前言

自我与意识的表达要发生联系，就必须有一个把两者联系起来的“衍场”，这个场域就是东方宗教哲学中的无。有与无的场丶相对与绝对的场、认为绝对无的场域才是真无的“衍场”，在有与无之间像镜子一样反射我们的日常，把符号与图像直接地反映在视觉之中。

从存在与时间出发追问存在的意义，在“衍场”中依据“时间性”和“空间性”进行存在的阐释。“衍场”是意识与图像形成的空间，也是情智、意志共同形成的所在，主观界与客观界的一切现象都在其中成立。

在中国的思维秩序中表达空间性、时间性、禅意、道德性以及色彩、符号与介质关系；在质觉美术概念的基础上探索后现代艺术的自律问题；在精神内核与质的本体问题中建构独特的视觉样式；在超越视觉中研究形态的关系问题；进而思考在视觉领域如何破解抽象图式中的机关消息并重新回归天籁。

“禅意”也是视觉体验在禅学、科学与神秘主义中激起的对“衍场”的一种普遍兴趣和读解可能。

“衍场”关注艺术的当代性和历史性及其关“衍场”关注艺术的当代性和历史性及其关系问题；在东西方思想的碰撞中莱布尼兹发现了伏羲在八卦图式中的01的概念，这次相遇非常重要，它带来了人类共享的数字时代，同时也带给我们在视觉艺术中无限的创作空间。

今天“衍场”再度回归，绝非下沉，而是相反，是按照历史时序的发展，并提示我们在当下被强大的科技掩盖，我们的大脑除了装下统一配给的网络信息之外，已常常被扭曲而无法自己思考。此次“衍场”回归的目的是重新认知数字的意义，发现新空间并将可能改換我们今后的命运。

Preface

Liu Xuguang

The “Prime Field” is the key to associate of self and consciousness expression. It is nihility in oriental religious philosophy. There are lots of field between being and nought， relativeness and absoluteness， just absolutely nihility is the real prime field. it is like a mirrior reflectour daily life between being and nought. so then the symbols and images directly in the visual.

From the existence and time to ask the significance of existence. It is accoding to “time” and “space” to explain. In the prime field， not only the space which foundmental consciousness and image， but also affection and ambition. the subjective and objective world in which all phenomena are established.

Expression of space， time， buddhist mood， morality， color， symbol and essential in Chinese thinking order based on concept of art essence. And explore on the selfdiscipline of modern art. The ontological problem of spiritual core and essence， construction of a unique visual style in the study of the relationship  between the shape of the visual， think about how in the visual field of news organs crack Abstract schema to return to nature.

“Buddhist mood” is also avisual experience in Zen and science and mysticism arouses a wide spread interest and reading of “prime field” solution. And concerned about the relationship between the contemporary and historic of art. In the collision of the eastern and Western ideas， Leibniz found the 01 concept in the Eight Diagrams. This encounter is very important to bring the digital age of human sharing， At the same time， it also brings us infinite creative space in the visual arts.

Nowadays， “Prime Field” return again， is not a sink； the contrary， is in accordance with the historical timing and development. And that in the moment is to conceal the strong science and technology. Our brains in addition to the uniform distribution of information on the Internet， it has often been distorted thinking， The return of the significance of our understanding of the number of new， and found that the new space will be possible to change our future fate.

比抽象和东方更多

刘旭光艺术中的古典修辞

李镇

抽象艺术不好聊。抽象艺术有一个强大的传统，整个20世纪几乎就是一个抽象艺术的世纪，格林伯格所说的现代主义艺术其实就是抽象艺术。今天我们在西方说一个艺术家是抽象画家就好比在中国说一个艺术家是文人画家，二者其实都很古典。而且关于抽象，格林伯格已经聊得我们几乎无话可说。另一方面我们说抽象艺术不好聊，恰恰是因为她的抽象性。因此康定斯基、蒙徳里安、马列维奇、青骑士、桥社之后，艺术史家在描述一个抽象流派时总是把抽象和地域、民族、国家结合起来，比如美国抽象表现主义、德国新表现主义、意大利超先锋派、日本物派等等。即便是奥利瓦也不能免俗地以“东方抽象”阐释他所谓的“伟大的天上抽象”。这样描述一个流派当然没有问题，但是如果我们试图深入解读一个艺术家的个案，就会发现这样笼统的概括性描述是远远不够的。

