R.A. 蘇里 文 劉惠芳 譯

王國?。荷钥v即逝的結(jié)構(gòu)

R.A. 蘇里 文 劉惠芳 譯

編者按：該文是加拿大評論家R. A. Suri，在觀察了王國俊一系列由影像和畫作構(gòu)成的觀念藝術(shù)作品之后，英文寫作翻譯而來。作者認(rèn)為王國俊的創(chuàng)作理念在于堅(jiān)持對結(jié)構(gòu)性的理解——其本質(zhì)乃稍縱即逝——的潛力與持續(xù)性作進(jìn)一步沉思。這樣一種流動(dòng)性的結(jié)構(gòu)，能更加恰當(dāng)?shù)孛枋鏊囆g(shù)家本人的創(chuàng)作活動(dòng)，不論是以油畫顏料、數(shù)位還是影片的語言，都是一種對于物質(zhì)本身的反轉(zhuǎn)表達(dá)。非靜態(tài)的視覺平面元素刻畫出漂流的、浮動(dòng)的形象，指向一個(gè)被懸置的生命。無需強(qiáng)調(diào)光學(xué)的暗示，客體對象可被構(gòu)想，我們見證并看到，無需其他的感官能力。我們從他的影像創(chuàng)作所體驗(yàn)到的形態(tài)模擬，導(dǎo)致了對規(guī)則的拋棄。如作者所言，王國俊是位敏感且投入的評論者，他將自己目睹的主要結(jié)果和社會的斷裂結(jié)合在一起，使得個(gè)人詩性的解放與創(chuàng)作者充滿生動(dòng)想象力的詩藝達(dá)到一種和諧狀態(tài)。

Editor’s note: This is a translation of an English paper by the Canadian critic R.A. Suri following his observation of Wang Guo Jun’s conceptual art works consisting of videos and paintings. The author believes that Wang’s art ideas lie in his persistent understanding of structural properties—ephemeral by nature—a further refection upon their potential and continuity. Such a fowing structure describes the artist’s creative activities more accurately; oil paint pigment, digits and flm language are all a reverse expression of the substance itself. Non-static visual plane elements portray drifting, floating images, pointing to a suspended life. An object can be conceived without emphasizing any optic hint, which we can witness and see without having to resort to other sense organs. Morphological simulations that we experience from his video creations lead to his disregard of rules. Wang, a sensitive and dedicated critic, combines most of his fndings and social fracture, and achieves a harmony between his own poeticized liberation and his full vivid imagination as a creator.

王國俊 電影 Water Light Human 系列 2012年 Wang Guo Jun, the flm Water Light Human series, 2012

哲學(xué)所處的狀態(tài)，不是對其他領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行外在的思考，而是與它們進(jìn)行積極的、內(nèi)在的聯(lián)合，它既不更加抽象，也不更加困難。

——吉爾·德勒茲

Philosophy is not in a state of external refection on other domains, but in a state of active and internal alliance with them, and it is neither more abstract nor more diffcult. - Gilles Deleuze

在觀察了這一系列觀念藝術(shù)作品——不論是否屬于錄像影像的畫作——之后，我以為王國俊的創(chuàng)作理念在于堅(jiān)持對結(jié)構(gòu)性的理解——其本質(zhì)乃稍縱即逝——的潛力與持續(xù)性作進(jìn)一步沉思。相較于幾何序列，流動(dòng)性能更加恰當(dāng)?shù)孛枋鏊囆g(shù)家本人的創(chuàng)作活動(dòng)——以油畫顏料或數(shù)位、影片的語言——皆回歸到反轉(zhuǎn)建立于辯證物質(zhì)之上的表達(dá)。

On observation of the series of conceptual works, whether paintings of video’s, the creations by Wang Guo Jun insist upon further speculation as to the potential and viability of structural reasoning of an ephemeral, impermanent nature. The fluid rather than geometrical sequence is preferred, apt, to better articulate the artist whose movement, whether in oil or digital/flmic language, returns to an invert dialectical material based expression.

