Lü Peng: An Encounter with The Entrepreneur
16th October, 2024
After a long 20 hour train from Beijing to Chengdu a group of students from the University of Western Australia sought relief from the invasive humidity in Lü Peng’s wisdom (and air conditioned room). Dr Lü generously offered them some tea during his Q&A session, the results of which are to follow. Questions were asked by Darren Jorgensen (DJ), Kye Fisher (KF), Matthew Vince (MV), Sam Beard (SB), Lucinda Thai-Le Tran (LTLT) and Jemma Kovacic Romanova (JKR).
LP-After China opened its doors in the 1980s and gained an understanding of the West, people became willing to use all sorts of styles, art criticism and artistic perspectives. The method was to use criticism as a way to discuss art, and this has also led to the emergence of new forms of art. So to a large extent, the 1980s marked the beginning of understanding, imitating and learning from the west. At the same time, there was also reflection on our own issues, so it wasn’t merely a pastiche of form but rather how to use different ideas and methods to reflect on ourselves; our country’s history, culture, and art.
However, even though we were learning the methods and language of the West in various aspects, it soon became apparent that the situation in China was not the same as in the West, so artists began reflecting on themselves. What kind of art we create today is what defines our contemporary art. But this refers to the 1980s; after the 1990s, we are talking about contemporary art, and critics will also ask, " What are the issues in Chinese art?” In this regard, it can be said that Chinese critics still maintain their independence, and this independence lies in the fact that they have learned western styles, but what they are contemplating are their own issues.
Chinese critics, or even Chinese artists themselves, are often questioned—whether by official entities or others—about their language, style, and art. People say, "Oh, your style follows Western forms. We have seen this before, so does that mean you haven't really achieved anything new?" I can counter this argument with an example. About 35 years ago, I went to Tate Modern, where I saw an exhibition on Pop Art, which included pieces addressing the global calamity of art. This exhibition didn't focus on key figures like Warhol or Hamilton, but rather on the broader global aspects of Pop Art.
As a language, Pop Art undeniably began with people like Hamilton in Britain in the 1950s and later in the 1960s. However, as a mode of expression, a tool, and a form of thought, Pop Art exists globally. Can we say this has no value? This is a very important question. For Chinese people in the 1980s, this concept held a lot of weight. I saw this exhibition 35 years ago, and it was eye-opening.
Of course, this question is very complex and is still being discussed in this way today. However, we also have a perspective on the changes in art throughout China as a whole- new historiography. The perspective is that the study of historical issues in any country or region should be based on its own context, rather than simply using some basic standards from Europe, the so-called Eurocentric standards of universalism, to define the history of each country itself.
Of course, there is an important distinction between Chinese critics and Western critics. It is the case that Western critics can freely express their views in the media, while Chinese critics have restrictions on their publications in China. It is necessary for them to subject themselves to scrutiny and to practise self-censorship. Without this self-restraint, there is no way they can publish. This is a very serious difference."
Recently, I have been encouraging some art historians and critics to write about the history of Chinese criticism. Perhaps in the future, this book will reflect on the developments in China over the past few decades, to provide a very comprehensive and systematic explanation of the situation regarding criticism.
KF- What are the Limitations of Chinese or Western theories of art when investigating Chinese contemporary art?
LP- Alright, let me give you an example. This book, A History of Art in 20th-Century China is in its second edition, and there will be a third and a fourth edition in the future. The first edition was published in 2007, and the second edition in 2009. This was during a time in China when people felt the most relaxed. That book you can say, is more complete and didn't have much censorship. The content is still there but nowadays if I want to do another edition, I would suffer a lot of censorship and the current version it not suitable for dissemination. It can no longer be reprinted and it simply cannot be published. So in China, it’s something that constantly changes depending on the political climate. Many publishers go through strict censorship, because the editors want to keep their jobs, and some of it is overseen by higher authorities. Some of the onus is also on the critics who must also practise self-censorship, but there are still limits. Beijing's political situation determines the benchmark of whether they should be stricter or more relaxed.
Again, I'll use this book [A History of Art in 20th-Century China] as an example. This is the second edition, but they censored some of the content from the first edition. In the third edition, they censored other content but it was published ok. Later, after it had been distributed for a while, the director of another publishing house asked the director of Peking University Press, “How could you publish such a book?” Once that question was raised, the book could no longer be sold. As time changes things are more or less ok to publish.
