Field Notes: Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Hong Kong
16th April, 2020
Can we trace a ‘beginning’ of Contemporary Art in China?
The question of whether we can trace a ‘beginning’ of contemporary art in China requires an understanding of the historical circumstances which precipitated the creation and development of Chinese contemporary art within a global context.(1) As curator Carol Yinghua Lu discussed, the development of contemporary art in China is not one of rupture from the fine art tradition since 1949, but one of continuity with artistic practices prior to the end of the Cultural Revolution (1966 – 1976).(2) This reframing of contemporary Chinese art in terms of continuity as opposed to rupture presents a more nuanced approach to tracing a ‘beginning’ of contemporary art in China. One that challenges the institutionalised art historical narrative, and insists upon the recognition of individualised modes of artistic practice and experimentation.
Within China, the term contemporary Chinese art was a self-appointed term, proposed by artists during the 1980s as a means of legitimising their practice.(3) However, the rapid internationalisation of the Chinese art system enabled the market to exert significant influence over the definition and evaluation of contemporary Chinese art.(4) Likewise, the emergence of the Chinese avant-garde during the 1980s, attributed to the introduction of Western philosophical writings and Modernist artworks, ignores the presence of modernist tendencies within the Chinese tradition.(5) The notion of a one-way exchange between China and the West contributes to this false dichotomy of contemporary/tradition, and abolishes any notion of reciprocity between Western and Chinese artistic practice.(6)
A calligrapher since childhood and a graduate of the Chinese Painting Department of the Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts in 1982, Yang Jiechang’s practice is intimately connected to local traditions and histories. Created through the simple yet laborious act of repeatedly applying ink to paper, these works are imbued with a heightened sense of physicality. While the paintings share a strong resemblance with the modernist tradition of colour field painting, for Jiechang it was calligraphic practice borne from the Song Dynasty (960-1279).(7) Earth Roots represents both a connection to and a significant departure from traditional ink paintings and calligraphic practice.(8) By tracing the beginning of Chinese contemporary art in relation to the emergence of individual practices which coalesced in the capital, it is possible to account for the many actions and directions present within contemporary art since the 1980s.
Yang Jiechang with One Hundred Layers of Ink Works at Les Magiciens de la Terre.
What makes an art museum an art museum? Is a building enough?
According to the Western tradition, the art museum is as a not-for-profit, permanent institution whose core function is to preserve, interpret and promote arts and culture for the benefit of society and its development.(9) Whereas this notion of public service is deeply connected to our understanding of what constitutes an art museum, the art museums in China are vastly different from their Western counterparts. Borne out of rapid economic expansion and overarching political agendas, the Chinese art museum has followed its own trajectory in an attempt to define itself in relation to contemporary Chinese values.
Established in 2012, the Power Station of Art (PSA) is China’s first state-run contemporary art museum. Developed by the Shanghai government, the grand- scale and striking facade of PSA demarcates the museum as an authoritative space for the production of knowledge and culture.(10) With over 15,000 square metres of dedicated exhibition space the museum has the capacity to mount expansive displays of contemporary art and public programming.(11) However, in practice PSA suffers under the weight of its own architecture. Whereas, well-designed buildings have the capacity to drive visitation and generate a greater understanding of art and culture through innovative, dynamic displays of artwork. Without a corresponding investment in staff and programming the museum lacks the resources or “software” to fill this new “hardware”.(12)
For PSA, the spectacularisation of the museum has come at the expense of traditional commitments to exhibition-making and education. The overabundance of unoccupied exhibition space demonstrates a significant flaw in the museum’s operational model.(13) Furthermore, in comparison to the hordes of visitors actively traversing the China Museum the lack of attendance at PSA demonstrates that the act of building is not synonymous with the production of culture. If the Chinese museum is to cement its importance within both the local community and the international cultural sphere then it must speak to and serve the needs of both Chinese and international audiences.
Museums in China challenge the notion of the museum as an “eternal” institution, questioning whether the 21st century museum must exist forever. Perhaps, the museum is better positioned to respond to new modes of artmaking by adopting a more fluid notion of permanency? Positioned as the centrepiece of PSA’s foyer, Chiharu Shiota’s Flow of Life (2017), a cascading installation of empty beds interweaved with circulatory tubes, suffers from a lack of contextualisation. Despite visual references to the body the connection between this work and the exhibition Body Media II, for which it was commissioned, is unclear. If PSA is to extend their audience’s understanding and appreciation of art then it must develop curatorial and educational strategies that engage audiences in the construction of meaning. By positioning itself as a shared environment for the production of Shanghai’s “new urban culture”, PSA can create meaningful connections between contemporaneity and rich local histories, enabling the museum to become more than a building.(14)
What place does Guangzhou occupy in the narrative of contemporary Chinese art? To what extent is Guangzhou an incubator for experimental art?
