时间：2012年11月11号

　　地点：北京顺义阿克曼公寓

　　老阿：让我们来谈谈男人，女人和艺术。我看你的画里面只画一个男人，就是你自己。关于这个画里的男人表面上看很简单，就是吃饭、玩女人的男人。不过这个男人一直都心存忧虑，很少百分之百的享受。依我看，这么极端地画自己，一面是自恋，一面意味着你不断反思自己。实际上你画的女人不妨也可以看成更多是对男人的思索。你为什么不断地画自己？

　　李津：画我自己没有什么故意，没有什么自觉。从我发觉自己画自己的时候并不是我开始画自己的时候。我画我自己无形中有十年时间。我为什么对单眼皮、大鼻头、有胡须的男人有一种特别认同感？我以前试过画一些不长胡子、眼睛吊着、眉毛也吊着，当时说是好看的男人，我也试过，也画过一些那样的形象，但是我画的时候觉得我跟“他”离得很远，我在塑造一个我认为的一个漂亮的形象、偶像的形象，那个时候的东西是我永远在追偶像，是被动的。后来不再想画这些，我自己好像永远跟那个东西没有缘分，虽然我有能力画这个东西，但是我自己觉得他不是我要的。我画我自己的时候好像不用去了解，我画了好多背面的我，太奇怪了，我从来没有通过镜子看我后边长什么样，但别人都说特像。这就是你自己对自己的相通，这种通的东西，不是你眼睛看到的。其实你最后选择的是把审美放下以后画你真正想画的男人的时候，你发觉那个男人就是你自己。

　　老阿：女人就不一样了吧，女人你画得很美，当然说不是一般意义上的美，画得很性感，给人一种刺激。好比朱新建画的《金瓶梅》，你发现男人丑，给你一种反感，女人就特别美，特别性感。他有很强烈的符号性，甚至有夸张漫画的倾向。男丑女美你身上也有。

　　李津：好多认为我画的女人也不美。

　　老阿：你画的女人绝对是美。

　　李津：你说的？

　　老阿：我说的。从艺术的角度来讲绝对是美的。

　　李津：很多人眼里的美和我是有距离的。我强调阅读女人关注点在哪儿。如果你们感觉到有美是因为我有这个关注在里头。我关注表达的细腻，有意思的是，这个关注所谓的理想化的女性的细腻，那还是我自己，你认为这个细腻跟你画的女人有关系，实际是你心里希望的东西。

　　老阿：实际上你画的你自己和你画的女人是一个人。

　　李津：一个人，是两面，把胡子去掉就是一个女人，把胡子加上就是我，是男人。实际上那种细腻的感觉，比如慵懒或者是很水、很凝视的眼神，包括眉宇之间的动作和角度都是我关注的，包括她的手势、肩膀等等都是你阅读的东西，是你自己阅读的。因此我认为我和朱新建不太一样的地方是朱新建把这种阅读形式化，把美固定化、审美化，我是永远觉得阅读有很多的不确定性，这个东西是不是需要固定？在我的思路里没法固定，你可以在很多女人身上总结出十条美，你固定下来突然发觉又认识一个女人她有十一条，就是总在不断地有一种东西，哪怕这个东西是特别不明显，但是可能这个东西，如果你要看到它，它就放大了。

　　老阿：我明白了。说实在话，看你的画我对这些“男人”更感兴趣。这些“男人”对女人有一种漠视。

　　李津：严格讲不是说对女人，我对自己以外的人都有一种漠视，无论男的、女的。

　　老阿：我们是男人，也不是同性恋，我对你的生活也有所了解。就是对女人，特别是对你的渴望或者是你的需求的一个对象是有一个绝对性的概念的。所以你的“男人”让我特别感兴趣，因为这些在艺术里的“男人”与现实不一样的是，他一直有一种忧虑。这个忧虑和女人有关系，不知道你同不同意？你抱着一个丰满的，符合男性需求的一个女人，却心怀忧虑。我马上感觉到了跟自己的关系，我想读这个，我想理解这个。