王國俊 電影 Water Light Human 系列 2012年 Wang Guo Jun, the flm Water Light Human series, 2012

The aesthetic and visceral impact of the visual core remains centric upon the transient and fuid rather than abrupt concretism of structural or post-structural compositional attributes. The artist connotates the instantaneous and spiritual rather than an ocular deviation which plays on predetermined codifcations and logistical necessity.

非靜態(tài)的視覺平面元素刻畫出漂流的、浮動(dòng)的形象，指向一個(gè)被懸置的生命——懸浮于消費(fèi)主義的因果關(guān)系——之中的生命力，顯示了具備社會良心的藝術(shù)特征。該含義是朝著一種分離的，既非認(rèn)同亦非爭論的歸屬。創(chuàng)作本身暗示一種“他者”的形式，在其中個(gè)別形象透露出對具體的、存在的及風(fēng)格主義面向的拋棄。

Non-static, the visual planar elements depict fgures adrift, foating, indicating the sense of animus within a suspended life, a suspension amidst causal consumerism and indicative of a socially conscientious artistic signature. The indication is towards an apart, a non-identifcation nor polemic of belonging. The creations themselves suggest an“otherness” of form, wherein the individual fgure bespeaks of abandon on both concrete, existential and mannerist aspects.

當(dāng)他搖擺于一種現(xiàn)存的精神主義以及呼應(yīng)物質(zhì)進(jìn)程的辯證式理解之間的同時(shí)，情境的面向進(jìn)一步延伸。超乎將“內(nèi)容”狹隘地視為相同呼應(yīng)的隱秘狀態(tài)——一種對“真實(shí)”的視覺上的歧義，并在公理化控制上出了差錯(cuò)。反轉(zhuǎn)：這個(gè)詞出現(xiàn)于視覺鮮明的美學(xué)主義，預(yù)示了藝術(shù)家在構(gòu)圖上或哲學(xué)上真正的“意向性”。反轉(zhuǎn)乃是以其語言的高度動(dòng)態(tài)藝術(shù)而言，而非一種相反的絕對體，在其中光學(xué)的平面可能落入傳統(tǒng)窠臼，內(nèi)容和形式不再是分開的實(shí)體成分。這些作品在溶解，沉重的預(yù)設(shè)及說教主義逐漸腐蝕。留給我們的是視覺經(jīng)驗(yàn)的順從薄膜，一個(gè)視覺的基調(diào)，指向德勒茲的立場——本質(zhì)的論述，其中經(jīng)驗(yàn)性與生命力共存。

在這個(gè)非——晦澀的寶藏或藝術(shù)——?dú)v史的必要命題的意義之下，這些創(chuàng)作標(biāo)志出藝術(shù)家細(xì)膩的敏感性，隨著媒介的前沿——我們集體經(jīng)驗(yàn)里的最恰當(dāng)領(lǐng)域：他自己的藝術(shù)面貌在其中遺失，借由來自互聯(lián)網(wǎng)隨機(jī)噪音的語言的發(fā)現(xiàn)，引申出構(gòu)圖式的客觀主義者宣言，就如同誕生自它們的“源頭”的構(gòu)成性描述。視覺上的獲取已然變成慣用手段，藝術(shù)家于是轉(zhuǎn)向完善框架本身，因而撕裂了敘事的潛力，編輯時(shí)的行動(dòng)式操作，啟動(dòng)了對鏡頭前事物的認(rèn)知，并呼應(yīng)留在他創(chuàng)作推動(dòng)力的想象的一切。

疑惑、光學(xué)幻象和同步經(jīng)驗(yàn)的屬性激發(fā)他對可修飾的“真實(shí)”的思索，而不是將自己知性的努力臣服于一種加密的“真實(shí)”的謬誤之下。

