Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Polit-Sheer-Form @ Bizart: Form=Content=Form; Is progress antithetical to the post modern condition and can you pass me a banana please?


Polit-Sheer-Form’s exhibition opening at BizArt took many viewers by surprise when upon arrival instead of finding your typical reception they found a meeting in progress. Around a large white table spotted by plates of bananas and clouded by cigarette smoke the artist collective Polit-Sheer-Form debated and discussed with local artists and audience members the merits of, well, what exactly was going on. New Poly-Form is a creative collective comprised of the critic-turned-gallerist Leng Lin and the artists: Liu Jianhua, Hong Hao, Xiao Yu, and Song Dong. Each of these characters, successful in their own practices, had decided to make their friendship and debates a pronounced art movement in 2005. According to the exhibition literature the group eats, plays, gets massages, travels, and discusses important topics together. Being together and the social processes that occur is the crux of their practice. It is a stance, they claim, that resists the growing culture of individualism in Chinese society and instead harks back to a time not so long ago when individuals relinquished their egos for the good of the collective. Earlier this year an exhibition at Leng Lin’s Beijing Commune presented images based upon the group’s outings painted in a uniformly deadpan manner and inflected with a labeling system reminiscent of propaganda pictorials from that bygone era. However the art that Polit-Sheer-Form usually produces is not object orientated but instead conceptual gestures aimed at completing a system of self-referentiality in effort to, as Leng Lin professes, advance the notion of art. For this noble reason the group decided to take their esoteric art practice on a road tour to Shanghai. In Biz Art’s bare walled corridor a large framed photograph (presumably a composite portrait of the group’s members) hung to the left of the table, on the other side banners installed vertically on poles unveiled the group’s manifesto. “Within the context of… private desires allowed for by the market economy, the individual, without the literal and metaphorical support of the collective, is isolated within the course of development” At the beginning of this collective affair a computer rattled off recordings of questions that were to be topics for discussion. But the discussion quickly deteriorated into an attack on the group itself and it’s convoluted intentions. Leng Lin did a lot of the defending to basically what was an inquiry into the inherent structure of the group and event at hand. Besides the form of the group what is the content? Surely everyone engages in cavorting with friends, is packaging this as art interesting? Is form alone, especially an already tried and true form (the artist collective), enough to advance art? Whether or not Polit-Sheer-Form’s rebuttal helped to quell these issues they had already succeeded in their mission. For an art world increasingly unable to engage in critical issues this meeting broke down the relationship of producer and consumer and exposed a goldmine of issues that affect the very sustenance of art.

CHRISTMAS IN SHANGHAI- a photo montage series




Today was December 25th 2007
Holiday spirits were just unusual business as usual
Near nor far - Your Christmas is our Christmas
A happy Holiday to all and to all a good night
Peace

Friday, December 14, 2007

Editing the edit - The hegemony of authorship and the free world of blogland



I've had five articles published in magazines this month. Unfortunately/fortunately none of them are the original versions. Editors, to make them fit and presumably fly, had edited them. Since I haven't been crazy about the directions and voice of this editorial flight I will use this here blog to publish the directors cut.

The article below is based on my experience not only as long time collaborator of the artist, Zhang Huan but on my experience making the film Zhang Huan Studio- that is being shown at the Asia Society show- Altered States. A while back, before the exhibition opened, I put a short clip of the video on YouTube along with an earlier entry about Zhang's studio. But the Asia Society folks asked me to take it down as they wanted to be the ones to premiere the piece. I complied like a gentleman. Now a severely re-edited version of the video is up on YouTube via the Asia Society site and generously credits me- Thank you ASOC but the film only slightly resembles the original version and all the other stuff that is stuffed into it is done in a way that doesn’t represent me.
Cest la vie
The hegemonic dynamic of authorship and authoritarianism battle it out in the feeble sphere of blogland. The Asia Society is winning with over 8000 hits and I just sit and complain.

The article below also appears severely edited in December’s issue of Art in America. In Art in America’s version they use the word gewgaw, which is a word I would never, in my wildest poetry, use. Just for the record.



