A precursor at the junction between the East and the West 

​

Born in Hong Kong in 1957, Christopher Ku learned painting when he was receiving his secondary education in Taiwan. At the age of 19 he went to the United Kingdom to further his studies. In order to devote himself to art he enrolled in the Gray’s School of Art in Scotland.  He was awarded a Master’s degree by the Royal College of Art in London in 1990.

​

A Chinese artist trained in European academic institutions, Ku demonstrates in his paintings the capability of art to transcend national frontiers.  He devotes his work to create a space for dialogue which is not confined to the tradition of Chinese ink wash painting while at the same time distinguishing from Western art.  Although Eastern and Western cultures seem to be two completely different systems and modes of thinking, Ku strives to explore their common areas and to demonstrate the universal values of art.

​

Broadly speaking, ‘Eastern culture’ is a general term for the regional cultures of countries in the East (China, India, Arabian countries, etc.). Different from the Western cultural system whose formation is influenced by ancient Greek philosophy, Eastern culture, though sharing similar characteristics, is not a unified system. Eastern culture is undeniably both broad and profound. It embraces, for examples, from philosophical metaphysics and cosmology, Taoism of Lao Zi and  Zhuang Zi of China’s Spring and Autumn Period, to Islamic Sufism, and the ancient Indian Buddhism.  In the past, Eastern thought was like a deep spring influencing the world in different ways. In the history of Western civilization, the development of European and American art always follows an ‘intrinsic logic’ based on formalism. This form of artistic creation, however, was almost exhausted in the nineteenth century. Its development would only lead to ceaseless reproduction according to old models and without any breakthrough.

​

In this regard the Eastern spirit opens a new path for artists. Examples are abundant in the history of European and American art.  Chinese paper-cutting influenced the late works of Picasso and Matisse.  Japanese ambience inspired Monet’s impressionist series of lotus and Van Gogh’s paintings. Even Gauguin and Mondrian were influenced by Eastern thought. Artists such as Arshile Gorky, the precursor of Abstract Expressionism from Armenia, Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko and Franz Kline all found inspiration in Eastern philosophy. The emphatic ‘brushwork’ and ‘immediacy’ of Cy Twombly’s works is reminiscent of Chinese calligraphy. Traces of the East are obvious in the works of the German Neo-Expressionist artists Baselitz and Kiefer.  It is clear that Eastern culture has been a constant influence to the development of modern and contemporary art in America and Europe.

​

After reflecting profoundly on their own culture, the above-mentioned Western artists ingeniously absorbed the essence of Eastern philosophy to convert themselves into revolutionaries of Western art.  In the case of China, one may wonder if there is such an example that Western art vitalizes the Eastern spirit.  Among Hong Kong artists, who are exposed to international cultures, is there any pioneer that stands on the globalized, common ground to promote the Eastern spirit? 

Convention has it that art is viewed in an Eastern-Western dichotomy. It is a methodological fault. Eastern culture cannot be truly understood by putting what happens in the East into a rigid Western theoretical framework.  By stating ‘orientalism’, Edward W. Saïd argues that the hegemony of European and American cultures simplify and read Eastern art as something exotic.   He also points out that seeing Eastern culture with the Western perspective is one of the major causes leading to the misreading.

​

Today, in order to discover the possibilities of ‘Eastern culture’, re-examining ‘Chinese art’ has become crucial. We have to be conscious of the clear line between history and future. As human beings are at the turning point of global changes, all knowledge, cultural consensus and frameworks that are passed down through history should be re-conceptualized and reconstructed. In pursuance of the continual development of Chinese culture, Chinese art must be understood within a forward-looking academic framework and the possibility of crossing national boundaries must be enabled. It has therefore become a trend to attempt to understand Chinese artistic culture from the outside by reflecting on the mode of Western culture. The foremost question to renew the artistic culture with the Chinese spirit is: in what attitude should artists understand and digest the essence of Chinese traditions?