對于1個(gè)普通的NVIDIA GPU，CUDA線程數(shù)目通常能達(dá)到數(shù)千個(gè)甚至更多，因而問題劃分模型可成倍地提升計(jì)算機(jī)的運(yùn)算性能。GPU由多個(gè)流水處理器構(gòu)成，流水處理器以Block為基本調(diào)度單元，對于流水處理器較多的GPU，它一次可以處理的Block更多，從而運(yùn)算速度更快，時(shí)間更短。該原理如圖1所示,由圖1可知，1個(gè)多線程程序被劃分為多個(gè)線程塊，塊之間彼此無關(guān)，均獨(dú)立執(zhí)行，因而核心越多執(zhí)行效率越高。

事實(shí)上，他作品里的視覺動(dòng)感提供了一種催眠般的誘惑，中央的人物以非公式化的序列變化：畫家萊昂內(nèi)爾·法寧格有一次評論道，表達(dá)是為了產(chǎn)生客體，“就像一艘畫出來的船在一片畫出來的大海上一般漫無目的”，而王國俊轉(zhuǎn)向某種特別的語言，在其中視覺客體隸屬于一種無形態(tài)的消亡，一種無溶解力，呼應(yīng)其所選擇的媒介。視覺的靈巧性發(fā)生了，相似的審美與融化般影像的至上，在繪畫與影片的視覺性之間搖擺，這是一種操作性的資源，反映我們自身的視覺文化和對光學(xué)的而非感官體驗(yàn)的著迷。演繹地——盡管同時(shí)被抹去——我們感受到物理存在的瞬逝，當(dāng)它從視覺的范圍延伸，開啟一個(gè)誕生自動(dòng)感張力、聲音與反應(yīng)的遺跡——其中回音首先發(fā)言——空間地認(rèn)知的精神活力。因此，無需強(qiáng)調(diào)光學(xué)的暗示，客體對象可被構(gòu)想，我們見證并看到，無需其他的感官能力。

The situational perspective further extends as he oscillates between suggestions of a spiritualism existent and a dialectical reasoning which resonates material process. One beyond the narrow estimation of“content” as being ulterior to the same resonancy. An ocular deviation of the “real” and one which is amiss of axiomatic control. Inversion: the term arises in the visually distinct aestheticism prefgures the actual compositional or philosophical “intentionality” of the artist. Inverse in the hyper-kineticism of the language, rather than a converse absolute wherein the optical plane might fall prey to convention, content and form cease to be separate entitical components. The works are in effuvium, the weight of presupposition and didacticism are eroded. We are left with the flial membrane of an experience visual, a visual leitmotif which suggest’s the Deleuzian position of an essential discourse wherein the emperical and vital co-exist.

This sense of an non-arcane lore or art-historico imperative, the creations demarcate the exquisite sensitivity of the artist, bearing the mediatic fore as being the most apt feld of our collective experience: his own artistic countenance therein, lost, he discovers languages drawn from the random noise of the internet and renders compositional objectivist statements as composite expressions born of their “source”. Visual capture being themodus operandi, the artist has opted to render finite the frame itself, hence, rupturing the potential of narrative, performatory operations in editing which enact cognition of what lies before the lens, and echo what remains within the imaginary of his creative impetus.

Doubt, optical illusion and synchronous experiential attribute invigorate his meditations as to the qualifable “real” rather than subject his own intellectual labour to the fallacy of an encrypted “real”.

In effect, the visual dynamism of his creations offer a hypnotic seduction as the central fgures morph in non-axiomatic sequence: the painter Lionel Feininger once commented that the cause of expression was to render the object, “As idle as a painted ship on a painted sea”, whereas Wang opts for a vernacular wherein the visual objects are subject to a formless disappearance, a non-solvency which echos the medium in selection. That a visual dexterity occurs, the similar aesthete and primacy of the soluable image, oscillates between both paint and filmic visuality is an operative ressource that reflects our own visual culture and fascinus with the optical rather than sensual experience. Apriori, while yet effaced, we sense the ephemeral of the physical, as it extends from the visual sphere and opens a vestige born of dynamic tension, sound and response - where the echo speaks frst - of a spatially cognitive spiritual animus. Hence, the object may be considered without an exaggerated optical connotative, we witness and see without other sensory faculty.