我在刘旭光的艺术中读到了比抽象和东方更多的东西。这些东西构成他更加独特的古典修辞系谱。《周易·系辞上》中说：“子曰：‘书不尽言，言不尽意。’然则，圣人之意，其不可见乎？子曰：‘圣人立象以尽意，设卦以尽情伪，系辞焉以尽其言，变而通之以尽利，鼓之舞之以尽神。’”这是中国典籍中关于意象较早的阐释之一。语言文字不能表达的东西往往通过图像表达，这种图像就是意象。《周易》中的卦和爻都是意象，河图洛书是意象，甲骨文是意象，中国书画也是意象。刘旭光选择了一个来自甲骨文的“卜”字和一种来自《周易》的数理逻辑，借此阐释他对“意象”这一概念的终极追问。与《周易》不同，《山海经》以另一种时空维度呈现了中国人关于“意象”可能性的无限想象。“酸与”“蠪蛭”和“鼓”这些我们认为荒诞不经的东方精灵也曾通过刘旭光的影像作品出现在美国密西西比河畔。在刘旭光看来，卜筮和巫术是中国文化的源头和修辞的起点。因此，与其说他是一位以古代文字和数理为母题的当代中国抽象水墨艺术家，不如说他是新千年新世纪以来中国艺术家中通过回到源头的方式走向未来的代表。不止于此，刘旭光20世纪80年代深受“伤痕美术”、“乡土写实”、“新中国装饰风”和“85新潮美术”的影响，90年代留学日本又深受日本物派和德国新表现主义的影响，然而他念兹在兹的依然是那条古老的黄河及其孕育的文明。于是从《天眼》到《悬空界》，在两件尺度惊人的大型装置作品中他完成了一次精彩的修辞转向。此后刘旭光在清华大学完成了他的博士论文《论质觉》，进而在北京电影学院开始了他新媒体实验电影的教学与创作。随着他的学生逐渐走入公众视野成为初露锋芒的新锐艺术家，他自己的艺术也在回望本体的林中路上越走越远。我们可以从刘旭光一系列以中国墨为元素的影像作品和此次展出的绘画作品《痕迹》与《衍场》中看到一种海德格尔与禅宗思想之间带有某种比较文学意味的对话。《五灯全书》中记载玉林通琇曾问旅庵本月：“一字不加画，是什么字？”答曰：“文彩已彰。”刘旭光在“文采已彰”的“一”字上加了一画，机锋重重之间仿佛是对临济禅师和存在的再次追问。

学术史很吊诡，从“甲骨四堂”的甲骨文研究到陈梦家的《殷虚卜辞综述》，中国现代学术的诞生从考古开始。同样，艺术史也很吊诡，有时候艺术家的精神越是先锋，其艺术的修辞就越是古典，比如现代艺术之父保罗·塞尚之于古典主义，又比如现代设计之父威廉·莫里斯之于中世纪。我想，刘旭光也是这样先锋而古典的艺术家，他的艺术比抽象和东方更多。

More than abstract and oriental：

classical rhetoric in the artwork of Liu Xuguang

Li Zhen

Abstract art is not a casual topic. It enjoys a solid foundation， with the entire 20th century being almost the abstract art era. Modernism art mentioned by Greenberg refers to the abstract art indeed. Describing a Western artist as an abstract artist is tantamount to referring a Chinese artist as a literati painter， both being classical. Greenberg has almost elaborated everything about the abstract art. Moreover， the reason of the abstract art being a tough topic lies in its abstraction. So after Kandinsky， Mondrian， Malevich， Der Blaus Reiter and DieBrücke， when an art historian describes an abstract school， the abstraction is always linked with regions， nations and countries， such as the American Abstract Expressionism， the German New-Expressionism， the Italian Trans-Avant-Garde and the Japanese Mono-Ha. Even Oliva is no exception， explaining his so-called “the Great Abstraction from Heaven” as “the Oriental Abstraction”. It is certainly feasible to describe a school in this way， but such a general description is far from being enough if we attempt to analyze a specific case of an artist.