When I collaborate with foreign publishers overseas, especially recently, they don’t censor your content, they just correct punctuation, grammar or technical issues. They don’t check your content. That's the difference between the West and China.
MV- Do International publications, published overseas, get followed up by the Chinese authorities if it has problematic content?
LP- They don’t care, as long as it’s not their issue they won’t bother. That's why I have published in English, French and Italian. They don’t care about what you do abroad. And often they don't find what has been published overseas
Lü Peng in his office.
Photo curtesy of Sam Beard, 2024.
DJ- Can you comment on the differences between Western and Chinese art discourses? It seems to me that ancient Chinese philosophy plays more of a role in interpretation of contemporary art in China, while in the west it is more secular.
LP- This issue lies in the fact that Chinese culture and traditional thought can only speak for Chinese traditional painting. When it comes to discussing contemporary or modern Chinese art, I believe the two cannot be compared, as they represent entirely different concepts, materials, and modes of thinking. Strictly speaking, they belong to different civilizations.
Western art, from ancient Greece and Rome onwards, follows its own logical progression. Similarly, Chinese traditional culture, particularly its awareness of calligraphy and painting, has evolved from its own historical context. These two civilizations have distinct forms of existence. The critical question for China is whether these can be integrated or not. There are many who argue that they cannot be, while others believe they can.
DJ- There are many contemporary Chinese artists, however, who are still discussing traditional Chinese art in some aspects of contemporary Chinese art. And take influences from Taoism, Zen Buddhism, and other aspects of Chinese culture.
LP- Buddhism, and these influences on contemporary Chinese art is something they think about in their heads over and over again, but when it comes to their practical works, it’s a different matter. I don't think they understand it.
Recently, I was working on an ink painting project in Wuhan. Its concept asks, ‘what exactly happened between 1978 to today?’ I raised the same exact question, but of course I asked it in a more subtle way. I asked it very subtly, because if I made myself to clear, I would face backlash from many. My salary won't be affected but it will lead to personal attack.
In China, there are too many critics and theorists who keep circling around using the metaphysical ideas of traditional Chinese culture, and in the end, it’s all nonsense.
For example, in Chinese discourse, there’s a phrase, 栩栩如生 (lifelike/ vivid Xǔxǔrúshēng). Too many people have used it. I want to ask, what does Xǔxǔrúshēng mean? Can you explain to me why you say Xǔxǔrúshēng? I don't think so. What does this mean? Using these words doesn't explain anything. It could be vivid, but why do I think it’s not vivid?” So where exactly is the distinction? I think it's nonsense.
SB- At present, are there any prevailing misreadings in the West of Contemporary Chinese Art? What are some of these misunderstandings or misinterpretations, from critics and art historians, outside of China?
LP- Okay, the issue here is one of understanding. In fact, one very important characteristic of contemporary art is that artists generally, once the artwork is created, is the issue of interpretation and narration beyond the artists’ control. One of the biggest characteristics of contemporary art is the artist’s starting point and the way society engages with the work in the future are very likely to be inconsistent. It is very likely to have 100 different interpretations from 100 different people just like 100 different people have 100 different Shakespeare’s and Hamlets. 100 different expressions. Take for example, how Chinese artists understand the works of Western artists. These Chinese folk may misinterpret it, but that’s fine, it doesn't matter—it’s not a problem. It’s about the journey of understanding and grasping the positive meaning. All contemporary art today can be different from that of this artist, but it's a kind of liberation on the journey, like that of Joseph Beuys, the way of viewing things from an ideological perspective. You see, these meanings are actually quite hard to grasp, but they are all there. So the most important thing is to inspire thought, understanding, comparison, and to prompt a deeper understanding of the world and to raise questions to make people think or form understandings and concepts. That’s what truly matters.
DJ- Why is Kenneth Clarke Important to you?
LP- That's very interesting. He holds great memories for me in translating his book and to be honest, I really like his writing. I can see his education and upbringing through his writing. Moreover, his character and the work he does make me admire him greatly, especially after my daughter translated Kenneth Clark's biography a couple of years ago.
I think he's wonderful, because first, he studied art history, second, he became the director of a museum, third he helped collectors and investors buy and sell artworks and fourth, during the most challenging times he stayed at his post. I'm referring to the World War II period. He insisted on being in the gallery and he organised exhibitions and concerts for the viewers during the war. I feel deeply sorry, but I admire and appreciate people like him. He is not just a simple scholar- he is a man of action, he is a practitioner.