在脈絡(luò)里，隨著技術(shù)官僚國家的出現(xiàn)，不可或缺的流行游戲裝置、虛擬世界和我們的媒體依賴癥里的數(shù)字至上的聯(lián)合體產(chǎn)生，視覺上的背離也許對內(nèi)地年輕一代的創(chuàng)作者來說不算罕見。一個(gè)立場超然的細(xì)膩觀察者顯然會讓王國俊感到困擾，而作為一個(gè)知性地并敏感地參與其中的評論者，我相信這一發(fā)自良心的靈魂的不同尋常聲音的標(biāo)志，是他拒絕僅僅停留于重述科技的初步證據(jù)，而是返回這場競賽，如同本文稍早暗示的，挑戰(zhàn)并反轉(zhuǎn)離去本身。顛覆分子通常被理解為對至高政治權(quán)力的對立結(jié)果以及所導(dǎo)致的必然。在其中，我們可能會詢問為什么那模式比起結(jié)果本身較少被關(guān)照到。在數(shù)次討論與介入之后，無比勤勉的王國俊透過對科技法典化的非－否定，引致推論要素的崇高轉(zhuǎn)化：對媒介的物質(zhì)辯證與“機(jī)器性”——在社會政治領(lǐng)域的資本主義或共產(chǎn)主義，物質(zhì)辯證主義的具體化——持續(xù)預(yù)設(shè)的并置。

In context, with the advent of a technocratic statehood, with the imperative devices of popular gaming, virtual reality and associated tenements of digital supremacy within our own mediatic dependancy, visual deviation might not be uncommon amongst the younger generation of mainland creators. A refned sense of the detached observer appears to plague Wang Guo Jun, as an intellectually and sensitively engaged commentator, yet I believe that what “signals” a rather exceptional voice of this conscientious soul is his adversion to simply reiterate the rudimentary evidence of the technological, one returns to the contest, challenge and inverse deperature as alluded to earlier in this text. The subversive is often read as an oppositional result of political primacy and resultant necessity, therein, where we might enquire as to why the modal is less attended to than the result. Wang Guo Jun, following several discussions and interventions, reveals an absolute diligence towards a non-negation of the codifcation of the technical, rather, incurs a sublime transmutation of the discursive element: the material dialectic of medium juxtaposed with the continual presupposition of the “machinus” owed to either capitalist or communist, material dialecticism incarnate, in the social political sphere.

因此，因果關(guān)系的虛構(gòu)薄膜自虛擬氣候的證據(jù)而生出，主體與主體性以“有機(jī)的”過程被小心翼翼地瓦解——科技的過程傾向，帶著迫切的必要性。

當(dāng)觀點(diǎn)執(zhí)著于非視覺的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，我們可以進(jìn)一步質(zhì)疑我們自己在觀看行為的視覺相互依賴。因此，部分作為沉迷的解放，非－標(biāo)志性的繪畫、流行圖像志的空白以及如同我們從他的影像創(chuàng)作所體驗(yàn)到的形態(tài)模擬，導(dǎo)致了對規(guī)則的拋棄。藝術(shù)具備解放的固有潛質(zhì)嗎？假使是肯定的，固守于個(gè)人主義的藝術(shù)，如同王爾德所說的“……藝術(shù)是個(gè)體的最佳表達(dá)”，得以與科技官僚的事實(shí)融合嗎？伴隨著視覺上的滿足，王還紀(jì)錄同樣的質(zhì)疑，他尖銳地指出人類經(jīng)驗(yàn)與時(shí)間牢不可破的關(guān)系，不論是寓言式的，歷史切片的或媒體生成的時(shí)間。手機(jī)相機(jī)光學(xué)的使用，作為偏好的工具，開啟日后編輯過程時(shí)的沉思，該工具的普及性堅(jiān)持的是可行的資源與刻意的另辟蹊徑：由內(nèi)在風(fēng)景與圖像拼貼所共同定義的過程傾向來自于“真正的”外在紀(jì)錄。

Hence, causal membranes fctive are derived from the evidence of climates virtual, subject and subjectivity erodes under a cautious labour with the “organic” process, the process orientation of the technical, with imminent necessity.

