mMK

藝評Jed Perl於2002年的New Republic寫了篇達6頁的文章,題為
'Saint Gehard of Sorrows of Painting',針對的是Gehard Richter於NY MOMA重修前的大型retrospective,是我鮮見劣評Richter的評論,文章中心針對其就繪畫對攝影的依賴(slavish dependency on photographic images),批評Robert Storr(Moma頭頭)當代(後繪畫之死)繪畫的偏好理解,以為對繪畫藝術不公.引其所言:

I do not dislike one or another of Gerhard Richter's paintings. I reject the work on fundamental grounds, as a matter of principle. I do not accept the premise on which his entire career is based: that in the past half-century painting has become essentially and irreversibly problematical, a medium in a condition of perpetual crisis.

我則大概也屬於其批評的以理論入畫的一幫,但我沒有Storr的地位影響力,因此我對Richter的想法,不代表Moma那種對過去半世紀繪畫的建制態度,Perl的分析反過來,於是對我反成了對其繪畫問題意識核心恰如其份的解讀,說明Richter的高超.再者,我早已放棄了繪畫和藝術的硬性區分,或起碼,我早就認同Richter是一個post-duchmpian的繪畫藝術家.
在紐約時專程北上dia art foundation的beacon館場,很有在瑞士Schaffhausen參觀的Hallen für neue Kunst的feel,大批大批的minimal舊作,但最觸動我的,卻乃是Richter的完整Six Gray Mirror(2003)系列.場地的Lynne Cooke解說,末段可為一絕:

At once somber veils and surfaces of pure unblemished radiance, they offer no reconciliation between the contraries of opacity and reflection, painterly paradigms for the monochrome and the window. Refuting the Enlightenment's belief in the power of illumination, and, with it, the promise of seeing as a transcendental experience, Richter proffers a stance that is, however, less unrelievedly pessimistic than that which underpinned his Gray Paintings in the mid-1970s. A qualified skepticism informs his Neither/Nor.

No photo is allowed in DIA BEACON, the photo here is of ©Richard Barnes. Gerhard Richter, Six Gray Mirrors No. 884/1-6, 2003.

for those who might not be familiar with the US art criticism scene, this Katy Siegel's article brief introduces Jed Perl and the "neo-con" New Republic. For some quotes from the original article, see this responding webpage.