​

As a Hong Kong artist, Christopher Ku has long reflected on the development of Chinese art. In an interview by the BBC Radio in 1996, he proposed the Experimental Principle Theory, stressing that ‘Chinese culture’ is not inexhaustible and thus it is necessary to carry out the kind of experiments that grasps the cultural fundamentals.  This is not only important for the revitalization and rejuvenation of Chinese culture, but is also where the essence of artistic creation lies.

​

Only the artwork itself can testify the validity of a theory. Ku’s works demonstrate that he has abided by his belief by experimenting with media and materials while rigorously implementing the brushwork. Striving for breakthroughs in the creation on paper or canvas has always been his aspiration. His technique is thus eclectic and unrestrained.  His use of media and materials ranges widely from pencil, acrylic, ink, bleach, to oil paint, etc.  With each one of them he displays eloquently the elements of brush and ink in Eastern art. For his large-sized oil paintings he employs the techniques of Chinese folk art including stamping and paper cutting. Although his work does not evolve from Chinese art and he is not directly influenced by Chinese philosophy, the spirituality that his paintings demonstrate parallels the purity and eternity emphasized in Chinese painting.

A principal representation of Chinese painting and calligraphy, ink wash painting has a history of over a thousand years.  As a pillar of traditional art form in China, it has long been regarded as the symbol of the Chinese nation and its cultural heritage. Because of its historical and cultural significances, the art of ink wash painting is very different from European and American art, and therefore has been conventionally treated as a separate realm regarding its development and interpretation. With the changes of times, this ancient art form faces unprecedented challenges in the contemporary discourse. Beauty is a result, not a prerequisite. The history of Chinese art shows that schools, movements and regionalism dominate its development.  The so-called ‘bloodline inheritance’ and rigid system of master and disciples have not only limited the potential of Eastern art from elevating into a higher level, but have also converted it into a superstitious cult. Without doubt an art that rigidly abides by norms means, distorted and false understanding, or even ignorance of art.  The spiritual and cultural significance of art is also misrepresented. As a result, a culture of no inspirational significance has become the mainstream, in which vital, flexible and creative factors are suffocated.  It is obviously a great danger. ‘Traditional Chinese Painting’ in a narrow sense implies that steadfast conviction supersedes knowledge that is, on the contrary, subject to changes. A rigid, closed system together with traditions becomes another kind of ignorance.

​

The development of Chinese art adhered to the medium of ‘ink wash’ is but a rigid, conservative, narrow and impoverished understanding of the gigantic spiritual richness of Eastern thought. If Chinese art could not be liberated from the dominance of materials and media, the closed mindset which is only at the service of authority would paralyze the progress of art and ultimately disable the Chinese cultural system to offer new philosophy, music and literature. ‘The art of ink wash’ has become a prisoner of the media whose authority is unchallengeable. This kind of knowledge is isolated with reality and global changes. If ‘ink wash painting’ becomes a symbol for the ‘Chinese-ness’, and with it the oriental charm is packaged and built, then what is the value of this kind of art? More precisely, what would be left in the ‘Chinese-ness’ and the ‘oriental-ness’, if paper, brushes, inks, ink slabs, mountains, flowers and birds are removed?

