edited by Sang Tian, translated by Daniel Szehin Ho, published on Randian[8/25/2017]

 

Dear ________:

Since the start of summer, every time I go to Prospect Park I get lost. The scenery in front of my eyes doesn’t match up with my memory: what was bleak during winter is now filled with all shades of green, and the large trees that once served as landmarks have now taken on a different contour and bearing. Casper said that nature is always changing. And I think back to when it was all wintry and cold here a few months ago, when strolling in the snow felt like walking in Levitan’s Russian landscape paintings. Is this exuberant summer’s day as ephemeral as dewdrops or flashes of lightning? After all, modern science and philosophy appear to be founded on the ruins of certainty: any concrete image or concept is merely a fleeting illusion, whereas objects, thoughts, or humans are all dynamic processes. In fact, I’ve heard how the difference in scale between an electron and an atom is like the difference between an apartment and the whole of Manhattan, of how the rest is just empty, just energy. At the very limit where the flat bottom of a glass meets the surface of a table, particles invisible to the eye are hurtling about, rendering that boundary between the glass and the table radically and yet undetectably tremulous.

I’ve changed, too. I no longer agree now, thinking back at how I answered some of your questions in our conversations a few years back. Or to put it this way: what I can’t identify with is any firm stance or the move to take such a stance. It seems ever harder for me to express myself clearly and succinctly; the nebulous, flickering possibilities and forking paths, now bright, now dim, can’t be ignored—say if we round out the specifics in history, we would end up with the crude narrative of a victor’s justice. Perhaps, to a certain degree, almost, somewhat, sometimes…these weak, gummy terms have become my intellect and righteousness. Is this connected to reading and writing more and more in English? In English (or in that Chinese inflected by English), the endless succession of conjunctions turns a sentence into a long interminable corridor whose end cannot be seen, while on both sides a series of doorways branch off to one clause after the other, and every clause is a room, some of which even have windows. The wealth of layers and space can indulge a writer’s irresolute indecisions, self-contradictions, delaying and even canceling the conclusions. Though I do admire that style in The Commentary of Zuo or that punkish crystal clarity in Lu Xun; I do admire people who are resolute.

Like Lisa. You remember her, she always dashes off email responses on her cell phone. Reading them, it’s as though you could feel that gush of wind around her words from the speed. Fast but accurate, like a chef who has mastered the arts of the kitchen. In her last letter there was this line: keep making art and life and art and life. It is all intertwined for artists such as you. Reading up to this point I suddenly realize this is exactly the direction I have long been striving towards. I thought I was resting, or waiting, but these passive postures are decisions I actively took on at a certain point in time, all too naturally—so I have forgotten about them. While I might not look like I’m working hard, I do strive at blurring the lines between life and art. In my practice, this includes: 1. Leaving the contours of art in tatters, and affording life a more rigorous structure; 2. Making art happen trivially, ordinarily, and granting life a greater sense of form and ceremony; 3. Not commenting on art, but ruminating endlessly on life, etc. Imagine two tanks of water: one gradually drops while the other gradually rises, until they are level; the water flows towards the other, becoming the other.

For example: I only work two days a week at the book store and earn very little money, so doing housework is also my duty, or should I say, another job of mine. Every day, I make the bed, wipe the table, sweep the floor, do the dishes, feed the cat, shovel the kitty litter, water the plants, take care of the clothing for Casper and me. Every week, I do the laundry, change the sheets, mop the floor, take care of the trash and recycling, wash the sink, tub, and the water stains around the faucet, and so on and so forth. The charm of housework lies in its never-ending state, its Sisyphean circular cycles, its Kafkaesque mercilessness: cups and plates, pots and pans, clean clothes—the meticulous construction of everything made for recurrent destruction. In such labors, I discovered I was rather talented and possessed the necessary patience and perseverance to do this job well. I thought of Mom and Grandma; our family does indeed have the genes for backbreaking labor. When doessomeone become an artist, and when does someone become a housewife, lover, teacher, and shop assistant? I use the same pair of eyes, the same pair of hands, the same passion at work.

Recently, on the occasion of a new book out on Chris Marker, Metrograph showed some of his films. I hate this cinema but I still went. I saw A Grin without a Cat yesterday, and I naturally thought of you. Not only because the last time I saw this film at Gene Siskle was with you, but more because it violently reminded me all that in you which I most esteem and cherish, and which I have never been equipped with: that care for others and for the world. I study critical theory, lingering over Benjamin’s exquisite, labyrinthine texts, over that disposition where hope and desperation coexist, yet I do not understand nor care for the real world. For me, politics is abstract philosophy, science, literature; I make use of it, but I don’t read the news, I don’t take part in debates, I don’t give money to panhandlers on the subway. Rather randomly, I heard this line: “Real thinking has to be done on one’s feet.” I felt I was being criticized, and thought of famous thinkers who were homebodies, like Proust, or Kant. Perhaps some ways of thought require some distance from the crowd? And I still believe what is most private is the most public. Yet amid the vast opening between these two extremes, is this merely surrendering to violence, apathy, ignorance, and superficiality? How to say this: Chris Marker overcame the contradiction between “devoted belief” and “detached realization”, even to the point where the contradiction has been twisted into a wick of a candle by which a warm light is actually produced.