　　李津：我听明白了。回到开始说的话题，不用生和死这个词，比如“活（鲜活）”“生动”，有的时候我理解的“生动”，好多人说我的画“生动”，实际上我有时候看眼神特别木讷，很倒霉蛋、特木讷、恍惚，你的焦距在哪儿？也不在里边，往往这种东西又感觉是一个人，有时候有神，恍惚就是一种神，我想这个神和这种恍惚是人们可能对比较确定的，很有态度的表情成为一种习惯，比如愤怒、高兴、一般性的发呆都有一种判断，我认为我所有画的东西是极其不确定，说他愤怒吗？说他真是忧伤，真是高兴吗？都不是很明确的，我自己的内心也是这样，我绝对不能说我自己是一个具有悲剧色彩的人，但我内心非常悲哀，我是知道悲哀不愿意看到结果的人。我是也许因为知道这种结果就特别想看更光明的人。

　　阿克曼：这个我同意。可是，你画里也有一种快乐。

　　李津：是，真正心里头有高兴的东西的时候，那个时候不用去想，画人的时候眉毛会松开，眼睛往上翘，嘴往上翘就是笑，你不用想什么别的问题，因为真的在笑。但是我现在画所有的东西有一种忧伤，它是自然而然的，你的生活，你的情绪，像自己的心电图一样。就是我这种画家。

　　阿克曼：这是很有意思，因为看你的画很随意，同时也会觉得你的表达是对你自己的一种探索，是完全专业的一个过程。

　　李津：是。别人看的是过程。对于我来，我能够做到的是画画的时候用心，你只要一用心，一进入状态的时候，你把这个事逼真了，所谓求逼真是什么呢？我理解是你自己和自己的心情联系得比较好，你作为演员你扮演角色的时候已经觉得你和角色之间没有距离，你就是角色，我们画画也是这样，你画的这个人已经和你不会是两个人，完全就是你，如果你要是男角、女角也是你，就把你的心思都扑在上头。

　　阿克曼：所谓的主观是一个艺术家的能力大小的标志，特别是水墨画.我看过的好的水墨画，跟作者本人确实有密切的关系。

　　李津：还是他自己，我们非常可悲的是并非表达而在表现自己，不为别的目的为前提来考虑自我的比较少。所以，我认为真正能献给自己的还是我们自己。

　　阿克曼：你是赤裸裸地表达自己，与别人不同，也不符合中国艺术传统。你这样做的同时，也制造了一种李津形象。你爱女人，你爱吃，你爱享乐等等，比如，你在画里和几个丰满女人一起吃特别丰盛的大餐时的疲惫，你跟女人在欢娱之后的沉吟，等等。甚至这个形象替代了现实中的李津，你愿意做这个形象么？

　　李津：我跟你这么讲，回到我最初画画的动机上，我认为永远有这样的人，就是要么编故事吓唬自己，要么编故事表扬自己，要么编故事安慰自己，我属于每个阶段都不一样，哪种都有，但是我有一个我在真的认识到编故事是重要的，因为故事本身不是真实，包括我们的经历，我认为所有的经历到今天我也认为不是真实。所谓的“真实”是心理的真实，就是你需要它的时候，它真实；你不需要它的时候，它不真实。你这一瞬间认为有人就要杀你，你特别紧张、特别恐惧这是真实，实际上没人杀你，是你自己吓唬自己。一个时候你觉得你特别爱，实际上未必对方爱你，是你感觉到爱，这个爱也是你制造的。所以我们认为很多事情是理想和现实，一个艺术家很多的偏离也在于你自以为是的东西在现实当中很可笑，可笑的人往往是艺术家。