As the window of China to the outside world, Guangzhou occupies a space of both convergence and divergence within the narrative of contemporary Chinese art. Whereas the close relationship between contemporary art and the events of 1949 has led to an interpretation of Chinese artists and artworks along communist lines.(15) Guangzhou’s geographical position within the Pearl River Delta (PRD), one of the first regions in China to up to the outside world, has enabled the city to become a “laboratory for negotiating national integration and regional identity, between assimilation to dominant language and social organisation and the preservation of regional characteristics.”(16) Through this process of cultural hybridisation and heightened commercial activity, Guangzhou has developed its own distinct identity, encompassing modes of thinking and ways of living that exhibit a greater level of diversity and openness within the Chinese context.
With a rich mercantile history, many people living in Guangzhou have acquired significant wealth. However, it is characteristic of the “southern attitude” to actively refrain from public displays of affluence.(17) Such attitudes have produced a recognisable disconnect between purchasing power and patronage of the arts, resulting in a smaller commercial network for contemporary art in comparison to Shanghai and Beijing. Whereas the absence of a local market makes it difficult for artists to earn an income. Such conditions encourage artists to adopt more experimental, self-reflexive ways of working, and to produce art less dictated by current art market trends.(18) The artistic community is therefore less concerned with national identity or “Chineseness”, and more interested in exploring the connection between art and everyday life.(19) With a greater emphasis on form and process, the types of art produced in Guangzhou do not reflect a recognizably “Chinese” aesthetic, being closer in look and feel to those currently being circulated on the global art circuit.
While the long-standing presence of institutions such as the Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts (GAFA) have made significant contributions to the region, the cultural system lacks large-scale infrastructure.(20) With fewer opportunities to exhibit an earn an income, artists and curators working in Guangzhou have responded to these vacuums, self-organising and creating their own narrative for contemporary Chinese art. As Feng Hanting from Observation Society put it, “there are more opportunities for artists in [those cities] but in Guangzhou I feel that because of [that] artists respond to the situation in more creative ways. There’s a sense of kind of feeling your way, with less opportunities people create their own.” Contemporary spaces such as Vitamin Creative, Video Bureau, Libreria Borges and Observation Society have established their own system that can exist alongside the official institutions, providing a supportive environment for living artists and Chinese contemporary art.
Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts.
The artist collective Observation Society provides an example of artists establishing their own spaces in response to the needs of their community. Founded in 2009 by three artists and one art critic from Guangzhou and Hong Kong. Their mission is to support young artists working in the PRD by providing exhibition opportunities for artists in which to explore new ideas and new ways of art-making.(21) Facilitating the production of four to five projects per year, Observation Society functions as an unofficial small-scale institution. By positioning themselves within the same district as GAFA, Observation Society acts as a “bookend to the Guangzhou arts scene within the one block.”(22) This proximity enables the spaces to establish a direct connection to Guangzhou’s new generation of artists, exposing them to new ideas and encouraging more experimental art practices and exhibitions.
Gallery Expansion into Hong Kong – The Chinese Contemporary Art Market
Over the past decade, the value of the Chinese art market has escalated rapidly. Accounting for 20% of global art sales in 2016, China has firmly cemented its position within the top three markets, alongside both the US and UK.(24) While the historical, social and political conditions of Hong Kong produce a noticeable tension between the city and mainland China. With a predominantly Cantonese-speaking population and infrastructure ties to the mainland, Hong Kong is uniquely positioned to respond to China’s growing appetite for contemporary art. For the Chinese art system, this porous relationship allows for access and exchange between China and the rest of the world.(25) Consequently, as a global Chinese City with the capacity to exert significant influence across the Asian region, top-tier galleries like Gagosian and Pace alongside local dealers such as Pearl Lam, have identified Hong Kong as a prime location for accessing this growing customer base.(26)
Just as the retail landscape has shifted to accommodate globalisation and mass production, commercial galleries have also responded by building recognisable brands and establishing multiple outposts across a variety of geographical regions. With a highly developed commercial gallery network, strengthened by Art Basel’s branding of the city, Hong Kong has emerged as a global art centre, and a key entry point to this growing market. In January 2011, Gagosian Gallery, opened its first Asian gallery within Hong’s Central business district.(27) Coinciding with the peak in the Chinese market, the addition of the Hong Kong gallery provided a counterpoint to Gagosian’s strong presence amongst traditional markets across the US, UK and Europe. Occupying the entire seventh floor of the historic Pedder Building, the sheer volume of this architecturally designed spaces, lends Gagosian a strong and easily recognisable presence. Currently exhibiting Portraits and Surrogates, the first presentation of American artist Taryn Simon in Hong Kong.(28) The museum quality exhibition provided a highly aestheticised display of the artist’s work, suitably tailored to attract an audience of collectors and general public alike. For high-end dealers like Gagosian, outposts like Hong Kong are not established as a place from which to conduct sales, rather, they function as a touchstone to mainland China and the broader region.29 Whereas the high rental costs and space restrictions present a challenge for galleries. In comparison to mainland China, Hong Kong’s ease of trade makes it easier for both the gallery and their clients to conduct transactions. By positioning themselves at the “gateway” of this potentially lucrative market, galleries aim to leverage off Hong Kong’s identity as a global city, with the ability to exert significant influence upon the contemporary art market both locally and globally.(30)
Citations
1. Salon, Salon: Fine Art Practices from 1972 to 1982 in Profile – A Beijing Perspective, Liu Ding and Carol Yinghua Lu (Beijing: Inside-Out Art Museum, 2017), Exhibition Catalogue.
