人們是怎麼談到馬克•夏加爾（Chagall Marc）的？異乎尋常的瑰麗？童心未泯的浪漫？還是其他？
對於偉大的藝術家，解釋他們似乎成為藝術史家惟一的任務，我們絮叨夏加爾為野獸派、立體派所作的貢獻，感慨他作為俄國出生的畫家成為巴黎畫派的重要人物的價值，但是我們卻很少提起，夏加爾後期那些偉大作品之所以打動我們，是因為它還藏有一種“超現實的感傷”，而這種感傷之所以産生是由於一個女人：他相依為命卻又在他們結婚29年後離他而去的妻子——帕拉•夏加爾，夏加爾從此開始了長達40餘年直至他生命結束以回憶帕拉為中心的題材綜合體創作。這時候，在時間的堅持下，“感傷”因超現實而成為一種生命的哲學。
好，我們回到雷子人，關於這位畫家，大家一定感到不很熟悉，雖然他已經出了一些書、辦過好幾次畫展。這是因為在所謂的當代中國藝術的格局中，雷子人的作品不知應歸為何類？新文人畫？塗鴉藝術？表現水墨？都不是，所以他可被稱為是那種“非主流”的畫家，我常感想，我們今日的藝術史紀錄為什麼只有一、二種角度？不是西方的視野就是官方的角度，看看《世説新語》或《歷代名畫記》，我們先人的創造和評説是何等的自由！藝術作為人的有意味的本能和自覺，是何等的自在！用一句現代漢語説：藝術是一片“生態”，而雷子人就是這“生態”中的一部分，草木枯榮或野草叢生，漫漫生長，歷史實際上是人的時間，在人的時間中，“千古風流人物”，以此作為出發點，來評説雷子人將成就如何，我們也就心態平和了！
很早就想為雷子人的作品寫點感想，但是由於很多原因，一拖竟是五年！如同一些人對他作品的看法一樣，我對他作品中顯露出來的“感傷”“頹廢”一直猶豫。面對雷子人的作品，我一直有兩種狀態：藝術史的狀態（因為我是學藝術史出身？！），感傷和頹廢，常常與小布爾喬亞情調聯繫在一起，在後現代的藝術範疇中，或是説在當代藝術的主流話語中，小資情調被人視為無病呻吟有意標榜而招致嘲笑，因此我的教育告訴我，大凡這樣的畫家，不能代表時代，因為這個時候，藝術作品的“深刻性”，會成為評價的惟一標準，實際上，整個後現代主義思潮濫觴以後的藝術批評大都如此，在行為、裝置、影像等新藝術樣式中，思想因素被極端放大，趣味、審美被認為是陳詞濫調，在現代藝術還原藝術是潛意識、是生命本能、是生存意志的同時，活潑的生命機制因現代社會中的種種不如意而被放大的苦難受到抑制，一種與中世紀藝術時期似曾相識的藝術評價體制籍“全球化經濟”之名出現了，我也不由自主地噤若寒蟬，人云亦云。另一種狀態是我的本真狀態，我的感覺讓我喜歡雷子人的作品，“感傷”亦好，“情色”亦好，我喜歡！憑著直覺，我不滿意雷子人受夏加爾等人的影響太深，但是，他用中國水墨自在的、甚至是憊懶的筆法，漫不經心地畫出各色的女人男人，讓人感覺曲折曖昧難言，它與現實生活的艱難形成鮮明的對比，讓我的內心與作品同時飛揚在超越現實的時空之中。他有時也是焦慮的痛苦的，但是他從不把它直接示意，而是轉換成一種感傷和情色的詩情。這種“節制”成為雷子人作品的意味重要延續之一，所以當我懷著觀看世俗畫的經驗，希望得到感官的愉悅時，“感官”不見了，節制使有教養的觀者的感官産生了位移。
當然，雷子人還十分年輕，這個瘦削、敏感、蒼白的畫家，讓我想起許多藝術史上傑出畫家的早期，夏加爾、勞特累克、弗洛伊德、巴爾蒂斯，瞧，我又回到藝術史了，但願我的藝術史經驗，會成為一個雷子人作品觀者對雷子人的鼓勵，我不知道在他的作品背後有沒有如夏加爾那樣的故事，但有一點可以確定：我和我們對於“感傷”的需要和人類對於“感傷”的需要一樣，將永遠延續下去。
杭 間
2005年1月10日寫于汕頭大學桑浦山日月湖畔
Homey Pathos
How people talk about Marc Chagall? Egregious splendor, innocent romance, or something else?