　　阿克曼：你自己意识到这种区别了吗？

　　李津：我意识到了但是没有用，就是意识到了也改变不了。除非你不是艺术家，所以我认为谁是艺术家？艺术家就是有病，总把自己的感受扩大化、放大化而且强加给别人，认为别人也像我一样，然后他不厌其烦地想宣传这一点或者证实这一点，这一点是你的个人愿望，不是客观。

　　阿克曼：这方面你把艺术和生活分开吗？

　　李津：不是分开的问题，现在没有界线。

　　阿克曼：你是一码事？

　　李津：一码事，百分之百一码事。

　　阿克曼：我理解，你说得非常清楚，一个艺术家和一个做艺术的人的区别。现在在中国做艺术的人多得是，艺术家还是少。我说的是真正的艺术家，把自己的事变成艺术。

　　男人女人的问题暂时放下，还是想和你谈谈跟传统的关系？我们一起去了看了鲁本斯，我觉得通过他你对肉感有了一种更深的理解，是这样吗？

　　李津：不是，有故事。就是我回来的时候我发微信，发鲁本斯的画，我很早就喜欢他的画，也很早有人跟我说过：“你是我们看到用中国水墨画鲁本斯的很少的人，你的感觉是找鲁本斯的感觉。”

　　阿克曼：不是找鲁本斯的感觉，是有一种相通的感觉。

　　李津：不是我说，别人这么说。是八十年代，那个时候我画了几个人体是太像（鲁本斯）了，那个时候年轻，那个时候画得更大，臀很大，腿和脚收的都特别小，鲁本斯的形就是这样，他的躯干和主体部分非常夸大，手、脚很纤细、很瘦，就是收得特别好，就是细和粗的对比，他玩这一块。

　　从德国回来，我把鲁本斯的画发到微信，宋永红回了一个说，“三哥，鲁本斯这一块国画、水墨玩不了。”我现在还保留着那个微信。鲁本斯是好也很棒，但是这个活不是很给水墨干的。我就很来气，怎么水墨就不能干呢？所以就想试试，只要一个画家想试什么，你的形式里头就有东西了，就有这种表象了。比如你对肉体的软的，我这次画的有一些感觉的东西，是把勾的那一部分更淡化了，淡化线，我在里头找圆润感，跟肉一体化所谓软的东西。

　　阿克曼：是这样。我知道，并不因为你是模仿鲁本斯，这是好像兄弟，我发现鲁本斯的东西你有，所以我觉得宋永红那个回的不对，因为水墨画玩不玩得了这个东西不是一个问题，是艺术家会不会玩这个东西。

　　李津：我们9月份去德国看了那么多巴洛克教堂，后来我看我的画的转变。我出去看到的东西对我一定有投射，我们听到的看到的给我的影响是是潜移默化的，画的时候没有故意想这个东西。后来我发觉这种丰盛，这种动感，一种装饰感觉的躁动、韵律，还有小花，小草细碎歌颂式的感觉，这些东西绝对不能说跟巴洛克，跟我看到的东西没有关系。而且我一直想这种对对肉体的歌颂，我在教堂里头看到的很多东西也是这样，它立足在哪里？就是它没有放弃肉体，没有放弃人本身有血肉的东西，教堂是人盖的，也是给人看的。我也想强调一个概念，就是无论你是有没有信仰，宗教先放在一边，首先知道载体是什么，载体还是人，还是肉身，肉身是有知觉的，作为人来讲有没有必要这个品种的欲望都放下，否则这个品种还有意义吗？

　　阿克曼：其实我带你看这些教堂的目的就是这个。画肉体的艺术特别多，不过一般的艺术家画的这个“肉体”，我只能说，就是一块肉完了，没有别的。我当初看了你的画就已经明白，你意识到意识不到无所谓，你明白肉体是唯一的能够全部表达我们的信仰，我们跟上帝的关系，是一个唯一的载体。我开始就谈你的宗教感，你觉得很莫名其妙，你当然不是一个佛教徒也不是一个基督徒，你把肉体变成生活最深刻的、最能表达核心的一个东西。你和鲁本斯这方面相同。