2. Discussion with Carol Yinghua Lu, Site visit: Inside-Out Art Museum (Beijing, 30 June 2017). Upon visiting the Inside-Out Art Museum (IOAM), Director Carol Yinghua Lu, discussed how the traditional positioning of contemporary Chinese art was intrinsically bound to the events of the Cultural Revolution and the rapid internationalisation of the Chinese art system. In order to think about contemporary Chinese art within a framework that sits outside these prevailing art historical narratives, she undertook a series of interviews with artists, critics, and dealers who were active participants in the Chinese art system throughout the 1980s. The perspective of individual practitioners offered an alternative understanding of the history and development of contemporary art in China. One that challenged the assumption that a Chinese art market did not exist prior to the 1990s and deconstructs the global/local dichotomy within contemporary Chinese art.
3. Discussion with Carol Yinghua Lu and Liu Ding, Industry Dinner (Beijing, 30 June 2017).
4. While the domestic art market of the 1990s actively participated in promoting the ‘brand’ of contemporary Chinese art, artistic practice remained relatively unchanged from that of earlier decades. Carol Yinghua Lu, “From the Anxiety of Participation to the Process of De-internationalization,” E-flux Journal 70 (February 2016). http://www.eflux.com/journal/70/60556/from-the-anxiety-of-participation-to-the-process-of-de-internationalization/
5. Discussion with Fan Yang, Ink Studio (Caochangdi, 29 June 2017).
6. Like Yinghua Lu, curator Wu Hung also challenges this narrow interpretation of Chinese contemporary art which is drawn exclusively from its “domestic context” or as a direct “manifestation of globalisation.” Wu Hung, “A Case of Being Contemporary: Conditions, Spheres and Narratives of Contemporary Chinese Art”, in Contemporary Art in Asia: A Critical Reader, edited by Melissa Chiu and Benjamin Genocchio (Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, 2011), pp. 392.
7. The exhibition Earth Roots: Yang Jiechang Paintings, 1985-1999, Ink Studio, was curated by Artistic Director Britta Erickson with the assistance of Alan Yeung. On show June 10th - August 12, 2017, Earth Roots is the first survey of Jiechang’s One Hundred Layers of Ink. “Earth Roots,” Ink Studio, accessed 30 June 2017. http://www.inkstudio.com.cn/exhibitions/26/overview/
8. Shen Shaomin also spoke of how the physicality and materiality of traditional techniques (Shaomin trained as a printmaker) has informed both his own practice and Chinese contemporary art practice more broadly. Specifically, the generation of artists working in the 1980s until now. For him, this focus on technique lends itself to experimentation, enabling artists to move across mediums and work across time and space with greater consideration. Discussion with Shen Shaomin, Studio visit (Beijing, 30 June 2017). Trained in both calligraphy and the Chinese landscape tradition, Yang Yongliang also expressed similar views concerning the relationship between traditional practice and experimentation. Studio visit: Yang Yongliang (Shanghai, 7 July 2017).