As the perspective holds to a non-ocular experience alone, we may question further our own visual interdependancy in the act of viewing. Thus, partial to a liberation of the “fascinus”, paintings non-emblematic and void of pop-iconography and the morphic simulacra as experienced with his flmic and video creations, result with an abandon of preception. Does art hold an inherent potential to liberate? If yes, does a qualifying adherent to individualism, which Wilde is quoted a stating, “…art being the best expression of the individual”, converge with solvent truths of technocracy? That Wang documents this same questioning along visual stratification, operates to poignantly denote the indissoluable of the human experience with time, time whether fabulae, historical (specumen) speculation or media generic. The usage of camera optics from the mobile phone, as a preferred instrument, opens upon later meditation during the process of editing, the commonality of the device insist’s on viable ressource and deliberates new paths: the process orientation defned as much by inner landscapes as pictoral collage derived from the“actual” external record.

＊＊＊

***

過去幾世紀(jì)來，由于個(gè)人評論以及藝術(shù)的、文學(xué)的或哲學(xué)的進(jìn)化，客觀美感事物的重要性高度擴(kuò)張，盡管感官和相關(guān)的發(fā)展是個(gè)無底洞。當(dāng)后工業(yè)主義時(shí)代終結(jié)，一個(gè)預(yù)言紀(jì)元降臨，其中數(shù)位與科技滿足至上的欲望無休無止。在全球化的背景下是烏托邦式的社會帶著不可磨滅的熱望。因此，與光學(xué)以及視覺背離、催眠的、另類的表達(dá)的脫離也許描繪出社會－政治至上的決定因素可被緩解，為更知性的、哲學(xué)的簡明所取代。理性的沉默或可引來“不和諧”狀態(tài)的聲音與空間詩性的出現(xiàn)。

Within the past centuries locus of individual commentary and emergence of artistic, literary or philosophical evolution, the importance of things aesthetic and objective hyperextends, despite an abyss of developments sensual or peripheral. As the era of post-industrialism ends, a prophetic epoch wherein the primacy of digital and technological stratification proves indefatigable. Indelible aspirations of Utopic congress within a conduit of globalization. Hence, the disseverance with the optical and visually deviant hypnotic alternative expressions might illustrate that the parameters of social-political primacy might yet be assuaged for a more intelligent and philosophical concision. The mute of reason might implore the sound of “discordant” states, of spatial poetics.

＊＊＊

***

對于去看，去目睹的行為的分析，表明了對事件與經(jīng)驗(yàn)的詮釋上對視覺的依賴，顯示對知覺體驗(yàn)的否定，在可辨認(rèn)的認(rèn)知的決定因素之外的探索。在一個(gè)被視為同時(shí)代的情況的出現(xiàn)，未來主義的投射充滿了恐懼的心理詭計(jì)－集權(quán)主義的科技“他者”，它驅(qū)逐人性的、宗教的或直覺的權(quán)威，就如庫斯勒所評論的，保持為迫近的專制主義的焦點(diǎn)。后者，較不反動(dòng)的以及機(jī)械性的中心情境，引至一個(gè)不同的推論，物理性的斷裂介入，展示了固有的破壞以及破壞性的概念和哲學(xué)區(qū)域的悲劇行動(dòng)，創(chuàng)作因之被鼓動(dòng)而生。

An analytical of the act to see, to witness, implies a reliance of the optical in interpretation of events & experiences which are in manifest denial of sensory experiences, explorations which lie beyond the parameters of thus “identifiable” cognition. At the advent of the situation considered contemporaneous, futurist projections imbued with the psychical machinations of fear, of a totalitarian technological“Other” which would banish the authority of the humane, the religious or inuitive, as commented upon by Koestler, remained focal on the imminence of authoritarianism. Latter less reactionary and mechanically centric episodes led to a different speculation, the interventions being physical ruptures which displayed the inherent tragic act of destruction and destructive conceptual & philosophical zones which instigated creation.