　　同时，这也绝对是和中国传统的一个决裂。这个是中国传统艺术绝对不允许的，不知道你自己意识到这个没有。

　　李津：起码有一个距离。我想把肉感做成一个问题。

　　阿克曼：我曾给你写过一篇文章，有一先生读后批评我说我不理解中国文化，他说我不明白在中国那些《肉圃团》里描述过这些。但我想说的是明清小说里基本上描述的不是真正的肉感，是肉欲。是对性活动的一个描写，引起一种性刺激。肉感包括肉欲，但超过纯粹的肉欲。肉感意味着对人和自然的肯定。通过感官来理解世界，这是不一样的。

　　李津：情色和肉感不一样，肉感还是人对肉体本身包括皮肉，包括本身的一种认同，要不然不会给你这个皮囊。从中国传统来讲是反对这个的，皮囊、肉身只不过是你的衣服，灵魂才是你的一切，这是过去中国人，西方也一样，有圣德的人会这么想。我的阅历里，觉得弱智者的肉体反应最直接，冷热他直接就说，一冲动马上就勃起了，没有任何羞耻，本能得多。现代文明精神活动太多了，尤其是知识分子阶层。如果是农民还能够知道累，或者搞体育的，有肌体的累。忘掉自己本身，忘掉基础的东西是挺恐怖的一件事。

　　阿克曼：你这么解释让人明白你为什么把吃和爱放在一块讲，画里的喧哗更是你对自己的肯定。实际上无论是画的萝卜或者是女人的奶子，都是一个东西，同样让我们理解自己和上帝。

Radish and Boob, Creations of Artist God

Dialogue between Ackermann and Li Jin

　　Date: November 11, 2012

　　Venue: Apartment of Ackermann, Shunyi District, Beijing

　　Ackermann: Let’s talk about male, female and art. When I look at your male figure paintings, I see one man only. That’s you yourself. Apparently, the man in these paintings is simply a womanizer and diner. But when I look deeper, I trace worries and reserved indulgence. So far as I am concerned, a man of such ardent cravings for self-portrait is on one hand a narcissist, and on the other a reflectivist. Another finding I get from your works is that women in your paintings are more speculation on men than pure portrait of female images. So why keep producing yourself in your paintings?

　　Li Jin: I am in fact neither intentional nor aware of it. The day when I came up with the idea of making myself a model in my paintings, it was ten years after I virtually started doing it. Why do I sympathize so much with men that have single-edge eyelids, big noses and beards? I used to settle my brushes on such men as those well-shaved faces and lifted eyes and brows. They were recognized as good looking idols. But I felt being alienated from them when I was illustrating them. When I have to make an image that I deem as pretty, I turn out to be a follower of some imagery idol. I have the capability to make it though, I am not at any chance appealed to it. It’s not what I want, so I quit it. On the contrary, I don’t have to struggle for the acquaintance with me when I symbolize myself in the painting. What’s more interesting, those portraits of my back view are widely acknowledged as being particularly identical to how it is. The thing is, I have never observed my back from a mirror or whatever. This is how the intrinsic connection works. You don’t illustrate what you see with your eyes. You just express your feelings towards someone that ignites your passion and that someone turns out to be you yourself.

　　Ackermann: Well, female is another story, I guess. Women in your painting are very beautiful, but not stereotypically beautiful. The beauty here is stimulatingly sexy. It may be likened to “The Golden Lotus” by Zhu Xinjian. In this painting, Mr. Zhu presents an acute collision between the male ugliness and female beauty. It’s this kind of collision that makes the women outstandingly beautiful and sensual. He creates an intensely symbolic style, tinted with caricatural exaggeration. Similar adoption of contrast between male ugliness and female beauty can be found in your paintings.

