Kai Dao Tu Mi / Iris Huang
When compared to modern life, the classical world is always shrouded in shining brilliance, with its own cast of elegant and refined characters and a sense of riches and power, while the eternal nature of natural birds and flowers artificially overlay the ostentatious desires of material life. When compared to the classical, modernity is boldly straightforward, juxtaposing evil nature and superficially clever wealth and beauty. The artist deliberately chooses and places together gaudy colors and fake objects as a way of deconstructing the alienation of the refined style and eternal truth of classical art history.
Su Meng-hung was born in 1976 and has his own youthful yet cynical approach to common customs. Relative to the concerns for society and integrity of senior officials, Su uses a common vocabulary when dealing with the world, using a modern popular style to raise questions about the vulgarity of art and the spirit of material consumer culture. At the same time, he transforms this critically exotic tone into his own inimical artistic style.
Su Meng-hung wittily plays with classical still life works in art history, transplanting alien mutant genes into the frozen and eternal aesthetic faith portrayed in these paintings. From each protruding semi-circular transparent glass grows a plastic flower that will never wilt or grow old. When compared to the exquisitely crafted bunch of flowers by the artist in this famous piece, a cheap plastic flower purchased at any store appears common and false. However, the artist uses this eye-catching addition to reflect the subsidiary refinement of market trade in art. In Material Paradise it is exactly these still life reproductions, so favored by people of refinement, that Su Meng-hung chooses to use, turning art into a prevailing custom of material consumption. In the hands of an artist what most people see as “true” and “false,” “refined” and “vulgar,” “spiritual” and “material” are subverted, mixed with art, art commodities and finished goods. Added to that are the purposeful construction of gaudy colors, the highlighting of material nature and a decorative overtone. If art is a product for sale, then aesthetics are nothing but flashy colors chosen by a particular artist.
Su uses gaudy colors as a vehicle to criticize vulgar language and ultimately employs this approach, replete with dazzling colors but essentially empty, to symbolize the cynical style and taste of a generation of young artists. The critical tone that comes with satirizing the present through the past, or explaining the past from the present, lacks the showy and sharp tones of the avant garde and does not display the disgust for the world and its ways of a defender of moral principle. From Material Paradise to Kai Dao Tu Mi, (開到荼靡：The Roseleaf Raspberry in Full Bloom) Su Meng-hung’s works have been infused with a form of “concerned criticism and optimistic joy” common in contemporary work. Even if the gaudiness of art, the vulgarity of culture and the consumption of taste are empty and resplendent, the artist still works hard to find something alluring about them. Even in a degenerate and material mortal world, there is still the freedom of heaven. Even if everything is ultimately decadent, the view of the roseleaf raspberry in full bloom makes everything worthwhile.
Kai Dao Tu Mi is an example of the artist extending cultural subject matter into his artistic taste, transforming the bird and flower paintings of the Chinese imperial court into Su Meng-hung-type pop art. He also utilizes a belittling of the spiritual meaning accorded colors in traditional Chinese aesthetics and their relationship to common values. Handicraft works that were looked down on in traditional aesthetics are deliberately added as a contrast to the bird and flower paintings, which are a symbol of refinement and prevalent customs. The bird and flower lanterns seen during Lantern Festival, with their powerful folk colors and graphic designs, are replete with a sense of hustle and bustle and common custom. In the past they were hung in the royal court or homes of senior officials to show off their refinement. As part of daily life marketplace aesthetics ensured gaudy colors were regarded as most beautiful, and enjoyment their main purpose. As part of the language of reproduction and transformation, the artist creates a form of local Taiwanese pop art, resplendent but empty, common but also innocent and romantic. Looking closely at the Su Meng-hung’s attention to detail in the use of color when painting on canvas, we discover that even coarse colors possess an inherent alternative refinement. Clearly then, the artist is not simply willful but seeking to subvert and oppose tradition. In fact, in his series of destructive actions we find an artistic garden of “blooming roseleaf raspberries” wherein the scenery is pleasing to both the eye and mind.
Su Meng-hung was born in 1976 and has his own youthful yet cynical approach to common customs. Relative to the concerns for society and integrity of senior officials, Su uses a common vocabulary when dealing with the world, using a modern popular style to raise questions about the vulgarity of art and the spirit of material consumer culture. At the same time, he transforms this critically exotic tone into his own inimical artistic style.
Su Meng-hung wittily plays with classical still life works in art history, transplanting alien mutant genes into the frozen and eternal aesthetic faith portrayed in these paintings. From each protruding semi-circular transparent glass grows a plastic flower that will never wilt or grow old. When compared to the exquisitely crafted bunch of flowers by the artist in this famous piece, a cheap plastic flower purchased at any store appears common and false. However, the artist uses this eye-catching addition to reflect the subsidiary refinement of market trade in art. In Material Paradise it is exactly these still life reproductions, so favored by people of refinement, that Su Meng-hung chooses to use, turning art into a prevailing custom of material consumption. In the hands of an artist what most people see as “true” and “false,” “refined” and “vulgar,” “spiritual” and “material” are subverted, mixed with art, art commodities and finished goods. Added to that are the purposeful construction of gaudy colors, the highlighting of material nature and a decorative overtone. If art is a product for sale, then aesthetics are nothing but flashy colors chosen by a particular artist.