​

Part of Chinese culture, the art of ink wash aspires to a freehand manner. What is important is the transmission of spirit, essence and prospect.  Conceptions are not less important than images. This is the essential artistic value of ink wash painting. In this sense, Ku’s works share the characteristics of Chinese landscape painting in projecting a perspective which is lofty, remote and profound. What makes them different, however, is Ku’s attitude towards contemporary artistic creation. In order to foster novelty instead of repetitiveness, he insists on the necessity to rid it of the baggage of traditional culture and the blind adherence to materials, as well as to liberate it from the constraint of theories and techniques. Instead of being conditioned by inks, xuan paper, brushes, and cultural symbols such as flowers, birds, water and mountains, an artist should follow his/her own aesthetic judgment. Accordingly Ku breaks through the constraints of materials for ink wash to pioneer new techniques of glazing and scumbling by means of oil paints.  The result is the evocation on the painting surface of a kind of subtleness which is as weightless as clouds, as faint as fog. Light alternates with opaqueness.  Transparent layers overlap each other. In addition, Ku’s paintings suggest an even wider and deeper spatial distance and ambience than traditional Chinese paintings. The limitation of the two-dimensional space and time collapses on his canvas, where dots, lines and color patches overlap each other repetitively. His paintings thus open another space which is delicate, complex and multi-dimensional.  Regarding brushwork, Ku demonstrates his techniques of ink wash painting.  Although he hasn’t been directly influenced by Buddhist philosophy, his paintings project the visual effects reminiscent of the randomness of Zen and evoke the sense of natural perfection in the art of ink wash. Ku’s search for a new path for the art of ink wash and his contribution to the new cultural horizon has made him the first and foremost painter that perfectly integrates the techniques, media and materials of both the East and West on canvas. This breakthrough has surpassed the ink wash painting that is subject to figurative objects, tools and materials.   Embedded in Ku’s work is a unique, distinctive spiritual world. This is unprecedented in art history. 

​

Ku is a precursor at the cultural junction between the East and the West. His artistic style and cultural judgment certainly owe to his 23-year stay in the United Kingdom. On his experience as an academic he once commented, “Since my graduation in 1990, my career in the art world as well as my personal life have undergone many changes and complications. During my stay in the UK, I had close contact and academic discussions with J. K. Rowling, nowadays famous Y.B.A. artists including Chapman Brothers, Chris Ofili, Anish Kapoor, and Tracy Emin, as well as some Chinese artists and curators living in Europe such as Leng Lin and Hou Hanru. It is indeed difficult to describe my direct and indirect linkage with art and culture in this period. To sum up my experience as an overseas Chinese, I would say that the differences between Chinese and Western culture have led to many inexplicable inequalities and discrepancies.  As a Chinese artist under foreign cultural institutions, whether I have become a member or a sacrifice in this system, to be marginalized is inevitable. In fact, history has told us to that it is always the case.”

In view of China’s social changes and the fate of the nation, discussions and thinking about Eastern and Western cultures have been ongoing since the 1930s.   It is Chinese people’s exploration of the development of their own culture.   As far back as the May Fourth Movement in 1919, it has been regarded as crucial to recognize the new historical stage brought forth by globalization and to deal with the relations between the Eastern and Western cultures. Comparative studies of the two cultures ever since their encounter have long been the concern of Chinese intellectuals. The debate carries on and is up to now not yet concluded.  This perseverance shows their senses of obligation and historical responsibility.  At the time when China was undergoing transformation, radical social conflicts of all kinds have led the country to plunge into great crises.  Ku, affected by the history of modern China, resists at all times to be subdued by the Western knowledge system while he distances himself from his own culture. Taking consideration of the historical background, it is evident that the vitality and insight of the artist’s thinking fundamentally stems from his concern for the fate of the Chinese nation, as well as that of the humanity and the universe. This may explain the presence of Eastern essence in his paintings.

​

What is art?  This is the foremost and indeed an universal question.  A culture without being subject to analysis and critical study of its origin and problems is nevertheless a closed system. On a critique of the deficiency of his own Arabic Islamic culture, the Syrian poet Adunis asked, ‘When will this culture, to which I belong, be no longer a dwelling for us to settle contentedly but rather a pinnacle from where we can see without obstacles, discover and explore the whole world?’.  Ku’s works show the artist’s awareness of and reflection on the contemporary multi-cultural environment. As a Chinese educated in European fine art, he has set himself as an example of integrating the two cultures.  Ku demonstrates Eastern philosophical essence by using media other than ink. This does not only form a controversial contrast with the ‘art of ink wash’, but also opens up serious discussions on the art of ink wash and Eastern art all around the world.

