On July 1, 2024, Professor Lü Peng(吕澎教授) engaged in a profound exchange and sharing session on the "History of Contemporary Chinese Art" with teachers and students from the Department of Art History at the University of Western Australia, held at the Unique Art Center.
Overview of the exchange content:
Q: Students from the University of Western Australia
A: Professor Lü Peng
Q: What’s the differences between the Western critics and Chinese critics?
A: This is a broad question. Firstly, true critics in China emerged in the 1980s. With the opening of China’s doors during that time, people had the opportunity to come into contact with and understand Western art, culture, and civilization. Some critics began reflecting on their own country's historical and cultural issues through the lens of Western methodologies. However, they quickly realized that the situations in China and the West were different. Thus, artists began to contemplate what it means to be a Chinese modern/contemporary artist, and critics started considering what constitutes Chinese art criticism. In this process, some questioned whether these practitioners had achieved significant results. I would like to explain this by referring to a Pop Art exhibition I saw at the Tate Gallery a few years ago. The exhibition did not focus on discussing Andy Warhol's and Richard Hamilton's works but emphasized Pop Art as a language, expression, method, and even thought, showcasing its manifestations in different countries and regions with a global perspective.
Another difference is the emergence of new methodologies and perspectives, such as "New History." New History advocates for broadening the field of historical research. Any country's or region's historical research should be based on its entire social context/background rather than simply using a European standard to frame each country's own history. Thirdly, unlike Western critics who can freely express themselves in the mass media, Chinese critics must restrain their content due to official censorship. Recently, I have been encouraging some researchers to write a history of Chinese criticism, hoping to thoroughly organize and document the realities of Chinese criticism over the past few decades.
Q: What limitations does censorship impose?
A: In short, one cannot freely and fully express their views. The degree of censorship subtly changes with shifts in China's political atmosphere. For instance, when I first published A History of Art in Twentieth-Century China in 2006, the level of censorship was relatively low, and not much was cut from the original text. In the revised edition published in 2009, I restored some parts that were cut from the first edition and successfully published it. However, after some time, as censorship intensified, the reprint was halted. Later, as censorship became even stricter, some books were not allowed to be reprinted. For example, my biography of the artist Zhang Xiaogang, The History of Blood Relations: Zhang Xiaogang Before 1996, was not reprinted because it was deemed to have a pessimistic tone unsuitable for dissemination. In recent years, my books have been published mainly by foreign publishers because they do not censor content and only deal with format issues.
Q: Do Chinese censors review your books published abroad?
A: No, they do not.
Q: Could you comment on the differences between Western and Chinese artistic movements? It seems to me that ancient Chinese philosophy plays a more significant role in interpreting contemporary art.
A: It is important to distinguish between two concepts: traditional Chinese painting and modern/contemporary Chinese art. They involve different materials and cognitive models and can be said to be products of different civilizational logics. Traditional Chinese culture and philosophical thought can only explain traditional Chinese painting, just as Western art has developed a complete logical system from ancient Greek art onward. Similarly, traditional Chinese painting has developed through a long historical process. Therefore, a series of complex issues arise between traditional Chinese painting and modern/contemporary Chinese art, including the problem of integration and what constitutes such integration.
Q: Many contemporary Chinese artists are still discussing the influence of traditional Chinese culture on contemporary art, such as the influence of Taoism, Zen, and Chinese Buddhism.
A: In fact, there is a distinction between what artists think and what is ultimately realized in their works. This May, I curated an exhibition at the Wuhan Art Museum—Contemporary Logic of A Pure and Remote View—which specifically discussed the issue of "Chinese ink painting" from 1978 to the present. However, due to the special circumstances of Chinese society, I had to discuss this topic in a circuitous and implicit way to avoid non-academic troubles. Religious culture is an important component of traditional Chinese culture. Focusing on the influence of religious culture on contemporary Chinese art, I believe that some Chinese critics and theorists prefer to use "Mysticism(玄学)" to understand and explain contemporary Chinese art in an illogical manner. For instance, many people use the term "vivid and lifelike(栩栩如生)" from traditional Chinese painting theory to explain contemporary Chinese art works. I would like to ask in return, what does "vivid and lifelike" mean? What kind of works can be called vivid and lifelike? Why do some people feel a work is vivid, while others do not? What exactly is the difference?
Q: I just visited the exhibition "Narrating Space: Factories, Viaducts and Lost Sacred Places" by Zhang Xiaotao. He uses concrete as the material in his works to create a feeling of traditional Chinese painting. Could you elaborate on this?
A: In his works, Zhang Xiaotao uses some symbolic images to evoke associations with ancient traditional content. However, this artist employs methods of "new painting" for his creations.
Q: Are there prevalent misunderstandings of contemporary Chinese art among Western critics and art historians that you have noticed? What are some common misunderstandings?