理性的經(jīng)驗(yàn)性還是一股暗流，不論是被懼怕或?qū)χ磻?yīng)，交錯(cuò)邏輯的檢驗(yàn)來規(guī)避固有的或它們的反藝術(shù)的系統(tǒng)結(jié)構(gòu)來源的自我生成。“真實(shí)”的崇高意義或獨(dú)特性包容不了太多，不論是借由實(shí)驗(yàn)的行動(dòng)或提供烏托邦他者的另類邊界所做的努力。離心的，科技架構(gòu)和由非面向想象之虛空界使之成為可能的經(jīng)驗(yàn)的“存在”的發(fā)生。為藝術(shù)范圍的邏輯而生的幽靈般的動(dòng)力，而非絕對具體或物理的“生活”宣言，出現(xiàn)了。

The emperical of reason was yet an undercurrent, whether feared or in reaction to, alternating logical examinations in order to evade the inherent or self-engenderment of the source of their anti-art systematic structures. The sense of the sublime or singularity of “truth” was not afforded much ground, either in the act of experimentation nor labour which was intent on offering alternative margins of a Utopic otherness. Centrifugal, the occurrence of technological frameworks and experiential“existence” made possible by a nether-realm of non-dimensional imagination. The spectral impetus for a logistic in the artistic sphere rather than absolute concrete or physical manifesto of “l(fā)ife” occurred.

虛擬的生活為無止境的重復(fù)性及易變性提供客體性的“影像”，在心靈之眼的良知之中同樣的影像進(jìn)化為“真實(shí)”的構(gòu)成部分。同一虛構(gòu)的成分顯得無法仿效，堅(jiān)不可摧，“絕對主義”與“辯證的事實(shí)”這些難以根除的怪物，在轉(zhuǎn)瞬即逝不斷轉(zhuǎn)變的相互關(guān)系的確實(shí)證據(jù)之間，顯得依然牢固。當(dāng)較早世代的視覺先鋒奪得視覺“平面”的雛形，慶?；蚴侵淞R社會變革的出現(xiàn)，一個(gè)來自邊緣并具備原動(dòng)力的青年已經(jīng)到來，他在關(guān)于物質(zhì)辯證法里的物質(zhì)的本質(zhì)的探討做出了更加個(gè)人化、敏感且深刻的評論：該運(yùn)動(dòng)和強(qiáng)度一開始是虛無主義的并消沉的，然而卻作為一個(gè)具備更強(qiáng)大恢復(fù)活力的隱秘模式取代了一個(gè)不協(xié)調(diào)“真實(shí)”的“非－真實(shí)”。一個(gè)極度機(jī)智巧妙的非－對照，以及作為來自邊緣經(jīng)驗(yàn)的一種觀點(diǎn)，不同于它們的先驅(qū)——不論是土生土長的或站立在數(shù)十年的文化霸權(quán)角度來引領(lǐng)當(dāng)代的那些人——的反動(dòng)戲劇。

這些非因果的目擊者提出衍生的評論并與隨機(jī)性共生，超越“成分”指示的關(guān)于細(xì)胞膜，關(guān)于“設(shè)備”至上……我們談及在網(wǎng)絡(luò)層想象的困境的流動(dòng)，以及經(jīng)驗(yàn)的創(chuàng)造與沒有破壞性沖動(dòng)的擴(kuò)散。當(dāng)經(jīng)驗(yàn)主義的東方、西方的分野逐漸消退，隨著兩區(qū)域拒絕簡單二元思維的行為準(zhǔn)則和特別語言的崛起。清晰表達(dá)的幽靈式體驗(yàn)無反應(yīng)地發(fā)生，我們有了進(jìn)入遺忘狀態(tài)的開端，出自包含經(jīng)驗(yàn)成分生命的面向及決定因素衍生來的真實(shí)，在技術(shù)官僚短視的制裁底下沉默了?；仨懼臻g的、精準(zhǔn)的、動(dòng)力的意義的沉思，既不折射也不反駁事物的真實(shí)。

