在我隔壁画室的艺术家隋丞，其日常生活很象古代文人。每天准时来到画室，点上烟后，先将其收藏的紫沙壶用泡好的茶水养一遍，然后慢慢地品茶。遇到有感觉时则开始画画，如有人来，则能闲聊至深夜，大有不醉不归之意(据说喝茶也有喝醉的)。隋丞常以茶会友，谈画论道, 纵论时势，以此为乐，好似古代文人的“雅集”。喝茶本身虽只是一种休闲方式，对隋丞而言，却不仅仅是一种生活方式，还包含了他认同的中国文人的生存方式与存在的意义。而且茶的品性是苦涩中见甘爽，与寻觅清静的心境相通，在对茶的品尝中，寄寓着一种文化精神——似乎以古代文人隐士的生活为模，与世无争。事实上，这种隐逸之风，反映了知识分子文化心理结构自我调整心态与自我救赎的本质。从兰亭雅集到宋朝西园雅集 ; 从白居易的诗酒文会到清初王士祯的红桥聚会;从柳亚子等人的南社雅集到2005年虎丘诗会无不带有自我反思、自我救赎的意味，充分体现了中国文人在雅集中所寄予的精神内涵。

　　事实上，任何人都不可能脱离社会而单独存在，都必须面临社会的各类法制制度，进行自我约束。在这种情况下，人们往往会通过远离现实来寻求更舒适的生活。而艺术往往会成为人们的避风港，所以在隋丞的画中会看到这样一种情景——类似青花的树林造型，形成岛状，穿插其中的高速公路与漂浮表面的标识是现代城市的映记。最引人注意的则是或隐或现的人形空白，形状诡异，又多少有点凄迷的状态，似希腊导演安哲罗普洛斯的名片《塞瑟岛之旅》中的男主角，固守着家园，却没有立足之地，站在海中的浮艇上，围着海岛转来转去却无法停靠在曾经的故土。隋丞作品明显地表现出这种对现实的距离——作品已然摆脱了现实所指，现实被抛却在拟像之外，或者反过来说，拟像取得了一种“超现实”的自由和自主，那些漂浮的拟像极限地表达了艺术家的精神底线。

　　其实，对艺术而言，靠近现实与疏远现实并没有优劣高下之分，它们不过是艺术与现实关系的两种方式而已。而且通过创造距离，艺术家在这种对生活的疏远中实现了对现实的更为深刻的认识。如齐美尔所指出：拉近与疏远之间存在着某种张力，张力是多样性存在的，正是多样性构成了艺术不同风格形态和千变万化的魅力。但不论是“拉近”还是“疏远”主体与现实的关系，为了获得对事物的更深刻和更真实的认识，我们只能承认这种距离，甚至我们还应努力创造出这种距离。只有在对距离的体认与创造中，个体才能从外在物化的客观文化中抽身出来，摆脱与外在事物间各种伪俗的、功利性的亲密接触。

　　隋丞的作品其形式上的独特性固然是醒目的，而且对于解蔽对象的认知和态度是根本的。他充分认识到艺术对世俗世界的拯救功能，通过拉开艺术与现实的距离，努力寻找人文关怀之精神的述说之途。但问题是通往“诗意栖居”的路途能否真正解开世俗世界套在生存主体身上的枷锁，使之回到完美世界呢?

　　从本质上来说，在艺术和生活之间并不存在截然分明的界限，唯有把生活本身当成艺术创造和审美的过程，才能彻底领悟生活的意义。同时，日常生活到处都有艺术性、反抗性因素，需要艺术家把这些因素挖掘出来，把日常生活变成一个颠覆工具理性原则和官僚体制权力的战场，才能使之最终走向一个自由的、审美的存在，正像列斐伏尔所说的：“让生活变成一件艺术品。” 所以，要打破日常生活领域现有的权力结构，达到一种“诗意”的生存，首先要寻找抵制和反抗的力量。日常生活的拯救是通过回避现实完成的，因此，艺术家隋丞通过品茶聚会的生活方式远离世俗，以保持一个城市知识分子的独立性。而在艺术中追求一种意象之外的状况，通过飞身世俗世界之外来表达内心世界的固守。隋丞作品的图像解除了绘画语言依其本性所造就的主体的深度阅读，其使用类似剪纸的造型手段，使得审美没有距离。图像中包含着逆行的、刺破整体的、断片的各种符号。在片段的、谜语一样的诗性话语中，我们见证了歧义的力量——在悖反和诧异中，获得非虚幻的真实性。如作品《高山流水》、《游乐图》、《溪山垂钓图》等刻画的内容是隐士般的闲适生活场景，但仔细端详会发现：刀法凌厉，具有撕裂性，曲折而宽大的线条所构成的内在的矛盾感强烈而明显。主体的分裂性使得叙述的推进变得艰难，我们只有在反思、质疑、探询中才能从重新确立主体的位置。