A: Once a work is completed, it faces a variety of interpretations. One hundred readers will have one hundred interpretations of Hamlet. The artist's creative concept and the viewer's understanding of the work are likely to be inconsistent or even out of control. However, this does not matter. Just as when understanding Western art, such as the works of Marcel Duchamp and Joseph Beuys, different interpretations also arise. But viewers can sense the "liberation" in Duchamp's works and the resistance to ideology in Beuys' works. Therefore, I believe that the most important aspect of contemporary art is to "present issues, provoke thought, and prompt public awareness."
Q: Why do you like Kenneth Clark?
A:During my student years, I translated his book Landscape into Art, which remains a cherished memory for me. I greatly appreciated his writing, which reflected his cultivated background. His character and the work he engaged in were also aspects I deeply admired. Two years ago, my daughter translated Kenneth Clark: Life, Art and ‘Civilisation’. I read it thoroughly and found it profoundly enlightening. Firstly, he conducted research in art history; secondly, he served as a museum director; thirdly, he assisted collectors and investors in buying and selling artworks; and finally, during World War II, he remained at his post, organizing exhibitions and concerts for audiences amidst the war. I believe he was not only a scholar but also a man of action and a practitioner, which had a significant impact on me. Similarly, I aspire to approach contemporary art not merely as a scholar. If given the opportunity, I would like to conduct research on the history of human civilization since the 16th century, as the beginning of the Age of Exploration marked the true commencement of globalization.
Moreover, I also agree with Kenneth Clark's academic research attitude. He believed that art ultimately depends on genius and the uniqueness of individuals, which is different from the views of the Warburg school. Yet, during World War II, he protected and supported many Warburg school scholars who were expelled by the German army to continue their academic research through his actions. I believe that academic researchers should have their own academic viewpoints while also supporting the existence of other viewpoints, even offering help when they encounter difficulties.
Q: Are there other art histories you debate with in China? While your work is translated, we are interested in the context for art history in China.
A: Across China, there are no more than twenty individuals writing about the history of contemporary Chinese art, and only two or three prominent art historians are consistently engaged in contemporary art history research. Their research focuses on the period from 1978 onward. I personally insist that to truly understand the context of contemporary art development, research should begin from the late 19th century (late Qing Dynasty). Therefore, in my book A History of Art in Twentieth-Century China, I have linked nearly 100 years of Chinese art.
Most researchers in Chinese institutions focus on traditional Chinese art to avoid potential troubles. This is also reflected in the topics discussed at international art history conferences and national art history conferences, where 90% of the speech topics are related to ancient Chinese art and abstract historiographical issues.
Q: Could you talk about the skills you acquired from writing art history that you then applied to writing your comprehensive history of China?
A: In the past, I translated a large number of books on Western art history, some of which were never published. I regard this as a learning process: learning their language, their methodologies, and their perspectives on the history of art. Subsequently, I applied these methods to my research on Chinese art history. Of course, it is essential to consider the contextual background in such research. This is where the study of contemporary Chinese art history differs from Western art history and accounts for the unique characteristics of Chinese art. Due to this distinctiveness, I have focused on researching Chinese art history from the 19th century, particularly the 20th century, since 1989, and have not devoted much effort to studying Western art history.
Regarding the writing of art history, I have elaborated in detail in my publication How to Study and Research Art History. It discusses the basic knowledge of art history, the qualities and preparation required for studying art history, and how to write art history, divided into three parts. Professor Zhu Qingsheng of Peking University pointed out that my research on art history focuses on observing the impact of political, economic, intellectual, and social changes on contemporary Chinese art, whereas other art historians tend to focus on the study of language (form, imagery, etc.). When I was 30, I wrote A Brief History of Modern Western Painting, which mainly analyzed the evolution of language in Western art, starting with Impressionism, without extensively discussing the contextual issues.
Q: I just read out we've heard in a previous interview that the art academies have become training ground for new artists to learn the language of contemporary art，but not produce any works containing deep and radical meanings. Do you disagree with this view or do you think there are other places where we are most more likely to find innovative art being produced in the next upcoming generation of artists?
A: As for contemporary China, the "pressures" primarily refer to the political system and the operational model of the capital market (market economy). General interventions are ineffective concerning the political system, so we will set that aside for now. Capital operates as a force under a volitional command and does not inherently possess any bias. There is a challenge in China's capital regarding its understanding of art: what types of art it should support and what it should not.
Regarding globalization, China is somewhat disconnected from the world. The West focuses more on issues such as race, black issues, feminism, and so on, which are nearly non-existent in today's China.
Q：You mentioned that there are not many contemporary art, Chinese art history classes in university. So were your classes popular or are students reluctant involving themselves with such a controversial subject in the modern political landscape?
A: It is difficult to judge the popularity of my courses. What I would like to share is that after teaching master's and doctoral students at the Macau University of Science and Technology, the feedback I received was that students mentioned they could only experience such fluent and liberating content here.
My students are actively engaged in research on contemporary and modern art. I am not very familiar with the situation at other universities, but I often hear students from other institutions say that my books are used as textbooks in their classes. I believe these books must have had some impact! Moreover, the sales of these books have been quite good, with each edition going through 3 to 4 reprints.
【https://www.guankanjournal.art/journalessays/4276em6278fhskthnesicm0nviazod】