　　Li Jin: Still, a lot of people find no beauty in the women I paint.

　　Ackermann: They are absolutely beautiful.

　　Li Jin: You think so?

　　Ackermann: Definitely yes, in the view of arts.

　　Li Jin: I appreciate the beauty in a different way from those of many. I read women and value the focus. It is this focus that creates the beauty you find in my paintings. I attend to expressing the beauty in female subtleness and fineness, which, interestingly, reflects the inner me. You may attribute the subtleness and fineness to the women you have in your paintings, while in fact, it is a manifesto of what you intrinsically want.

　　Ackermann: The female and the self in your paintings are actually the same one.

　　Li Jin: One person with two sides. The side with beard is male me, the other beardless side is the female. In real cases, those fine and subtle features, such as loaf, dewy or attentive eyes, and movements and angles of their brows and foreheads, are all of my focus. Their gestures and shoulder movements are all available and open for your individual readings. This is the reason why I differentiate myself from Zhu Xinjian, who on the contrary, presents a fixed style for some certain reading and creates beauty in a fixed existence of aesthetics. Is it supposed to be fixed anyway? Personally speaking, I am open to uncertainties in beauty and will never settle down on a fixed style. You may be able to make a list of Top Ten Beauties of various women, but soon you will come across some other women and find something new to the list. It happens always that this may lie invisible before you get to know it, but once you find it, it becomes outstanding.

　　Ackermann: I get it. Be honest, I am more appealed to the male in your paintings. They present indifference towards women.

　　Li Jin: Strictly speaking, it’s not like that. I disregard any other existence than me myself, regardless of gender.

　　Ackermann: We are both men and straight. I have gained some understanding of your life and an absolute concept of women in your eyes, especially those you crave for or you ask for. However, the male group in your works is lingered by a sense of anxiety, which is quite different from the real world. That’s why they appeal to me so much. Do you agree that this sense of anxiety relates somehow to the female group? With some plump woman that all men dream for in your arms, you still look worried. It triggers sympathy in me. I want to read and understand it.

　　Li Jin: I see what you mean. To resume the topic we had just now, I don’t use words relating to “live” or “dead”, such as “alive (fresh and alive)” and “lively”. A lot of people use the word of “lively” to describe my paintings, but this “lively” expression, in my eyes, looks dull, unfortunate and absent-minded. Can you find the focus? It’s not here, not anywhere. It’s like a person that may various manners and spirits. Similar to absent-mindedness, anger, joy and daze may be defined by certain standards that have become habitual and expressive. However, in my paintings, certainty is not granted. Do you think he is angry? Or is he really grieved or joyful? There is no definite answer. This uncertainty applies to the inner me as well. I am by no means a person of tragic characteristics, but I do feel melancholy deep down in my heart while in the meantime I deliberately turn a blind eye to any possible consequence. Maybe that’s because I am the kind of person who strives harder for brightness when there is a thickness of dark clouds.

　　Ackermann: I agree with that. However, there is joy in your paintings, too.

　　Li Jin: Yes. When there is real happiness in your heart, it becomes natural that you would express it in your paintings by loosened eyebrows, raises eyes and curved lips. You don’t have to think hard with your mind, because you are genuinely happy from your heart. However, my paintings are immersed in a trace of sorrow, which clings spontaneously to me in my life. It tells my emotions just like a real-time electrocardiogram tells my heart. This is the kind of painter I am.

　　Ackermann: It is very appealing that your paintings apparently look random and casual, while they reveal a completely professional process in which you explore and express your inner world.

　　Li Jin: You are right that outsiders may look at the process. But as far as I am concerned, attention and concentration work the most for me to get into the creative and artistic mood, which blends my works into my earthly existence. What does it imply? In my opinion, it’s seamless connection between the emotional being and the earthly being of you. In may be likened to what actors and actresses do. The closer it gets between the real personality and the role, the better the performance turns out to be. In the same way, when I indulge myself fully into the creation, the one in the painting and the one making the painting turn out to be a single and authentic self. As simple as it is, you put your heart and you make it you, male or female.