“Making money is art and working is art and good business is the best art” - Andy Warhol

China’s manufacturing industry is the largest in the world, employing more workers than all of the G-7 industrial countries combined. Midway down China’s eastern shore lays one of its fastest growing regions, the Yangtze River Delta. Surpassing all other regions in terms of economic growth, productivity and per capita income, the Delta boasts Shanghai, a city of 17 million, as its center. It is also home to what may be the largest artist’s studio on the planet.
Way out in Shanghai’s western suburbs, tucked behind a stretch of shanty noodle joints, shady massage parlors, and stores that sell a lot of circular plastic things lies Zhang Huan’s manufacturing empire. It is here that the tenets of Buddhism, mysticism and the global market congeal to produce one of the world’s top fine art brands. The scope of his enterprise is deceiving at first, but after a tour of his three complexes, Zhang Huan, whose reputation stems from a decade of performance art, will dramatically redefine the notion of artistic production for any visitor.

As you enter the east studio, workers, sitting cross-legged upon flat palettes, rock back and forth while rubbing huge sheets of hand-made paper with stones. Astonishing fourteen by twenty foot woodblock prints, laden with images culled from traditional medicinal texts, line the walls. In the next room, amidst flying woodchips, and a symphony of chainsaws and chisels, crews of traditional carvers bang into formation everything from reliefs on barn doors to free standing sculptures. Down the back alley, pass a friendly German Shepard, are two oil painting studios. Inside recent art school graduates, some on scaffolding, meticulously render insects onto mammoth canvases. These swarms of flies represent contemporary man’s misguided busyness; a series Zhang claims links back to his legendary “12sqm” performance. Another building houses an office where the studio’s accounts are kept, along with an array of Buddha figurines collected on visits to Tibet, heavy metal CDs and a bed lodged under a table where the boss takes his daily afternoon nap.

In between the east and west studios is another vacuous space dedicated to more printmaking. Reams of silk screens and etchings, from an unusually large, custom-made press, were likened by one visitor to a bank printing it’s own money.

After a dusty sprint down the road, past another line of shacks and a towering pink apartment complex, gates open onto the west studio. Inside a hangar lit by spot welders, workers piece together enormous (up to 10m high or 26m long) copper sculptures. These mangled figurations are modeled after the dismembered limbs of broken Buddha statues, relics from China’s torturous Cultural Revolution. In the connecting space, a woodshop busily produces the stretchers, scaffolding and crates necessary for the studio’s operations. In an oven shaped building next door a crew clad with dust masks sift, sort and craft everything from paintings to tremendous head sculptures out of the artist’s favorite material, incense ash. Zhang has contracted local Buddhist temples to supply him with their burnt offerings. The ash, Zhang claims, is imbued with millions of people’s dreams and wishes, certainly good stuff for the art world. Shipments arrive weekly as research and development continues to invent more and more uses for the sacred substance. A showroom, larger than most venues the artist actually exhibits in, is where the product line gets flaunted for clients and documented. The last stop for works in this assembly line is ironically a departing point for others. The crating and shipping warehouse doubles as storage. Here stacks of Styrofoam fight with Ming furniture, ancient barn doors and other raw materials that await their destiny as art objects.

It’s hard to say where the studio ends and the factory begins in this fractured 75,000 square foot labyrinth. It is certainly not Warhol’s factory, but rather a hybrid of antique market and late-capital industrialism run like a series of rituals by a retired performance artist. At first it was an issue of quality control. Zhang would hire foundries and studios for the fabrication of his work but could never fully oversee the process. So he brought the outsourcing under his own roof. Here he could collaborate with the fabricators, sometimes allowing them creative freedoms they never imagined before. From then the studio continued to grow, as did Zhang’s perpetual inspiration and financial means. It now employs anywhere from 80-100 people who descend from all over China. Additional specialists are often called in for particular projects. For instance earlier this year, after visiting a Halal slaughter-house, China’s premiere taxidermists were called in on a project that juxtaposed the artist’s own sculpted figure with the stuffed bodies of cows. A Yi-Jing master has also recently been hired to consult on the studio’s direction and works. But besides the hocus-pocus and improvisational nature of art making this enterprise is a factory in most senses of the word. It runs during normal business hours (punched in and out by each employee), houses the workers in dormitories and has a canteen that serves them 3 meals a day. It is a space that in both conception and practice requires strong leadership and business skills. Zhang Huan along with his confidant and studio director, Fang Wei never stop. Not only do they drum up new creative possibilities and refine existing ones but they also resolve arguments, hire and fire workers (due to the diverse appetites of the staff, the studio has seen 3 chefs come and go in the last year) and oversee the maintenance of these hulking edifices. However the real business takes place behind the scenes in Shanghai’s old French concession. From here Zhang Huan’s wife and business partner, Hu Junjun, coordinates, not only the studio’s sales, exhibitions and commissions, but a philanthropic organization funded by studio profits that is aimed at renovating rural schoolhouses.