王國俊是位敏感且投入的評論者，他將自己目睹的主要結(jié)果和社會的斷裂無法磨滅地結(jié)合在一起，漫無目的的目光或焦慮激發(fā)他對所見的反思，而他藝術(shù)的、敏銳的感受力堅(jiān)持一種對動(dòng)機(jī)與精神的和科技的狀態(tài)做出準(zhǔn)科學(xué)的探問。寫入他的影片創(chuàng)作、橫過他的畫布之上的，是幽靈的姿態(tài)，重述創(chuàng)作的一個(gè)非客觀性的契機(jī)：個(gè)人詩性的解放與創(chuàng)作者充滿生動(dòng)想象力的詩藝所達(dá)到的一種和諧狀態(tài)。

The virtual life offered the endless multiplicity and mutability of the“image” of objecthood, evolved the same imagery as a constituent “real’in the conscience of the mind’s eye. The same constituent of fabrication appeared inimitable, impregnable, while the hydra of “absolutism”and “dialectial truth” appeared to remain entrenched amidst the actual evidence of a transformative near transient inter-relationship. As the earlier generation of visual pioneers in contemporaneous practiced seized upon rudiments of the visual “plane” to articule expressions which either celebrated or damned the advent of social change, a peripheral and seminal youth have come to create more individually sensitive and profound remarks on the nature of the material within material dialecticism: the movement and magnitude being one at first nihistic and dispirited, yet with a greater licence of a rejuvenation as an ulterior modality to replace “non-truth” with a licence upon incongruous“truth’s”. An extremely dextrous and intelligent non-counter point, a view of an experience from a peripheral aside to the reactionary play of their predecessors, whether indigenous or those who heralded the sense of contemporary practice given several decades of cultural hegemony.

These non-causal witnesses issue commentary derivative and symbiotic of randomness, of the stuff of cellular membrane beyond that of the directives of the “component”, of the primacy of the “device”…we speak of the fuity of strait’s imagined in cyber-strata and of experiential creation and diffusion without a time for destructive impulse. As the imperical shores of Occident/Orient dissipate with the emergence of both zones of code and vernacular which desist facile dualistic speculations. Articulated spectral experience occurs without response, we have an initiation into states oblivious, in the literal sense, which issues truths derivative of aspects and parameters of a life experiential component which has fallen silent in the myopia of sanctioned technocratic practice. Meditations which resound with a forensic kinetic spatial which neither refracts nor retorts upon the actual of things.

Wang Guo Jun appears as an engaged and sensitive commentator, indelibly wed with the prime consequences and social ruptures he witnesses, idle gaze or angst inspired refections on that which he has seen, while his artistic and acute sensitivity insist on a quasi-scientifc enquiry into motives and states spiritual and technical. Written within his flmic creations and morphed across his canvas, are spectral gestures which reiterate the momentum of a non-objectivity in creation: wherein the poetic liberation of the individual comes to harmony with thears poeticaof the author of such a vivid imaginary spectrum.

R. A. Suri

中國西安

2016年5月26日

R. A. Suri

Xi’an, P.R.C

2016/05/26

R.A. 蘇里：前泰達(dá)美術(shù)館策展人 現(xiàn)自由策展人 藝術(shù)評論家

劉惠芳：自由翻譯

R.A. Suri: former curator of TEDA Contemporary Art Museum, presently freelance curator and art critic

Liu Huifang: freelance translator

Wang Guo Jun: Structures Ephemeral

Text by R. A. Suri, translated by Liu Huifang