缺失與意義     
藝術(shù)家范勃訪談

黃 篤

黃篤（以下簡稱：黃）： 這次您在藝瑯國際的個展似乎完全不同于以往的展覽形態(tài)，在以往的展覽中，您更多關(guān)注的是后現(xiàn)代語境下媒介的擴張，既拼貼又混合，然而，這次展覽您更傾向采用"并行"的方法，即把非視覺的東西（盲人閱讀的東西）以視覺化呈現(xiàn)，意欲用"顛倒"的方法去建構(gòu)新的藝術(shù)語言。為什么會產(chǎn)生這樣的想法？
范勃（以下簡稱：范）：探索媒介的可能性，只是計劃中我創(chuàng)作轉(zhuǎn)向的第一階段。通過這個階段，我初步探明了后現(xiàn)代語境下語言、意義、場域之間的關(guān)聯(lián)，帶有較強的實驗性質(zhì)。而我真正關(guān)注的核心問題是心靈問題，這個問題需要通過長期艱苦的工作、持續(xù)性的階段展覽實踐去逐漸接近答案。從表達的完整度來說，本次個展顯然距離我的核心探索區(qū)域更近了。
在當(dāng)代哲學(xué)領(lǐng)域，"知覺"是一個被重新發(fā)現(xiàn)并賦予極端重要性的概念。按照現(xiàn)象學(xué)的看法，知覺是思維的基礎(chǔ)，又是思維的本體：有什么樣的知覺，就有什么樣的心靈?，F(xiàn)代社會的本質(zhì)是視覺社會，我們所習(xí)慣的一切，包括思維、概念、行動、結(jié)果，都是以視覺為基礎(chǔ)的。對于一個視覺藝術(shù)家，我想在這個展覽中提出這樣一個概念：如果社會化的視覺對個體的人的心靈規(guī)訓(xùn)不存在了，那么人類感知的世界、人類心靈的世界會有怎樣的可能性？
你提出的"并行"與"顛倒"概念我很喜歡。正常人的心靈存在著視覺施加的規(guī)訓(xùn)，盲人的心靈同樣也存在著非視覺形式（觸覺、聽覺等）施加的規(guī)訓(xùn)，這是人類個體想融入正常社會系統(tǒng)所必須付出的代價；但這兩種知覺系統(tǒng)永遠平行不相交。我試著用你說的"顛倒"的方式，將這兩種知覺系統(tǒng)打個結(jié)。讓它們交織在一起，看看能否產(chǎn)生新的可能性？
 
黃：顯然，您非常喜歡梅洛-龐蒂的觀念"生命機體行為和其適應(yīng)性環(huán)境同時被構(gòu)建"。能否解釋一下這一觀念在您作品中是如何滲透和呈現(xiàn)的？
 
范：笛卡爾以來的理性主義把現(xiàn)代人帶入心靈的孤獨境地，"我思故我在"，似乎人的心靈是世界的發(fā)動機。這種觀念折射在藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作中，就體現(xiàn)在預(yù)設(shè)概念左右作品形式，不管是主流架上繪畫還是當(dāng)代藝術(shù)，都存在這個問題。
我贊賞梅洛-龐蒂的存在主義思想，是因為梅洛-龐蒂延續(xù)了尼采"一切從身體出發(fā)"的反笛卡爾主義主張，提出"運動意向性"和"身體圖式"（《知覺現(xiàn)象學(xué)》）的假設(shè)，為客觀世界、物質(zhì)身體、心靈思維三者之間關(guān)系做了更為恰當(dāng)?shù)慕忉尅Ｔ诿仿?龐蒂看來，身體和世界是不可分離的，世界是我的身體投射的世界，而我的身體則是世界的一個視點，世界在我的身體中實現(xiàn)了它自己，我就是世界本身的表達，我與世界之間有一種原始的"共謀關(guān)系"。這就是"生命機體行為和其適應(yīng)性環(huán)境同時被構(gòu)建"的內(nèi)在含義。這個見解讓我更加堅定了探討盲人和正常人知覺世界差異的信心。
在這套作品中，觀眾"身體的視點"--采用視知覺角度還是觸覺角度去感知作品--是解讀欣賞作品的關(guān)鍵。我不預(yù)設(shè)概念，我也不傳達觀點，我只是設(shè)定讓兩個世界互相糾結(jié)的場所。可能這就是你所說的梅洛-龐蒂觀念的滲透吧。
 