But how did this performance artist whose studio for the longest time was, as the artist states, in his brain, turn into the 21st century Chinese incarnation of Andy Warhol? Zhang Huan’s story is actually very similar to the story of modern China: rapid economic development and cultural transformation in a short period of time. Going to NY in 1998 with a little underground fame, the clothes on his back, and a determination to succeed, Zhang Huan literally became the poster boy for Chinese contemporary art in the US when Asia Society’s Inside Out show donned his piece as their catalog cover and promotional image. During his six years in the US his performance documents, becoming more elaborate and expensive were fodder for smart investments. Imbued with an eclectic mix of iconography and drama, his performances in the West functioned as a sort of surrealist cultural diplomacy. “I took the 30-40 years of my internal culture on a road show…” In this global arena, after several tumultuous turns in NY’s gallery system, Zhang Huan became very attuned to the business of art. But it wasn’t until his return to China that an onslaught of inspiration, welling up from his childhood and beyond, became motivation for the studio. It is here that his enterprise has snowballed. It is only here, as Fang Wei states, “in China’s market place of cheap migrant labor, low cost real estate and materials that a phenomenon like this could ever happen”. Theatre projects, feature films, and animation projects seem to be on the horizon but as the studio’s parade of Buddhist objects keep selling the incense crews will remain sifting and sorting. After all good business is the best art.

Mathieu Borysevicz 10.2.06

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

The Big Trash Debate

“Garbage is not what we cast out, but the prime locus of meaning in our lives: we arrange our existences so as to make room for garbage.”
–Don Delillo, Underworld

So I finally got a comment on this blog by a Mr. A. Gerelle (thank you very much - and my email is mabz@bestweb.net if you wanna talk directly) who alerted me to the debate on China's trash trade that Liu Jianhua's installation at Shanghai Gallery of Art in September incited. Lisa Movius wrote about it in the Wall Street Journal and Shanghai SCRAP scrapped the shit out of it in an overly informed -in the stats dept., under informed- in the art dept. and belligerent in an all around, way. Both of these writings were considered for the piece below which will be published in both Chinese- ARTCO and English -YISHU Journal of Contemporary Chinese Art. It is an interesting debate that, either way you look at it, points to a growing global dilemma where we will eventually be enveloped in the trash of our own making.

It's a very long piece, sorry.

Export—Cargo Transit
Mathieu Borysevicz


According to the U.S.-based Clean Air Council, only two manmade structures on earth are large enough to be seen from outer space: the Great Wall of China and the Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island, New York. These two structures, merely little grey impressions from a zillion miles away, are perhaps the oddball duo that has come to define an important aspect of our current global condition.

It’s actually surprising that at the current worldwide rate of garbage production, the Fresh Kills Landfill is the only depository visible from the cosmos. In the U.S., the average person creates 4.39 pounds of trash per day and up to fifty-six tons of trash per year. China's city waste production is also increasing dramatically. According to statistics, current annual waste production in China is at 150 million tons and increasing eight to ten percent each year. This cumulative waste storage would cover an area of over 300,000 acres, and, certainly, like Fresh Kills, be big enough to see from the heavens.

