术的程式，这包括“白马”集团策展的探索、活动的策划探索，更多在于郭承辉自己创作的新探索。用油性材料、水和铜版纸、布面做貌似水墨的山水，且从传统山水画的近、中、远走开，在山里看山，浑浑沌沌，程序是看山、抚水、听香、观画。倒不怎么看到传统程序的“起、承、转、合”，反而有点日本的“序、破、急”，云蒸雾绕、山风呼啸，煞是有趣，从艺术评论来说，内外价值都有得说，甚至有限内涵系统也有其比较紧凑的正确性了。

2017年4月5日星期三

Preface of "Looking at Mountains" by Guo Chenghui

​Wang Shouzhi

　　Over one hundreds paintings by artist Guo Chenghui, are presented in four sites simultaneously in Guangzhou. All of them are new works created in a short period of time. They are far beyond what I knew of his works. As a combination, these are paintings oozing up a specific mood of honesty, mono-no-aware, wabi-sabi. To experience them is like reading aesthetic paper by Kuki Shuzo. You have to read them in whole, not one by one, to gain their momentum.

　　Art critics are feeling harder and harder now to write comments. The art itself is getting more complicated is not the cause but uncertainty of art judgment is. Art has been never simple. For art critics, when there was standard or criteria, there was certainty for critics. Whenever criteria art missing, critics got missing too. Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein）,Gottlob Frege and George Edward "G. E." Moore all once tried to locate possible criteria. G.E. Moore listed two: fault finding and judgment of value. Robert Hartman, a philosopher focusing on structure of value, helped to propose three principles: finite intentional set, intrinsic value and extrinsic value. Finite intentional set tends to be obsolete, which is not much favorite by art critics. Extrinsic value links to social, cultural and epical content, which is considered denumerable and measurable. Intrinsic value goes with psychological, ethical and moral nature of artists. That is why art criticism has been so profound and so rich.  All the judgment bases on a belief that art is unique artifact. Criticism is what fault finding and value judgment by art world consisting by artists, critics, organizers, galleries, museums, media, collectors, etc. Art critics have been more difficulty since Pop art transformed art itself from unique masterpieces into mass produced objects. The context of critics has been narrowed down to on third of previous foundation combined by intrinsic, extrinsic and finite intentional set.

　　Guo's paintings are still belonging to "unique masterpiece" prototype, which can be judged from both extrinsic and intrinsic values. We are familiar with his background, educational, epical influence. For intrinsic value, he firmly believes his body response comes first before ideological consideration. This belief makes him different from most of his cotemporaries who work starts from planning carefully before they paint. It would be easier to explain this concept from sexual relation of human being. Put in this way: "to Fxxk first before thinking its result" this is what Guo's way of creation.

　　In recent years, contemporary art exhibitions have been stereotyped. Whenever they call for "anti tradition", "anti convention", they become a tradition and convention. The show of "looking at Mountains", from the painting to the organizing activities helped by Clear Media is quite different. Guo himself also tries in new ways of expression, new media of painting. Departing from viewing mountains from a fixed view point as Chinese ink painting tradition to setting down in the middle of mountains with uncertain perspectives. As he told me the process of these paintings is based on looking mountains, touching waters, hearing fragrance and watching paintings finally. I recall Chinese four steps in composition as introduction, elucidation, transition and summing up, but failed to see them in Guo's painting. What I got is steps as introduction, break down, and rush up, which are more Japanese aesthetic principles.

6 April , 2017​

作者：王受之