Unlike artworks derived from the tradition of ink wash, Ku’s paintings rupture the stiff dichotomy between the East and the West.  Besides, his works demonstrate an innovative aspect of representing ‘ink wash’.   More than just media and materials, for the artist it is also an attitude, philosophy, world view and mode of thinking.  This guiding and universal aspect offers an inspirational starting point for the thinking of contemporary art. For artists who strive after the oriental essence and attempt to link up the art of ink wash and international art movements, it is necessary to understand the ‘Chinese-ness’ and ‘oriental-ness’ within a broader academic conception of universal aesthetic value.  Only in this way Eastern art can be revitalized and rejuvenated, and the Eastern spirit can be interpreted in a completely new manner.

 

 

站在東西交界的先行者

​

 

谷敏昭，1957年於香港出生，在中學時期於台灣學習繪畫，19歲遠赴英國留學。為了繼續專注創作，藝術家就讀於蘇格蘭的基爾藝術學院，並於1990年於倫敦皇家藝術學院獲得碩士學位。

 

經過歐洲純藝術的學院系統訓練、同時是華人身份的谷敏昭，其畫作為藝術作出超越國界的示範。畫家致力在藝術上，拓展出一個既不因襲狹隘的中國水墨傳統，同時又有別於西方藝術的話語空間。他在「東／西文化」兩個看似毫不相干的系統和思維方式中間，尋找殊途同歸的重疊點，展現普世藝術價值。

​

廣義來說，「東方文化」是東方國家（中國、印度、阿拉伯等）區域文化的總稱。區別於在古希臘哲學影響下形成的西方文化體系，東方文化不是統一的文化體系，但有相似的文化特徵。東方文化無疑是博大精深的，如哲學中的形上學、宇宙論，中國春秋時期的老莊道家思想，乃至穆斯林的蘇菲主義，以及起源於遠古印度的佛學。過往，東方思想精神一直像深邃的泉源，以不同方式影響全球，在西方文明的歷史背景中，歐美藝術一直在以形式主義為本的「內在邏輯」發展，這一類型的藝術創作發展至十九世紀已幾近抵達盡頭，發展下去，只會不停依循舊有的模式創作，無法突破創新。

 

東方精神正好為藝術家們提出一條新的路徑。宏觀歐美藝術發展，當時中國剪紙藝術對後期畢加索和馬蒂斯的影響；日本意景對印象派中莫奈的荷花系列和梵高的啟發，及至高更和蒙德里安等也被受東方思想影響；亞美尼亞裔的戈爾基是抽象表現主義的先軀，波洛克，羅斯科，克林因等畫家無不受到東方哲學的啟發；塞‧湯伯利作品中所強調的「筆意」及「即時性」令人聯想到中國書法；德國新印象派中巴澤利茨和基弗的作品也透露了東方性的端倪......可見東方文化潛而默化地影響了整條近代歐美藝術的發展長河。

 

以上是西方藝術家們對自身文化作出深刻反思後，巧妙地仰仗東方哲學精神，為西方藝術作出變革的部份例子。反之，觀乎中國，以西方藝術活化東方精神的例子存在嗎？站在多元文化交界的香港藝術家，是否存在站立於全球化的同一點去推動東方精神的先行者？

 

過往東／西方二元對立的藝術觀，在方法學上存在著一種「配格子」式的流弊，這種方法的特點是以歐美理論作框架，硬將東方的情況套入，這並不能真正了解東方文化。其中，學者薩伊德的「東方主義」解釋了歐美文化霸權對東方藝術獵奇趣味式的約化和解讀，也指出以西方視角了解東方文化是造成嚴重誤讀的一大主因。

 

今天，要尋找「東方文化」的進路，重新審視「中國藝術」已經變得極其必要，我們需意識到，歷史和未來存在著一條壁壘分明的界線，人類站在世界轉變的關鍵點上，過往所有累積下來的知識、文化共識和框架都值得被重新思考和建構。中國文化要持續發展，必須於具前膽性的學術框架內理解中國藝術，並開闢跨國界的可能性。是故，伴隨着對西方文化模式的反思，從局外的角度認識中國藝術文化已經成為其發展的一個趨勢。首當其衝的是，要更新中華精神的藝術文化，藝術家應以怎樣的態度去理解和消化中國傳統養份？