The Fresh Kills Landfill closed in late 2001 after specialists looking for signs of human remains used it as a laboratory to sift through the charred ruins of the twin towers. The dump is now the resting place of all that was destroyed during the 9/11 World Trade Center disaster. Fresh Kills has been closed for several years now, but the citizens of the U.S. continue to fill enough garbage trucks to form a line that would stretch from the earth halfway to the moon. It’s an image that recalls lower Manhattan in the months after 9/11, when monstrous trucks laden with torqued steel became the ultimate caravan, testimony to an insecure world that lay ahead and, behind, modernity, rotting.

It is here, in modernity’s final crescendo, that a new epic has begun, what president Bush calls the New World Order. It is a world that is reconfigured in terms of terrorism, the global market, and the emergence of new economic powers. Yet what we have seen in the wake after 9/11 seems like an endless cycle of diatribe, extremism, consumption, pollution, apathy, spectacle, etc. A world whose ideologies, once containing assorted pretenses to idealism, are now transparently mired in profit margins. China, quickly becoming the world’s largest economy, is at the epicentre of this debacle. A nation that has hastily left its agricultural roots in the dust to join hyper-modernity and its discontents, China is the world’s last hope and biggest threat. It has triumphantly lifted millions out of poverty, entered the World Trade Organization, and will host the upcoming Olympics, all in a remarkably short period of time. Yet many ruptures have been left in the course of China’s rise to stardom. Severe environmental pollution, precarious economics, and an increasingly tenuous class structure have come to plague China and influence its international relations. In the conundrum of globalism, where boundaries between nations are evaporating on the one hand and nationalism is building on the other, China will have to quickly define its aspirations in order to continue its rise. It is here, in China’s ill defined but rapidly changing set of global ambitions, that the artist Liu Jianhua makes his move. In his last two installation projects, Liu Jianhua has confronted China’s role in the global market head on.

At the 2006 Shanghai Biennale, Liu lodged the back end of a big red shipping container into a wall of the gallery. At the other, open end, a landslide of whizzing plastic toys, tools, lights, and electronics pushed out onto the floor and washed up at the viewers’ feet. Yiwu Investigation, as the piece was titled, simply presented the fruits of Yiwu, China’s largest commodity producer and exporter, en masse to the viewer. Liu’s presentation, besides being dazzling—the kind of brilliance that makes the supermarket far more exciting than any art space—was also very pointed. The city of Yiwu is the primary mass-manufacturing base of cheap goods on the planet. Over one thousand containers full of this hodgepodge are exported from Yiwu’s shores daily. They fill up dollar stores, flea markets, and, sooner than later, garbage dumps worldwide. However, Liu Jianhua’s argument is not (yet) about growing landfills. It’s about the dynamic of the world market and, thus, Yiwu’s, as well as China’s, position in it.

The six thousand plus foreign businessmen who live in Yiwu testify to the root of this dynamic. Yiwu’s success is based on the outside world’s insatiable appetite for economical little plastic things. The market boats 320,000 varieties of goods from 1,502 categories. According to the Yiwu International Commodities Fair, there are only 500,000 varieties of goods in the world. So almost everything in the world is produced in Yiwu and then exported to almost all points in the world. Two hundred and twelve countries receive regular shipments of plastic photo frames, lighting ware, hosiery, slippers, handy tools, imitation jewelry, make up, artificial hair, and dry flowers. The U.S. is one of the main recipients of these goods. Chinese-made products have become so ubiquitous in the U.S. that it is not only rare to find items made anywhere else, but it may be next to impossible for Americans to do without them. In Sara Bongiorni’s book A Year Without “Made in China”,” the author’s experiment of trying to live an entire year without any Chinese- made goods ends in near bankruptcy. China’s exportation of cheap products basically allows the poor in developed countries to continue their materialistic pursuits. This is not only an empowering position for China to be in, but also one that puts the country in a constant state of compromise. Ever since China joined the World Trade OrganizationWTO in 2001 and began its spectacular transformation into a trade superpower, the chorus of complaints about its low-priced goods has swelled. China has been blamed for everything from the massive loss of manufacturing jobs in the U.S., to using unfair trade practices to capture an ever-increasing share of the world market, to high levels of toxicity in Chinese-made Barbie dolls, Polly Pockets, and other playthings that eventually prompted the suicide of a Chinese factory owner. Not only does the world demand cheap goods, but it demands safe and clean ones as well. This is China’s relationship to the rest of the world. It is a relationship mediated by the need for need: the need for economic growth and the need for cheap little plastic things that eventually fill up places like the Fresh Kills Landfill.