9. International Council of Museums (ICOM), ‘ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums,’ Paris, 2013.
10. In his 2012 report to Congress, former President Hu Jintao emphasised the “soft power of culture” as a tool for the State’s promotion of core socialist values and a means of enriching “people’s intellectual and cultural lives” and increasing the competitiveness of Chinese culture at an international level. Selina Chui-fun Ho, “Between the Museum and the Public: Negotiating the “Circuit of Culture” as an Analytical Tool for Researching Museums in China,” The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum 9(4), pp. 18-19. For a discussion of PSA and Shanghai’s museum boom see Barbara Pollock, Shanghai’s Tricky Museum Transformation, ARTnews, March 2014. http://www.artnews.com/2014/03/17/shanghais-trickymuseum-transformation/
11. “About,” Power Station of Art, accessed 9 July 2017, http://www.powerstationofart.com/en/index/page/about-7.html
12. Wong, Winnie, ‘China’s Museum boom’, Artforum (November 2015): 124.
13. Site visit: Power Station of Art, 5 July 2017. At the time of visiting the museum over half the ground floor was cordoned off and wall texts were difficult to access.
14. PSA defines itself as, “an open platform for the public to learn and appreciate contemporary art, break the barrier between life and art, and promote cooperation and knowledge generation between different schools of art and culture.” “About,” Power Station of Art, 2017.
15. Cai Tao, Associate Professor, Art History, Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts, Site visit: Introduction to Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts Art Museum (Guangzhou, 11 July 2017). Tao elaborated upon Guangzhou’s unique relationship between art, politics and revolution. Referring to the statue of the Founder of the Guangzhou Academy of Fine Art, Teo stated that he was originally a member of the Guangzhou avant-garde but his practice was later subsumed by the rising communist ideology. As part of this history, the younger avant-garde was suppressed as propaganda became a mainstream part of contemporary Chinese practice.
16. Hou Hanru, BEYOND: an extraordinary space of experimentation for modernization, Guangdong Museum of Art, The Second Guangzhou Triennial, 2005. http://www.gdmoa.org/Exhibition/Special_Exhibition/Gztriennial/second/themeen/
2005110302.html
17. Feng Hanting, Site visit: Introduction to Observation Society (Guangzhou, 13 July 2017). Han Ting from Observation Society expanded upon this observation of Guangzhou ways of living and thinking, “people [in Guangzhou] dress modestly, if they smoke they smoke the cheaper cigarettes.” The sensibility of Guangzhou is far more modest than their northern counterparts.
18. Minerva Inwald, ‘Cities, neighbourhoods, spaces: conversations with Anthony Yung, Lucas Ihlein and Trevor Yeung,” in 4A Papers. Issue 1, 2016. http://www.4a.com.au/4a_papers_article/minerva-inwald/
19. Such tendencies can be seen in the current show at Observation Society involving CAFA post-graduate Tang Linglong. Tang spent one month in Guangzhou and was very involved in developing her practice through lengthy discussions with Co-Founder Anthony Yung and immersion within the community.
20. Ruijin Shen. “Guangzhou” in ArtAsiaPacific July/August 2013. http://artasiapacific.com/Magazine/84/Guangzhou
21. Hanting, Site Visit: Introduction to Observation Society.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Clare McAndrew, The Art Market Report 2017, Art Basel & UBS Report. 2017, 33.
25. Dr Pi Li, Sigg Senior Curator (Visual Art), Site Visit to M+ Pavilion and tour of Canton Express (Hong Kong, 17 July 2017). Dr Li provided an explanation of the complex set of linkages that govern Hong Kong’s identity as a city. This networked existence, depicted within the Pearl River Delta Mind Map as both a wall text and publication, established a set of binaries including City/State and City/Region, which have led to a heightened tension within the region. See also Hou Hanru, M+ and Asia Art Archive, Mind Map of Pearl River Delta Art, 2017.
26. Hong Kong is ranked seventh in the Global Power City Index. See Figure 1-1 Top 10 Cities by Function in Institute for Urban Strategies, Global Power City Index 2016, The Mori Memorial Foundation, October 2016.
27. Press Release, Gagosian Gallery to open its first Asian space in Hong Kong, Hong Kong’s Information Services Department, 14 January 2011. http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201101/14/P201101140199.htm
28. Site Visit to Gagosian (Pedder Building, Central, Hong Kong, 14 July 2017).
29. Lydia, Industry lunch: Personal communication (Hong Kong, 17 July 2017). Having worked across Hong Kong’s commercial gallery sector, Art Central, and until recently Phillips Auction House, Lydia shared her views on the state of the Chinese art market and the role of the commercial gallery within Hong Kong.
30. Managing Director of Gagosian Gallery, Mr Nick Simunovic, stated, "We established the gallery in Hong Kong because the city is the gateway to Asia. It also has the added bonus of being the world's third largest art market after New York and London. There is no question that interest in western modern and contemporary art in Asia is both serious and substantial at all levels of the market, from new entrants to experienced collectors. Hong Kong provides us with an ideal platform from which to reach private, corporate and institutional collectors across the region." Gagosian Gallery to open its first Asian space in Hong Kong, Hong Kong’s Information Services Department, 2011.