氤氳、灘涂與歪像：觀丁成繪畫
和他的詩一樣，丁成的畫產生出相當大的衝擊力和爆發力，也可以說同樣昭示了這樣一個美學法則：破壞力同時正是一種創造力。
Ding Cheng』s painting isaesthetically stunning with great explosive power as well as his poetry. Italso indicates the same aesthetic principle: destructive power associates withcreativity.
——楊小濱·法 鐳 Yang Xiaobin
Exhibition scene，Ding Cheng，AMNUA，2018（墨妮｜攝影）
氤氳、灘涂與歪像：觀丁成繪畫
Yin-Yun, Littoral and Anamorphosis: On Ding Cheng』sPainting
楊小濱·法 鐳
Yang Xiaobin
汪嫣然 譯
Translated by Yanran WANG
和他的詩一樣，丁成的畫產生出相當大的衝擊力和爆發力，也可以說同樣昭示了這樣一個美學法則：破壞力同時正是一種創造力。但，破壞什麼？如何破壞？在《爬著爬著掛回原位（1-4）》這一組裡，我們可以看到，中國傳統書法的元素被保留了，但文字呈現出自由、散亂和殘破的局面。《爬著爬著掛回原位-3》和《爬著爬著掛回原位-4》遠看既像是飄浮在空中的羽毛又像是各種擠在一起飛舞在空中的蟲鳥，細看之下是一些漢字和漢字殘缺部分或部首的隨意集合，大小不一，（墨色）深淺各異，與傳統書法相比，雖保留了筆墨的意趣，但文字（或文字的碎片）本身並無常態的「意義」可言，而是呈現出無序的拼貼狀態。換句話說，作為文化權威的能指秩序遭遇了嘩變，漢字的表意功能遭到了瓦解。這個做法與徐冰《天書》那類作品似有異曲同工之妙，不過丁成更強調的不是印刷和典籍的體系，而是文人書寫的傳統；丁成畫中的書寫符號也並沒有徐冰式的偽漢字，而是無法整合的、被肢解的，並且失去組片語句功能的漢字（這一點，與他自己的「抽象詩」寫作保持著同一個指向）。
Ding Cheng』s painting isaesthetically stunning with great explosive power as well as his poetry. Italso indicates the same aesthetic principle: destructive power associates withcreativity. Nevertheless, what does he destroy? How does he destroy it? In hisserial paintings Crawling and Climbing Backto the Original Place (1-4), we can find that the distinctive qualities ofChinese traditional calligraphy are retained in his works, while the charactersare free, scattered and fragmentary. If we have a look at Crawling and Climbing Back to the Original Place-3 and Crawling and Climbing Back to the Original Place-4,we will gain a general impression of the floating feathers or crowded birds alongwith insects in the air. In close-up, these elements are random combinations ofChinese characters and various components of Chinese characters in differentsizes and ink shades. Ding Cheng』s painting partly adopts freehand brushwork ofChinese traditional calligraphy, however, while its text (or fragments of text)shows a disordered state of collage without conventional meanings. In otherwords, as the symbol of cultural authority, the order of signifier collapses. Asa result, the ideographic function of Chinese characters no longer exists inhis works. This kind of approach is similar to Xu Bing』s Tianshu, but Ding Cheng puts more emphasis on the tradition of literatiwriting, not on the printing system and historical documents; Ding Cheng』swriting symbols in his painting are not the same type of pseudo-Chinese charactersas Xu Bing』s, but non-integrated, dismembered Chinese characters withoutrepresentational functions (this point is in line with his 「abstract poetry」).