 

香港藝術家谷敏昭早對中國藝術問題作出反思。1996年，谷敏昭接受BBC英國電台採訪時已提出「實驗原則主義」，強調「中國文化」發展下去不能坐食山崩，中華文化應在不失原則的前提下進行試驗，從而將其活化、更新，這是必經之路，也是藝術創作精粹所在。

 

只有藝術品本身才能檢驗理論的真確性。從谷敏昭作品看到的，是他依據其主義實踐了跨媒材的試驗，並保持繪畫筆法的嚴謹。一直以來，畫家於平面的紙本、布本創作中力求突破，創作手法不拘一格。他使用的媒材誇度很大：從鉛筆、塑膠彩、水墨、漂白水、油彩等，無不流暢地展現東方藝術的筆墨元素；他又運用托印、剪紙藝術於其大型油畫創作中，展現中國民間藝術色彩。雖然其創作並非從中國藝術中演變出來，亦沒有直接受到中國哲學思想的影響，但畫作所展現的精神性，與中國繪畫強調的純淨與永恆的本質是如出一轍的。 

 

作為中國主要的繪畫和書法媒介，「水墨畫」有著上千年的歷史；作為中國傳統藝術支柱，水墨藝術長久以來被尊為中華民族和文化遺產的象徵。水墨藝術因其所承載的歷史和文化涵意與歐美藝術體系大相逕庭，一直被看作一個獨立的領域去發展和被詮釋，但隨著時代更迭，這項古老的藝術形式在當代語境亦受到前所未有的衝擊。美是結果，不是前提。中國藝術的歷史發展一直重視門閥、流派和地域分野，所謂的「血脈承傳」和死守師徒制，令原本可以昇華至更高層次的東方精神藝術變成迷信式的宗教，因循的藝術絕對是對東方精神的曲解、誤解和不解，亦歪曲了其精神文化的要旨。至此，毫無啟示意義的文化成了主流，抹殺了其中鮮活、變動、創造性的因素，這顯然十分危險，狹義的「國畫藝術」讓穩定的信仰凌駕於變化的知識之上，僵化、封閉的系統與傳統為伍，變成了另一種愚昧。

 

依據著「水墨」媒介為發展脈絡的中國藝術，恰恰是對「東方思想」中巨大的精神財富一種生硬、因襲、狹隘、貧乏的理解。如果中國藝術無法從物料、媒介的權力中解放出來，這種只為權力服務的閉固性思維，不光癱瘓藝術前進，最終亦令中華文化體系無法孕育出新的哲學、音樂與文學。「水墨藝術」成為媒介的囚徒，媒介的權力凌駕一切，這種知識與現實和全球的變化割裂。如果「水墨」成為一種「中國性」的符號，並以這符號和包裝堆砌出東方魅力，建立在上述基礎上的藝術，它的價值何在？更確切的問題是：倘若「水墨藝術」拿走紙、筆、墨、硯、山、水、花、鳥，它的「中國性」、「東方性」還剩下甚麼？

 

中國文化中，水墨藝術力求寫意，著重表現「氣韻」、「境界」，畫面之外，可留思想，這也是「水墨畫」作品藝術價值的實質所在。與之相比，谷敏昭的畫作同樣呈現出中國山水畫中「高、遠、深」的宏闊視野，惟與前者不同的是，畫家一直強調，當代藝術創作應當摒棄對傳統文化包袱和物料的執迷，解除畫論和技法的束縛，方能於畫面上推陳出新。藝術家所依仗的，不應是水墨、宣紙、毛筆、花鳥山水等文化符號，而是其獨到的美學判斷。是以，他打破水墨畫物料所帶來的限制，利用油彩開創嶄新的薄塗和平塗法，營造畫面上輕如雲、淡如霧，或明或晦，層層透疊的飄邈感，同時比國畫更能表現縱深、遼闊的空間距離和意境；畫面中重覆堆疊點、線和色塊，顛覆了平面空間和時間限制，提示出精密而複雜的多維空間。於筆法上，他同樣善用水墨技法：刮、掃、流，雖然藝術家沒有受到佛學的直接影響，當中的視覺效果無不蘊含禪式的隨機性與渾然天成的水墨渲染效果。為了尋求水墨藝術另一面向的變革，開創新的文化意境，谷敏昭可說是首位將中西技法、媒介、物料於畫面上發揮到極致的畫家，這史無前例的突破，經已遠遠超越了水墨畫憑藉物象、工具和物料做畫的成規，其畫作隱藏獨一無二的精神世界，在藝術史上是前所未見的。