Su uses gaudy colors as a vehicle to criticize vulgar language and ultimately employs this approach, replete with dazzling colors but essentially empty, to symbolize the cynical style and taste of a generation of young artists. The critical tone that comes with satirizing the present through the past, or explaining the past from the present, lacks the showy and sharp tones of the avant garde and does not display the disgust for the world and its ways of a defender of moral principle. From Material Paradise to Kai Dao Tu Mi, (開到荼靡：The Roseleaf Raspberry in Full Bloom) Su Meng-hung’s works have been infused with a form of “concerned criticism and optimistic joy” common in contemporary work. Even if the gaudiness of art, the vulgarity of culture and the consumption of taste are empty and resplendent, the artist still works hard to find something alluring about them. Even in a degenerate and material mortal world, there is still the freedom of heaven. Even if everything is ultimately decadent, the view of the roseleaf raspberry in full bloom makes everything worthwhile.
Kai Dao Tu Mi is an example of the artist extending cultural subject matter into his artistic taste, transforming the bird and flower paintings of the Chinese imperial court into Su Meng-hung-type pop art. He also utilizes a belittling of the spiritual meaning accorded colors in traditional Chinese aesthetics and their relationship to common values. Handicraft works that were looked down on in traditional aesthetics are deliberately added as a contrast to the bird and flower paintings, which are a symbol of refinement and prevalent customs. The bird and flower lanterns seen during Lantern Festival, with their powerful folk colors and graphic designs, are replete with a sense of hustle and bustle and common custom. In the past they were hung in the royal court or homes of senior officials to show off their refinement. As part of daily life marketplace aesthetics ensured gaudy colors were regarded as most beautiful, and enjoyment their main purpose. As part of the language of reproduction and transformation, the artist creates a form of local Taiwanese pop art, resplendent but empty, common but also innocent and romantic. Looking closely at the Su Meng-hung’s attention to detail in the use of color when painting on canvas, we discover that even coarse colors possess an inherent alternative refinement. Clearly then, the artist is not simply willful but seeking to subvert and oppose tradition. In fact, in his series of destructive actions we find an artistic garden of “blooming roseleaf raspberries” wherein the scenery is pleasing to both the eye and mind.