　　作为当代艺术家，隋丞常常感到一种无言的焦虑，一种难以言说的痛苦。在异化的世界，一种绝望、孤独、荒谬和恐惧的体验成为现代人心灵中难以摆脱的阴影。因此，他选择了隐逸与游走的生活方式。既隐于城市，寻求志同道和者雅聚。同时又经常远离本土，漫游或聚集于北京等各个城市的艺术区。 对于一个艺术家来讲在不同城市之间的游走可以获得一些思考的来源。尤其是有意无意疏离于“艺术主流意识形态”的艺术家群体来说，隐逸和漫游不仅是现实的存在状况，也是他们创作的源泉。艺术家在来往的过程中视野更开阔，接触面更大，对于创作的审视和反省更有力度，能够拓展创作的深度和变化，从而超越意识形态触及更为深广的文化问题。而且这样一种更广阔的文化和地理的视野，会令艺术家不断的用另外的眼光去看原来的视觉经验，原来的观念，原来的自我世界。通过时间和空间的文化转换，通过其他文化的参照和冲突，不断的把原来的一些理所当然的、固定的思维方式不断的被推到一种被质疑、被拷问的境地。当然，在城市之间游走多了，城市和城市之间的差异性，也会被轻易地混淆起来或者拼贴在一起，产生一些碎片和一些错落的时空(我们看隋丞的《都市浮水者系列》似乎就有这种感觉)，这些碎片和拼贴其实也像今天社会的缩影——这正是隋丞作为一个城市知识分子的艺术灵感的来源，由此他的艺术也具有了对城市和自我的思考与反观;是具有反思精神的知识分子对传统价值观念的默认和对现实秩序的一种否定。

　　当我们在观看隋丞的影像装置作品《偶像》的时候，很容易联想到贝克特的戏剧《等待戈多》。这部戏剧的主题是“等待”，它向我们揭示了一个残酷的社会现实，也给我们以极大的启迪：希望是存在的，但要等待希望的实现是未知的，等待就是意味着幻灭。这正是荒诞概念中的人类生存条件，即缺乏意义。《等待戈多》中对希望的等待，体现了贝克特不愿将痛苦的人类推入绝望的深渊，于无望之中给人留下一道希望之光的存在主义人道主义的思想。当今世界让人捉摸不透，社会令人心神不安，具有反思精神的知识分子对现存的秩序持否定的态度。往日的精神支柱瓦解了，新的信仰尚未找到，这种精神上的空虚反映到艺术上，自然形成了一个“没有意义，荒诞，无用的主题” ——在荒诞的世界里，似乎只有内心深处的生活才具有意义。因此，隋丞作品中的人物是只有外形、没有具体面容的人形，“他”的存在总是处于难以确定、不可捉摸，甚至无法看见——“他”既是一切，又什么都不是，可能只是作者本人的变相反映——他周围的人物都失去了自身独立存在的意义——而是幻觉、幻想、附庸品而已。

　　隋丞作为一个知识分子，以生活和艺术的方式表达自我对社会的体认。以知识分子性艺术的方式参与到社会的构建。他清楚地知道如何表达自己内心深处的欲望、反感、希望和报负，通过自己的艺术，一直不停地对熟悉的和被认可的事物，重新审视，并以此来实现他的知识分子使命。从这个意义上说，隋丞的作品作为一种观念性的表达，不在于形式上的发现，而在于指涉艺术之外的思想和意义，不是通过艺术去得到"艺术"，而是借艺术反省社会状况，以知识分子身份对社会文化进行检省，最终成为对繁杂社会的图像记录，并作为具有公共性的艺术家及其作品因为基于对社会显示及其内质的根本认知，而始终保持着自己独立的姿态。