　　Ackermann: So called subjectivity symbolizes the competence of an artist, in particular, an artist of ink painting. I have seen a lot of good works of ink painting and I can tell there is close relationship between the art and the artist.

　　Li Jin: What’s pathetic, we are more inclined to show ourselves rather than express ourselves and we intend to overlook ourselves due to other purposes. Therefore, I think the best reward we deserve is ourselves.

　　Ackermann: The way you express yourself is disparate from Chinese tradition and other contemporary styles in that you make your arts in bold nakedness. By doing this, you have created a “Li Jin image”, which visualizes Li Jin as a womanizer, a diner and a hedonist who reveals fatigue when sitting and feasting with multiple sensual women, and who gasps after making love to a woman. This imagery Li Jin has outshined or even replaced the real Li Jin? Are you comfortable with that?

　　Li Jin: Let’s go back to why I started painting and from there we go with your question. To my point of view, there is a standing existence of such people who enjoys making stories to shock, comfort or praise themselves. I have been there all at different stages. But I am really aware of the significance in making stories. Stories are not real, and what we have experienced is not real either. If you ask me, I would tell you that all that I have experienced so far is not real to me. Real or not, it’s mental. When you need it, it may be real; when you don’t, it may be not real. For one moment, you may be frightened to death by a fake reality that someone is chasing to kill you, while the fact is you are intensely scared only because you think it is real. Sometimes, you may fall in deep love with someone, who may not be reciprocally attached. You feel the love only because you think your fabrication is real. In one word, it is all about imagination and reality. Artists appear to be far away from the crowd only because what they believe in and live on may turn out to be ludicrous in the earthly reality, while it’s this ludicrous spirit makes an artist.

　　Ackermann: Are you aware of the disparity I mentioned before?

　　Li Jin: I am aware, but it means nothing and changes nothing to an artist. What I think makes an artist? Well, it requires a morbid fantasy which amplifies and magnifies even a tiny trace of emotion to such a mighty power that may imposes influence on others, with the narcissistic illusion that those others sympathize with him as well as a sick persistence in propagandizing and demonstrating it. In fact, it is personal, not universal.

　　Ackermann: Do you separate your daily life from your art creation?

　　Li Jin: It is not about separation, since there is no boundary.

　　Ackermann: They are the same thing to you?

　　Li Jin: Yes, one hundred percent same.

　　Ackermann: I see what you mean. You make a clear distinction between an artist and an artistic person. There are multitudes of artistic persons in contemporary China, but only a few artists by which, I mean, genuine artists that create arts out from own businesses.

　　Let’s put down the male and female subject here. I am interested in talking about the relationship with traditions with you. We went to the Rubens collection some time ago, and I would say you have gained a deeper understanding of sensuality from those masterpieces. What do you think?

　　Li Jin: Not exactly. There is a story to tell. After I came back, I posted paintings of Rubens on WeChat, a social networking. In fact, I have been a fan of Rubens since long before, and I was told long time ago, saying, “You are one of the few artists that have portrayed Rubens in Chinese ink painting, which renders a quest for Rubens.”

　　Ackermann: It’s not a quest for Rubens. It communicates with him.

　　Li Jin: It’s what others said, not my opinion. It was in 1980s, when I was quite young and made more exaggerative shapes. I made several figure paintings, which resembles the image of Rubens, who has big butt and tiny legs and feet. It is Rubens style that features extraordinarily big torso and body and slender arms and legs, which structures a sharp contrast. That’s Rubens.