《開到荼靡－蘇孟鴻個展》 展覽論述∕黃舒屏
相對於當代，古典總有一股不可逼視的輝煌氣勢，它附庸於風雅人士與富豪之氣當中，假自然花鳥的永恆氣質虛掩物質生活的浮華慾望。當代之於古典，則有大膽不羈的坦率不諱，它讓惡壞的本質堂而皇之地對峙於華而不實的富美中，藉由藝術家所刻意選擇併置的艷俗色調與造假物件，對古典藝術史高雅品味與亙古的真理價值進行異化的解構。
蘇孟鴻是六年級生，對於風尚自持一套玩世不恭的調調，相對於世紳大夫的憂世情懷與清高色彩，他以艷俗的語彙入世，以一種現世關照的大眾品味，對整個藝術媚俗與物質消費文化的情態作出提問，與此同時，他也將這帶有批判性的異色情調轉化成為藝術家的個人風格。
蘇孟鴻俏皮搬弄藝術史上的經典靜物作品，將平面畫作中凝止永恆的美學信仰，植入了異種突變的基因，一個個突起的半圓形透明鏡眼裡，生長著永不凋謝、百年不腐化的塑膠花，相對於名作中藝術家精巧雕琢繪製的花束，市場店面廉價購買的塑膠花顯得世俗而虛假，但藉由這個突起的鏡面，藝術家所反映的卻是藝術市面上以有價交易的附庸風雅，蘇孟鴻在【Material Paradise】裡所選用的正是這些風雅人士偏好的靜物複製畫；藝術，成了物質消費的一種風尚。而在世人眼中所謂的「真」「假」、所謂的「高雅」與「拙劣」，所謂的「精神」與「物質」，在藝術家顛倒錯置的手法中，混雜了藝術、藝術商品、以及現成物的市面商品，加上刻意堆砌的艷俗色澤，強調一種物化的本質，與一種裝飾的意味；藝術，若成了販售的產品，那麼再怎麼高談闊論的美學是否也不過是那藝術家特意挑選的浮華色彩。
蘇孟鴻以艷俗色彩作為批判艷俗的語言，到最後又以這種充滿華麗卻空虛的艷俗風，來象徵當代青年藝術家毫不氣短、玩世不恭的風格品味。以古諷今，又或以今說古，這批判的語調少了前衛潮流鋒芒畢露的尖銳語調，也不講求衛道者的滿腔憤世嫉俗；反而，從【Material Paradise】衍生到【開到荼靡】，這一路的脈絡，蘇孟鴻多了當代風潮那種「憂心批判但樂觀享樂」的形式，藝術的艷俗、文化的媚俗、品味的消費，即使是空虛的華麗堂皇，藝術家仍舊努力在其中找到足以輝煌的遊戲趣味；即使是墮落到物質的俗世，也尋得到天堂的自由；即使最終是頹廢，曾經開到荼靡的燦爛，也就有聊以自慰的美意了。
【開到荼靡】是藝術家延伸其在藝術品味上的文化議題，將中國宮廷畫院的花鳥畫變色，搖身成為蘇孟鴻式的普普色彩，他也借用中國傳統美學上對於色彩精神意義的貶抑以及它與俗艷價值的關聯，相當刻意地加入在傳統美學中備受排斥的工藝品，與花鳥畫所象徵風雅流俗相襯：元宵節中的花鳥燈籠，強烈的民俗色彩，與它所相輝映的平面設色，洋溢著一種熱鬧世俗的氣氛，過去高掛在宮廷世紳、富豪之廳的賣弄風雅，到了日常生活內容中，也不免成了艷俗最美、享樂最高的市井美學。藝術家在複製與轉化的語言中，創造了一種本土化的台式普普，華麗但不免空虛，艷俗但又毫無心機般天真浪漫，仔細觀入藝術家在平面畫布上對顏色的用心，發現原來艷俗的色彩也有一種另類的雅致，可見藝術家不是一昧任性而為的搞顛覆、反傳統，反而在他一系列的破壞行動中，覓得了一處賞心悅目「開到荼靡」的藝術花園。
蘇孟鴻是六年級生，對於風尚自持一套玩世不恭的調調，相對於世紳大夫的憂世情懷與清高色彩，他以艷俗的語彙入世，以一種現世關照的大眾品味，對整個藝術媚俗與物質消費文化的情態作出提問，與此同時，他也將這帶有批判性的異色情調轉化成為藝術家的個人風格。
蘇孟鴻俏皮搬弄藝術史上的經典靜物作品，將平面畫作中凝止永恆的美學信仰，植入了異種突變的基因，一個個突起的半圓形透明鏡眼裡，生長著永不凋謝、百年不腐化的塑膠花，相對於名作中藝術家精巧雕琢繪製的花束，市場店面廉價購買的塑膠花顯得世俗而虛假，但藉由這個突起的鏡面，藝術家所反映的卻是藝術市面上以有價交易的附庸風雅，蘇孟鴻在【Material Paradise】裡所選用的正是這些風雅人士偏好的靜物複製畫；藝術，成了物質消費的一種風尚。而在世人眼中所謂的「真」「假」、所謂的「高雅」與「拙劣」，所謂的「精神」與「物質」，在藝術家顛倒錯置的手法中，混雜了藝術、藝術商品、以及現成物的市面商品，加上刻意堆砌的艷俗色澤，強調一種物化的本質，與一種裝飾的意味；藝術，若成了販售的產品，那麼再怎麼高談闊論的美學是否也不過是那藝術家特意挑選的浮華色彩。
蘇孟鴻以艷俗色彩作為批判艷俗的語言，到最後又以這種充滿華麗卻空虛的艷俗風，來象徵當代青年藝術家毫不氣短、玩世不恭的風格品味。以古諷今，又或以今說古，這批判的語調少了前衛潮流鋒芒畢露的尖銳語調，也不講求衛道者的滿腔憤世嫉俗；反而，從【Material Paradise】衍生到【開到荼靡】，這一路的脈絡，蘇孟鴻多了當代風潮那種「憂心批判但樂觀享樂」的形式，藝術的艷俗、文化的媚俗、品味的消費，即使是空虛的華麗堂皇，藝術家仍舊努力在其中找到足以輝煌的遊戲趣味；即使是墮落到物質的俗世，也尋得到天堂的自由；即使最終是頹廢，曾經開到荼靡的燦爛，也就有聊以自慰的美意了。
【開到荼靡】是藝術家延伸其在藝術品味上的文化議題，將中國宮廷畫院的花鳥畫變色，搖身成為蘇孟鴻式的普普色彩，他也借用中國傳統美學上對於色彩精神意義的貶抑以及它與俗艷價值的關聯，相當刻意地加入在傳統美學中備受排斥的工藝品，與花鳥畫所象徵風雅流俗相襯：元宵節中的花鳥燈籠，強烈的民俗色彩，與它所相輝映的平面設色，洋溢著一種熱鬧世俗的氣氛，過去高掛在宮廷世紳、富豪之廳的賣弄風雅，到了日常生活內容中，也不免成了艷俗最美、享樂最高的市井美學。藝術家在複製與轉化的語言中，創造了一種本土化的台式普普，華麗但不免空虛，艷俗但又毫無心機般天真浪漫，仔細觀入藝術家在平面畫布上對顏色的用心，發現原來艷俗的色彩也有一種另類的雅致，可見藝術家不是一昧任性而為的搞顛覆、反傳統，反而在他一系列的破壞行動中，覓得了一處賞心悅目「開到荼靡」的藝術花園。
Exhibition 相關展覽
|
2003Kai Dao Tu Mi
Museum of Contemporary Art, Taipei, Taiwan 開到荼靡 台北當代藝術館，台北，台灣 |