黃：在我看來，您的作品似乎是一種悖論，雖然以盲人的東西抗拒圖像解讀，但去視覺化的方式最終還是還原以視覺形式來呈現(xiàn)，只不過對有正常視覺的人而言造成了視覺閱讀的障礙，僅僅呈現(xiàn)的是符號，也就是純粹的視覺結(jié)構(gòu)。這是否就是您要追求的和想要實現(xiàn)的語言的純粹性？
范：你說的這點我比較認(rèn)同。雖然我屏蔽了作品要傳遞的意義--意義是觀眾自行補充完成的；但作為藝術(shù)家，我仍然要對作品的語言和形式負(fù)責(zé)，我是通過形式來思考的。如何用最單純有效的方式來呈現(xiàn)兩個世界的內(nèi)容？又如何將兩個世界打個結(jié)？為此我耗費了大量的時間和精力來做減法。
1《世界?》，材料來源于現(xiàn)成品，通過數(shù)個盲人家庭的追蹤調(diào)查，發(fā)現(xiàn)盲人關(guān)于個人日常生活的盲文紀(jì)錄，諸如菜譜、歌詞、地址、電話號碼、信仰、詩歌等所用紙張來源于各種不同時間段的廣告、雜志、圖片、日常政治文本、房地產(chǎn)推銷書等印刷品，印刷品本身的內(nèi)容恰恰巧妙地反映了在地的城市化進程。而盲文本身同紙張所印刷的信息分屬兩個世界，兩者之間沒有任何關(guān)系，重要的是這兩個世界在此交匯了。
   對于我個人來說，這種言外之像，像外之言，是我創(chuàng)作線索的近一步延伸，所不同的是，作者從其中巧妙的隱身了。展示方式是將這些扎滿盲文的印刷現(xiàn)成品裸貼于6.25米長、2.85米高的一整面墻上盲人可觸摸閱讀印刷品上面的文字記錄。有視覺能力與沒有視覺能力的讀者各自解讀分?jǐn)?shù)兩個世界的信息，通過這個解讀過程，兩個世界再次分離。
2《切片》，在24張用盲文紀(jì)錄夢境的紙張上進行書寫與描繪，然后再反復(fù)涂抹與覆蓋，形成涂鴉效果的手稿。通過對所繪信息的干擾，使觀者陷入觀看的困境。在描繪的過程中，水、色、筆力的作用使得紙上的盲文凸點不斷的損失，盲文信息也會殘缺不全，使得有視覺能力的人與盲人對作品的解讀都有缺失。從而使在視覺上分屬兩個世界的群體在某種形而上的意義上取得了平等。
3《B2》，大展廳由三十二張盲文檢討書組成的線性長卷式展陳方式。形式上追求極簡，與空間融為一體，從觀看角度來說，正常人無法解讀盲文，每張檢討書為100cmX60cm，維生素B2藥片組成了放大后的盲文凸點，所以盲人即使觸摸作品表面也無法解讀其內(nèi)容，作品本身產(chǎn)生了無法觀看與解讀的雙重困境；從符號意義上來看每一份檢討書都來源于真實的盲文符號，用手及身體的解讀方試在這里完全失效，每一個具體的檢討在這里成為了無意義的無解的盲書。
 
黃：在作品《B2》中，您用三十二張盲文檢討書組成的線性長卷式。每張檢討書為100cmX60cm，維生素B2藥片組成了放大后的盲文凸點，變成了無意義的無解的盲書。那么，您為什么選用藥片作為媒介？ 或者，以藥片為媒介蘊涵了什么意義？
范：藥的含義是有目的地調(diào)節(jié)動物的生理機能并規(guī)定有適應(yīng)癥或者功能與主治、用法與用量的物質(zhì)。
我選擇用藥片做為放大了的盲文凸點的替代品，首先考慮的是作品尺度上的合適。藥片于作品中是隱晦的、秘密的、被遮蔽的在場。如果非要闡述其意義的話，那么藥片在做為藝術(shù)作品表達媒介的同時也提示了藝術(shù)本身是一種保持社會肌體健康的活性物質(zhì)。盡管比重不大，但不可或缺。