A similar stirring happened a few months ago when I went back to Beijing to see “Salon, Salon: Fine Art Practices from 1972 to 1982 in Profile—A Beijing Perspective”, an exhibition Lu Yinghua and Liu Ding did at Inside-Out Museum. I have always admired Lu’s work. After graduating from university, I took part in a contest, and the exhibition of shortlisted artists was curated by her. That was the first time I joined in at a scene of revelry and applause because of a work. My deepest impression was her introduction to the exhibition, etched on a wall, entitled “The Length of Time and the Shape of Profession”. The accuracy and concreteness of these words seemingly pinned down something as flighty and fleeting as a sheet of paper, securing my memories of that event. It was the same this time. What exactly is that accuracy and concreteness? Treating each image earnestly and not rushing to pigeonhole them into pre-existing types and descriptive habits, and attentively reading each historical source and not trying to command them into a unifying centrism; on the contrary, allowing for independence and autonomy to these materials, thereby having the ecology they carried with them  unfold naturally…these which are sensitive yet dangerous, mutable and contradictory—and real.

Why is history necessary? Why is there an absolute need to know what happened in the past? I thought of a new answer: for the sake of the imagination. Contemporary reality is righteous of its own justice, and overwhelming; examples include the law, international boundaries, language. Yet a trivial search will reveal how reality is often the result of a certain event or intellectual current, of a group or even an individual; it is not merely natural. The power of imagination will be produced here: then or now—are there other possibilities? Or perhaps, such an imagination means a certain open and fluid understanding of reality. Instead of viewing reality as a wall, make an effort to see it as a temporary assemblage of certain materials and energy, a frame or a tableau in movement over time. That perhaps will give rise to greater courage.

I took a long while writing this letter. I have been making changes to it, and it has been making changes to me. Meeting up with a few friends yesterday, the words I uttered gradually became the words I wrote to you in this letter. Sometimes I don’t know who is really in charge, my words or me.

Summer is fading fast.

 

Yuchen

July 24, 2017

 

/

 

编辑 / 桑田 译 / Daniel Szehin Ho,原载于燃点 [2017.08.25]  

 

Dear___:

入夏以来,我去Prospect Park总会迷路,记忆对不上眼前的风景,冬天疏落的现在都被深深浅浅的绿色填满,对我来说具有地标意义的大树也改变了轮廓和神态。小虎说,大自然就是一直在变的。我想起几个月前这里天寒地冻,在雪中散步一如Levitan凄冷的油画。这生机盎然的夏日是否也如露如电?现代科学与哲学似乎都建立在确定性坍塌后的废墟之上:固定的形象或概念都是一时一刻的幻觉,事物或思想或人都是动态的进程。我听说电子和原子的比例如同一间公寓和整个曼哈顿,其余竟是空旷——除了能量。在玻璃杯底和桌子接触的表面,看不到的粒子在空旷中大开大闔地奔跑着,让玻璃杯和桌子的分界线激烈而又难以觉察地颤抖着…

我也变了。想起几年前和你谈话时自己对一些问题的回应,现在不再能够同意,或者说,不再能够接受任何坚决的立场或站队的动作。我好像越来越难以用简洁的语言表达自己,那些影影绰绰、忽明忽暗的可能和岔路,不能被忽略——例如对历史的四舍五入,结果就是胜者为王败者寇的粗暴叙述。或许、某种程度上、几乎、一些、有时…这些黏滞虚弱的词汇成为了我的理智和正义。这是否和越来越多地使用英语阅读、写作有关?在英语(或英语腔的汉语里)里,层出不穷的连词会让一句话成为一条望不到头的走廊,两侧排列着通往一个个分句的门扉;每一个分句都是一个房间,有时房间里甚至还有窗。丰富的层次和空间可以姑息作者的优柔寡断、自相矛盾,拖延乃至取消了结论。虽然我也仰慕《左传》或鲁迅甘冽到朋克的文风,仰慕那些果断的人。