　　After I came back from Germany, I posted paintings of Rubens on WeChat and got a reply from Mr. Song Yonghong, saying, “Hi Bro, Chinese painting and ink painting don’t apply to Rubens.” I still have this message which denies Rubens for ink paintings, though he is brilliant. But I got worked up by the stereotype. Why is that Chinese ink painting does not apply to Rubens? So I challenged myself and have proved that as long as a painter comes up with an attempt, a layout can be available for his presentation, such as soft flesh. I blend something perceptual into my paintings this time, with a pale manipulation of outlines. I am hunting for a mellow and full effect, which integrate into the symbolic softness of a flesh.

　　Ackermann: So it is. I can tell that you are not imitating Rubens. Rubens, to you, is more like someone of brotherhood, some elements of which you share. So I don’t agree with Song Yonghong, either. It’s not about Chinese ink painting being applicable or not, it’s about the artist being capable or not.

　　Li Jin: Since our visits to multiple Baroque churches in Germany this September, I have seen some changes to my paintings. It is certain that the things I see and hear will unconsciously cast subtle influences, which is not visible or traceable in the process of my creation. It is well reflected in my works by a lavish, dynamic and decorative presence of restless movements and rhythms, as well as by a fine and detailed praise of flowers and grasses. There is no denying the fact that all these elements are closely attached to the Baroque splendor I experienced. I have been wondering on what ground can this praise of body and flesh, which can also be found in those Baroque churches, flourish. Now I get it that it is attributed to an ardent pursuit of the human body and its intrinsic elements of flesh and blood. Churches are built by man and for man. One idea I want to point out in particular is that regardless of the faith you may or may not have, put religion aside. First and foremost, the carrier, namely, the human body matters the most. If we human beings, as one of the varieties created by the nature, have to give up all natural desires, can we still make the sense out of our existence?

　　Ackermann: This is actually why I took you to these churches. We can find an excess of paintings on flesh. But to be honest, the most flesh paintings by ordinary painters just present nothing more than purely pieces of meat. At first sight of your paintings, I got to know that regardless of your consciousness, you understand that the human body is the single carrier of our faith and our connection with God. I can sense your confusion when I asked about your religious belief in the first place. I know you are neither a Buddhist nor a Christian. You transform the human body into an expressive media for exploring into the deepest territory of our lives. In this aspect, you are identical with Rubens.

　　While in the meantime, it breaks itself up with Chinese traditions, which are definitely not tolerant to this way of expressing human body. Are you aware of it?

　　Li Jin: There is a gap at least. What I want to achieve is to make sensuality a theme.

　　Ackermann: I wrote an article about you. A male reader commented on my lacking in understanding of Chinese culture by saying that I was not aware of the fact that such Chinese literatures as “Sex and Zen” had given descriptions. But the point I want to make is that those novels of Chinese Ming and Qing Dynasties talk about carnal desires by detailing sexual activities that cause sexual arousal, not really sensuality. Sensuality involves carnal desires for sure, but goes far beyond them. Sensuality gives credit to human and nature by exploring and understanding them through senses. It is so much different.

　　Li Jin: Sensual appeal differs from erotic desire in that the former refers to the human recognition of the body, including skin and flesh, which, without this recognition, make no sense at all. The traditional Chinese culture and virtuous western culture alike, which give the highest esteem for soul and disregard skin and flesh as pure vanity, are in the opposite. So far as my experiences are concerned, intelligently challenged people belong to the most responsive and direct group of human beings. For them, hot and cold are clearly distinguished, and erection is the most natural response to arousal. In this way, instinct overtakes shame. In modern times however, there is excessive reference to civilization and mentality, among the intelligentsia in particular. Sportsmen and even farmers are able to sense and tell clearly when they are physically exhausted. It is horrible when the most fundamental and intrinsic self falls into oblivion.

　　Ackermann: Your explanation this way makes it clear why you prefer to mingle eating with loving. It’s affirmation to yourself by presenting the chaotic senses in your paintings. As a matter of fact, radish or boobs tell one story and this story enables us better understand ourselves and the God.