 黃： 整個展覽僅有三組作品《世界?》、《切片》和《B2》組成，它們都與盲文相關(guān)，那么，這三組作品在整體上是一個什么結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系以及邏輯聯(lián)系？
范：就像我上面所說的，整個展覽就是嘗試將兩個知覺系統(tǒng)打個結(jié)，看看背后的人類心靈世界有什么樣新的可能性。那么這三組作品順序漸進，呈現(xiàn)兩個系統(tǒng)重新產(chǎn)生交集過程中從互不相屬，到互相抵抗，最后到和諧新生狀態(tài)，這三層邏輯關(guān)系就非常明顯了。
《世界?》，"3"變?yōu)榱⒎?，表?quot;每一次心靈感知經(jīng)驗通過符號，都成為對同一個主題的不同表達"，即兩個或多個世界交叉產(chǎn)生無數(shù)世界。常人感知到的是花花綠綠的視覺和印刷文字；而盲人感知到的是凸起的盲文；這兩個世界同時存在，卻毫不相關(guān)；把它作為第一個呈現(xiàn)的作品，為后面的"信息轉(zhuǎn)化-重建"進行鋪墊，也是希望它能作為一個線索，串聯(lián)起以往的創(chuàng)作，即它暗喻了《言外像》"出生前"的樣子。
《切片》，通過藝術(shù)家身體行為（涂鴉式繪畫）的介入，視知覺世界已經(jīng)不能被完整解讀了；同樣盲人的觸覺世界也不完整了。視覺上所描繪的內(nèi)容都是人體的不同器官（有的是病態(tài)的器官）以及相對應(yīng)的各種檢查波線、化驗單數(shù)據(jù)、相關(guān)藥物的英文名稱、分子結(jié)構(gòu)、化學(xué)方程式。英文文字內(nèi)容主要是器官的功能、作用、同盲人的關(guān)系（聽覺、嗅覺、味覺、觸覺）。而作品中屬于觸覺的部分則是我之前采集到的一些盲人表述自己夢境的凸起的盲文。這兩種知覺系統(tǒng)表述符號的交叉重疊，暗喻人性中種種傾向，思想、味道、聲音、詩性、信仰、死亡、生存、希望、恐懼、幸福、敏感、誘惑、痛苦、貪婪、脆弱等等。這些符號信息的相互轉(zhuǎn)換、消解，使在視覺上分屬兩個世界的群體在某種形而上的意義上取得了平等和對話的可能。因為此時光憑視覺，或光憑觸覺是無法完整解讀這件作品所傳遞的信息的。
《B2》呈現(xiàn)的是觸覺世界和視覺世界在碰撞、彌散之后的均態(tài)分布，這是一種和諧相處的狀態(tài)，這也可能是一個全新的知覺世界。命名為《B2》，來源于作品材料本身。如此命名的思考重點在于消除作品本來的身份元素-盲文凸起式的語言特點，避免不同的社會群體因為作品的"命名"而主動代入"盲人身份"，使作品承載過多的道德教義，讓觀眾能直接進入"去圖像化的觀看和解讀"階段。不過對現(xiàn)在的正常人和盲人來說，這個世界都是無法被解讀的，只能以審美的角度去感受?？赡苤挥兴囆g(shù)，才有可能以這種方式將哲學(xué)所設(shè)想的世界呈現(xiàn)吧。
 
黃： 我很理解您的意圖，讓有視覺的人與盲人對作品的解讀都有缺失，使在視覺上分屬兩個世界的群體在某種意義上取得了平等。這是不是一種過于理想化的視覺重現(xiàn)？
范：社會意義和道德意義上的平等，不是我這件作品的主題。上面我曾經(jīng)說過，關(guān)注心靈問題才是我創(chuàng)作的主題。"子非魚，安知魚之樂？"，人的心靈如何感知對象？不同的人感知對象有什么差異？如果一下子回答不了這樣的問題，那么退而求其次，我在社會系統(tǒng)中尋找感知方式差異最大的兩類人--正常人和盲人--來做比較和呈現(xiàn)，探討我們探討心靈問題的可能性，這是我的創(chuàng)作目標(biāo)。若要說到理想化，我想我設(shè)置了一個兩者世界的交集，這便是最大的理想化；而對于社會系統(tǒng)中的兩類人能否能取得平等，我覺得這好像不是藝術(shù)所能解決的問題。
 
黃： 我曾看到一位日本藝術(shù)家小泉明郎以盲人表演盲人的錄像作品《視覺缺陷》（Defect in Vision），他從哲學(xué)和物理上探測"盲"性。場景設(shè)置在二戰(zhàn)期間，是與歷史贖罪相關(guān)以及涉及現(xiàn)實的敘事，即在過去的歷史上演與現(xiàn)實狀況的關(guān)系，即將發(fā)生的災(zāi)難征兆又與福島核災(zāi)難相關(guān)。但您的作品似乎摒棄了任何敘事，更顯理性，讓作品理念回到視覺與非視覺的錯位關(guān)系中。這是不是您追求的藝術(shù)本體的關(guān)鍵？
范：我是一個純粹的視覺藝術(shù)家。做好視知覺領(lǐng)域內(nèi)的工作、研究和創(chuàng)作，我樂此不疲。我無力講述故事，那是文學(xué)家所擅長的；我也無力針砭時事，那個領(lǐng)域有知識分子和社會精英進行責(zé)任擔(dān)當(dāng)；最后我也不宣揚理性，因為對于一件作品，理性說不清楚的東西往往更重要。
 