比如Lisa。你记得她。总是用手机迅速地回邮件,读起来仿佛能感受到因她快步疾行而产生在文字周身的风。快而准确,像炉火纯青的大厨。在她的上一封信里有这样一句:Keep making art and life and art and life. It is all intertwined for artists such as you. 读到这里我突然意识到,这正是很久以来我在努力的方向。我以为我在休息,或等待,但这种被动的姿态是我在某个时间主动做出的选择,太自然了,我都忘记了,看起来不太努力的我是在努力地模糊艺术和生活的界限。在实践中,这包括:1.让艺术的轮廓破碎,而赋予生活更严谨的结构;2.让艺术的发生稀松平常,而赋予生活更多的形式感和仪式感;3.对艺术不予置评,对生活反刍不已等等。想象两个水箱,一个水箱渐渐降低,一个水箱渐渐升起,直至完全高度一致,水流向对方,成为对方。

例如——我一周只在书店打工两天,挣钱很少,所以家务是我的职责,或者说是我的另一份工作。每天铺床、擦桌子、扫地、洗碗、喂猫、铲猫砂、浇花、整理自己和小虎的衣物,每周洗衣服、换床单、拖地板、整理回收垃圾、清洁洗脸池、浴缸和水龙头周围的水垢等等——家务的魅力在于它永无止境,希绪弗斯般周而复始,卡夫卡一般无情:杯碗盘碟或干净衣物,精心建筑的一切都是为了周期性的摧毁。在这些劳动中,我发现了自己颇具才华,也有做好这份工作所需要的耐心和坚持。我想到妈妈,姥姥,我们家的确是有朝耕暮耘的基因。一个人,什么时候成为了艺术家,又在什么时候成为了主妇,爱人,老师,店员?我一直是用同一双眼睛,同一双手,同样充满感情的劳动。

最近因为一本关于Chris Marker的新书出版,Metrograph又在放一些他的电影。我讨厌这个电影院,但还是去看了。昨天看了《A Grin Without a Cat》,自然我想到你。不只因为上一次在Gene Siskel看这部电影是和你一起,更因为它猛烈地提醒着我,在你身上最令我钦佩和思念、而我始终不具备的,是对他人和世界的关怀。我学习批判理论,流连于本雅明迷宫一般的精巧的写作、希望与绝望并存的气质,我却不了解也不关心现实世界。政治对我来说是抽象的哲学、科学、文学,我享用它;却不看新闻,不参与讨论,不施舍地铁里的乞讨者。偶然听到一个说法:“Real thinking has to be done on one’s feet”,我仿佛感到自己受了批评,想到普鲁斯特、康德等一些以足不出户而著名的思想者。或许某种思考是必须远离人群的?我仍相信最私人的就是最公共的。然而在这两极之间的广大场域,是否就拱手让给了暴力,麻木、愚昧和浅薄?怎么说呢,Chris Marker超越了在“笃信”和“看清”之间的矛盾;甚至,矛盾被拧成了蜡烛的芯,竟有温暖的光亮缘它产生。

一个类似的触动是,几个月前回北京看了卢迎华和刘鼎在中间美术馆的做的展览《沙龙沙龙》,副标题是《1972-1982年以北京为视角的现代美术实践侧影》。我一向倾慕卢的工作。大学毕业时参加一个比赛,入围展是她做策展。那是我第一次因为作品而参加觥筹交错、鲜花掌声的场合 。印象最深的是贴字在墙上的她的导言,标题《时间的长度和行业的形状》。这几个词之明确、之具体,仿佛摁钉稳固了一张摇晃飘动的纸一般,稳定了我关于那个场合的记忆。这一次也一样。那明确和具体究竟是什么?郑重看待每一张图画而不急于把它归纳于既有的类型和描述习惯,仔细阅读每一篇史料而不试图用一以贯之的中心思想统领它们;相反,让这些材料自主、自治,由此它们所携带的生态系统也都自然地舒展开——那些敏感而危险的、多变而矛盾的,那些真实的。

为什么需要历史,为什么有绝对的必要知道过去发生了什么?我想到一个新的回答,为了想象力。当下的现实是理直气壮并具有压倒性的,譬如法律、国境线、语言;然而稍稍向上求索就会发现,现实往往是某个事件、思潮、集团或个人而产生的后果,不是天然。想象力会在这里产生:在那时,或现在,是否有别的可能?或者说,这种想象力意味着对现实开放而流动的理解:与其将现实看做一堵墙,试着把现实看做一些物质和能量暂时地聚集,一个长期运动的一帧画面。这也许会带来更多勇气。

这封信我写了好久了。我一直在改它,它也在改我。昨天和几个朋友见面,我说的话渐渐变成了信里写给你的话。我有时不知我说的话和我谁是主人。

夏天都要结束了,

羽辰
7/24/2017

/