To explain great artists and their works becomes the only goal of art historians. Although we have been talking Chagall’s contributions to Fauvism and Cubism and sighing with emotion his important values as a Russia-born painter in Paris School, we rarely mention Chagall’s late works that moved us because of its hidden “Surrealistic Pathos”. It derived from a woman that he married and lived together for 29 years. To remember his wife Pala Chagall, he started his complexe creation during 40 years until his life end. In the persistence of time, “Pathos” becomes a life philosophy because of Surrealism.
Well, now we return to Lei Ziren. People will not be quite familiar with this artist although he has published a few books and held some exhibitions. The reason is that among the contemporary Chinese arts Lei’s works are not easy to be labeled. New Scholars? Doodle? Expressionist Ink and Wash? None of them. He can be called and labeled to be a “Non-Mainsteam” painter. I often think that why our contemporary art records have only one or two angles? Either western or official angles? How free our forefathers’ creation and comments were in “Shi Shuo Xin Yue” and “Famous Paintings of All Dynasties”! How free their art as human being’s meaningful sense and self-consciousness! Using a modern Chinese terms: art is a “zoology”, and Lei Ziren is a part of it. Seeds grow up and die, like that, history is also man’s time where “smart people live in dynasties”. From this point of view, we will be quite peaceful when commenting Lei’s achievements.
Although I hoped to write something for Lei’s works before, this article has been lagged for 5 years because of many reasons. As many people’s opinion toward his works, I also am hesitating about the “pathos” and “decadence” hidden in his works. Facing his works, I have been in two status: art historic status (my major is art history?!). My pathos and decadence are often mingled with little bourgeois sentiments. In the art frame of post-modernism or the mainstream languages of contemporary art, little bourgeois sentiments is mocked for it’s been regarded as “make a fuss about an imaginary illness for boosting”. My education tells me: such painters are not representatives of the time, because “profundity” of art works will be the only criteria. In fact, all art critics after post-modernism trends are almost the same. In the new art forms as performance, assemblage, video etc, thinking factors are zoomed extremely while interest and taste are regarded as hackneyed and stereotyped expressions. At the same time modern art renders art as subconsciousness, life instinct and existing volition, vivid life system is depressed because of exaggerated miserables in modern society. Disguised by the name of “global economy” an art critics system, familiar to middle ages, appeared, and before it I keep quiet our of fear and echo what other says. Another status is my own reality. From my sense I like Lei Ziren’s works, either his “pathos” or “love and sexuality”. I like them! My instinct doesn’t allow me to be satisfied with his works influenced by Chagall too deeply. Under his free and somehow lazy Chinese ink and wash brushes he portrayed all kinds of women and men of sinuosity and obliquity, in contrast of hardships in real world. My soul fly with his works in surrealistic time and space. Sometimes anxious and miserable, he doesn’t want to express directly his feelings, but he hopes to transfer them into a poetic pathos and love. This “abstention” becomes one of Lei Ziren’s meaningful features. So, with experiences in watching ordinary paitings and hope to obtain sensual pleasure, my “sense” is lost and the abstention turned out to be exchange of sense for cultivated painting watchers.
Certainly, Lei Ziren, this slim, sensible and pale painter, is yet too young. It remembers me of the early period of many celebrated painters in art history, such as Chagall, Lauterec, Lautrec, Freud and Balthus. Look, I again returned to art history. I wish that my art history experiences will become the encouragement to Lei Ziren as Lei’s art works watcher. I don’t know whether behind Lei’s works there are some Chagall-like stories, but I am sure of one point: our demand of “pathos” as the human being’s demand of “pathos” will continue for ever.
Han Jian
Shantou University, January 10, 2005