丁成另有幾幅畫作——如《被大爆炸驚醒之後》《安眠藥中的翻斗車》《早安》《進化之旅》，甚至包括彩色的《世界還是有希望的》《一連串語病》等——或抽象，或具象，但也都保留了傳統水墨的元素，並通過枯潤濃淡的豐富變幻，將石濤的「氤氳」概念推進到現代繪畫實踐中——「筆與墨會，是為氤氳，氤氳不分，是為混沌」。拉康（Jacques Lacan）在他的第十四期研討班《幻想的邏輯》上引用石濤的「氤氳」說，呼應了他對符號域與真實域關係的思考：能指秩序構成的符號域與深不可測的黑暗真實域二者不是對立的、截然分割的，而是互為表裡，如莫比烏斯帶兩面的相互轉換；換句話說，筆觸所經營的點線面作為符號元素，本來似應提供某種界定性的意義，但經由水墨所帶來的不確定、模糊和偶然，鋪展出符號的自我消解狀態。「氤氳」或「混沌」，恰恰是真實域從符號域內部顯示其難以壓制的謎樣態勢。
His other paintings like After Being Awakened by the Big Bang, Eat SleepingPills tipcart, If you can』t see metomorrow.Well,good morning,good afternoon,good evening, A Journey of Evolution, even the coloredpaintings, for instance, The World is StillHopeful, A Series of languagediseases — whether abstract or figurative, they retain the basic elementsof traditional ink painting. Through variations of brush strokes, Ding Chengdevelops Shi Tao』s concept 「Yin-Yun」 into the practice of the modern painting —「When the brush strokes and ink wash are unified, this is called Yin-Yun; Yinand Yun are not divided, they are harmonized.」 Jacques Lacan cited Shi Tao』sconcept of 「Yin-Yun」 in Seminar XIV: The Logicof Fantasy, echoing his thoughts on the relationship between the Symbolicand the Real: The Symbolic which involves the formation of signifiers is not onthe opposite side of the Real. Like two sides of Mobius Strip, they are incontinuous transformation. To put it in another way, symbolic elements (likedots, lines and spheres) born from strokes, should have generated formativesignificance, but they gradually turn into self-digestion because of the uncertaintyand the occasionality of ink. 「Yin-Yun」 or 「Hun-Dun」, to be exact, is anirresistible and mysterious trend that the Real reveals from the internal ofthe Symbolic.
在丁成另一些畫作中——如《猶如錯動不停的語法敗局》《公轉軌道被某些行星險惡地私有化了》——真實域對符號域的塗抹就更為顯見了。《公轉軌道被某些行星險惡地私有化了》用紅色和黑色（加上少量藍色和橙色）划出了似字而非字的紊亂線條，粗看有如文革中面目猙獰的大字報的某個局部，揭示出作為符號的漢字與作為真實的亂塗之間的交界地帶——這個交界地帶便是拉康稱為「灘涂」（littoral）的界域。拉康曾提到自己赴日本旅行途中，坐飛機在西伯利亞平原上空看到的灘涂景象：交錯的河流及其形成的灘涂——正是水岸在河流的「塗抹」下形成了灘涂的現象。他把自己在西伯利亞上空看到的河流 「讀作……隱喻性的寫作蹤跡」，這種灘涂的形態恰好就體現了 「純粹的擦拭」，意指遭到能指沖刷和洗滌（符號化）的過程中的文字蹤跡作為泥沙存留（真實域的殘留）的特性。甚至，丁成畫中的符號性元素超越了漢字，比如《在無邊無際的海洋中要找到他幾乎是不可能的》中，這種灘涂景觀中我們看到的是被擦拭後的英文。在丁成的這些畫里，忽隱忽現的文字有一種能指符號被沖刷後泥沙俱下的樣貌：任何能指符號本身都無法掩蓋其難以符號化的真實域痕迹。更為明顯的則是《集中清理審批相關中介服務》《1+1=7》這樣的作品：丁成似乎是直接在印滿了文字的報紙上施以墨彩，而被覆蓋的印刷文字彷彿歷經了塗抹而依舊若隱若現。
It seems that the smearing on theReal by the Symbolic turns to be much more visible in some other paintings ofDing Cheng, It』s like an interlaced FailedGrammar, The Orbit of the Revolutionis Privatized by Some Planets. With the disordered lines in red and black(with a little bit of blue and orange) which compose the 「quasi-character」, The Orbit of the Revolution is Privatized bySome Planets seems to be a part of the Big-character poster (Dazibao) in the Cultural Revolution whichis considered as a totally violent symbol, revealing the boundary formedbetween the Chinese characters as signs and the smearing as the reality. Theboundary here is thus the realm of 「littoral」 named by Lacan who once describedhis journey to Japan on a plane, over the Siberia plain, during which heobserved the rivers below: the anastomosing streams form the littoral, that is,the bank shapes the littoral by the smearing of the river. These rivers can beread as 「metaphorical traces of writing」. The form of the littoral isabsolutely a proof of the 「pure litura」,which means that the literal trace is just the residual of the Real after the processof symbolization, like being continuously rushed and wiped out by signifiers.The symbolic elements in his paintings are even something beyond the Chinesecharacters. For instance, in It』s Almost Impossibleto Find Him in the Immense Ocean, we can only see the wiped English lettersin the landscape of littoral. These characters or signs, appearingindistinctly, seem to be remains after being wiped out by signifiers: anysignifier cannot cover up the trace of the symbolized Real. Some other casesare Centrally Cleaning Up and Approving RelatedIntermediary Services and 1+1=7,in which Ding Cheng dips the ink on the newspapers filled with printedcharacters, while these characters appear to be partly visible after beingsmeared.