But he is able to apply his own understanding to art. Of course, the impression his civilization left on me is very profound. I have also read his other books and seen the contributions he made in the field of art. I think it's outstanding. However, within the art community and academic circles some people say that his academic level is not that great. But I want to ask, who is truly great anyway?
During World War II, he protected many scholars from the Warburg Institute. This is because the German army forced them to flee abroad to London. He provided the money—of course, maybe it was government funds—to help these scholars continue their work so that they were able to survive and continue their research during the war. Extremely remarkable, truly. And what was his attitude towards academia? His attitude towards academia was that he recognized their research on iconography and acknowledged the research of the Warburg Institute. He didn’t really agree with this philosophy personally, but he still supported their research
Moreover, he also didn’t personally believe that Art ultimately relies on genius and the individuality of the person. But he still supported them. So, in this sense, he wasn’t an overly pedantic scholar, and that’s exactly the kind of person I like. He actually didn’t agree, and those people didn’t really agree with nim either, but they could agree to disagree. He said he didn’t fully agree with their views, but in reality, he still allowed them to continue their research- that’s how he believed academia should be.
DJ- Are there other art historians you are debating in China? While your work is indeed translated into English, I am interested in the context of your writing.
LP- The number of critics writing about contemporary Chinese art is quite considerable. If we must talk about numbers, there are at least a dozen or even 20. However, those who consistently engage in contemporary art research are very few. There are two or three ‘art families' who have also written works on contemporary art. They can all serve as great references, but they focus on Chinese contemporary art only since the Since 1970, but I personally think we need to start from the 19th century to find the context of Chinese contemporary art.
We need to look at how we have come through these past few decades, and that's how we will keep moving forward, by looking back to before the founding of the PRC for example in the 1920s or even the Qing Dynasty. This is the way to understand Chinese contemporary art today.
In the field of art history, there are many official art historians and teachers. Every art academy has them, but they all focus on studying ancient art, not 20th century or contemporary art. The topics they discuss at international conferences are all related to ancient art. They all focus on ancient art. Why? It's obvious—they don't want to stir up trouble.
China also participates in the World Congress of Art History every year. However, of the topics discussed there, more than 90% of the topics are focused on ancient Chinese art or certain entrenched issues related to abstraction.
DJ- Can you speak about the skills you got from writing art history to then write your universal history of Chinese contemporary art.
LP- I have translated many book from the west, there are also some books that haven’t been published yet, but I’ve translated many. My perspective is that this is essentially a learning process, regarding methodology, perspectives and technique. But as my focus is Chinese contemporary art, it is necessary to address its own characteristics and art historical research- the study of the Chinese context.
During the War of Resistance, the chinese discovered that China is different from the West, from France, from the UK, and from the USA. Since it is different, the art it produces must have its own uniqueness. But, it’s natural for me to follow some of the most basic methods of historical research to explore this. Yet, my shift towards exploring Chinese art in 1989 was precisely because China's context is so unique. I no longer have the energy to study Western art history, but instead, I focus on studying the surroundings of our own history. All of this requires a lifetime of effort. So, from this perspective, I believe it provides a base level approach. That’s why I wrote that book that was published by Peking University [A History of Art in 20th-Century China]. It’s basically a coursebook that emphasises two major aspects: one is studying the written text, and the other is researching formal visual language. This is easy to handle. We can conduct research through iconography, psychoanalysis, and from ancient projects, for when it comes to the contemporary elements of China’s art today
Let me add something: once, Professor Zhu from Peking University— you know, this professor is very famous—was the chair of one session of the World Congress of Art History. He said, “In your art history research, the most important characteristic is to study it through the lens of political, economic, ideological, and social changes.” To observe contemporary Chinese art, many of our art historians primarily focus on the language itself. He said, “This is your distinctive approach.
LTLT- We have heard in a previous interview that the art academies have become a training ground for new artists to learn the language of contemporary art, but not produce any works containing deep and radical meanings. Do you disagree with this view or do you think there are other places where we are more likely to find innovative art being produced in the next upcoming generation of arts?
LP- Okay, so actually this is a very interesting research topic.