​

作為站在兩者（東／西方藝術文化精神）交界的先行者，谷敏昭在留英的23年間所建立藝術風格與中西文化批判不無關係。他曾對自己的學術生涯作出如此表述：「自1990年畢業至今，在藝術上的際遇以及個人生活的改變繁複，難以詳述。留英期間，曾與J.K Rowling和現今成名的Y.B.A.藝術家們Chapman Brothers、Chris Ofili、Anish Kapoor、Tracy Emin等藝術家們，在學術上結下不解之緣；當中也包括一些中國留歐的藝術家和策展人，如：冷林和侯瀚如等。有關本人於這段時期在藝術文化上直接或間接的之關連，實在難以形容。總歸一個中國人在海外的經歷， 也可說是中西文化之差異造成一連串難以解釋的不平等以及落差，而一個中國人在別人文化體制下，成為其中一員或是犧牲品也好，回想起來，從往時至今，藝術家被邊緣化也是必然的事。」

 

從二十世紀三十年代至今，圍繞着中華民族的命運和中國社會變遷，東西方文化的討論和思考就一直沒有停止過，這是國人對自身文化發展道路的深入探索。追述五四運動以來，考慮人類進入全球化的新歷史階段，處理東西文化的關係就顯得尤為重要。中西文化碰了頭，二者的比較，一直是中國知識分子關注的問題，至今仍爭論不休。這種堅持反映出中國知識分子特有的使命感和歷史責任感。其時各種激化的社會矛盾，使蛻變中的中國社會陷入深深的危機之中，這莫不在藝術家的思想中留下烙印。正因如此，谷敏昭一直拒絕被歐美知識體系馴化，亦時刻對自身文化保持距離。可見在歷史發展的脈絡中，一位畫家的思想之生命力和穿透力，始終根植於對中華民族命運的關注，更及至人類命運，到整個宇宙的人文關懷，這也許能夠解釋：為甚麼藝術家谷敏昭的畫作始終流露著深刻的東方神韻。

​

藝術首先是什麼？誠然，本質的探問是無分國界的。一種文化，不經分析，不以批判的角度去審視其根源和問題，終究是封閉的文化。叙利亞詩人阿多尼斯曾對自身阿拉伯穆斯林文化的流弊提出探問：「甚麼時候，我歸屬其中的文化，不再是我們安居的屋舍，而是我們可以俯瞰、發現、探索萬象的頂峰？」在當代多元文化的處境下，藝術家谷敏昭在創作中顯示出警覺性和反思，同時亦示範了一個接受歐洲純藝術教育的中國人，是如何將二者貫通。畫家將東方哲學精神以水墨以外的媒材展現出來，這與「水墨藝術」形成具爭議性的對照，更展開水墨／東方藝術在全球更深刻的討論。

 

有別於從傳統水墨演變出來的作品，谷敏昭的畫作不僅打破了「東／西」方二元對立的刻板觀念，更以嶄新的面向表現「水墨」：它不只是媒材，更是一種態度、哲學、世界觀和思維方式，而這個面向具有帶領性和普世性，也為思考當代藝術提供了一個具啟發性的切入點﹕有志於探究東方精神，並要將水墨藝術運動與國際藝術運動接軌的藝術家，只有將「中國性」、「東方性」放置於一個更宏大，更具普世美學價值的學術概念中，東方藝術才能被活化、更新；東方精神才能得到全新的詮釋。