黃：在這樣的觀念中，藥片被轉(zhuǎn)化成無法解讀的無意義的意義，這似乎有點"主觀表現(xiàn)的客觀性"，也就是說，主觀性的觀念干預(yù)改變了客觀物質(zhì)的形態(tài)，也使其中的內(nèi)涵和意義發(fā)生偏移。是這樣嗎！
范：使用藥片作為承載這件作品的物質(zhì)載體，實際上是一個小概率事件，帶有一定的隨機性。我之所以選擇它，是因為它審美形態(tài)上的適合。至于其內(nèi)涵和意義，尤其是將"藥片"這個物質(zhì)放入這樣一個特定的語境和文化場域中去理解，我想留一點詩性的空缺感，讓觀眾見仁見智，也許會更好吧。
 
黃：您認(rèn)為自己的作品在屬性或類型上屬于什么樣的藝術(shù)形態(tài)？
范：我相信藝術(shù)的發(fā)生有其因果和緣分；但我不相信藝術(shù)甘心被現(xiàn)有的藝術(shù)形態(tài)所規(guī)定。從架上繪畫一路走到今天，拼貼也好、影像裝置也好、觀念作品也好，從外部看也許我都是用了一些大家都能分類辨識的形態(tài)外殼；但對于我所進行的心靈探討，我認(rèn)為這些都是無關(guān)緊要的。心靈問題的復(fù)雜性遠遠超出了我們的想象。
 
黃：能否談?wù)劊谶@一組作品之后，您將延著一個怎樣的觀念向前發(fā)展？
范：這是一個易于回答的問題，也是一個難于回答的問題。我在創(chuàng)作中對心靈的探索是不變的，但具體到作品中以何種表征出現(xiàn)、又會取得何種認(rèn)識上的進展，這需要交托給冥冥之中未知的神秘力量。

The Deficiency and Its Meaning: Interview with Fan Bo
Huang Du

Huang Du (Huang in the following parts): Your solo exhibition this time in ARTASTE is completely different from your past ones, since you used to focus more on the expansion of medium featuring collage and mixture in the post-modern context. However, this time is more of a "parallel" structure, and to visualize the non-visualized (the blind's reading material), so as to construct a new art language by the way of "reversing". How did you develop that idea?

Fan Bo (Fan in the following parts): Exploring the possibility of medium is only the first phase of the turn of my artistic creation. And in this phase I primarily explored the relationships between language, meaning, and sphere in the post-modern context and it was done with a strong experimental nature. However, my real focus is the mind and it requires longstanding work, continuous practice and exhibitions of each stage to approach the answer. From the sense of completeness of expression, I could apparently move closer to the intended core exploration zone through the solo exhibition this time.

In the current philosophy sphere, perception is a concept of crucial significance that was rediscovered. According to phenomenology, perception is the base for thinking, and thinking itself. Perception shapes mind. Modern society is a visual society in nature. Everything we are accustomed to, including thinking, concept, action, and result, is based on visual perception. As a visual artist, I intended to propose the following concept in this exhibition: if the socialized visual perception has no more power on individual's mind, what are the other possibilities of a world that human beings' perceive?

I like the idea about "parallel" vs "reversing" you just mentioned. People's mind is trained by visual sense while the blind's mind is trained by other non-visual senses, such as hearing and touching. The training is the price human pay to integrate into the normal social system, however, the two perception systems never cross with each other. So I tried to apply the "reversing" way, as you put it, and bound these two systems, in order to see if there would be any new possibilities.
 
Huang: You obviously are fond of Merleau-Ponty's idea that the organic life and its environment are constructed simultaneously. Could you explain how this idea blended into and was demonstrated in your work?
 
Fan: Since Descartes, rationalism has brought human being to a lonely state of mind. "Cogito ergo sum." It seems that the mind is the generator of the world. When this idea is adopted in an artwork, preset concepts tend to manipulate the form of the work. This problem is popular in both paintings and contemporary arts.