To be precise, for quite a long time, Chinese art academies did not offer any contemporary art education. It was only provided only after contemporary artists born in the 1950s became teachers and professors. So when was that? It was generally in the later part of the 1980s, because by then they had all graduated. Those born in the 1950s graduated between the early and late 1980s. When they stayed on at the school as teachers, because they themselves were involved in modern art, they allowed more freedom for their students. Although not on a large scale, this freedom, combined with the broader atmosphere of reform and opening up, provided adjustment and support. Of course, this seemed like a very free and contemporary way of learning compared to before, but it’s clear that this is not something the academies alone could solve. The only thing the school could provide was an environment. It was a process of gradual change, and it should be said that it was during the 1990s that some contemporary issues began to be addressed in art schools. In the 1980s, many of these people were still students, and even the teachers at the schools didn’t dare to take too many liberties because there were still senior professors keeping them in check. Teaching contemporary art history has since become part of the curriculum, but that’s something that only really happened after the 2000s. Before 2000, there weren’t any contemporary art specialist teachers.
At the China Academy of Art, I used to teach a course in Chinese contemporary art. Now that I’ve retired, there are no teachers continuing this. It started like this, and now the younger students are also avoiding it because they know that teaching contemporary art history could get them in trouble. You know, it’s subtle—there’s an atmosphere in the system which makes it sensitive to talk about Chinese contemporary art.
KF- How do you think the history of Japanese and Western oppression and neo-imperialist globalization has shaped national artistic discourse? It seems that Chinese contemporary art has a large anxiety around these issues.
LP- Okay, this issue is actually one of the most discussed topics today, but I believe this problem is more significant in other countries. It garners more attention abroad. In today’s China, this kind of pressure still comes from two key factors: one is the political system, and the second is the the market economy. The political system, of course, is self-evident—it presents many challenges that leave you unsure of how to respond. As for the market economy, sometimes it operates based on its own will. A force under its own control, it itself has no inherent bias, but it operates based on its own will. As for capital in China, it indeed has a problem in terms of its understanding of art—specifically, what kind of art it chooses to support and what kind it does not.
From an academic standpoint, sometimes it seems that capital is driven by short-sighted or immature perspectives. Yet art cannot avoid engaging with it, which leads to an ongoing process of mutual influence and education.
Regarding the issue of globalization, people are already witnessing how, in the context of decoupling and the new cold war, China’s relationship with the world, with Western countries, and with the United States is unfolding. In fact, the issue of globalization has become even less relevant, given the context of this disconnection.
If there is, in the end, a decoupling from Europe and America, there will be even less of a globalization issue—everyone will just play on their own field.
The related issues of Western political correctness are mostly about minority issues and rights, like Black Lives Matter and Feminist issues. These things, in today’s China, are almost non-existent. For young and old Chinese artists today, they are less focused on minority issues, and focus on politics and economics.
SB- As a teacher, as well as an art historian, are there any new or experimental methods of resistance or political engagement you have noticed students participating in?
LX- When I was a professor in the Chinese Academy of Fine Art I rarely stayed on campus; after finishing my class, I would leave. Later, many students did internships and graduated, and then went to Chengdu or participated in various exhibitions and practices with me. I think all of this is very meaningful. At the same time, they also worked with me on writing—through exhibitions, writing, and interacting with other artists. They also curated exhibitions, and in this process, we grew together, facing different kinds of challenges. This is roughly my method—sometimes we discuss, sometimes we organize exhibitions, sometimes we write. Even with writing, when there is a new book, I bring them in and train them during this practice. I simply say, 'You write two pages, and I'll write two pages.' Then I try to ensure the quality, and that’s it. After that, they no longer need us—they can be independent.
JKR- You mentioned that art schools have not functioned as fruitful spaces for the cultivation of radical ideas and forms given its aversion to contemporary art discourse. Is this why we see the popularity of artist villages and communes in China? And have these spaces been integral to the growth of contemporary movements?
LP- Partially. The school and teachers have, after all, gone through 40 years of reform in China, so the paradigm of regulation and authoritarianism only happens in specific times, like during study sessions or in the curriculum.
However, on a daily basis, both students and teachers have plenty of free space and time. So they are not only connected to the school, but also engage with society and independent artists. A large number of graduates, in fact, rely on their own efforts, labour, and means of survival to pursue their art. From this perspective, the school certainly has this environment, and atmosphere. But the independent art scene also contributes to this.
To truly mature as an artist and to produce significant contemporary art, there is no doubt that one must move beyond the school. The school, by its nature, imposes controls—school rules, expectations, oversight of exhibitions, and so on. That doesn't mean that all the teachers in the school don't support contemporary art; on the contrary, many teachers certainly support it, which is great. But there is institutional control, and that's unavoidable. It is in the process of practice that one is able to create radical contemporary art.
Translated by Tami Xiang. Transcribed by Kye Fisher