Liu’s gesture is one that swipes the manifold arrangements of an increasingly accelerated global market past our eyes. The avalanche of cheap, candy-coloured items that he puts before us comprises the kaleidoscope of consumption, trade imbalances, and late-capital activity that has defined the twenty-first century. It also poses questions of civilization in general; for example, how did we get to this point? How is it that global culture is caught up in a bunch of little, disposable, artificialities? In the Biennale’s exhibition catalogue, Liu’s endeavor as artist is equated to that of sociologist or anthropologist. He displays his fieldwork not as documentation but as artifact. The evidence of China’s increasingly powerful role in the global market bellows out as harvested treasures from a shipping container, anticipating their exported destiny. Liu does not make a complete argument with his work, but he poses an inquiry. What is China’s relationship with the rest of the world? How is this relationship defined?

One man’s garbage is another man’s treasure

In September, 2007 when the international art world was descending on Shanghai for the prestigious SHContemporary Art Fair, Liu Jianhua was busy answering the above-mentioned questions with more questions. Whereas Yiwu Investigation showed the front side of China’s exportation equation, Export—Cargo Transit, at the Shanghai Gallery of Art, shows the rear.

Not only does product go out of China, but once used, it often returns. In order to feed its forceful manufacturing sector, China’s recycling industries are some of the most competitive in the world, importing some forty million metric tons of scrap materials annually. It is part of a sixty-five billion dollar industry that employs 50,000 people. To add another twist to international trade imbalances, the U.S.’s biggest export to China is scrap paper, which, reciprocally, often goes back in the form of shoe boxes and other product packaging. It is not unreasonable to assume that many of the products in Yiwu are made with recyclable materials imported from abroad. While there are many benefits to a vibrant recycling industry, with a developing market and vigorous competition come dangerous loopholes that often produce harmful results. In the waste trade lies another complicated global dynamic that echoes colonial exploits of yesteryear. It is here, with site-specific poignancy, that Liu aims to catch our attention.

In an elegant, post-Renaissance building along the historic Bund sits the Shanghai Gallery of Art. Erected in 1916, during the heyday of capitalist expansionism into the far East, the building originally housed international banks. Today, the building embodies Shanghai’s new-found extravagance, a situation often considered a sequel to that turn-of-the-century jazz age. Recently renovated by Michael Graves, Bund No. 3 hosts such luxury stores as Armani and Hugo Boss, as well as Jean Georges Restaurant. On its third floor, in the exalted halls of Three on the Bund’s gallery, Liu Jianhua has installed over ten tons of recyclable foreign waste. Bound in stacks, scattered along the floors, piled under the windows, and pushed tightly into Plexiglas cases that line the atrium, this imported garbage is literally everywhere. Field recordings of shipyards and processing plants play from overhead speakers. A dysfunctional compactor rises from the mess. Plastic medicine bottles, shiny foils, fibres, abstract packaging material, shredded resins, and adhesive backings all congeal to produce one extraordinary allover composition. As in Yiwu Investigation’s wholesale market aesthetic, Liu once again, through the captivating qualities of industrial debris, achieves the dazzle that the fictional domain of the art space usually doesn’t allow for.
In news quotes printed on the walls, another type of garbage is addressed:
“Most of the world's electronic trash, especially old computers, is dumped in China, causing severe environmental problems and illnesses among residents...”
“Britain is shipping a record 1.9 million tons of rubbish eight thousand miles across the world to be dumped in China. . . . Campaigners fear vast amounts of the waste, including potentially lethal chemicals, are ending up in illegal landfill sites instead of being recycled.”
The quotes go on to paint a sinister picture of the electronic trash trade wherein developed countries dump lethal goods on developing countries, wreaking environmental havoc and irreversible health problems:

“Because processing this e-waste tends to employ very basic technology, large amounts of dangerous materials end up getting released into the environment. Environmental inspections have shown that the town of Guiyu has no potable water. More than eighty percent of the town's children are suffering from lead poisoning. . . . .”
The quotes are nauseating. Not only is this waste coming from so-called developed nations, but these are nations that have all signed the Basel Convention—a pact of wealthier nations that agrees to stop exporting garbage to poorer nations. The convention is proving difficult to enforce. “The waste is illegal, but somehow,” the artist fumes, “it evades customs agents on both sides.”
In his introductory essay, curator Cao Weijun equates the situation with a form of neo-colonialization. “Liu’s use of foreign rubbish has everything to do with the literal translation of ‘foreign,’ which [in Chinese] suggests colonialization and Chinese history.” This aspect is surely heightened by the site of the gallery itself, a structure that once banked the profits of Western businesses in Asia and that today represents the pinnacle of luxury à la Western name brands. The fact that southern Guangdong, where much of the trash trade occurs (and where the installation materials originate), is the same territory that once hosted the Opium Wars also helps to embellish the colonial picture. But to portray this situation entirely as a return of past exploits is denying China’s own tenuous struggle with economic development. Cao goes on to expound the dilemma as a cause for self-reflection. “While investigating the colonizer’s crime, to what extent is it necessary to review ourselves? From being colonized to self-colonization, from feeling the pain of the lack of our own spirit and cultural identity to deriving pleasure by consuming the colonizer’s food and money, this has been the spiritual journey for the individuals and also the whole nation” According to government statistics, China itself disposes of at least five million television sets, five million computers, and tens of millions of cell phones every year. Many of these, like foreign rubbish, once stripped of valuable materials, are discarded along riverbanks, polluting the earth and groundwater. While the global market for foreign scrap is dominated by China, it is in China that businesses looking to increase earnings violate safety regulations at the expense of their own country’s environment and health. But no one escapes this dilemma free of blame. Complicity stretches to both sides of the global divide. While Liu’s gesture is an open platform for co-existing debates, it once again raises the same fundamental questions. How did we get here, besieged by all this garbage?
Liu’s action is based in a world of art. But does such a discourse, in an arena of luxury and fiction, have any real capacity to affect change, and to what extent? Garbage, as political provocateur, has often found its way into the art world. As early as Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque, it has served as an avant-garde destabilizer of the fine arts, bridging low culture with high culture and constituting one of the fundamental tenets of postmodernity. Marcel Duchamp was of course the main instigator, presenting trash with negligible transformation to a bewildered public. Robert Rauschenberg exploited its beauty as a means of formal expression. Arman sliced it, diced it, and sometimes bronzed it as a way to demonstrate against the useless waste of "unfashionable" items in the consumption-driven society of the 1960s and 70s. Allan Kaprow had his used tire installations, and David Hammons had his bottle caps, which copied folk artists from all over the world whose only materials were recycled ones. Certainly throughout Export—Cargo Transit, one cannot help but be reminded of Barry Le Va’s early scatter pieces. But perhaps more aligned with where this article is going is “The Social Mirror,” a twelve-ton, twenty-eight-foot long New York City Department of Sanitation collection truck reconfigured with mirrored panels. This piece, by Mierle Laderman Ukeles, was a highlight of the inaugural New York City Art Parade in 1983, and is a permanent, mobile public art work that continues to mirror our garbage-spewing society.
But for Liu Jianhua’s garbage, the most interesting thing that ties itself back to the art world is its newly contextualized status as a consumable luxury item. In containers marked Art Export, the stuffed trash prepares itself for repatriation back to its Western origins. This is part of Liu’s program, to see this foreign refuse re-enter the global market as a Chinese high-art commodity. Like much of China’s trade balance with the rest of the world, the country’s contemporary art market has been, almost exclusively, an export business. Since the early 1980’s, the primary patronage for Chinese avant-garde art has been from collectors and venues outside of China. This has of course affected its the development of Chinese contemporary art in many ways. Countless accusations have been made that wWestern patronage and palates helped to produce work that catered to Western tastes. Today, record Chinese art market performances have bewildered even the most seasoned of speculators. Some attribute this market phenomenon to a growing Chinese collectorship. Here, in this erratic market transformation, Liu also takes a stab. He aims to tie the market of “foreign trash” to the market for valuable, Chinese high-art collectables, therefore adding one more loop to the cycles of global commerce. His exhibition couldn’t have come at a better time. SHContemporary Art fFair brought collectors and gallerists from across the globe to Shanghai, willing to consume, some times, it seems, blindly, the next mainland craze; —in this instance, piles of trash.