I am fond of Merleau-Ponty's exisitentialism because he developed Nietzsche's idea that body is the primary, which is against Descartes's idea, and proposed the hypothesis on "motor intentionality" and "body schema", giving a more grounded explanation for the relationships among mind, body, and world. According to Merleau-Ponty, body and world cannot be separated because the world is my body's projection, and my body is a point of view of the world. The world realizes itself through my body and I am the world's expression myself. There is a primitive collusive relationship between me and the world. This is the meaning of the idea that the organic life and its environment are constructed simultaneously. This perception consolidated my belief in discussing the differences between blind people and normal people's perception world. In this series of works, the key to appreciating is the audience's "body's view", to use visual or haptic sense to perceive the work. I don't give any preset concept, and I don't send my views, either. All I do is to set a place where the two worlds tangle with each other. Maybe this is what you may call the penetration of Merleau-Ponty's idea.
 
Huang: From my point of view, your work actually goes against itself. Though they are the blind's possessions and resist being read as images, your non-visual approach eventually is demonstrated in a visual form. They only cause trouble and reading barrier to people with normal visual sense because only symbols, which are purely visual structures, are shown. Is this the purity of language that you are looking for and want to achieve?

Fan: I quite agree with you on this point. Although I shield the meaning of the work meant to convey, since that part is for the audience to complete. However, as an artist, I am still responsible for the language and form of my work. I think through the form. Then how can I demonstrate the content of two worlds in the purest and most efficient way? How should I bring them together? It took me a lot of time and efforts to do the clarification.

1 The World?. The materials are ready-made articles. During the tracking investigations on several blind people's households, we found that they recorded their daily life, recipes, lyrics, addresses, phone numbers, religions and poems in Braille on papers which were advertisements, magazines, pictures, political texts, property pamphlets from different times. The prints themselves showing the process of urbanization in the local area, and the Braille on them, however, belong to the other world and has nothing to do with them. But the important thing is that the two worlds meet each other here.

For me, the image beyond the language and the language beyond the image are the stretching part of my creation track, but the creator is delicately invisible. Presenting the print-outs full of Braille on the wall of 6.25 meters in width and 2.85 meters in height, audience with and without visual sense can read two separated worlds of information respectively. And the two worlds are separated again through the interpretation process.

2. Slices. I wrote and painted on 24 pieces of paper with dreams written on in Braille, and produced the scrawled drafts after scribbling repeatedly on it. The disruption of the information on the paper caused difficulties for the audience. And the effects of water, colours, and the force of the strokes would wear the dots of Braille out gradually so that the messages carried by Braille were also incomplete. By making the information incomplete for both the blind and people with normal visual sense, the two groups divided by visual sense are equal to a certain extent.

3 B2. The exhibition hall demonstrated 32 letters of repentance in Braille in the handscroll form. The minimal form allows the work integrate into the space. Normal people cannot understand Braille only by watching. However, neither do the blind because each of the letter is the size of 100cm x 60cm and the Braille were magnified and composed by B2 vitamin tablets. The work created double dilemma of uninterpretable. From the sense of symbol, the content of each letter of repentance is genuine, but the interpreting by hands or body cannot work anymore, and the letters become meaningless.

Huang: In B2, you used 32 letters of repentance and arranged them in the handscroll form. Each letter is the size of 100cmX60cm, and the vitamin B2 tablets represent the magnified raised dots in Braille, however, meaningless. Why did you choose tablets as the medium? What's the point of it?

Fan: Medication is a drug or other substance used to adjust physiology and has its indication, functions and effects and dosage.
I chose tablets as the substitute of magnified raised dots firstly for the reason of the suitable size. The tablets in the work are obscure, secret and shielded. If the meaning has to be explained, I would say that when the tablets are serving as a medium in an artwork, they are also suggesting that art itself is an active material that keeps the society healthy, though taking a small proportion but indispensable.

Huang: The exhibition consisted of only three series of your work, The World?, Slices, and B2, which are all about Braille. What is the structural and logical relationship link them three as a whole?

Fan: I have mentioned that the exhibition was trying to bind the two sense systems and see what are the new possibilities lie in human's inside world. These three series of works gradually present the crossing process of the two systems, from irrelevant, to resisting against each other, and to the final state of new-born harmony. The progressive relationship here is obvious.

