Xu Xiaoguo’s “lines”
2014-05-20
Xu Xiaoguo’s “lines”
Bao Dong
In recent years, the “lines” in Xu Xiaowen’s
painting practices are distributed to three dimensions. On the most literal
dimension, the “lines” are the stripes in his painting. Since 2012, Xu
Xiaoguo’s work has gradually penetrated into the study of pure visual issues
from the semantics and aesthetics of the images. The various visual issues have
gradually become the focus of his work. Moreover, the relationship between
spatial dimension and the flatness of a painting became its center. He began to
use lines and stripes to interrupt the visual space in the painting. For
instance, in theHangerseries, his
initial geometrical simplification of particular objects highlighted the
formulaic composition of certain paintings, and in this painting context, he
added lines to these painting-model objects, that allow our viewing habit of
the stereoscopic and the extension of the surface suggested by these lines and
stripes to connect and collide. Eventually, the background of the painting was
fully covered by the layering lines that shape the logic of spatial illusion
and sense of the flat surface in one’s overlapping viewing experience.
The lines have thus become one of the most
critical “roles” in Xu Xiaoguo’s painting. Unlike the diverse figures in his
painting in the past, lines do not embody particular cultural, social and
political meaning, but are purely visual tools. In other words, the lines in
these paintings only have literal meanings, but not implications. Like the
minimalist artist Frank Stella’s lines, “What you see is what you see.”
On the second-dimension, “lines” thereon
entered into an awareness of more specific painting structure, from the
selection of his subject, the unfolding of the painting and its completion,
even to the entitling of the artworks. Since hisLarge cageseries, Xu Xiaoguo has purposefully chosen the cage with
complex and rich, yet structurally distinct spatial subject. In these works,
the border of the cage overlaps with the frame of the painting, and the
interior space of the cage becomes the entirety of the painting. In fact, the
subject of these paintings is not the cage per se, but the space that is
contoured, defined and furthermore, fully ordered of the cage. On canvas, the
cage becomes an excellent spatial sample that awaiting to be dissected. The
most interesting component of Xu Xiaoguo’s work is to analysis its thereafter
reconfiguration. He adopts various possible approaches to displace the
structure of the cage, compliment the background of the painting, and creating
visual chaos in the displaced representation of space, by which to urge the
flatness of the painting to surface.
This series of work can be interpreted as a
translation of spatial sense to flatness, which was not a search of one on one
correspondence between these two languages, but to depart from the aimed
language and fully reorganize the conceptual basis of the original language.
Thus, these paintings are processes of “re-weaving” the relationship between
flat surfaces. Although the lines engaged in or even enhanced this process of
“weaving”, and making this process more sensible, yet “weaving” space is only
one of Xu Xiaoguo’s basic concept and approach, the specific lines no long play
the main role. In fact, “lines” have transformed from a noun to a verb, or even
to become a sentence and grammar.
Finally, “lines” embody a proactive state of
Xu Xiaoguo’s constant pushing forward and derivations of his painting practice.
His work method often departs from specific found image or drawings and use
them as its initial painting sample, then strip and screen its structure to
isolate the various visual models. For example, lines, cage, spheres, tree
branches, zebra, are adopted, derived and reorganized repetitively into new
image relationships. Such reiterating work method demonstrates a conscious act
of cross-referencing. In Roland Barthes’ view, the essence writing is to
cross-reference, because it does not have a direct relationship with reality,
writing is only rewriting of what’s been written, and it only refers to
writing, a context of a text is still a text.
Whether Xu Xiaoguo has adopted
post-structuralism as his creative theory or not, it is apparent that his
painting practice has already demonstrated certain proactive cross-referencing.
So much so that Roland Barthes’ phrase “text is texture” can be figuratively
embodied in Xu Xiaoguo’s paintings, even though what he weaves is not language
and characters, but the gaze of the viewers.
What Roland Barthes refers as texture is translated as “the woven object”
in Chinese, yet, in line with the characteristics of the Chinese language, most
scholars suggest to translate it into the “basis of lines”. InShuo Wen Jie Zi(Word and Expression), Xu Shen stated, a word, consists of making
overlapping strokes; and Duan Yucai annotated, the one who writes, produces
overlapping strokes. In other words, in Chinese, the “word” is the “line”,
“text” is the “essence of lines”, however for Xu Xiaoguo, in terms of “weaving”
in, and between his painting, he is not confronted with the “basis” of its “essence”,
but the “body” of an “experience”. In fact, painting does not have its essence,
because the so-called essence is a historicized experience of understanding.
Thus, Xu Xiaoguo’s paintings are not passively proclaiming the flatness of
painting, but to invoke the energy of our viewing experience through his
process of “weaving” the spatial and flat sense of the paintings.
2014/5/20