這就是為什麼我們在丁成的畫里也看到了他詩中的那種符號的崩裂，或者說，在符號域崩裂過程中顯露出來的真實域痕迹。這也體現在丁成的畫作中——如《瞳孔里發著好奇的光》《這麼做，也許只是因為太飢餓了》《像是，一個還沒有完全長好尾巴的海盜船》《它們弄出動靜來》《我用詩也說不明白》等——大量出現的神秘眼睛，閃爍出拉康意義上的「凝視」（gaze）。這些神秘眼睛的背後透露出令人相當不安的意蘊，正契合了拉康對凝視作為「小它物」（objet petit a）的界定。在拉康的理論中，「小它物」是一個至為關鍵的概念，它意味著符號域無法遏制真實域滲漏出污漬殘渣，或者無時不在扮出鬼臉。《無巧不成書地完成了一次劫後小插入》《我只會記住能夠忘記我的人》《七點鐘為七點零一分親自上發條》《錯覺佔據上風》等幾幅乾脆就把怪眼和怪臉結合在一起，將恐懼、驚異、搞笑、威脅、痴獃等不同意味奇妙地凝聚到同一個畫面內，成為對一個時代主體性的精確隱喻。換句話說，丁成畫作所體現的主體已不再僅僅是被他者秩序嚴格規整的符號化主體，而是通過表達無法被完整符號化的視像，探索主體如何染上了真實域的濃重陰影。
That』s why we can see thecollapse of symbol in Ding Cheng』s paintings as well as in his poetry, in otherwords, the traces of the Real are exposed in the process of the collapse of theSymbolic. This is also revealed in Ding Cheng』s paintings, such as Look at What to See, Maybe It』s just Because It』s Too Hungry,It』s Like a Pirate Ship without a Full Tail,They Make a Move, and Poetry is not used to explain, a largenumber of mysterious eyes flicker like Jacques Lacan』s so-called 「gaze」. Thesemysterious eyes suggest some kind of unsettling meaning, perfectly matchingwith Lacan』s definition of the gaze as 「objet Petit a」. 「Objet Petit a」 is acore concept in Lacan』s theory, which means that the Symbolic cannot prohibitthe leakage of the Real. In the paintings like It』s very academic, I』ll JustRemember People Who Forgot Me, Timephagocytosis time, The Illusion TakesUp The Upper Wind, he combines weird eyes with weird faces in a rough way,rendering emotional expressions like fear, amazement, fun, menace and dementiainto the same scene, which is exactly an metaphor for the subjectivity of thisera. In other words, the subject represented by Ding Cheng』s paintings is nolonger merely a symbolized subject strictly regulated by the other』s order, instead,his paintings aim to explore, through the expression of images that cannot befully symbolized, how the subject is affected by the shadow of the Real.