Saturday, October 20, 2007

King of the mountain- will the real M50 please stand up?





I haven't had time to fart much less work on the project that I (use as an excuse to) relocated back to China for in the first place. So in effort to find some space to concentrate I move up to the mountains- a little writer's residency of sorts, a little fresh air, food and clear thoughts. Right.
If I knew what was good for me I'd cut the Internet cords and bury the cellphone. But I do not. I'm in Moganshan - a stupendous mountain range about four hours from Shanghai on the local-relentless hornhonking-bumpydumpy-peasant bus. It's about 2.5 hours by car. I don't have a car nor do I intend to add to China's already dire state of the environment by buying one. Plus I can't afford one. Anyway Moganshan became a hot spot for foreigners and rich Chinese capitalists during the 20's and 30's looking for the same solitude and cool, crisp air. They built all these mighty, stone houses that look out onto the world below- or the bamboo. Some, like the one I'm in resembles a castle, others cottages, all from the same turn of the century, country home, architectural data bank. Either way the architecture helps to create the illusion that you're in Europe far from the honking, bustling, pollution laden air of Zhejiang, China. It is actually an indeterminate space and time in Moganshan- not Europe of 80 years ago and not China today but a dreamy in between. It is funny that while I'm up here in the green hills that I'm asked to write a piece about Shanghai's art scene. Moganshan, ironically, is also the road that Shanghai's premiere gallery district is located on. Most people refer to the district plainly as Moganshan. Truthfully I'd rather think about the birds and the breeze than the sceney, sophisticated hubbub of Shanghai's art scene. and so I procrastinate and the deadline approaches....

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Refreshing and Waiting for Publication OR the continual emerging artist syndrome





So I've been out of touch
Not touching so much
because other, more serious, professional writing endeavors have kept me from letting loose here. BUT some of those potential publishers have dragged their heels and timeliness has got left in the dust. So below a short review of REFRESH, a group show of emerging (love the term- you can emerge till 35 years old and then you're a has been-emerging artist or a successful artist- or by that time the day job has taken over along with the mortgage and nursery school fees and art just seems like a silly waste of time. Me, I'm still clunking along, post-emerging at 36 with a group show here or there and wasting my time on this here blog.
Here's REFRESH slightly refreshed so it has some minor differences with the soon-to-be published version on artforum.com which isn't as interesting as bookforum.com but will bring you your daily dose of art chatter (which is what art is all about anyway -chatter). Below more chatter:


In the art world’s unrelenting pursuit of the continually new, REFRESH, a group exhibition at ZenDai MoMA, waves its youthful hand for attention. This show of thirty-five artists, most of who were born during the 1980’s, presents an eclectic range of mediums and mall-rat sensibilities in a museum, oddly enough, situated in a mall. These artists are of China’s first generation to experience an entirely Economic-Reform era life, complete with its material privileges and freedoms that previous generations could never have dreamed of. Subsequently much of the work embodies concerns less akin to their socio-politically infatuated predecessors and more attuned to a burgeoning global culture. Suitably, consumerism and its discontents greet the viewer in the lobby.
A table case by Sha Weichen displays an array of home electronic equipment - cell phones, digital camcorders, laptops all meticulously constructed out of black tape. Light-boxes show a bright mountain of small toys, apparently self-portraits of the artist, Fan Mingzhu, buried underneath. A bay of blowing fans make a pun on the company's Great Wall name. from The show’s centerpiece, a humorous cross between sculpture and painting by Guo Hongwei, is a square of actual lawn littered with Coke cans, condom wrappers and banana peels which were made from multiple layers of acrylic paint. Many other examples of post painting dot the show. TV noise appears on a flat screen monitor next to a painting of the same subject. Along the expanse of another wall wasshisname (I'll check this later) painfully has rendered his signature marbleizing technique over which sits yet another flat screen monitor that shows the artist painting his colossal studio wall with the same little squiggly interlacing lines. It was a project that apparently took an entire month.

