Ai Weiwei’s new essay in the Guardian, is ‘China’s art world does not exist.’ That’s a little harsh. But, maybe not too harsh.
Twenty years ago, Chinese artists brought the human figure as art back from the dead. Since then, well, maybe he has a point. But, from Mr. Ai’s point of view, the same might be said of the highly commercial western art world.
Art for art’s sake, though, is not Mr. Ai’s point. His aesthetic requires that Chinese artists address China’s ‘…most pressing contemporary issues,’ or it’s not art. A limited but important stance on the purpose of art, but in China’s case, a very reasonable one.
Consider:
Widespread state control over art and culture has left no room for freedom of expression in the country. For more than 60 years, anyone with a dissenting opinion has been suppressed. Chinese art is merely a product: it avoids any meaningful engagement. There is no larger context. Its only purpose is to charm viewers with its ambiguity.
The Chinese art world does not exist. In a society that restricts individual freedoms and violates human rights, anything that calls itself creative or independent is a pretence. It is impossible for a totalitarian society to create anything with passion and imagination.
I understand these points. But, for many years, Chinese art was the only art with imagination, if not passion. Instead of feeling this was impossible in a ‘totalitarian society,’ I was impressed that the currents of Chinese creativity ran so deep that a few decades of Communist rule buried but did not destroy them. From what seemed to be a standing start a couple of decades ago, Chinese artists started churning out exceptional and original work. Just not very polemical.
Mr. Ai contends that ‘[A]rt has to stand for something.’ sometimes,though, art is just art.
Ai seems to think all art should be politicized and “about” something. That’s curiously the same position the Communists take. So who is right? Anything can be politicised, even if it isn’t overtly political in its own way – see for example Japanese water colors currently being removed from museums and collections across China. However I do believe Ai is correct in that Chinese artists, with very few exceptions, are creating works to do with anything that could be construed to be a commentary regarding the current state of Chinese society. That’s not a position art (but not all art) has historically taken, yet China seems muted, (Ai would say muzzled) by comparison. There are no painters, musicians or literary figures who dare speak out their own minds in China. Apparently however, it’s both something the Chinese, and we in the West, appear to be quite content about. Why rock the boat when there is money to be made? Who cares about the moral state of society when incomes have gone up ten times in the last decade?
Ai asks, therefore, an interesting question. I’m just not sure if he is the right person to be asking it. – Chris
Good to hear from you, Chris! And thanks for the insightful comments.
Saw that you moved to the U.S. Any chance you are in NY, DC, or Boston–my usual destinations. It would be great to meet in person, finally.
In any case, let’s talk when you have a minute.
All the best,
Malcolm