The World?. "3" here represents cube, and means that "through symbol, each perception experience of mind can be another expression of a common theme." In other words, when two or multiple worlds cross, countless worlds emerge. In this case, normal people see the colorful printed words while the blind feel the raised dots. The two worlds co-exist, though irrelevant to each other. As the first presented work, it set a steppingstone for the following process of "information transfer-rebuild". Also, it may, hopefully, relate to former works. For example, it suggested the yet-to-be-born Image beyond Language.

In the case of Slices, the participation of the artist's actions (the graffiti drawing) make it impossible to fully interpret the visual target anymore while the haptic target for the blind is incomplete. The visual contents include different human organs (some are even pathological), and correspondingly, the wave lines, figures on inspection sheets, (English) name, molecular structure and chemical equation of the medicine. The English contents are mainly about the functions of the organs and their relations with the blind (hearing, smelling, tasting and touching). The haptic part in the work is Braille describing the blind's dreams I collected beforehand. The crossing and overlapping of the expression symbols from two sense systems suggest multiple characters in humanity, such as thoughts, flavor, voice, poetry, religion, death, living, hope, fear, happiness, sensitivity, temptation, agony, greed, vulnerability, etc. The offset and transfer between these symbols and their meanings make it possible that the two groups divided by vision are equal and open to conversation, at a certain metaphysical level, due to the fact that either seeing or touching alone cannot lead to the complete interpretation of this work.

B2 manifests an even distribution of the haptic and visual worlds after clashing and dispersing. It is a harmony state and possibly, a brand new sense world as well. The title of B2 came from the material, and the point of it is to erase the original identity of the work-the raised dots of Braille, so that other social groups would directly enter the stage of "devisualised observation and interpretation" instead of putting themselves into the blind's shoes because of the title and load the work with too much moral meanings. However, for now, the world remains uninterpretable for both normal people and the blind, and we can only enjoy it from the aesthetic perspective. Maybe only art can present the world proposed by philosophy.
 
Huang: I understand your intention, which is to let both normal people and the blind's interpretation of the work miss some part, so that the two groups divided by visual sense are equal to some extent. However, is this visual-reproduction too ideal?

Fan: Equality in the sense of social and moral level is not the theme of my work. I said that the focus on mind is the theme of my creation. "You are not the fish, and how do you understand his happiness?" How do human minds perceive an object and what's the difference between different people's perception? I could not answer these questions at one blow so I stepped back and looked for the two groups of people in the society, who have the least in common in the way of perceiving, normal ones and the blind. I compared and presented them, in order to explore the possibilities of discussing the issues of mind. This is the aim of my creation. As for being ideal, I guess I set a crossing point between these two groups and this is the most ideal scenario. As for the question that if these two groups of people are equal in the society, I don't think this is a question that can be solved by art.
 
Huang: I have seen a Japanese artist Meiro Koizumi's video work Defect in Vision, in which the blind were playing the role of blind people. He tested blindness from the perspective of both philosophy and physics. The scene was set in the WW2, and was about redemption and history-involved narrative. The story was set in the history but about current reality. The omen of forthcoming disaster also related to Fukushima catastrophe. However, your works seem to abandon narration completely and are more rational, bringing back the idea to the mismatched relation between visual and non-visual parts. Is this the key to art itself that you are pursuing for?

Fan: I am completely a visual artist. I can never get tired doing my work, research and creation in my area. I am not a story-teller, which is litterateur's job; and I don't comment on the society since we have intellectuals and social elites to take the responsibilities. And I don't advocate rationality, because for a piece of work, things that cannot be explained by rationality are usually more important.
 
Huang: The tablets are representing the meaning that cannot be interpreted, it seems to me that the objectiveness is subjectively expressed. In other word, the subjective idea intervenes the objective articles' form so that the connotation and denotation both shift. Is that true?

Fan: Using tablets as the carrier of this work was actually by chance. I chose tablets due to its suitable shape. As for the meaning, especially the meaning of putting "tablets" into a specific context and culture sphere, I would like to leave some poetic space to it and let the audience have their own answers.

Huang: What form or type of art do you think your works belong to?

Fan: I believe that the generation of art has its reasons, results and fate. But I don't believe that art would be willingly disciplined by the current art forms. From paintings in the history to today, there have been collages, video installations and conceptual works. For the appearance part, I probably used some forms that can be recognized or distinguished. However, for the inside part, the exploration of mind, I think the forms are irrelevant. The complexity of mind is far beyond our imagination.

Huang: Could you talk about what idea you will stick to in the future after this series of works?

Fan: This is a both easy and difficult question. My exploration into mind will never change, however, the way the idea is presented or the progress I make will depend on the unknown power.
 
Translated by: HU Tianxiu