There are several photographers who show misguided youth in various stages of undress, intoxication and reflection ala Wolfgang Tillmans reminding us that this image obsessed generation is also one that is entirely sibling-less. However the results of China’s one-child family experiment are most successfully transmitted here via video. In a piece dedicated to her parents, Ma Qiusha recites the story of her life with a razor blade in her mouth. In Zu Weimin’s inscrutable video, execution style killings unfold in a gritty industrial wasteland to the reggae version of Bob Dylan’s “Blowing in the Wind”. Another video shows a rifle-scope focusing in on and falling pedestrian traffic, a nod to the pervasive influence of gaming on China’s youth.
The curatorial aim of the show is to “refresh”, to make anew the hitherto categorically confined name game of historians. Despite much derivation and a desperate need for a final edit, the show presents young artists with a lot of promising territory to explore.

REFRESH: Emerging Chinese Artists
September 23 – November 08, 2007

Shanghai Zendai Museum of Modern Art

Monday, September 24, 2007

And another thing about SH Contemporary before it completely fades into the abdominal mist






This is me and my atrocious Chinese (not to mention the wackjob hairdo) explaining Zhang Dali's new, very hard to sell, series of Bronzes, "Man and Beast" in ddmWarehouse's booth at the SH Contemporary Fair. The lengthier written English version which has little to do with the work and more to do with a convoluted notion of power ... without mentioning Foucault is below.

That's Yanyao in the photo- He's ddm's backbone who is somtimes distracted by his responsibities for a very cool place to view experimental video (not only)
in China- artmofile.com He's also running the renegade Yunan Documentary Festival at Zendai Museum next week.


“Oppressive government is more cruel than a tiger”
- Confucius

From about 2000 to 1500 B.C., a people known as the Xia dominated the northern regions of China. The Xia worshiped the snake, a creature that appears in some of the oldest Chinese myths. Eventually, the snake changed into the dragon, which became one of the most enduring symbols of Chinese culture and mythology. It was said that Confucius himself was born under the guard of two dragons. Like the Chinese zodiac calendar, which measures time in a cycle marked by 12 distinct animals, the dragon is an amalgamation of many entities. This mythical beast dons the head of camel, the eyes of a demon, the ears of a cow, the horns of a stag, the neck of a snake, claws of an eagle and so on. While in Christian mythology the dragon was equated with Satan or war, in China the dragon was equated with generosity, good fortune and also the supreme divinity of the emperor. The connection between the dragon and the emperor was so great that some emperors claimed to have descended from dragons and were said to posses tails. Anyone other than the emperor who used the sign of the Imperial Dragon, with its signature five claws, was immediately put to death. This fantastical national symbol, on the one hand representing benevolence, on the other hand represents the deep-rooted social/political hierarchy of Chinese civilization.

While Confucius felt that tyranny is more ferocious than a tiger he was also under the belief that the legitimacy of a ruler comes from his birth. The Emperor is the ‘son of heaven’ no matter what happens. It is only when the Emperor starts to act unknowingly that a new ‘son of heaven’ will rise and take over. Commoners are not allowed to rebel because they possess no divinity and their actions would break the Confucian Order of Rites. This is antithetical to the West’s idea of a social contract, a theory formulated by Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes believed that the King and his subjects enter into a contract through which the people give the mandate of governance to the monarch. Once the King has breached the contract it is justifiable for the people to rebel. But for the common man, ignorant of alternative ideologies and subject to a strict system, the option for rebellion doesn’t exist. Confucian ethics, tradition, and history have molded man into a subject that is eternally obedient to the powers above him.

Power structures have changed over the years but the hierarchy remains. Where once the emperor ruled supreme, now other ideologies are in the mix. Money, government, religion, bureaucracy, corporations and markets have spawned irreversible structures that are far more powerful than individuals. Man has inevitably become the beast of burden to the systems he has created around himself.

Mathieu Borysevicz 8/07