I ’ve perceived something more than abstract and oriental in the art works of Liu Xuguang， which is composed of his unique， classical rhetoric spectrum. According to the Book of Zhouyi： The Great Appendix， “The Master said， ‘the written characters are not the full exponent of speech， and speech is not the full expression of ideas； is it impossible to discover the ideas of sages？’ The Master said， ‘the sages made their emblematic symbols to set forth fully their ideas； appointed (all) the diagrams to show fully the truth and falsehood (of things)； appended their explanations to give the full expression of their words； and changed (the various lines) and made general the method of doing so， to exhibitfully what was advantageous. They (thus) stimulated (the people) as by drumsand dances， thereby completely developing the spirit-like (character of the Yi).’” This is a very early explanation for the ideas in the Chinese classics. What words cannot fully describe is expressed in pictures， and these pictures are ideas. Diagramsand trigrams in the Book of Zhouyi are both ideas， so are “Hetu” and“Luoshu”， the inscriptions of bones or tortoise shells， and Chinese paintings. Liu Xuguang Chose a character of “卜” from the inscriptions and borrowed a mathematical logic from the Book of Zhouyi， to explain his ultimate question for concept of “idea”. Unlike the Book of Zhouyi， the Classic of Mountains and Seas demonstrates the infinite imagination for the possibility of “ideas” in another time-space dimension. Those absurd oriental spirits like “Suanyu”， “Longzhi” and “Gu” once appeared on the Mississippi banks thought the images created by Liu Xuguang. In his eyes， divination and witchcraft are the origin of Chinese culture and the beginning of the rhetoric. He is not so much a modern Chinese abstract painter with motif of ancient characters and mathematics， as a representative of Chinese artists in the new age heading for the future by tracing to the origin. Furthermore， in the 1980s， Liu was heavily influenced by “Scar Art”， “Local Realist”， “New China OrnamentStyle” and “85’ New Tide Fine Arts”. In the 1990s， the influence was extended to the Japanese Mono-Ha and the German New-Expressionism. However， what he kept in mind was still the ancient Yellow River and its Culture. From the Eyes of Heaven to the Suspension， these two huge installation art works witnessed his fabulous rhetoric diversion. Then， Liu completed hisdoctorial paper， On Essence Consciousness， in the Tsinghua University and started his tutorial and creation exploration of new media experimental movie in the Beijing Film Academy. With his students rising as new pioneer artists， Liu’s art also went far down the road of tracing the origin. In his image works featuring Chinese colors and the paintings exhibited this time， Marks and Prime Field， a dialogue with a certain sense ofcomparative literature is observed， between Heidegger and the ideas of Zen. In the Five Light Books Collection， Yulintongxiu once asked the Master Lvanbenyue， “What is the character ‘一’ without any more stroke？” The Master replied， “The meaning has fully expressed.” Liu added a stroke on the “一” with “fully expressed meaning”， which seemed to be a further eloquent question for Linji Zen Master and the Being.

The academic history is paradoxical. From the “four scholars of bone and tortoise shell inscriptions study” to the Overview of Inscriptions in the Ruins of Yin by Chen Mengjia， the modern academy in China originated in the archaeology. The history of art is paradoxical as well. The more pioneering the spirit of artists， the more classical its art rhetoric， as Paul Cezanne， the father of modern art， to the Classicism， or William Morris， the father of modern design， to the Middle Age. As far as I’m concerned， Liu Xuguang is supposed to be such a pioneering but classical artist， whose art is more than abstract and oriental.