　　因而，隋丞的隐逸与游走的生活方式，实则是在“游”的过程中，去对世界寻找“观”的直觉感知与体悟。在游走中观，在静观中游，既是艺术的生活又是生活的艺术——于是，“游观”成了艺术家作为文人的一种文化自觉。“游观”强调的不是单一的视觉再现，而是连续的意象表达，强调的是艺术家创作过程中的“独与天地精神往来”的游心于道，强调的是对物我两重世界的精神超越。

　　Wandering Vision: Survival Pattern and Metaphor of An Intellectual

　　——Analysis of the Spiritual Essence of Sui Cheng’s Art

　　Chen Xiangbing

　　Sui Cheng, my neighbor artist, lives like an ancient artist. He comes to his studio on time each day. After lighting a cigarette, he nourishes his collected teapots in tea, and starts his tea ceremony. When he feels right, he will start his art creation. When friends come, they will chat till midnight. Sui Cheng often entertains acquaintances with tea, talking about the art or the current affairs, just like in ancient “elegant assembly”. Tea itself is a leisure way in daily life. But to Sui Cheng, it is not only a life style, but also the survival pattern and existence meaning of Chinese artists in his mind. The nature of tea is sweet in bitter. In tasting tea, there is a kind of cultural spirit---take ancient artists’ life style as example, standing aloof from worldly success. In fact, this hermit way of life reflected the nature of intellectuals’ self adjustment and self redemption of their cultural psychological structure. From Orchid Pavilion to Western Garden assembly, from Bai Juyi to Wang Shizhen’s poets’ party till Huqiu poets’ meeting in 2005, these assembly implied self reflection and redemption and embodied fully the spiritual connotation Chinese artists have placed on elegant assemblies.

　　In fact, no one can exist away from the society. He/she has to live under all kinds of laws, regulations and self-restraints. Under this situation, people will seek more comfortable life by keeping distance from the reality. Therefore the art usually becomes a harbor of refuge. In Sui Cheng’s works, people can see such images: China flower-like woods, islands full of highways and floating signs, which are the marks of modern cities. The most attractive thing is the blank human idols. They look weird with a kind of melancholy air, just like the hero in film Voyage to Cythera, held on to his home but had no foothold. Sui Cheng’s works express this distance from the reality--- his works have got away from the reality, the reality is separated from the images, or we can say, the images have got a “surrealistic” freedom. Those floating images express the spiritual bottom line of the artist.

　　Actually, for art there is nothing right or wrong to get close to or away from the reality. Both of them are the relationship between art and reality. By creating distance, artists can see the reality more clearly. Simmel once pointed out that there was a certain strengthening power between “getting close” and “getting away”. The strengthening power is diverse, and it was the diversity that made different styles of art so charming. But no matter whether we draw close or separate the relationship between the subject and the reality, we have to admit or sometimes create this distance in order to know things better. Only in the recognition and creation of distance can the individual keep distance from external objective culture and get rid of the intimate touch of the vulgar and utilitarian external things.

　　The form of Sui Cheng’s works is unique. His recognition and attitude to the interpreting target comes from the root of the object. He fully knows the redemption function of art on this world. He also hopes to find an expressing approach of the spirit of humanistic concern by way of keeping art apart from the reality. But the problem is whether the way to “poetic dwelling” can unchain the survival subject from this world and return it back to the perfect world.