在丁成的不少畫作里，也常常可以看到中外經典藝術或隱或顯的烙印。比如《直到現在》《鄰居們是怎樣拋棄他們的鄰居的》讓人聯想到八大山人對魚鳥眼睛的特異處理，但丁成將八大山人那種鄙視或高傲的眼神作了更具現代主義色彩的變形，使得主體性的表達不再是一種絕世的孤傲，更多流露出的是現代生活背景下的無奈、獃滯、脫序和畸變。還有像《像脈顫脈顫小驚喜》、《退堂鼓一定要敲》，特別是《用最尖銳的冷靜》，則以對面部線條的粗獷勾勒切近了木刻的效果，在很大程度上令人想起法國表現主義畫家魯奧（Georges Rouault）的繪畫，因此也就具有了某種絕望與神聖之間的奇特效果。而《大多數的人類情感》則在一定程度上有畢加索（Pablo Picasso）《格爾尼卡》的影子，那些八大山人式孤懸的眼珠和畢加索式孤懸的人獸頭顱耦合在一起，將拉康在第十一期研討班上闡述的「歪像」（anamorphosis）理論推向了新的境界。
The influence of Chinese andforeign classic art is a clue to decipher Ding Cheng』s painting. As it shows inEndless Waiting and How Did the Neighbors Abandon Their Neighbors, his approach more or less reminds us the technics of Bada Shanren. What』smore important is that Ding Cheng makes a modernistic change to the way thatBada Shanren depicted the eyes; as a result, the expression of subjectivity isno longer kind of aristocratic exclusiveness, but showing dullness, disorderand distortion behind the modern life. Besides, in the paintings I』m so Ugly and I』m so Happy, It』s Time to be Weak, especially With the Sharpest Calmness, his strokesroughly outline the facial contour, which appears to be similar to the woodcut,largely reminiscent of the French expressionist Georges Rouault』s paintings,bringing a striking effect between the despair and the sacred, while the Emotional Pattern of Ordinary People ispartly influenced by Pablo Picasso』s Guernica.Those upturned eyes of Bada Shanren』s style along with the heads of humanbeings and wild beasts of Picasso』s style, updates the theory of 「anamorphosis」discussed by Lacan in his Seminar XI.
如果說丁成的畫在較為抽象的向度上顯示出一種解構了符號秩序的「氤氳」氛圍，那麼，在他較為具象的向度上，「歪像」同樣以扭曲了符號化影像的方式，佔據了整體視像的核心地位——《大家都學會了有限度地控制情緒》《他們滿含愧意》等都是出色的例證。拉康對霍爾拜因（Hans Holbein）《使節》一畫中骷髏形象的闡述也恰好用來觀察丁成對「歪像」的營造，因為「歪像」正是「小它物」的典型表徵，如《大家都學會了有限度地控制情緒》中的視覺形象消解了任何能指化的意義構造，成為一種迷惑，一道難題，透露出真實域的深淵，我們或許只有從另一個視角才能看到它令人恐懼的樣貌。丁成畫中的「歪像」將真實的核心以乜斜錯亂的樣態鋪展出對符號化影像的瓦解，有力地呼應了他充滿了解構潛能的整體美學指向。
From the perspective of the abstraction,Ding Cheng』s painting shows an atmosphere of 「Yin-Yun」 which deconstructs thesymbolic order; meanwhile, in a representational dimension, 「anamorphosis」 is notonly a way of distorting symbolic images, but the core of the overall vision aswell: You Have to Learn to Control Yourselfand They Are Full of Shame are bothexcellent examples. Lacan』s demonstration of the skull in Hans Holbein』s The Ambassadors can also be used toobserve the creation of 「anamorphosis」 by Ding Cheng, because 「anamorphosis」 isthe typical representation of the 「objet Petit a」. For example, the visual image in You Have to Learn to Control Yourself dispels any structure ofsignifiers, as a result, it becomes a puzzle which reveals the abyss of theReal. We may only see its frightening appearance from another perspective.Technically, 「anamorphosis」 in Ding Cheng』s painting, interprets the reality asthe disintegration of symbolic images, which strongly echoes the overallaesthetic tendency of his deconstructive potential.
2018/3/3 台北
March 3, 2018
in Taipei
楊小濱?法 鐳YANG XIAOBIN
詩人，藝術家，評論家。耶魯大學博士，台灣中央研究院文哲所研究員，台灣政治大學教授。
A poet, an artist, a critic. Ph. D., Yale University, Professor of philosophy and culture, Taiwan Institute of central research, Professor of Taiwan University of political science.
汪嫣然Yanran WANG
詩人，譯者，策展人，巴黎高等藝術研究院。
Poet, translator, curator, Paris Academy of advanced arts.
TAG:蛤蟆TOADS |