　　In nature, there is not a clear boundary between art and life. The meaning of life can be understood only by taking life itself as the process of art creation and aesthetics. Meanwhile, the art and resistance elements exist everywhere in our daily life, this need to be found out by artists. Only by turning daily life into a field to fight against instrumental rules and bureaucrat system can lead it to a free and aesthetic existence, just as Lefebvre said, “Turn life into a work of art.” Hence, in order to break the power system in our daily life and reach to the “poetic” survival state, the resistant and fighting strength have to be found out first. The redemption of daily life is realized by getting away from the real world. Sui Cheng hopes to keep away from the mundane world by tea parties and keep his independence of an urban intellectual. The images in Sui Cheng’s works have broken away from the depth reading depending on art language itself. The usage of paper cut-like patterns keeps aesthete close to people. In the symbols and poetic language, people can see the power of ambiguity--- in violation and shock, the reality comes. In his works like Mountains and Rivers, Entertainment and Fishing in Creeks, the images are showing people a kind of leisure life of hermits, but when looking closely, people can feel a strong sense of contradiction from the sharp carving, the tearing and curving lines. The separation of the subject makes the narration difficult. Only by review, doubting and researching can people reset the subject’s position.。

　　As a contemporary artist, Sui Cheng often feels anxious and painful beyond language. In an alienated world, an experience of desperateness, loneliness, ridiculousness and fear has become a shadow in people’s hearts. That’s why Sui Cheng has chosen reclusive and wandering way, living in seclusion in the city to assemble together with same-minded artists, traveling abroad often and wandering sometimes in art communities in Beijing and other cities. An artist can get some creation sources when he/she wanders in different places, especially for those who would alienate from “art consciousness of main stream” intentionally or unintentionally. Seclusion and wandering are not only their survival status, but also the source of their art creation. In this contact, artists’ vision is widened, their knowledge is enriched, and their inspection and reflection go deeper. This widened vision of culture and geography will enable artists to check their past visual experience, idea and their own world. The cultural exchange in time and space and the comparison and conflict with other cultures will push the fixed model of thing they have taken for granted into doubt and interrogation. Of course, when people wander among cities for a long time, the differences among cities will be confused or mixed, which will lead to some broken pieces and scattered space and time. (As in Sui Cheng’s Urban Swimmers) These broken pieces are the miniature of today’s society, which is exactly the art inspiration of Sui Cheng, an urban intellectual. Hence, his art is an intellectual’s reflection of the city and himself, a tacit approval of traditional value and denial of reality order.

　　Watching Sui Cheng’s installation work Icon will easily remind me of Beckett’s Nobel Prize work Waiting for Godot. The theme of the play is “waiting”. It disclosed a cruel reality and also inspired us: Hope did exist, but it was unknown to us whether it could be realized. Waiting means vanishing and meaningless life. Despite of this, human beings still make impossible matters possible, which is exactly the survival condition of human beings in the ridiculous concept, i. e., meaningless. The waiting for hope in Waiting for Godot reflected Beckett’s existentialist and humanist ideal not to push miserable humans into a desperate abyss and to leave a light of hope for people. The world today is unpredictable, and the society is upsetting. The intellectuals with reflective spirits hold a negative attitude to traditional value and the existent order. Their spiritual support has collapsed and the new belief has not formed. Reflected on art, this kind of vanity in spirit will bring out a “meaningless, ridiculous and useless theme”---in the absurd world, it seems only the life deep in one’s heart is meaningful. Due to these, the persons in Sui Cheng’s works only have outlined shapes, no facial features. “His” existence is indefinable, untouchable and even invisible--- “he” is everything and nothing. Probably “he” is only another form of the artist---people around him have lost their existent meaning---but just illusion, imagination and vassal.

　　Sui Cheng, as an urban intellectual, is expressing his own acknowledgement to the society in his life and his art. He participates in the construction of the society in an intellectual art. In today’s society, intellectuals tend to self-understand what is happening around them. He knows exactly how to express clearly the dislike, desire, hope, and ambition in their hearts. From this point of view, Sui Cheng’s art works, as an expression of idea, are meaningful not on the new form, but on the idea and meaning they refer to outside the art. He is not creating art via art, but reflecting the current social situation via art. Actually he is introspecting upon the social culture as an intellectual, and keeping his own independent attitude by his works’ basic recognition of the society and its nature.

　　Therefore, Sui Cheng’s lifestyle of seclusion and wandering is in fact, to look for the instinct and inspiration from “vision” during the course of wandering. It is both the life of art and art of life. Thus, wandering has become a kind of self-consciousness of the artist as literati. In the process of art creation, instead of simply visual reproduction, the wandering focuses on the continuous image expression, the doctrine of “spiritual interaction with the world”, and the transcendence of both the material and spiritual world.

作者：陈向兵